Jump to content
Prefonteen

Syndicate declaration of war on the New Pacific Order and the United Purple Nations

Recommended Posts

So, to sumarize everything I've read here:

 

1) t$ is pissy because they see things as going round and round and that the cycle never ends where they have to fight people they have historically fought

 

2) Both UPN and t$ attempt to repair the chasm that is their relations since January/February

 

3) t$ reaches out with a treaty that essentially would have left UPN's allies holding the bag and open to attack with with no way for UPN to really respond without losing a lot of face

 

4) t$ gets all pissy about a polite declining of the offer even though UPN continues to try to be friendly and avoid conflict

 

5) t$ gets all pissy that ONE member of the "old" guard is re-elected while most of the other council seats were from people who leaned being towards t$. Said old guard member publicly states that he wants to bury the hatchet.

 

6) t$ gets even more pissy that UPN make the natural steps towards people that don't act butt hurt whenever they disagree (referring to the fact that the NPO treaty took literally the majority of Emmad and Victor's term to get to)

 

7) t$ gets even more pissy that UPN expands tC (something that'd taken a lot of Emmad and Victor's tenure)

 

8) t$ declares war on UPN even though UPN, since last Thursday, has been actively attempting to get peace.

 

8) t$ blames the victims of the war and then laments that they can't break free of the cycle.

 

The cycle is going to be the same no matter what happens. Diplomatic incidents are going to happen, tensions are going to rise, war is going to happen. The only thing that is going to change are the players. If you don't like the fact that your'e fighting the same people, maybe go somewhere else where the people are different or stop betraying the trust that you've built up. You had several members of UPN's government CONVINCED that you really wanted to be friendly and not fight us. If anyone here isn't being consistent with the "turning over a new leaf" message, its you.

You can't honestly believe that UPN signing NPO wouldn't be seen as a major threat to us. Whether or not UPN has good intentions is irrelevant. You are allied NPO who we believe do not have good intentions and if they decided to attack tS, you would defend them from our allies counters. You can call us liars all you want, but we sincerely did not want to war UPN again. Hell, we didn't want to war NPO either (we have mutual allies). However, this was the best course of action for our long term survival.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kind of jealous that all the Syndicate threads go for 10+ pages and BK gets no love :(

Edited by Corvo
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, to sumarize everything I've read here:

 

1) t$ is pissy because they see things as going round and round and that the cycle never ends where they have to fight people they have historically fought

 

2) Both UPN and t$ attempt to repair the chasm that is their relations since January/February

 

3) t$ reaches out with a treaty that essentially would have left UPN's allies holding the bag and open to attack with with no way for UPN to really respond without losing a lot of face

 

4) t$ gets all pissy about a polite declining of the offer even though UPN continues to try to be friendly and avoid conflict

 

5) t$ gets all pissy that ONE member of the "old" guard is re-elected while most of the other council seats were from people who leaned being towards t$.  Said old guard member publicly states that he wants to bury the hatchet.

 

6) t$ gets even more pissy that UPN make the natural steps towards people that don't act butt hurt whenever they disagree (referring to the fact that the NPO treaty took literally the majority of Emmad and Victor's term to get to)

 

7) t$ gets even more pissy that UPN expands tC (something that'd taken a lot of Emmad and Victor's tenure)

 

8) t$ declares war on UPN even though UPN, since last Thursday, has been actively attempting to get peace.

 

8) t$ blames the victims of the war and then laments that they can't break free of the cycle.

 

The cycle is going to be the same no matter what happens.  Diplomatic incidents are going to happen, tensions are going to rise, war is going to happen.  The only thing that is going to change are the players.  If you don't like the fact that your'e fighting the same people, maybe go somewhere else where the people are different or stop betraying the trust that you've built up.  You had several members of UPN's government CONVINCED that you really wanted to be friendly and not fight us.  If anyone here isn't being consistent with the "turning over a new leaf" message, its you.

 

1) true

 

2) true

 

3) An ODP has that power?

 

4) If you say that you want to do something, that you want to break that cycle too, you got to put your money where your mouth is.

 

5) Same old guard member who actively vouched against the ODP, which was the only thing that could have proven you were serious about it.

 

6) You can make moves toward anyone you want, we'll react accordingly to protect our interests.

 

7) Not sure where you got that, you can blob together into a megazord if you want.

 

8) In truth, we're actually done playing the victims, if we're destined to fight, might as well be on our terms.

 

The last part of it, its rich, Bambino. The nature of this game and the treaty web actively made a war between UPN and tS a constant possibility, and it made it a reality its fair share of times.

 

You signed VE, getting closer to the Paragon bloc, and came after us in Oktoberfest.

 

You signed Rose, which hoped to lure us in a treaty trap in the previous war, something we tried to avoid, by not attacking VE. You literally took the first chance you had to attack us ( the SK communication mistake ), it could have been solved diplomatically, it wasn't. 

 

We legitimately tried to move on, with something SOLID, enough of words, promises, that we see broken everytime.

 

Lastly, NPO. We have been fighting Alpha for a month now, and we have received all manner of insults by now, i have yet to see a single line of condemnation for the opposite camp. Its easy to assume y'all are just to happy to profit from it, regardless of how toxic it is.

 

You constantly moved away from us, further and further, while saying otherwise. I'm sorry to say that the past has proven that we are no longer to simply believe you on your word. If that seems odd, unfair, or disloyal, we can talk about it further, but i don't see how.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't honestly believe that UPN signing NPO wouldn't be seen as a major threat to us. Whether or not UPN has good intentions is irrelevant. You are allied NPO who we believe do not have good intentions and if they decided to attack tS, you would defend them from our allies counters. You can call us liars all you want, but we sincerely did not want to war UPN again. Hell, we didn't want to war NPO either (we have mutual allies). However, this was the best course of action for our long term survival.

Bullshit. We have always been on the defensive. If you sincerely believe the NPO was planning an offensive war against tS you are delusional. We have always been the ones being put into situations where we could potentially end up getting hit by your sphere. End of. You wanted this war and you have it. Own it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullshit. We have always been on the defensive. If you sincerely believe the NPO was planning an offensive war against tS you are delusional. We have always been the ones being put into situations where we could potentially end up getting hit by your sphere. End of. You wanted this war and you have it. Own it.

Whether or not internally you guys were planning to be defensive is irrelevant. We can only base our moves on what we see and hear. NPO allied a lot of people who have been on the opposite side of tS in the past. On top of that, look at vala and partisans post for additional things that led us to believe NPO is a threat.

 

I don't mind UPN being angry with us. I do mind you guys trying to portray us as liars. We did want peace with UPN. (The previous thing where I said we wanted peace with NPO was my personal view so I guess I shouldn't have shared it as a alliance wide statement). Either way, these are the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether or not internally you guys were planning to be defensive is irrelevant. We can only base our moves on what we see and hear. NPO allied a lot of people who have been on the opposite side of tS in the past. On top of that, look at vala and partisans post for additional things that led us to believe NPO is a threat.

 

I don't mind UPN being angry with us. I do mind you guys trying to portray us as liars. We did want peace with UPN. (The previous thing where I said we wanted peace with NPO was my personal view so I guess I shouldn't have shared it as a alliance wide statement). Either way, these are the facts.

 

My comments were exclusively with regards to the hostility towards NPO. I'm sure you would have been happy to roll some alliances you don't like on theirr own with UPN sitting out since it plays into the whole divide and conquer stratagem you guys have been able to employ thus far in the past year or so of your dominance.  You have always been a far greater threat to us than we could ever be to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, can someone here name the last time NPO declared war on someone? No, it's physically impossible.

Edited by greatkitteh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comments were exclusively with regards to the hostility towards NPO. I'm sure you would have been happy to roll some alliances you don't like on theirr own with UPN sitting out since it plays into the whole divide and conquer stratagem you guys have been able to employ thus far in the past year or so of your dominance. You have always been a far greater threat to us than we could ever be to you.

Well actually no. You have strong allies, and Rose is in your corner by proxy. Excluding GPA, you have the top 3/5 supporting you.

 

Unless you're trying to say we are a far bigger threat because we are more willing to attack? There isn't a point in trying to argue this point because it's up for interpretation. I'd say the opposite.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well actually no. You have strong allies, and Rose is in your corner by proxy. Excluding GPA, you have the top 3/5 supporting you.

 

Unless you're trying to say we are a far bigger threat because we are more willing to attack? There isn't a point in trying to argue this point because it's up for interpretation. I'd say the opposite.

Yes, you have shown a propensity to attack and go for set ups where your opposition is divided.

 

 

Let's just get it straight unless there were huge fractures within tS sphere(like OO splitting off which there is no indication of there being any possibility of happening) that were particularly big there were only a small number of possibilities:

 

1. Rolling Paragon or Covenant on their own along with maybe some of their allies.

 

2. Rolling NPO on its own or with one of the two.

3. Fighting all three of Paragon/Covenant/NPO.

 

4. Fighting GPA

Edited by Roquentin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is clearly an objective and completely unbiased post! Nothing narrow-minded or one sided about it whatsoever! Clearly we should all believe everything you write and take your post at its face value, because it's totally not like your point of view is skewed to hell by your experiences as a UPN member, oh not at all. You are most equitable and impartial good sir, a most true and trustworthy source of information and surely you would have no interest in spinning things to make it seem like UPN is good and The $yndicate is bad, of course not! :rolleyes:

I believe you would find must of us to be a little less offended had you not first feigned interest in reconciliation, then declared war on us without us having caused you harm or insult and then project responsibility of the situation on us. With that in mind I believe we are allowed to be a little biased in our point of view regarding which one of the two of us who is the good guy and the bad guy. :rolleyes:

Edited by Hansarius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you have shown a propensity to attack and go for set ups where your opposition is divided.

 

 

Let's just get it straight unless there were huge fractures within tS sphere(like OO splitting off which there is no indication of there being any possibility of happening) that were particularly big there were only a small number of possibilities:

 

1. Rolling Paragon or Covenant on their own along with maybe some of their allies.

 

2. Rolling NPO on its own or with one of the two.

3. Fighting all three of Paragon/Covenant/NPO.

 

4. Fighting GPA

So you admit there are only a few possibilities for the future with how the treaties are currently set up. With these limited options, you're going to fault us for making one of those options happen, but on our terms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you admit there are only a few possibilities for the future with how the treaties are currently set up. With these limited options, you're going to fault us for making one of those options happen, but on our terms?

 

I'm not faulting you for doing it because your sphere shows no signs of breaking up, I'm faulting you for portraying us as aggressive and not acknowledging you presented a threat to anyone in those groupings. The attempts to blame the other side for the limited possibilities is the issue along with using consolidation as a reason to vilify us.

Edited by Roquentin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you would find must of us to be a little less offended had you not first feigned interest in reconciliation, then declared war on us without us having caused you harm or insult and then project responsibility of the situation on us. With that in mind I believe we are allowed to be a little biased in our point of view regarding which one of the two of us who is the good guy and the bad guy. :rolleyes:

 

Then you misunderstand the concept of bias. Even if we were solely responsible for all this (which we're not), being biased essentially means you're not seeing things clearly. It's not something that should ever be accepted or tolerated. Being biased is not something one should want to be in any case.

 

Now, I'm not saying we didn't have a hand in things turning out the way they did, it would be futile to deny that. But to deny that other parties are involved and have a part to play would be equally futile. This outcome is not the result of our actions alone and we should not have to accept full responsibility for it. The blame game is a very old and dull game, if you ask me.

 

Anyway, lykke til med krigen ;)

Edited by Big Brother

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not faulting you for doing it because your sphere shows no signs of breaking up, I'm faulting you for portraying us as aggressive and not acknowledging you presented a threat to anyone in those groupings. The attempts to blame the other side for the limited possibilities is the issue along with using consolidation as a reason to vilify us.

We never said we didn't pose a threat to the other side. We said we weren't lying when we said we wanted peace with UPN and we weren't lying when we said we were tired of the same type of war. We don't expect the other side to 100% take us by our word.

 

You're interpreting our CB as blaming you? Dude, you took actions and we responded to those actions. It's pretty straightforward. It is the other side that claims we have ulterior motives for this war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) true

 

2) true

 

3) An ODP has that power?

 

4) If you say that you want to do something, that you want to break that cycle too, you got to put your money where your mouth is.

 

5) Same old guard member who actively vouched against the ODP, which was the only thing that could have proven you were serious about it.

 

6) You can make moves toward anyone you want, we'll react accordingly to protect our interests.

 

7) Not sure where you got that, you can blob together into a megazord if you want.

 

8) In truth, we're actually done playing the victims, if we're destined to fight, might as well be on our terms.

 

The last part of it, its rich, Bambino. The nature of this game and the treaty web actively made a war between UPN and tS a constant possibility, and it made it a reality its fair share of times.

 

You signed VE, getting closer to the Paragon bloc, and came after us in Oktoberfest.

 

You signed Rose, which hoped to lure us in a treaty trap in the previous war, something we tried to avoid, by not attacking VE. You literally took the first chance you had to attack us ( the SK communication mistake ), it could have been solved diplomatically, it wasn't. 

 

We legitimately tried to move on, with something SOLID, enough of words, promises, that we see broken everytime.

 

Lastly, NPO. We have been fighting Alpha for a month now, and we have received all manner of insults by now, i have yet to see a single line of condemnation for the opposite camp. Its easy to assume y'all are just to happy to profit from it, regardless of how toxic it is.

 

You constantly moved away from us, further and further, while saying otherwise. I'm sorry to say that the past has proven that we are no longer to simply believe you on your word. If that seems odd, unfair, or disloyal, we can talk about it further, but i don't see how.

 

3) ODP does have that power.  It's essentially a glorified NAP and would prevent us from taking direct action against you and your allies.  Spin it how you want, but that's how it would have shook out.

 

4) Takes two to tango on putting money where your mouth is.  Right now the only people doing the aggression is you.  Heaven forbid we attempt to strengthen our position.  I'm sure t$ would have done the same if they could.

 

5) So your complaint is that one person you don't like got re-elected and somehow that makes UPN the bad guy.  I'll keep that in mind in regards to all rival alliances from now on, particularly Syndicate.

 

6) OK.  Just be honest about it.  Don't spin it to make it seem like we didn't attempt to be friendly.  I guess everyone on Orbis needs to keep this in mind.  If you decline an offer to t$, you're black listed and need to start the kill clock.

 

7)  OK.  Thanks for your permission.  We will likely do just that.

 

8) OK.  That's fine.  Just stop !@#$ing about how you want a different dynamic for the game but then repeat the same pattern that you advocate against. This is the royal you, not the personal you.

 

So, we share the same sentiment then Valakias regarding how it's going to be the same dynamic.

 

No promises were made to you Valakias.  We tried to get the ODP through and it didn't work out.  The fact that you are so butt hurt about this clearly shows how desperate you are to win the PR side of an aggressive war against alliances that didn't have any plans for you and were focused quite a bit on strengthening relations with people we viewed as allies and making new friends.  We always have the option to not fight as was demonstrated by our non-militarization when your conflict broke out with Alpha (not direct treaty members).

 

Whelp, I guess there's no way we'll convince each other that we don't want to be friendly.  As it stands, from my perspective, t$ has deceived everyone more than UPN ever has.  We've always been very straight forward with our intentions, so I guess there's that.  Good luck in the war.

 

This is clearly an objective and completely unbiased post! Nothing narrow-minded or one sided about it whatsoever! Clearly we should all believe everything you write and take your post at its face value, because it's totally not like your point of view is skewed to hell by your experiences as a UPN member, oh not at all. You are most equitable and impartial good sir, a most true and trustworthy source of information and surely you would have no interest in spinning things to make it seem like UPN is good and The $yndicate is bad, of course not! :rolleyes:

 

Yup, no biase here.  I'm not asking you to believe me, just posting for everyone to see through the spin your side so desperately wants to create regarding the bad actors here.

 

Whether or not internally you guys were planning to be defensive is irrelevant. We can only base our moves on what we see and hear. NPO allied a lot of people who have been on the opposite side of tS in the past. On top of that, look at vala and partisans post for additional things that led us to believe NPO is a threat.

 

I don't mind UPN being angry with us. I do mind you guys trying to portray us as liars. We did want peace with UPN. (The previous thing where I said we wanted peace with NPO was my personal view so I guess I shouldn't have shared it as a alliance wide statement). Either way, these are the facts.

 

Sounds like a lot of paranoia won out in my opinion.  I can respect the idea that you're doing what you think is right for your sphere, but the honest truth is that if you don't want peace, then be up front about it rather than wasting our time and then claiming the people you attack didn't want peace.  UPN reached out multiple times to try to avoid this and we were basically spurned each time. Good luck.  Doubtful you'll ever see us being friendly in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) ODP does have that power. It's essentially a glorified NAP and would prevent us from taking direct action against you and your allies. Spin it how you want, but that's how it would have shook out.

 

4) Takes two to tango on putting money where your mouth is. Right now the only people doing the aggression is you. Heaven forbid we attempt to strengthen our position. I'm sure t$ would have done the same if they could.

 

5) So your complaint is that one person you don't like got re-elected and somehow that makes UPN the bad guy. I'll keep that in mind in regards to all rival alliances from now on, particularly Syndicate.

 

6) OK. Just be honest about it. Don't spin it to make it seem like we didn't attempt to be friendly. I guess everyone on Orbis needs to keep this in mind. If you decline an offer to t$, you're black listed and need to start the kill clock.

 

7) OK. Thanks for your permission. We will likely do just that.

 

8) OK. That's fine. Just stop [email protected]#$ about how you want a different dynamic for the game but then repeat the same pattern that you advocate against. This is the royal you, not the personal you.

 

So, we share the same sentiment then Valakias regarding how it's going to be the same dynamic.

 

No promises were made to you Valakias. We tried to get the ODP through and it didn't work out. The fact that you are so butt hurt about this clearly shows how desperate you are to win the PR side of an aggressive war against alliances that didn't have any plans for you and were focused quite a bit on strengthening relations with people we viewed as allies and making new friends. We always have the option to not fight as was demonstrated by our non-militarization when your conflict broke out with Alpha (not direct treaty members).

 

Whelp, I guess there's no way we'll convince each other that we don't want to be friendly. As it stands, from my perspective, t$ has deceived everyone more than UPN ever has. We've always been very straight forward with our intentions, so I guess there's that. Good luck in the war.

 

 

Yup, no biase here. I'm not asking you to believe me, just posting for everyone to see through the spin your side so desperately wants to create regarding the bad actors here.

 

 

Sounds like a lot of paranoia won out in my opinion. I can respect the idea that you're doing what you think is right for your sphere, but the honest truth is that if you don't want peace, then be up front about it rather than wasting our time and then claiming the people you attack didn't want peace. UPN reached out multiple times to try to avoid this and we were basically spurned each time. Good luck. Doubtful you'll ever see us being friendly in the future.

You do remember when UPN, led by Saru and Hans, lied to us and their allies right before Oktoberfest? You do realize that those same two people lied to us during the proxy war and we have evidence to prove these facts. (If you want evidence, partisan has a post somewhere that I'm lazy to find). Either way, I'm sure you can see why we don't 100% trust UPN, especially when they are led by Hans and Saru who have lied to us in the past.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, no biase here.  I'm not asking you to believe me, just posting for everyone to see through the spin your side so desperately wants to create regarding the bad actors here.

 

You're not asking people to believe you but you want them to see through our supposed spin? That's pretty contradictory. Keep spinning if you want but there's nothing you could say that we haven't heard and disproved before. Old arguments are old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well actually no. You have strong allies, and Rose is in your corner by proxy. Excluding GPA, you have the top 3/5 supporting you.

 

Unless you're trying to say we are a far bigger threat because we are more willing to attack? There isn't a point in trying to argue this point because it's up for interpretation. I'd say the opposite.

Yes being more willing to attack by definition makes you a bigger threat.  You can say the opposite but that doesn't make it true.

 

We never said we didn't pose a threat to the other side. We said we weren't lying when we said we wanted peace with UPN and we weren't lying when we said we were tired of the same type of war. We don't expect the other side to 100% take us by our word.

 

You're interpreting our CB as blaming you? Dude, you took actions and we responded to those actions. It's pretty straightforward. It is the other side that claims we have ulterior motives for this war.

So you did pose a threat, you say you want peace with UPN despite all the agressive attack, and you say you're tired of the same type of war while starting the same type of war.  Yeah no one is taking you 100% by your word.

And as for the CB, I didn't see one written out by you (sorry if I missed it).  You obviously do have ulterior motives for this war, virtually every post by you screams it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do remember when UPN, led by Saru and Hans, lied to us and their allies right before Oktoberfest? You do realize that those same two people lied to us during the proxy war and we have evidence to prove these facts. (If you want evidence, partisan has a post somewhere that I'm lazy to find). Either way, I'm sure you can see why we don't 100% trust UPN, especially when they are led by Hans and Saru who have lied to us in the past.

And YES!!!  Evidence please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all pixels lie wrecked

walls of text are built sky high
as the snek trumps steve
Edited by Kemal Ergenekon
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<Partisan> When they are finally rebuilt (and we left them alone because peace and intentions), a 'CB' drops into the laps of one of them (Ideally they sit out a war first but hey!) and all the others chain in or threaten to chain in because treaties.

 

I demand proof that there was any intention of hitting TS, that anyone threatened TS, that anyone threatened to chain in on TS, or that anyone threatened to chain in because of treaties on TS.

 

If all others but Partisan could ignore this post I'd greatly appreciate it, as I'd like his WoT not someone elses. 

 

kthx.

 

edit: i was way more happy when this was just a "meh let's go to war because" rather then a "we were threatened so we pre-empted"

Edited by MrHat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less arguing and more STEEEEEVE pls.

STEVE! STEVE! STEVE! STEVE! STEVE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes being more willing to attack by definition makes you a bigger threat. You can say the opposite but that doesn't make it true.

 

So you did pose a threat, you say you want peace with UPN despite all the agressive attack, and you say you're tired of the same type of war while starting the same type of war. Yeah no one is taking you 100% by your word.

And as for the CB, I didn't see one written out by you (sorry if I missed it). You obviously do have ulterior motives for this war, virtually every post by you screams it.

Look, I understand everyone is biased in favor of themselves, but please think about what you say before posting. The situation changed when you allied NPO so us wanting peace with UPN doesnt apply anymore.

 

And no, us being more willing to attack does not make us more of a threat, nor did I agree we were more willing to attack. You do realize that most wars tS has been in was not started by tS? You do realize that we've been on the defensive most wars? The fact that we won those wars does not make us the more aggressive party. Hell, the only two wars tS started was the war with Alpha and this one.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you misunderstand the concept of bias. Even if we were solely responsible for all this (which we're not), being biased essentially means you're not seeing things clearly. It's not something that should ever be accepted or tolerated. Being biased is not something one should want to be in any case.

 

Now, I'm not saying we didn't have a hand in things turning out the way they did, it would be futile to deny that. But to deny that other parties are involved and have a part to play would be equally futile. This outcome is not the result of our actions alone and we should not have to accept full responsibility for it. The blame game is a very old and dull game, if you ask me.

 

Anyway, lykke til med krigen ;)

Bias means having a preference towards one point of view over another. Yes I am biased towards UPN's point of view on who is responsible for this war, largely because you started this war.

Now I see many of you having owned up to this being simply about retaining the supremacy of your sphere before our own could become a credible threat to it. I can respect that.

I find it harder to respect that others of the Syndicate is so prone to condescension of anyone who objects and criticizes them and then have the nerve to accuse and lecture us about bias.

 

Jo lykke til der og.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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