Jump to content
Prefonteen

An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks

Recommended Posts

Why is IQ not letting us surrender? And why are they forcing their allies to fight under threat of hitting them? I know they've threatened at least three if they peaced out, and them hitting former coalition allies in itself is a threat.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some help, @kalev60, happy to provide more examples of multiple members of Coalition B saying that those comments do not reflect the consensus of the coalition. Just not sure it's worth doing more than a cursory search.

On 8/9/2019 at 10:27 AM, Pasky Darkfire said:

There were two main people who said anything along these lines of a death match. And there have been more than that, really, who have said they would be willing to come to the table and that it wasn't a death match. So this "rhetoric" isn't really a rhetoric from our side. It's rhetoric from individuals that you either just want to consider our main voice to keep your propaganda/shenanigans going, or you actually take Sketchy at his absolute word as the be all end all voice for the entire side. Which, quite frankly, is really funny to me. Because... ya know. I like Sketchy. But he's a bit of a Troll.

no.png

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, James II said:

Why is IQ not letting us surrender? And why are they forcing their allies to fight under threat of hitting them? I know they've threatened at least three if they peaced out, and them hitting former coalition allies in itself is a threat.

It's been made perfectly clear to us that the reason we were hit was to send a message to those left within Coalition B

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hodor said:

bait.png

downvote.png

This literally made me laugh out loud.  Awesome.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hodor said:

BK feeling left out:

Perpetually riding coattails 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro I hit my Juul like 20x reading this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jordan said:

I wasn't aware that they let their non-gov members read any news that they didn't produce themselves.

I've been saying this for years now, we read the forums, most of us just don't care to comment on KERCHTOG$' circlejerking. Myself excepted.

What result are you hoping for? Us to agree with you and validate your self aggrandizement? Or one guy to show up with a dissenting opinion so you all can jump down his throat?

This thread full of KERCHTOG$ members pretending to ponder the question of why Coalition B members aren't bumbling into a hostile environment is hilarious though ngl.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pop said:

I've been saying this for years now, we read the forums, most of us just don't care to comment on KERCHTOG$' circlejerking. Myself excepted.

What result are you hoping for? Us to agree with you and validate your self aggrandizement? Or one guy to show up with a dissenting opinion so you all can jump down his throat?

This thread full of KERCHTOG$ members pretending to ponder the question of why Coalition B members aren't bumbling into a hostile environment is hilarious though ngl.

So the reason why most of your guys don't want to post here is that there isn't enough of your guys here 

ORnBXEK.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Pop said:

I've been saying this for years now, we read the forums, most of us just don't care to comment on KERCHTOG$' circlejerking. Myself excepted.

What result are you hoping for? Us to agree with you and validate your self aggrandizement? Or one guy to show up with a dissenting opinion so you all can jump down his throat?

This thread full of KERCHTOG$ members pretending to ponder the question of why Coalition B members aren't bumbling into a hostile environment is hilarious though ngl.

As was pointed out earlier your side had no problem arguing and blaming our side for the delay in talks earlier. It's only now that actual evidence has been displayed that you don't want to particpate in a "circlejerk". 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kalev60 said:

Why would we even need to read OWF after KT and few others declared perma.war few months ago and should total destruction of Colo B  with their rhetorics ?

So you can be reminded of how bad a GOONS win would be & them riding on the coat tails of any hegemony which might come out of this. Thought police are watching, so only think happy thoughts so they can't pretend to be offended by it. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cooper_ said:

Afaik your general policy is to not let any of your members go into other servers in case they might encounter IC content without the permission of your gov.  I don't think its that's much of a stretch to assume that the only the more involved players/gov ever see most of the content here.  Another question would then be why we almost never see reactions like upvotes/downvotes, especially on those of NPO posters, from the NPO membership.

It isn't general policy. I have 0 involvement in Pacificas internal/external runnings and my post count testifies to that. 

On the up votes/downvotes. We don't really care for or need the validation of others when we post. In most cases discussion etc takes place in our offsite active community. Furthermore most of the content here is just the same thing regurgitated over 5 threads. It got boring the first time around, arguing the same point over and over isn't suddenly going to become interesting and engaging. 

 

 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I compare my downvotes I have atm, which KETOG is mostly to blame for compare to getting warn points from GOONS existing, suddenly I'm kind of thankful for the downvotes & KETOG doesn't seem toxic at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

When I compare my downvotes I have atm, which KETOG is mostly to blame for compare to getting warn points from GOONS existing, suddenly I'm kind of thankful for the downvotes & KETOG doesn't seem toxic at all.

Blaming other people for your own rules violations sure is a take

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Teaspoon said:

Blaming other people for your own rules violations sure is a take

How dare you: the forum's own 'God of Downvotes' is trying to tell us all what toxic behavior looks like. Clearly this is all GOONS' fault he can't follow the rules - it's so obvious even a kindergartner could see it.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

It isn't general policy. I have 0 involvement in Pacificas internal/external runnings and my post count testifies to that. 

On the up votes/downvotes. We don't really care for or need the validation of others when we post. In most cases discussion etc takes place in our offsite active community. Furthermore most of the content here is just the same thing regurgitated over 5 threads. It got boring the first time around, arguing the same point over and over isn't suddenly going to become interesting and engaging. 

The policy I was referring to was how your gov handles discord servers and such "official" fora.  It was more a general commentary on the isolationism your gov practices as opposed to actual OWF rules, which I suspect isn't exactly promoted by them either.  I only know about this because of circumstances that have transpired previously that aren't exactly appropriate to discuss here (so I'll leave it at that).  

As for the content quality, yeah most of the stuff sucks, but the OP was pretty good.  If y'all want to move forward and get new stuff on the forums, I suggest starting with good faith negotiations so we can end this wretched war.  I'll miss the loot, but at least we get some new things going on these forums.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Teaspoon said:

Blaming other people for your own rules violations sure is a take

Actually, currently I have none. Although I don't like people who rat on others for anything they think might get them in trouble, whether bad or not. You guys deserve everything you get in response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sval said:

It's not the lack of Co-B general membership that's most telling here.

It's the lack of any government attempt to refute the facts that's most telling. But then it's impossible to spin when the evidence is presented OP.

Can't spin, won't comment.

They're not trying to spin it anymore, many of you are just underestimating the threat. Going from some of the comments we have seen, they beleive the other side would have tried wiping them had they lost; whether true or not. Each alliance NPO attacks to set an example is another fighting at least, since I many still underestimate the threat. NPO kept FAN at war just as a regular thing always going almost when hegemony in CN pre-karma. CnG would dog pile NPO whenever they had completed their previous terms; only to be put under terms again until eventually they became allies. For people used to playing CN, a lot of what I heard from BK on them not wanting to create a hegemony for a fun environment sounded like inviting defeat. Still BK's leader claims they don't want a hegemony; although really what choice do they have other than keep fighting...
 

 

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prefonteen might be way better at phrasing this but to continue my previous post:

1. Coal A doesnt like the way the terms are presented.

2. Coal B is really stupid and mean (hodor can perhaps make another song/rap/poem about it?)

The answer could be:

3. Coal A dislikes, thinks its unfair but still just accepted the (stupid, awful) way the terms are presented. And they got peace out of it. 

Or 

4. Keep explaining 1 and 2.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Duke Arthur said:

Prefonteen might be way better at phrasing this but to continue my previous post:

1. Coal A doesnt like the way the terms are presented.

2. Coal B is really stupid and mean (hodor can perhaps make another song/rap/poem about it?)

The answer could be:

3. Coal A dislikes, thinks its unfair but still just accepted the (stupid, awful) way the terms are presented. And they got peace out of it. 

Or 

4. Keep explaining 1 and 2.

Do the terms get progressively worse though, with the worst one last? Sounds like by design they will be destroyed by them. Although I guess GOONS are de facto getting rolled this entire war regardless of who's winning, so shouldn't really matter that much to me.

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 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.