Jump to content

An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks


Prefonteen
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Viva Miriya
On 12/4/2019 at 8:32 AM, Prefonteen said:

 

 

Nah. I have throughout my tenure been very consistent in carrying out my belief that logs are fair game to be used when one is directly lying about matters said in private. These logs merely clear our name from false accusations. I have also been completely open about my intention to play the cards above the table going into these negotiations. 

Nothing is new about my approach, nor is it shocking in sky way shape or form. Merely prudent. 

You do not get to gaslight about your frustrations of peace without pushback. Sorry. 

We are a member of CoA as per both our and CoA's definition. You refusing to recognize that and us initially being willing to compromise on negotiating seperately does not change that. 

Your negotiators last claimed they now have terms but refuse to negotiate with me, throwing up yet another barrier. 

 

So what is it? 

I heard it's because you aren't actually a recognized coalition member. Guess you'll need to negotiate alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Buorhann said:

What else do we have to lose at this point?  All you're doing is burning pixels in the game.  I mean...  we leave the game according to your goals, so what?  It's not a huge deal to those who actually have left, and hell, probably frees up some time for others.  The Discord communities will still exist, they'll simply move on to other games, etc.

Oh, I thought Partisan wanted to use this to pressure CoB into altering the parameters by which peace would be negotiated and that's clearly failed.  If you're cool with continuing the war that's okay with us too.

GICjEwp.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Entertainment.

What else do we have to lose at this point?  All you're doing is burning pixels in the game.  I mean...  we leave the game according to your goals, so what?  It's not a huge deal to those who actually have left, and hell, probably frees up some time for others.  The Discord communities will still exist, they'll simply move on to other games, etc.

But we might as well read through all the hypocrisy, paranoia, and lies being presented.  It's entertaining.  Especially for me, to see a certain someone who has a wild obsession over me.

Is that what you call sharing around to the general public raw chat logs of conversation that have OOC personally identifiable information in them, "entertainment"?  What next, you going to contact someone abusive ex-husband to try to get dirt on one of us? 

Our "goal", you twit, was never to force disband or force delete anyone out of this damn game.  Period.  In a moment of utter frustration after months of war, playing whack-a-mole over and over again with members of your coalition while you went from claiming to be winning to claiming to be winning statistically, going months without any contact, to offering surrender but only under certain conditions, then breaking off all negotiations, I said the obvious--I speculated that the only way the members of my coalition were ever going to get peace was to end you as alliances, since it was apparent that you utterly refuse to talk peace.

We set the terms for negotiations, you don't.  That's what happens when you lose a war and no third party offers mediation.  The really stupid part was that you don't have to be an e-lawyer to know that no peace treaty is done until it is signed.  If by the time you saw all the provisions and the agreed to terms, and you didn't like what you saw, you could have walked away.  What's the worst that happens, we keep fighting?  We're doing that now.  You might have gotten peace had you negotiated.  Now, I could give a shit whether there is a peace of not.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"No third party offers mediation" I know for a fact Prefontaine has. Hell, I would if anybody asked. Nobody would ever ask Fark or their sphere too but I'm sure they would as well.

 

And really, it's probably the best decision, if you actually want peace to happen. They're more likely to roll with your process if the face on the other side of the table is somebody they actually trust.

Edited by Akuryo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, George Clooney said:

Our "goal", you twit, was never to force disband or force delete anyone out of this damn game.  Period.  In a moment of utter frustration after months of war, playing whack-a-mole over and over again with members of your coalition while you went from claiming to be winning to claiming to be winning statistically, going months without any contact, to offering surrender but only under certain conditions, then breaking off all negotiations, I said the obvious--I speculated that the only way the members of my coalition were ever going to get peace was to end you as alliances, since it was apparent that you utterly refuse to talk peace.

You do realize that there are dozens of logs that say otherwise, right?  Also, it's not just you.  It's basically every major coalition leader besides Sphinx.  NPO, BK, GoG, UPN, Acadia, Polaris.  So stop gaslighting and start acting in good faith.

Before you comment on the OOC issue, I direct you to my previous comment.

Edited by Cooper_
Word Error
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

You do realize that there are dozens of logs that say otherwise, right?  Also, it's not just you.  It's basically every major coalition leader besides Sphinx.  NPO, BK, GoG, UPN, Acadia, Polaris.  So stop gaslighting and start acting in good faith.

Before you comment on the OOC issue, I direct you to my previous comment.

U do realise that in any peace talk there seems to be rumors of forced disbandment.  One bad thing about logs most of the time is taken out of context.  Reading through this thread who the eggs wants to talk peace.  There is so much buldedash running through it I think everyone has forgot what the reality is that there r suppose to be peace talks going on.  Personally I think each coalition should pick just one representative each to limit the people in the room amd hammer crap out for at least 23 to 48 hours and at the end if no peace in site the  we continue fighting. Less interruptions.. less public crying ... amd if there is leaks then there is limited access so might just not happen and just maybe something will be accomplished.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brucemna said:

U do realise that in any peace talk there seems to be rumors of forced disbandment.  One bad thing about logs most of the time is taken out of context.  Reading through this thread who the eggs wants to talk peace.  There is so much buldedash running through it I think everyone has forgot what the reality is that there r suppose to be peace talks going on.  Personally I think each coalition should pick just one representative each to limit the people in the room amd hammer crap out for at least 23 to 48 hours and at the end if no peace in site the  we continue fighting. Less interruptions.. less public crying ... amd if there is leaks then there is limited access so might just not happen and just maybe something will be accomplished.  

See the thing is with these logs is that we have the context, all of the context actually.  And in reading them, the main thing that's clear is that your coalition doesn't want peace.  I think I've responded to you previously respecting your personal desire to find a solution, but you can't peace out to an enemy that is purposely trying to extend the war to do more damage (and finding every method to avoid peacing out to do so).  There's a reason when your side has dropped a lot of its rhetoric on that front because its simply indefensible.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

See the thing is with these logs is that we have the context, all of the context actually.  And in reading them, the main thing that's clear is that your coalition doesn't want peace.  I think I've responded to you previously respecting your personal desire to find a solution, but you can't peace out to an enemy that is purposely trying to extend the war to do more damage (and finding every method to avoid peacing out to do so).  There's a reason when your side has dropped a lot of its rhetoric on that front because its simply indefensible.  

This is what I am talking about .. instead of shutting up u still want to argue and agian it will go on and on ... all this thread is about is semantics .. hell I can argue or debate as well but geeesh semantics  do not solve problems they create them.  

Edited by brucemna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This?is?why?you?don't?leak?negotiation?logs?
sorry?my?space?key?is?broken?one?sec?

right - it just weakens everyone's bargaining position as the two sides of the negotiation squabble endlessly and undermine progress towards settling peace agreements.

  • Downvote 2

Improper-Request-2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Akuryo said:

"No third party offers mediation" I know for a fact Prefontaine has. Hell, I would if anybody asked. Nobody would ever ask Fark or their sphere too but I'm sure they would as well.

 

And really, it's probably the best decision, if you actually want peace to happen. They're more likely to roll with your process if the face on the other side of the table is somebody they actually trust.

For the record, I have given prefontaines offer a positive reception. We are willing to work with mediators if need be.

30 minutes ago, brucemna said:

This is what I am talking about .. instead of shutting up u still want to argue and agian it will go on and on ... all this thread is about is semantics .. hell I can argue or debate as well but geeesh semantics  do not solve problems they create them.  

No. The problem is that certain people refuse to acknowledge that one side simply hasn't come to the table *in good faith*. I know t$ for a fact still has not received any serious response.

5 minutes ago, Supreme Master Joi said:

This?is?why?you?don't?leak?negotiation?logs?
sorry?my?space?key?is?broken?one?sec?

right - it just weakens everyone's bargaining position as the two sides of the negotiation squabble endlessly and undermine progress towards settling peace agreements.

Our bargaining position was non-existent as we were not allowed at the table. There was nothing to be undermined besides the absolutely bs narrative which was being put out by certain leaders on coalition B's side. As the logs have proven.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George Clooney said:

In a moment of utter frustration after months of war, playing whack-a-mole over and over again with members of your coalition while you went from claiming to be winning to claiming to be winning statistically, going months without any contact, to offering surrender but only under certain conditions, then breaking off all negotiations, I said the obvious--I speculated that the only way the members of my coalition were ever going to get peace was to end you as alliances, since it was apparent that you utterly refuse to talk peace.

Aside from this being one of the more productive posts of your (I do mean that as a compliment), the bolded is something I do think we can understand. We've been made to eat the words of a select 2 coalition members for months because they spoke out in a moment of utter frustration. Hell, we're all frustrated, but until y'all understand our frustration as well then we aren't getting anywhere that will help this mess be resolved. The issue to me is less that we end the war, but that we end this god awful dynamic we are all riding on like lunatics.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

For the record, I have given prefontaines offer a positive reception. We are willing to work with mediators if need be.

No. The problem is that certain people refuse to acknowledge that one side simply hasn't come to the table *in good faith*. I know t$ for a fact still has not received any serious response.

Our bargaining position was non-existent as we were not allowed at the table. There was nothing to be undermined besides the absolutely bs narrative which was being put out by certain leaders on coalition B's side. As the logs have proven.

Where is faith when people are posting here things such as logs and everything else.  Agian this are the se semantics from page one amd so forth. Agian putting the blame somewhere by someone. Why u may be shut out is because ur trying and others are trying to bargain here. If anything I  supprosed no one has turned this to say u must be weak amd desperate to be here in a open forum. Dont get me wrong if the rest of ur side is not standing by u .. hell that is a great trait but there comes a moment to maybe say fine accept the process the other side says. I think amd this is just a opinion.. if the rest of ur coalition does do there part a.d follow the process I would in their case make the final agreement contingent on a peace deal with u.  Ia saying this amd I am sure someone will tell me that I  wrong but u took a stance too quick without going through the process right from the get go.  I think once ur other members of ur coalition had a conditional agreement u would of been next.  I can say the dog jumped over the fence but 10 people will tell me a different color of the dog or fence or types. Hence the perception and reading of the leaked logs really mean nothing. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Viva Miriya said:

Guess you guys are food then.

I hope I taste good, friend!

8 minutes ago, brucemna said:

Where is faith when people are posting here things such as logs and everything else.  Agian this are the se semantics from page one amd so forth. Agian putting the blame somewhere by someone. Why u may be shut out is because ur trying and others are trying to bargain here. If anything I  supprosed no one has turned this to say u must be weak amd desperate to be here in a open forum. Dont get me wrong if the rest of ur side is not standing by u .. hell that is a great trait but there comes a moment to maybe say fine accept the process the other side says. I think amd this is just a opinion.. if the rest of ur coalition does do there part a.d follow the process I would in their case make the final agreement contingent on a peace deal with u.  Ia saying this amd I am sure someone will tell me that I  wrong but u took a stance too quick without going through the process right from the get go.  I think once ur other members of ur coalition had a conditional agreement u would of been next.  I can say the dog jumped over the fence but 10 people will tell me a different color of the dog or fence or types. Hence the perception and reading of the leaked logs really mean nothing. 

 

I'm sorry. These things were posted after 20 days of silence. There was ample time in which good faith was given and not reciprocated. That's roughly where any argument or justification ends.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Viva Miriya
1 hour ago, George Clooney said:

Is that what you call sharing around to the general public raw chat logs of conversation that have OOC personally identifiable information in them, "entertainment"?  What next, you going to contact someone abusive ex-husband to try to get dirt on one of us? 

Our "goal", you twit, was never to force disband or force delete anyone out of this damn game.  Period.  In a moment of utter frustration after months of war, playing whack-a-mole over and over again with members of your coalition while you went from claiming to be winning to claiming to be winning statistically, going months without any contact, to offering surrender but only under certain conditions, then breaking off all negotiations, I said the obvious--I speculated that the only way the members of my coalition were ever going to get peace was to end you as alliances, since it was apparent that you utterly refuse to talk peace.

We set the terms for negotiations, you don't.  That's what happens when you lose a war and no third party offers mediation.  The really stupid part was that you don't have to be an e-lawyer to know that no peace treaty is done until it is signed.  If by the time you saw all the provisions and the agreed to terms, and you didn't like what you saw, you could have walked away.  What's the worst that happens, we keep fighting?  We're doing that now.  You might have gotten peace had you negotiated.  Now, I could give a shit whether there is a peace of not.

I didn't know this is how it all went down! Wow! Coalition A, be thankful people are still willing to be reasonable with you!

Personally I'd have taken this treatment as a great reason to break you all, until your membership individually surrendered and left you all. Nations get destroyed everyday b. Alliances come and go. A player who wants a fair shake in this game can get one and join up with whomever they wish, IMO. They need homes, not necessarily your leadership.

This sort of bellicose nature is why I'm not authorized to make foreign policy and my words are mine and mine alone. That said, I hope it gives our mutual friends some ideas. Because as far as I'm concerned: you guys are worthless. The sooner your members abandon you, the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

I hope I taste good, friend!

I'm sorry. These things were posted after 20 days of silence. There was ample time in which good faith was given and not reciprocated. That's roughly where any argument or justification ends.

The question is when did  the rest of ur coalition walk away when u werfound out the u were to be separated from the main talks.  Thiugh I do understand at the point they backed of but that would mean 20 days is mute amd it would of been up to ur side to now accept the process that was given to ur side. I guess in a round about way would ur side now consider the separation in talks on condition as long as nothing is final til peace is made with all .... 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, brucemna said:

The question is when did  the rest of ur coalition walk away when u werfound out the u were to be separated from the main talks.  Thiugh I do understand at the point they backed of but that would mean 20 days is mute amd it would of been up to ur side to now accept the process that was given to ur side. I guess in a round about way would ur side now consider the separation in talks on condition as long as nothing is final til peace is made with all .... 

No, they didn't walk away when they found out. They indulged in this coalition B power trip with the a expectation that t$ would at least be given the courtesy of terms. That courtesy wasn't given, and the many leaked logs showed that there was no intent to give us terms anytime soon.

 

The big problem to us isn't just the process itself. It's that a lot of logs have been leaked which clearly show that the intent of coalition B is to extend the war and/or kill us off. Can you blame us for being up in arms about that?

  • Upvote 2

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Viva Miriya
1 minute ago, Prefonteen said:

No, they didn't walk away when they found out. They indulged in this coalition B power trip with the a expectation that t$ would at least be given the courtesy of terms. That courtesy wasn't given, and the many leaked logs showed that there was no intent to give us terms anytime soon.

 

The big problem to us isn't just the process itself. It's that a lot of logs have been leaked which clearly show that the intent of coalition B is to extend the war and/or kill us off. Can you blame us for being up in arms about that?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

No, they didn't walk away when they found out. They indulged in this coalition B power trip with the a expectation that t$ would at least be given the courtesy of terms. That courtesy wasn't given, and the many leaked logs showed that there was no intent to give us terms anytime soon.

 

The big problem to us isn't just the process itself. It's that a lot of logs have been leaked which clearly show that the intent of coalition B is to extend the war and/or kill us off. Can you blame us for being up in arms about that?

No to a point but regardless how u word it the rest of ur coalition did walk away or stop the talks... agian the logs lol ... never mind.  I do understand to a,point but I am going to go outta this world a bit as NPO itself has been separated in talks in many wars amd held to longer wars and worse terms. The making of a great allainceis the resiliency to take it on the chin then habe to aviluty to bounce back .. the out of this world part look at NPO from karma to it's current state.  Read the history just to maybe help u understand that cause u cant always get what u want being g on the losing end but cam ce back and prove ur better and worth if u have the desire. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, brucemna said:

No to a point but regardless how u word it the rest of ur coalition did walk away or stop the talks... agian the logs lol ... never mind.  I do understand to a,point but I am going to go outta this world a bit as NPO itself has been separated in talks in many wars amd held to longer wars and worse terms. The making of a great allainceis the resiliency to take it on the chin then habe to aviluty to bounce back .. the out of this world part look at NPO from karma to it's current state.  Read the history just to maybe help u understand that cause u cant always get what u want being g on the losing end but cam ce back and prove ur better and worth if u have the desire. 

That's factually incorrect. NPO never received egregrious terms. The current terms, scale of punishment, and deliberate extension of the war are all unprecedented. This is all verifiable by simply looking at the full terms and comparing those to terms NPO has received in the past.

I have read the history. I was also there for the history. NPO was shown mercy on almost every occasion.

  • Upvote 1

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Prefonteen said:

That's factually incorrect. NPO never received egregrious terms. The current terms, scale of punishment, and deliberate extension of the war are all unprecedented. This is all verifiable by simply looking at the full terms and comparing those to terms NPO has received in the past.

I have read the history. I was also there for the history. NPO was shown mercy on almost every occasion.

If ur talking this game possibly.  If we are talking which I tried to say about karma it was in CN which the terms given were meant to cripple NPO for years which they did until probally after the doomhiuse war were even agian we were held to a extended war to cripple the upper tier at that time which was a matter of fact done by our current emperor here.  Now NPO in the realm is probally untouchable thanks to time and on emperor actually listening to a peon that instead of trying to beat them let's join them. But that is a older realm compared here were history os still being made.  I think maybe part of the problem here is just cause of the past there seems to be a expectation of entitlement.  Just cause in the past joe blow was treated nice amd so should we.  Well that was yesterday and today is a different day. Agian things change and maybe sometimes going with the flow will make u greater in the future. As a leader one is responsible for his people and his allies.  Meaning all ur leaders need to find a way to sort this out causing less harm to ur people and allies.  Like I mentioned I understand the musical chairs at the beginning and grandstanding but there comes a time when there are no longer any chairs to sit on for anyone..  what is that saying I heard in a movie.  The needs of the many out way the needs of the few ? 

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, brucemna said:

If ur talking this game possibly.  If we are talking which I tried to say about karma it was in CN which the terms given were meant to cripple NPO for years which they did until probally after the doomhiuse war were even agian we were held to a extended war to cripple the upper tier at that time which was a matter of fact done by our current emperor here.  Now NPO in the realm is probally untouchable thanks to time and on emperor actually listening to a peon that instead of trying to beat them let's join them. But that is a older realm compared here were history os still being made.  I think maybe part of the problem here is just cause of the past there seems to be a expectation of entitlement.  Just cause in the past joe blow was treated nice amd so should we.  Well that was yesterday and today is a different day. Agian things change and maybe sometimes going with the flow will make u greater in the future. As a leader one is responsible for his people and his allies.  Meaning all ur leaders need to find a way to sort this out causing less harm to ur people and allies.  Like I mentioned I understand the musical chairs at the beginning and grandstanding but there comes a time when there are no longer any chairs to sit on for anyone..  what is that saying I heard in a movie.  The needs of the many out way the needs of the few ? 

Karma happened because NPO pull nonsense like this. All we are doing is repeating a cycle the same tired cycle. This isn't that world nor should that world be even used as a talking point in this one. If people choose to hold grudges or compare this one with that than we will do nothing but repeat it. So let's move on. 

  • Upvote 2

FORMER LEADER OF COTL. PLEASE GROW INTERNALLY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Leftbehind said:

Karma happened because NPO pull nonsense like this. All we are doing is repeating a cycle the same tired cycle. This isn't that world nor should that world be even used as a talking point in this one. If people choose to hold grudges or compare this one with that than we will do nothing but repeat it. So let's move on. 

Oh I agree.   Dont need to say why karma happened just trying to point out something.  And I doubt that terms here would be as harsh or crippling I would think. Maybe a little history created from the past but at least would be fair I imagine. My hole point is this threads post habe been just a cycle but stubbornness it seems with continue that and even I cam admit as long as it stays the way it is now we gonna be burning war for awhile yet . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • 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.