Jump to content

Smith

Members
  • Posts

    767
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by Smith

  1. The negotiations are intentionally being lengthen by your process. Here are some bullet points that might help you understand how. They might look familiar: "So you're admitting that t$/$yndispere never did negotiations your way? Specifically: - we never made our opponents wait multiple weeks before presenting terms after they offered their surrender. - we never revealed terms one at a time, forcing opposition to accept term 1 before being allowed to see term 2 (and so on). - we never force-split peace negotiations into two servers. The times we did have split negotiations, we gave opposition the choice between leaving the war seperately, or negotiating together. It was their choice, not our demand. Procedurally, there are very few if any similarities between the way peace talks were historically conducted and your "super cool new structured way". Can you kindly stop making blatantly false claims?" Just change "we never" to "IQ is currently" Wow you were able to do both lines in one section! Also interesting to hear that dogpiling TKR in KnightFall hurt NPO? If I wanted Sphinx's opinion I'd just wait for him to leak it I have no doubt. Hopefully it doesn't hurt you like KF apparently did?
  2. You are being blamed for creating a peace system that is intentionally slow with the goal to drive people out of the game. Also while I know you are Keshavbot and must fulfill line 1. blame TKR and line 2. passive aggressive emoji, TKR is not the only alliance in our coalition. I have no doubt you are happy to "drag out" the war because that's obviously your real goal
  3. Gosh darn it Hodor, now he is going to ignore both Partisan AND I and only respond to you
  4. I have said the actions you have taken on multiple occasions now. The post from Partisan you are ignoring even lists some of them in bullet point. Maybe you missed that so I'll post it for you again. Here are some of the intentional actions: "So you're admitting that t$/$yndispere never did negotiations your way? Specifically: - we never made our opponents wait multiple weeks before presenting terms after they offered their surrender. - we never revealed terms one at a time, forcing opposition to accept term 1 before being allowed to see term 2 (and so on). - we never force-split peace negotiations into two servers. The times we did have split negotiations, we gave opposition the choice between leaving the war seperately, or negotiating together. It was their choice, not our demand. Procedurally, there are very few if any similarities between the way peace talks were historically conducted and your "super cool new structured way". Can you kindly stop making blatantly false claims?" Just change "we never" to "IQ is currently"
  5. Any particular reason you keep ignoring Partisan's post pointing out your previous claim was false? You previously justified your new and much slower method of peace negotiations by saying that's how most peace talks were conducted. His post also points out the several actions your side has been doing to delay peace talks and why your argument of us not making peace a priority is inaccurate
  6. Personally I blame Fraggle Hahaha "What did we do to try to kill our opponents alliances besides try to kill our opponents alliances". You are specifically making the war as long as possible in the hope more people on our side quit the game. You are intentionally stifling the activity and gameplay of the global community in an effort to drive people out. You are then justifying this by saying others did the same such as above even though you quickly had to admit that was wrong Edit: Also why do you keep ignoring Partisan? He is presumably a person with feelings too
  7. Misrepresentations of peace talks aside, you are responsible for your intentional actions to drive players from this game. "not our exact way" No it did not resemble it at all
  8. It is not a lack of willpower but a lack of desire to run our opponents out of the game. Also, you seemed to have missed Partisan's post pointing out your second point as being incorrect and my response reaffirming that. What were you talking about there?
  9. 1. I doubt a debate over historical positioning will change much here but I'm sure if our side had kept the war going on for another 6 months we would have been able to ask for more if we wanted. Regardless of that reps were not sought, the terms were easy, and the talks went quickly despite complaints on your side. Also feel free to take the credit for adding that phase, I certainly don't want it! 2. You are wrong here but Partisan can better address this point
  10. The last time TKR was in a coalition that gave peace terms to IQ we simply asked for a surrender. If I remember correctly your side complained and then requested we add in a term saying you "fought hard". Here is a link: In those talks we also did not intentionally drag them out by proposing terms one at a time. We did it in a quick way like every other major war has seen before this one (at least since I've played). What a coincidence you change the style of negotiations to a much slower format now after the war has already been dragging on for over 6 months.
  11. You're right, the best thing to do after suffering from toxicity is to be as toxic as possible yourself. I'd also argue there are different kinds of toxicity. Before this there was a never a war where the opposing side so clearly was trying to drag the war out as long as possible in an effort to bully as many people from the game as possible. Oh really? That's actually a good program/idea. Might have to suggest that for ourselves.
  12. Big talk from an alliance that shields their membership from the OWF ?
  13. Hodor: I am cynical about the game but hope it could one day be less toxic. A fleeting dream, but one I yet hold onto Malal: lol ur mom fat
  14. Happy to see people took my advice and implemented the Keshavbot: if anybody { 'mentions NPO'}; then keshav ('brings up TKR from 3 years ago') if keshav = { 'has no argument' } then keshav posts = ( 'passive aggressive emoji' )
  15. NPO congratulating GPWC on the #1 spot
  16. Happy Birthday, hope you didn't invite any Frey's ?
  17. I am starting a petition to give relief to our dear friend Keshav. This war has dragged on for months and months and he deserves a break. Therefore I am suggesting we create a "Keshavbot". I believe with just a few lines of code we can have Keshav's OWF posts fully automated by 2020! Here is an example: if anybody { 'mentions NPO'}; then keshav ('brings up TKR from 3 years ago') if keshav = { 'has no argument' } then keshav posts = ( 'passive aggressive emoji' )
  18. I actually have logs of you planning to hit them but I can't post them because reasons
  19. I think the question being asked is you are say we are working against our "supposed goals" as if you had specific ones in mind. What are the "supposed goals" you are referencing? Though I will point out our sphere's coalition name is Chaos
  20. I can't believe the alliance that has a history of making up CBs and not providing any proof would make up a CB and not provide any proof
  21. Adrienne has found a way to incorporate duck wangs even into OWF posts now. God help us all
  22. You are right I am being silly. I thought you were being perverted but now I understand you were just letting kids into your pants ? no
  23. Don't start being funny now, my heart can't take it
  24. This will be used as a CB by NPO 6 months from now So uh it really looks like you have an arrow pointing to your wang that says "Kid-tested, Roquentin approved"
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.