Arrgh Sails again

[Fistandantilus]

Your word and any agreement you sign is now viewed as worthless by the majority of alliances here, if not all of them who read this topic.

 

Sure there are some, who you are fighting for, that won't tell you this to your face.  But everyone is thinking it and most of us are laughing about it.  And in the future you will find out what that really means and the permanent ramifications.

 

Incorrect.

 

The UPN deal only specified raiding, this is a War. Arrgh is legally in the clear and did not break the agreement.

 

You could argue that they broke the spirit of the treaty but it's hard to do that when it was extorted..

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they Steve?

Edited June 18, 2016 by Fistandantilus

[Placentica]

Incorrect.

 

The UPN deal only specified raiding, this is a War. Arrgh is legally in the clear and did not break the agreement.

 

You could argue that they broke the spirit of the treaty but it's hard to do that when it was extorted..

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they Steve?

Joshua, I think you quoted the wrong post here because I wasn't talking about Arrgh.

 

But to respond, as I think you wanted to quote my previous post... when was a raid not a war?  And what if Arrgh attacks inactives and beiges them in this war?  Are those raids?  We had several Alphan declare war on and beige their targets for $10m in loot.  Was that war or a raid?  When tS was mass-beiging us was that a raid or war?

 

I honestly don't really care, but lets call a spade a spade.  I don't see a reason to not be honest about that.

 

 

If you repeat the same Lie often enough it becomes true. You may want to look into that.

also while i have you'r atenttion can we talk about what is and what isnt an OOC attack? Cause you'r overusage is diluting the term. Cause you seem to think that any OOC reffrence is equal to an attack. Like the fact that ppl keep calling you Steve is of the same magnitude as the horrendous slandering of Pfeiffers RL persona in august. And i know things havent Been going you'r way lately and that you might want to make up for ingame shortcomings with OWF loudmouthedness or IRC rants, but from some Who have had some though times in This game to anouther, take a break with some friends, make a change, go find the comunity that makes you happy for me that was TEst, for you that might be NPO or Rose or Even staying in Alpha, idc. Just take care of you, cause we are starting to Get worried!

Edit: i take no responsiblity for spelling or grammar, my phone is in norwegian....

Where did I lie?  Did one of my allies not attack the other?  You said Alpha broke a treaty.  But then you refuse to offer up where we did.  All I hear you saying there is quit the game because some people are trying to make it hard for me to play.  I don't think that has anything to do with my history with the treaties I've had.

[Bezzers]

YAY for Dylan still existing, btw! 

I couldnt find his nation and I was sad

[Prefonteen]

Incorrect.

 

The UPN deal only specified raiding, this is a War. Arrgh is legally in the clear and did not break the agreement.

 

You could argue that they broke the spirit of the treaty but it's hard to do that when it was extorted..

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they Steve?

 

 

Joshua, I think you quoted the wrong post here because I wasn't talking about Arrgh.

 

But to respond, as I think you wanted to quote my previous post... when was a raid not a war?  And what if Arrgh attacks inactives and beiges them in this war?  Are those raids?  We had several Alphan declare war on and beige their targets for $10m in loot.  Was that war or a raid?  When tS was mass-beiging us was that a raid or war?

 

I honestly don't really care, but lets call a spade a spade.  I don't see a reason to not be honest about that.

 

 

Where did I lie?  Did one of my allies not attack the other?  You said Alpha broke a treaty.  But then you refuse to offer up where we did.  All I hear you saying there is quit the game because some people are trying to make it hard for me to play.  I don't think that has anything to do with my history with the treaties I've had.

 

YEAH JOSHUA.

 

@Steve: No.

[Fistandantilus]

Joshua, I think you quoted the wrong post here because I wasn't talking about Arrgh.

 

But to respond, as I think you wanted to quote my previous post... when was a raid not a war?  And what if Arrgh attacks inactives and beiges them in this war?  Are those raids?  We had several Alphan declare war on and beige their targets for $10m in loot.  Was that war or a raid?  When tS was mass-beiging us was that a raid or war?

 

I honestly don't really care, but lets call a spade a spade.  I don't see a reason to not be honest about that..

 

You don't know the difference between a raid and a war? Intent and a/or a DoW. A raid is a military action undertaken strictly for profit(Think Tech raids from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) That does not have a DoW. A war is a more broad term for a different type of military action(usually politics, allies, infra damage, merc contract,ect). Profit tends to take a sideline, especially if accompanied by a DoW. If a DoW is given, regardless of actions, it is a war. Arrgh has given a DoW, so that makes it a war. It is undeniable that it is a war with a DoW. While they are inherently similar(Raids/Wars), there are succinct differences, you really didnt know?

 

Saying Arrgh broke an agreement that they did not is a serious thing, and as such, the right thing to do would be to give them an apology.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Fistandantilus

[Valakias]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLhIdM3r7yA

Edited June 18, 2016 by Valakias

[greatkitteh]

YEAH JOSHUA.

 

@Steve Placentica : No.

 

This is an OOC attack

[LostWorld]

where did you find this 

 

Precious booty muhahahaha

Edited June 18, 2016 by LostWorld

[LostWorld]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPu1C0QaMPM

 

Arrghs be like Hector  - To serve is suffice sire UPN... 

 

I guess UPN wasn't such a nicer class of persons

Edited June 18, 2016 by LostWorld

[Jodo]

This is an OOC attack

Drink.

[Prefonteen]

You don't know the difference between a raid and a war? Intent and a/or a DoW. A raid is a military action undertaken strictly for profit(Think Tech raids from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) That does not have a DoW. A war is a more broad term for a different type of military action(usually politics, allies, infra damage, merc contract,ect). Profit tends to take a sideline, especially if accompanied by a DoW. If a DoW is given, regardless of actions, it is a war. Arrgh has given a DoW, so that makes it a war. It is undeniable that it is a war with a DoW. While they are inherently similar(Raids/Wars), there are succinct differences, you really didnt know?

 

Saying Arrgh broke an agreement that they did not is a serious thing, and as such, the right thing to do would be to give them an apology.

 

DAMN JOSHUA! STOP APPLYING LOGIC

[Prefontaine]

Saying Arrgh broke an agreement that they did not is a serious thing, and as such, the right thing to do would be to give them an apology.

Steve, apologize? Ahahahahahahahahaaaahhhaaa. He only knows how to do that sarcastically.

[DragonK]

Something I pointed out in the surrender thread itself way back in April. Honestly, UPN et al. coalition should've hired better eLawyers to look over the terms to make sure something like this didn't happen. 

 

Yeah, my first reaction to it was, wait, we "just" can't raid them, but DoWs are ok, right? Also, for obvius reasons, I refrained form mentioning it publicly, last thing I wanted was for someone on winning side to realize it and firce chage the terms.

Edited June 18, 2016 by DragonK

[LostWorld]

Or maybe Arrghs were just resting and here we startled them with our wars

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szUEkiRPQwQ

[TheNG]

Incorrect.

 

The UPN deal only specified raiding, this is a War. Arrgh is legally in the clear and did not break the agreement.

 

You could argue that they broke the spirit of the treaty but it's hard to do that when it was extorted..

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they Steve?

 

Regardless of whether or not the spirit of the peace agreement was violated, claiming it was extorted from Arrgh is ridiculous.

The war was one that Arrgh itself â€‹started and lost. They approached us looking for peace, and those terms were the ones we gave.

Arrgh was entirely free to reject those terms, at which point the war would've continued until one side decided to try negotiating again.

If that is an extortion, then I suppose that means every other peace treaty ever made in this game is extorted, now doesn't it?

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they?

[Ole]

Where did I lie?  Did one of my allies not attack the other?  You said Alpha broke a treaty.  But then you refuse to offer up where we did.  All I hear you saying there is quit the game because some people are trying to make it hard for me to play.  I don't think that has anything to do with my history with the treaties I've had.

 

1. Effort fiinding those logs. Have to talk to snek. Dont want to.

 

2. Did i say that? if so one of us needs glasses. Ill try again, what i tried to say is you seems "unhinged" alot of the time, might want to take a break. And by break i dont mean quit, i mean do like i did, fade out alittle, comeback with new energi and have fun again, cause it just seems you spend your time on thngs that dosent make you happy. And from time to time the rest of us too...

[greatkitteh]

Regardless of whether or not the spirit of the peace agreement was violated, claiming it was extorted from Arrgh is ridiculous.

The war was one that Arrgh itself ​started and lost. They approached us looking for peace, and those terms were the ones we gave.

Arrgh was entirely free to reject those terms, at which point the war would've continued until one side decided to try negotiating again.

If that is an extortion, then I suppose that means every other peace treaty ever made in this game is extorted, now doesn't it?

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they?

>Tell DEIC about unfair peace terms

>Thats a pretty good propoganda machine

[LostWorld]

another good scene

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvyZruSs3ds

[Fistandantilus]

Regardless of whether or not the spirit of the peace agreement was violated, claiming it was extorted from Arrgh is ridiculous.

The war was one that Arrgh itself â€‹started and lost. They approached us looking for peace, and those terms were the ones we gave.

Arrgh was entirely free to reject those terms, at which point the war would've continued until one side decided to try negotiating again.

If that is an extortion, then I suppose that means every other peace treaty ever made in this game is extorted, now doesn't it?

 

Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they?

 

Did Arrgh raise serious objections about those terms but only agree to them because of how the war was going? If so, it is extortion technically. I dont blame you guys for doing what you did, people have every right to do everything in their power to protect themselves and their allies from threats. But when you force terms that are to hard, especially if the document isnt worked well to include "Military actions", it will just create a grudge I think.

 

ex·tort

ikˈstôrt/

verb

verb: extort; 3rd person present: extorts; past tense: extorted; past participle: extorted; gerund or present participle: extorting

obtain (something) by force, threats, or unfair means.

 

Would UPN of gotten those terms, or any at all if they didn't have the force to make arrgh agree? Unlikely IMO. I don't think it was an agreement both parties agreed to willingly, I would assume it was one arrgh felt they where forced to do given the situation and UPN felt it had to leverage to do so. To say that they where free to reject does not mean it was not extortion.

 

But as I said, I don't blame UPN or it's allies for doing what they did(Though personally, I think it may of not been the best way to go about it), it was just clearly forced(And this was not the first time here in PnW a party has done this. I don't intend for it to be sinister or accusatory, just factual. Especially given the situation you guys where in at, and before, that time with arrgh).

Edited June 18, 2016 by Fistandantilus

[TheNG]

 

Did Arrgh raise serious objections about those terms but only agree to them because of how the war was going? If so, it is extortion technically. I dont blame you guys for doing what you did, people have every right to do everything in their power to protect themselves and their allies from threats. But when you force terms that are to hard, especially if the document isnt worked well to include "Military actions", it will just create a grudge I think.

 

ex·tort

ikˈstôrt/

verb

verb: extort; 3rd person present: extorts; past tense: extorted; past participle: extorted; gerund or present participle: extorting

obtain (something) by force, threats, or unfair means.

 

Would UPN of gotten those terms, or any at all if they didn't have the force to make arrgh agree? Unlikely IMO. I don't think it was an agreement both parties agreed to willingly, I would assume it was one arrgh felt they where forced to do given the situation and UPN felt it had to leverage to do so. To say that they where free to reject does not mean it was not extortion.

 

But as I said, I don't blame UPN or it's allies for doing what they did(Though personally, I think it may of not been the best way to go about it), it was just clearly forced(And this was not the first time here in PnW a party has done this. I don't intend for it to be sinister or accusatory, just factual. Especially given the situation you guys where in at, and before, that time with arrgh).

 

Alright, so I don't really see how that disproves anything that I said. Let's break it down.

 

So, first we have our definition of extort. Did Arrgh only agree to the terms presented because of how the war was going and with the threat of violence from UPN and friends? Of course they did! The peace talks were done with the understanding that if an agreement wasn't reached then the war would continue and Arrgh would continue to get beat up, that's how wars work. Indeed, that's how all wars work. No one has ever tried to surrender when they were winning after all. If we take a hypothetical victor alliance and a defeated alliance, the victor of will always use the unstated (or stated) threat of continuing violence to get an agreement on the terms they desire, whether those terms are reparations, demilitarization, a no-raid agreement, or anything they decide to demand. So by your own definition, every peace treaty ever in this game was extorted from the defeated alliance by the victor, including any peace treaties Pantheon was party to or directly involved in. The peace negotiations with Arrgh were fairly average and unremarkable, with the slight exception of the particular terms demanded, so if the victor alliances are guilty of "extortion," then so are you. ​As such, when all peace treaties can be considered a form of extortion, then the word really loses any real meaning as a descriptor for them, wouldn't you say?

 

Bluster aside, I don't think you care a whole lot about how the peace treaty was obtained. You care about the terms themselves of the peace treaty. It's clear from your posts that you dislike the terms, consider them poorly thought out, too harsh, and so on. That's perfectly fine, you're free to feel that way. And I would say that given the context around the negotiations, months of raids and an undeclared war before an actual declaration, and Arrgh's campaign of slander, insults, and refused negotiations, and the fact that the final terms were much less harsh than those originally thrown around, then the terms were more than justified. And again, you're perfectly free to continue to disagree with me, and post your opinion about the subject. But you are not doing that. No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due. It's disingenuous at best, so just drop the "factual" spin and post what you think without the narrative. The worst I can do, after all, is disagree.

[Placentica]

1. Effort fiinding those logs. Have to talk to snek. Dont want to.

 

2. Did i say that? if so one of us needs glasses. Ill try again, what i tried to say is you seems "unhinged" alot of the time, might want to take a break. And by break i dont mean quit, i mean do like i did, fade out alittle, comeback with new energi and have fun again, cause it just seems you spend your time on thngs that dosent make you happy. And from time to time the rest of us too...

For someone that has never had a single conversation with me, you seem to think you know a lot about me or the amount of fun I and Alpha has had nuking people this war.

 

You could've just summarized this "log" because I know the one you think proves your point (and doesn't), used without complete context of hours of hours of logs I had with tS gov that war.  You also fail to acknowledge that one of my allies attacked the other directly and how that became Alpha's betrayal vs. that ally's is an interesting spin on the level of "the bigger the lie the more they will believe it".  But I think you will drop this because all the arguments you can make can be easily proven false.  And every single one of your claims of treaty violation are pre-dated by tS breaking the intel clause with Alpha.  At which point the treaty is dead.  I made 100% clear I supported Rose's defense of Vanguard, I viewed Mensa as the aggressor, and I don't believe their MDPs should've triggered, even if I understood that tS most likely would activate them.  This is just my opinion, one that is in the minority I realize, but the important part is where I communicated this very very clearly to everyone including tS.  I fulfilled my intel clause with them by being 100% upfront at every stage of that war, and there were many stages.  When Roz hit, we were obligated to attack them.  At which point that was our full involvement if the war remained unchanged.  Since I cannot predict who was going to hit Rose, I also couldn't predict how Alpha would be obligated to react to a change in the war.  That change happened twice and Alpha's involvement changed accordingly.  To say we violated any treaty that war is just plain untrue.  You can say all you want about how awful you think I am or how stupid you think I am or how "unhinged" you think I am.  But stick to that, and not the case you are trying to make.  I realize you think I'm low-hanging fruit right now and you know that any post you make that is poking fun at me will get 10 likes and lots of o7 o7 o7 we love you! o7 o7 o7's.  But this doesn't change facts.  I know we helped to roll you in Oktoberfest and I wish I could change our involvement knowing that we were used, but I can't and hindsight is 20/20.

[Boony]

For someone that has never had a single conversation with me, you seem to think you know a lot about me or the amount of fun I and Alpha has had nuking people this war.

 

You could've just summarized this "log" because I know the one you think proves your point (and doesn't), used without complete context of hours of hours of logs I had with tS gov that war. You also fail to acknowledge that one of my allies attacked the other directly and how that became Alpha's betrayal vs. that ally's is an interesting spin on the level of "the bigger the lie the more they will believe it". But I think you will drop this because all the arguments you can make can be easily proven false. And every single one of your claims of treaty violation are pre-dated by tS breaking the intel clause with Alpha. At which point the treaty is dead. I made 100% clear I supported Rose's defense of Vanguard, I viewed Mensa as the aggressor, and I don't believe their MDPs should've triggered, even if I understood that tS most likely would activate them. This is just my opinion, one that is in the minority I realize, but the important part is where I communicated this very very clearly to everyone including tS. I fulfilled my intel clause with them by being 100% upfront at every stage of that war, and there were many stages. When Roz hit, we were obligated to attack them. At which point that was our full involvement if the war remained unchanged. Since I cannot predict who was going to hit Rose, I also couldn't predict how Alpha would be obligated to react to a change in the war. That change happened twice and Alpha's involvement changed accordingly. To say we violated any treaty that war is just plain untrue. You can say all you want about how awful you think I am or how stupid you think I am or how "unhinged" you think I am. But stick to that, and not the case you are trying to make. I realize you think I'm low-hanging fruit right now and you know that any post you make that is poking fun at me will get 10 likes and lots of o7 o7 o7 we love you! o7 o7 o7's. But this doesn't change facts. I know we helped to roll you in Oktoberfest and I wish I could change our involvement knowing that we were used, but I can't and hindsight is 20/20.

*sniffs*

 

What's that smell?

 

*sniffs*

 

I think I smell bullshit

[Ole]

For someone that has never had a single conversation with me, you seem to think you know a lot about me or the amount of fun I and Alpha has had nuking people this war.

 

You could've just summarized this "log" because I know the one you think proves your point (and doesn't), used without complete context of hours of hours of logs I had with tS gov that war.  You also fail to acknowledge that one of my allies attacked the other directly and how that became Alpha's betrayal vs. that ally's is an interesting spin on the level of "the bigger the lie the more they will believe it".  But I think you will drop this because all the arguments you can make can be easily proven false.  And every single one of your claims of treaty violation are pre-dated by tS breaking the intel clause with Alpha.  At which point the treaty is dead.  I made 100% clear I supported Rose's defense of Vanguard, I viewed Mensa as the aggressor, and I don't believe their MDPs should've triggered, even if I understood that tS most likely would activate them.  This is just my opinion, one that is in the minority I realize, but the important part is where I communicated this very very clearly to everyone including tS.  I fulfilled my intel clause with them by being 100% upfront at every stage of that war, and there were many stages.  When Roz hit, we were obligated to attack them.  At which point that was our full involvement if the war remained unchanged.  Since I cannot predict who was going to hit Rose, I also couldn't predict how Alpha would be obligated to react to a change in the war.  That change happened twice and Alpha's involvement changed accordingly.  To say we violated any treaty that war is just plain untrue.  You can say all you want about how awful you think I am or how stupid you think I am or how "unhinged" you think I am.  But stick to that, and not the case you are trying to make.  I realize you think I'm low-hanging fruit right now and you know that any post you make that is poking fun at me will get 10 likes and lots of o7 o7 o7 we love you! o7 o7 o7's.  But this doesn't change facts.  I know we helped to roll you in Oktoberfest and I wish I could change our involvement knowing that we were used, but I can't and hindsight is 20/20.

 

Im too drunk and too lazy to write a wall to match you so ill make it short:

 

1. "For someone that has never had a single conversation with me, you seem to think you know a lot about me or the amount of fun I and Alpha has had nuking people this war."

 

you are right, i just observe.

 

But im not trying to shit on you with that part im trying to help : )

 

2. "You could've just summarized this "log" because I know the one you think proves your point."

 

Still fairly sure it does. Still havent reread it tho.

 

3. "You can say all you want about how awful you think I am or how stupid you think I am or how "unhinged" you think I am"

 

Dont think or said you where awful or stupid, or that you where "unhinged" but you seem to be, i dont think that you are, but i think the stress of this spring has eaten at you in some fasion, and that a break might do you some good.

 

4. "I realize you think I'm low-hanging fruit right now and you know that any post you make that is poking fun at me will get 10 likes and lots of o7 o7 o7 we love you! o7 o7 o7's."

 

Dont think you are a weakling to poke fun at, but tS and most of their friends have stoped responding to you, so i figured i would : )

 

5. "I know we helped to roll you in Oktoberfest and I wish I could change our involvement knowing that we were used"

 

Dont give a shit, and your bad luck, and i dont even care that you helped VE spoil my fun when i was in SK. I got you back in our last war so in my book we're all good.

[Tywin Lannister]

Arrgh's campaign of slander, insults, 

 

When and where did that happen? 

[Fistandantilus]

Alright, so I don't really see how that disproves anything that I said. Let's break it down.

 

So, first we have our definition of extort. Did Arrgh only agree to the terms presented because of how the war was going and with the threat of violence from UPN and friends? Of course they did! The peace talks were done with the understanding that if an agreement wasn't reached then the war would continue and Arrgh would continue to get beat up, that's how wars work. Indeed, that's how all wars work. No one has ever tried to surrender when they were winning after all. If we take a hypothetical victor alliance and a defeated alliance, the victor of will always use the unstated (or stated) threat of continuing violence to get an agreement on the terms they desire, whether those terms are reparations, demilitarization, a no-raid agreement, or anything they decide to demand. So by your own definition, every peace treaty ever in this game was extorted from the defeated alliance by the victor, including any peace treaties Pantheon was party to or directly involved in. The peace negotiations with Arrgh were fairly average and unremarkable, with the slight exception of the particular terms demanded, so if the victor alliances are guilty of "extortion," then so are you. ​As such, when all peace treaties can be considered a form of extortion, then the word really loses any real meaning as a descriptor for them, wouldn't you say?

 

Bluster aside, I don't think you care a whole lot about how the peace treaty was obtained. You care about the terms themselves of the peace treaty. It's clear from your posts that you dislike the terms, consider them poorly thought out, too harsh, and so on. That's perfectly fine, you're free to feel that way. And I would say that given the context around the negotiations, months of raids and an undeclared war before an actual declaration, and Arrgh's campaign of slander, insults, and refused negotiations, and the fact that the final terms were much less harsh than those originally thrown around, then the terms were more than justified. And again, you're perfectly free to continue to disagree with me, and post your opinion about the subject. But you are not doing that. No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due. It's disingenuous at best, so just drop the "factual" spin and post what you think without the narrative. The worst I can do, after all, is disagree.

 

 

You are incorrect on several points, let me break it down so it's easy to understand:

 

1) It is absurd to think that all peace agreements are extorted. White peace happens, and happens often. Both sides agreeing on reps in good faith happens as well. To say that because the looser never gives the terms = Every war in the history of ever has resulted in extortion is incorrect, and very silly.

 

2) My entire point of last post was that it was extortion. You said it wasn't, but it is. I said nothing about going into the fairness/justifications/commonality of it all, but as I said in #1, the term is meaningful as it is far from universal. I could go into a discussion about how I think is the correct way to do them, but that is offtopic.

 

3) My point here was that they didnt break them, and that is the fact.And certainly not "No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due"

 

4) But on the the topic of Bias, I can say with certainty that you are the one biased here. The only thing I said about me doing things differently(Insinuation that UPN could of done better) was this: "

But as I said, I don't blame UPN or it's allies for doing what they did(Though personally, I think it may of not been the best way to go about it), it was just clearly forced(And this was not the first time here in PnW a party has done this. I don't intend for it to be sinister or accusatory, just factual. Especially given the situation you guys where in at, and before, that time with arrgh)."

 

You then translate this as "No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due. It's disingenuous at best, so just drop the "factual" spin and post what you think without the narrative. The worst I can do, after all, is disagree."

 

This is a clear cut case of bias on your end to anyone who is capable of seeing bias.

 

 

If you want a reasonable discussion to continue, I need to you to acknowledge that your points where wrong. Acknowledged that your 1st point was incorrect, where you claimed it was not extortion(The dictionary disagreed with you). Acknowledge that White peace is not extortion every time(I could argue that it is not often in my experiences, but that's unnecessary), so your claim about every peace treaty being extortion is false. Acknowledge that it is in fact you* who are the biased one here and that you took that comment waayyyyy to far in an incorrect direction as I have proven(Via bias). Acknowledge that there is no spinning on my end, I have been accurate with everything so far. I have never been disingenuous here. I have not slandered UPN in any way as you have said, I just said I didn't blame you guys and it was a tough time, but I would of done it differently.

 

If you disagree with any of these, feel free to argue, but do not change the subject and dodge again(Dont Steve me bro), let's get this settled in a rational way before we progress. I understand bias is blinding though, I hope my points are clear to you. It is also key to acknowledge mistakes, we're all human, their is no shame in that. Just have the awareness to see them so you can overcome them.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Fistandantilus