[Unlimited Attacks Project is OP, Please Nerf]

[Graphic Nation Description Promoting Genocide]

"A convenient, disingenuous reframing" he posts unironically and with no self awareness while calling the French Revolution a genocide.

[Graphic Nation Description Promoting Genocide]

"The French Revolution is too violent to reference", he posts unironically and with no self awareness from his Viking themed account.

[Are we willing to forgive?]

On 5/27/2020 at 6:28 PM, Abbas Mehdi said:

I am aware of goons attempt to get tkr and chaos sphere out of the war but we all know that attempt was not sincere when goons was making blocs within blocs and negotiating those surrenders.

Hello, ghost of Goonmas past here. Just wanted to clear some stuff up. Ignore it if you want, but note that I've long since checked out of the game and have no allegiances or politics to push.

First up, it was very much sincere, and happened long before any "blocs within blocs" came about. We got along quite well with TKR and many of the other Chaos alliances. We wanted them out of the war and would have been very open to working on a "sphere" with them post war. We ultimately worked it out with the coalition that we could extend an offer of white peace to Chaos, but they refused to peace without KETOG.

 

This was not a deal breaker, we didn't really care for many of the KETOG alliances, particularly considering TGH were the reason we ended up in the war in the first place, but whatever, fight to the end. The real final nail in the coffin was the two-facedness, namely when you have an alliance such as TKR playing the BFF role in private, and then posting on the forums that the GOON Boogeyman wanted to drive them from the game, while an offer of white peace was on the table the entire time.

So yes, when all your options are either alliances you despise, or two faced manipulators, you get "blocs within blocs" with NPO. Keep in mind, we had no strong ties to NPO from the outset. We started out with a protectorate from them because we were familiar with Roquentin from back in the CN days. We had no interest in the war until we ended up dragged by TGH, and we had no grudges or dislikes of any alliances outside of those who were ideology opposed to us. We could have went in any direction post war, but everyone was nice enough to shoehorn us into a role, so naturally we embraced it and bonded with what would become the OD sphere.

On 5/27/2020 at 7:21 PM, Azazel said:

In fact it was common knowledge that goons wanted to roll Camelot but BK was stopping them. 

Nope. We just didn't like Epi very much. Arthur and the rest were cool, and we honestly had bigger and better fish to fry than gunning for Camelot.

[[Announcement] Goons were a mistake.]

Hmm yes, the Italian teenager/US Navy Seal who had a $500k business deal cancelled mere hours after someone told them to stop acting skeevy on discord in a browser game.

I'm sure the dump of that server still exists if you want to start playing the victim card again.

[My dreams are shattered]

8 minutes ago, The Boofinator said:

theres at least 1. I am too busy watching wrassling to look for others. anyhow, i knew no one was leaving it was just feigned outrage is all, ppl venting

That's a picture of a plan on their own forum, not an announcement here.

At least we know only the best and brightest will be left behind if they do quit.

[My dreams are shattered]

I don't think any of those alliances have claimed to be quitting?

[God have mercy on Orbis]

Heartwarming to see Minesome added to the list of things that can bring both sides of the war together in agreement.

[Dubious moderation 2: Electric Bugaloo]

54 minutes ago, Madokami said:

What i'm talking about is the "H" word lol, besides, the only people that see it as such are Goons

from https://myanimelist.net/featured/1337/Top_20_Loli_Anime_Characters_Youll_Want_as_Little_Sisters

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I believe the moderation team sees it as such too, seeing as despite your objection, all references to "Lolis" have been rightly scrubbed from the game when found.

[Dubious moderation 2: Electric Bugaloo]

Are you still hung up on the fact that you can't talk about your "Loli" child pornography? It's time to let it go, and no, a drawing of a skeleton hugging a butt is not equivalent.

[God have mercy on Orbis]

Please stop reminding me that this wonderful war is partially because of you.

[[Treaty] This is the Prophecy of the End]

What a lovely bunch of coconuts.

[Guardians of The Galaxy, Willfully and Knowingly Harboring Debtors.]

1 hour ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

This is why loans, bonds, and any other shenanigans should just not be done. Now that IQ has rendered every possible treaty promise invalid through breaking each kind from NAP up to MDAP, there's really no reason to imagine why IQ would honor something as direct as a bond measure. And since IQ can't be trusted, there's no reason for anyone to expect good faith anywhere.

You're basically Noctis, but instead of having to mention GOONS in every topic, it's a defunct Bloc.

[WORLD FIRST MOON LANDING]

Godspeed, Jazz Aldrin.

[Guardians of The Galaxy, Willfully and Knowingly Harboring Debtors.]

4 minutes ago, Royal Confederacy said:

Our quarters are different.

Quarter centuries?

[[DoE] So Glad You Made It Out Of The Weeds ...]

Greatest alliance ever? I really can't say, but yes.

[The House surrenders to Goons]

1 hour ago, Malleator said:

I for one don't think this, "House," alliance has ever existed, and was solely a fictional creation of the goonies so that they may have an excuse to post their signatures.
I'm on to you, boonies.

We live in a Butt House of lies.

[Knock a GOON down]

Quality post.

[Enforcement of no-discussion rules is explicitly inconsistent with the written rules.]

7 hours ago, Zephyr said:

I think this is a misunderstanding of the forum rules: https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/guidelines/

Note it says 'specific forum rules', this does not indicate that these are the only rules in these forums. If it did that'd imply that any time you're the thread creator or accused, you can go on a porn posting spree if you so felt inclined because those rules weren't explicitly included in the specific forum rules thread. Obviously this is not the case and the forum rules apply, the specific forum rules are pointing out the deviations from the normal forum rules.

That's... exactly what I just said my dude. 

Going on a "porn posting spree" is obviously disallowed no matter where you post, but warning you for "posting in a NDF" rather than for posting porn, spamming, or whatever gives mixed signals.

Regardless, the rules have been updated now to more closely represent the moderation approach, which is appreciated @Chief Wiggum

[Peace In Our Time]

28 minutes ago, Charles the Tyrant said:

 Save yourself the effort and give up the obtuse act. 

Looks like you're winning!

[A Call to Arms]

35 minutes ago, James II said:

Are you suggesting IQ has no intention of letting us, or immortals peace out until at least December 2020? I can't say I'm surprised.

Are we really trying the "You won't let us surrender, also we're winning" schtick again?

[Enforcement of no-discussion rules is explicitly inconsistent with the written rules.]

2 hours ago, Chief Wiggum said:

The fact that you are the one being reported doesn't mean you can post anything you want. You have to specifically provide evidence that e.g. explains/defends yourself from the report. Besides, at any parts of the forum, posts including only "lol" or the like fall under the "no spamming" rule.

I believe that's the point he's trying to make. What you said is how it's enforced, but the rules specify otherwise, particularly that you can post if you're the accused, or you're providing evidence, not necessarily both.

In addition, if the post is spam, perhaps give a warn for spam, not for posting in NDF, which as far as the written rules are concerned, he is allowed to.

I guess the idea here at the end of the day is clarity. The way the moderation was handled is reasonable, but the rules should be adjusted to reflect the approach.

[Peace In Our Time]

8 hours ago, Charles the Tyrant said:

This is rich considering the events which have transpired since early November.

Please continue being a jester and amusing everyone with such humorous tidbits of logic and reasoning. 

Is there a competition between yourself and Barfsalot in TGH to see who can make the most vague allusions to things with absolutely nothing to back it up? What's the prize?

[Peace In Our Time]

50 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

An in-game treaty has nothing to do with the diplomatic realities.  As I've tried to explain to y'all, TLE had a valid option to enter defensively through their previous treaty to Pantheon (I believe that treaty was since cancelled/expired) and Schrute Farms.  I don't believe they entered until Pantheon was hit AND countered by other alliances, representing an expansion of the war.  This chain of events constitutes a valid defensive entry coherent with adherence to a NAP in-game treaty notwithstanding and frankly irrelevant.  

Just to make sure I'm not confused with who I'm talking to. Is this the same Cooper that recently tried to tell me that BK defending BoC with Camelot wasn't a defensive action? TLE hits us because someone 2 treaty chains away also hit us, and that's what you call entering defensively?

[Peace In Our Time]

8 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Says the serial pactbreaker

Still waiting for evidence of this. 

Note that things you've pulled out of your rear end do not qualify as evidence.