Recognition of aggressive acts

[Vanek26]

You're all expecting me to get on and defend Lordaeron's actions, I'm not. Mensa and Lordaeron both know the reason they declared, and made it obvious in their first 2 posts(looking at you hippo). So lets stop all the blaming, and just have a fun fight. 1v1(if you guys can do that, you're used to 8 alliance blitzes), and see what happens going forward. The way we see it, we're defending ourselves, the way they see it, they're defending themselves. Lets fight it out and go from there. I really wish Mensa hadn't have made an OWF topic over this, but hey, anything to make me look bad, Bourhann's had a boner for me for about a year if not longer.

 

Honestly, we don't care, everyone in Lordaeron has been begging for a war for awhile. Lets get it poppin.

 

We don't need a forum post to do that, you do that just fine yourself. 

[hidude45454]

"We were under the impression from our Leader Kastor that you had given us permission to raid applicants." That is pretty unambiguous. We put some people at applicant while they are temporarily inactive, it has several effects, one of which is preventing raids against them from harming the bank. That does not mean, nor has it ever, that they are open to raiding. For years it has been common practice for alliances to protect their applicants, and for us that hasn't changed. Many have recently asked us if that is still true, and we've consistently said that it is. 

Not saying that that first statement is vague; just curious in what exactly Kastor said to his members and how you found out he said it. The more vague statement is this one:

Kastor has decided that Mensa is at fault for defending ourselves, since even though Lordaeron's leadership attacked us they are much smaller and should be left alone.

What exactly did Kastor say?

And again, protecting your applicants isn't the issue; you have a right to do that. I just don't like that certain alliances use their inactives as bait for war practice, and personally for my own alliance I tend to remove inactives from my alliance completely.

[Micchan]

Mensa should propose two alternatives to Lord to aron

1. Mensa vs Lord a aron for one round

2. Mensa vs only Kastor for 50 days with the rest of the alliance who can't help him in any way

[Buorhann]

Not saying that that first statement is vague; just curious in what exactly Kastor said to his members and how you found out he said it. The more vague statement is this one:

What exactly did Kastor say?

And again, protecting your applicants isn't the issue; you have a right to do that. I just don't like that certain alliances use their inactives as bait for war practice, and personally for my own alliance I tend to remove inactives from my alliance completely.

 

"How we found out"

His members talked to us and asked us why we were doing what we're doing?  Through those conversations we've found out.

 

"What did Kastor say?"

Quite a few stuff.

 

">war baiting"

We were not war baiting.

 

"I remove inactives from my alliance completely"

That's cool for you, but we have our own community and these members are regular contributors to our community elsewhere.

 

 

 

We're not going to log drop to completely justify our stance here (Unless it gets too stupid here).  There's no need for it.  You can literally check our Applicants and see the timestamp of their raids.  You can also try to play devil's advocate all you want to try and tell us that we're too aggressive.  I'll simply point to a thread I recently created that made it very clear as to how we will handle things.

Edited February 13, 2017 by Buorhann

[Kastor]

Yeah Avruch, who exactly told you that?

[Avruch]

Yeah Avruch, who exactly told you that?

 

Do you deny that is what you told people in your alliance? 

[Sailor Jerry]

 I just don't like that certain alliances use their inactives as bait for war practice, and personally for my own alliance I tend to remove inactives from my alliance completely.

I don't think it's necessarily for war practice as such....yes maybe for "quick response" training......but I think most AAs want to keep their inactives around for as long as possible (and as undamaged as possible) for the taxes they can get from them. 

[Vanek26]

[Kastor]

"How we found out"

His members talked to us and asked us why we were doing what we're doing?  Through those conversations we've found out.

 

"What did Kastor say?"

Quite a few stuff.

 

">war baiting"

We were not war baiting.

 

"I remove inactives from my alliance completely"

That's cool for you, but we have our own community and these members are regular contributors to our community elsewhere.

 

 

 

We're not going to log drop to completely justify our stance here (Unless it gets too stupid here).  There's no need for it.  You can literally check our Applicants and see the timestamp of their raids.  You can also try to play devil's advocate all you want to try and tell us that we're too aggressive.  I'll simply point to a thread I recently created that made it very clear as to how we will handle things.

So what I really said was that they were bored and was using this as a have assed reason to attack Lordaeron. I asked why they didn't come to me first, or any gov, to discuss the raids, especially considering we were an ally of an ally. They spun some bull about how they're always "defense first" (which they aren't, but meh). I didn't say anything about how to "Remove inactives" or anything. They're just lying throughout this thread, which is why I'd rather them just say they were bored and wanted to fight someone. 

[durmij]

So Rose, who is the better friend?

 

Rose need some invisibility cloak now

Here is Rose's official stance on the issue.

 

[Spaceman Thrax]

So what I really said was that they were bored and was using this as a have assed reason to attack Lordaeron. I asked why they didn't come to me first, or any gov, to discuss the raids, especially considering we were an ally of an ally. They spun some bull about how they're always "defense first" (which they aren't, but meh). I didn't say anything about how to "Remove inactives" or anything. They're just lying throughout this thread, which is why I'd rather them just say they were bored and wanted to fight someone. 

 

Why didn't you go to them before attacking them, since Rose is a mutual ally? Kinda goes both ways. You ignored a forum post AND a blurb on the front page of their AA in attacking an ally of an ally. Kinda open and shut, don't you think?

 

If you wanted to fight Mensa, just tell 'em you did. They'd oblige you. If you didn't, don't attack them. If you wanted to make them look bad, try not making yourself look worse.

 

Good luck to the rest of Lordaeron.

[Buorhann]

So what I really said was that they were bored and was using this as a have assed reason to attack Lordaeron. I asked why they didn't come to me first, or any gov, to discuss the raids, especially considering we were an ally of an ally. They spun some bull about how they're always "defense first" (which they aren't, but meh). I didn't say anything about how to "Remove inactives" or anything. They're just lying throughout this thread, which is why I'd rather them just say they were bored and wanted to fight someone. 

 

 

Sure, we're bored, but that isn't the reason since we're also occupied with playing two other games (Utopia and Travian).

 

Yes, we've mostly reacted defensively in our history of raiders, but most of the time those have been single raiders and not a gang of them.  They also weren't lied to from their leader about Mensa giving them permission to do so.

 

When you have multiple raiders hitting your members, you tend to take it for what it is.  We're just paying it back 10 fold.

Edited February 13, 2017 by Buorhann

[Bollocks]

I'm not sure which is worse: the bank looting (2x) or this brilliant FA maneuver 

 

Anyways, I'm always up for watching Mensa rev up the steamroller. 

[hidude45454]

@Buorhann Not necessarily baiting war between two alliances, but just baiting raids so that you get a chance to retaliate. I just suspect this because other alliances do it so if that's not the case then I drop my point. If your members are playing other games there's no reason why they can't at least log for one second in here; plus since we all agree that bringing in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) to PnW was annoying I think that extends to other games too.

 

Regardless, I don't have a problem with you retaliating against raids, so I'll step out of this one. Have fun to both sides; war is exciting regardless

[Buorhann]

If I was baiting for raids, I wouldn't have made that thread that clearly expresses how we'll react.  I mean, I guess it's baiting as much as telling a child not to touch a hot stove top or they'll get burned.  

[Harrison Richardson]

I'm not sure which is worse: the bank looting (2x) or this brilliant FA maneuver 

 

Anyways, I'm always up for watching Mensa rev up the steamroller. 

 

I've been hoarding gas for this very occasion.  Steamrollers aren't cheap.

[Justin076]

 

Starting the campaign early this year Kastor?? 

[Utter Nutter]

I can't resist the temptation of saying something.

WHAT THE !@#$ WERE YOU THINKING LORDAERON?

and 1v1 Kastor? do you think Mensa needs help rolling Lordaeron?

and Rose? they don't have to do anything but sit and wait it out, they don't have to defend an ally that goes looking for trouble nor they have to assist Mensa because this guys are perfectly capable of dealing with such a poor threat.

[TellUrGrlThx]

There's actually drama over this?

[Kastor]

There's actually drama over this?

There's actually drama over this?

I've been saying let's skip the BS and fight but for some reason Bourhann and Av wanna "explain" their actions or something. I don't see why this is such a big deal. lol

[Sans]

There is no baiting here nor bullying. This is not a defensive war for Ron, it's retaliation for raids launched offensively on Mensa. Mensa posted a very public announcement about their policy on applicant raiding, that they will kill you if you raid them. It is in black and white, in public, for all to see. 

 

If anyone was unsure what their policy was, there it is. No room for misunderstanding, no bait. Yeah, someone who doesn't frequent these forums could not have read it, but in this case I think we have one of the most forum active aa's involved so there is no argument there.  

 

This is a clear cut CB with actually no room to even consider arguing against it. You can not like their policy, but that is another argument. What you cannot say without being dumb is they were baiting or they are bullying. They are just doing what they said they would do. 

[Bollocks]

The hippo has always been a excellent (jail)bait. Chris Hansen would like a talk.

[Charles Bolivar]

Takes a special kind of stupidity to not only ignore a two week old policy but to raid Mensa in the first place.

 

Anyone else want to second my nomination of kastor for a Darwin Award?

[LordStrum]

You're bullying, Orbis knows you're bullying, and thats the way it is.

 

[Kastor]

Pretty sweet.