Jump to content
Prefonteen

An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Legoboyvdlp said:

Do you usually have words like these coming out your mouth - sounds like it's coming out the wrong end.

And u wonder why the peace talks are were they are at lmao .. serious question for u .. where did the logs come from and how did u get them lol.  Just so maybe my leaders know who is accountable 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely got them directly from the devil and their source was some random archangel in heaven.

?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I definitely got them directly from the devil and their source was some random archangel in heaven.

?

Agian perfect example of why it is what it is 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, brucemna said:

Okay I cam understand ur scepticism on the intent. In all honesty how bout u post logs from ur coalition channels and I bet we will see similar kinds of intents as well. We all know that in private we all say things such as let's ruin them til they .... well u get the point I think we all have some intelligence in us. And sure maybe from 3 or so years ago before NPO  time here when we were vanguard i can relate to maybe what 3 years means. We all know history is never forgotten and given a chance we all may say vindictive things to air out r resentments.  With that in mind we also know that when it comes down to it we all settle down during talks and move on with our peace and heck sometimes we make knew friends. Regardless of anything as the surrending coalition I think the processes given to talk peace or not out of the norm and in many cases talks happen with segregation in certain instances. Log dumping or threads like this only make the process of peace longer and create longer or more distasteful resentment to reach the peace terms. 

 

No coalition has ever held people at war for 7 months and expressed excitement over people quitting before. I'm not sure what you would expect to see in our coalition channel since we aren't in a position to do what your side has been doing and when we were in that position in past wars we didn't do it

Edited by Smith
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Smith said:

No coalition has ever held people at war for 7 months and expressed excitement over people quitting before. I'm not sure what you would expect to see in our coalition channel since we aren't in a position to do what your side has been doing and when we were in that position in past wars we didn't do it

I was referring to trash talk  in ur channel.  And this is not a past war as we are talking present tense. As for length of wars it dont matter. Wars can last from one attack to indefinite given the circumstance. In this case ur side stopped talking cause of one concern instead of continuing to see what the final outcome will be with the process given. Hell if I stopped everything cause of trash talk I would be locked in a room not moving on in life.  Given that as mentioned before my play would of been for the first part of the process I would of accepted the terms on condition of tS getting peace with their terms amd negotiations. Then if not happy decline and go from there. Honestly though with what has happened with the log dumps and forum discussions i dont know if that would be possible now. I would think though u could try and maybe it works or it doesn't 

Edited by brucemna
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, brucemna said:

Okay I cam understand ur scepticism on the intent. In all honesty how bout u post logs from ur coalition channels and I bet we will see similar kinds of intents as well. We all know that in private we all say things such as let's ruin them til they .... well u get the point I think we all have some intelligence in us. And sure maybe from 3 or so years ago before NPO  time here when we were vanguard i can relate to maybe what 3 years means. We all know history is never forgotten and given a chance we all may say vindictive things to air out r resentments.  With that in mind we also know that when it comes down to it we all settle down during talks and move on with our peace and heck sometimes we make knew friends. Regardless of anything as the surrending coalition I think the processes given to talk peace or not out of the norm and in many cases talks happen with segregation in certain instances. Log dumping or threads like this only make the process of peace longer and create longer or more distasteful resentment to reach the peace terms. 

 

It's not the log dumping which is prolonging the peace process. It's your leaders deliberately dragging out negotiations as stated within the logs themselves who are to blame.

We have admitted defeat and expressed a willingness to end this war and are awaiting terms. Your leaders have deliberately held the process up with the stated goal of doing so in order to destroy our communities. 

There really is nothing more to it. If you want the toxicity present on forums to end which I admit is present on both sides to varying degrees, this war needs to end and in order to do so you need to put pressure on your own government to end this charade. Your gov does not listen to us but they are answerable to their own memberships at the end of the day.

Edited by Charles the Tyrant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>In this case ur side stopped talking cause of one concern instead of continuing to see what the final outcome will be with the process given. 

DID. YOU. READ. THE. LOGS?

Quote

underlordgc9/27/2019, 10:09:33 PM
I propose we replace ng and sphinx with george and myself so that we can ensure their won;t be an october peace

Quote

TheNG11/1/2019, 4:46:18 PM
I mean there’s plenty of ways to slow down talks

Quote

    underlordgc11/3/2019, 7:56:43 AM
    And we can just stall them by saying we want people to get organized or some random bs like that

Quote

    underlordgc10/2/2019, 8:41:11 PM
    super memey if we start refusing to reconmize their reps

    underlordgc10/2/2019, 8:41:22 PM
    def will give us two more months of infra grinding

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why read logs when ignorance is bliss?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Karl VII
3 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Why read logs when ignorance is bliss?

Or maybe some people just feel uncomfortable reading around 2 billion pages of other peoples private conversations ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


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

Or maybe some people just feel uncomfortable reading around 2 billion pages of other peoples private conversations ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well, that's just pure madness. How else is Thinkpol supposed to root out thoughtcrime among enemies of the state? Are we supposed to abandon all hopes of a safe and secure nation? No, we will have to keep watching, for the good of us all.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ArcKnox said:

>In this case ur side stopped talking cause of one concern instead of continuing to see what the final outcome will be with the process given. 

DID. YOU. READ. THE. LOGS?

 

How can one not read the logs. Point is how do u know there is truth to the logs when  the process was stopped when u stopped the talks due to the concerns instead of following the process to see what the separated terms for TS was to be. Could there have been a extended week or two... Could there have been crippling reps... could there have been a vice Roy or could there have been other unkown factors.  That's is a unkown. My point is from experience I would of continued the process to find out what the outcome would of been.  Now with what has happened the narrative has  changed  cause of paranoia and assumption. Instead some took it upon themselves and r using semantics log dumpling and open forum and assuming what the outcome was gonna be. I personally give ur side credit for wanting peace  but then because u think something is going to happen because ur handed logs by someone who themselves did not want the war to end possibly we are held in a status quo here. I would on ur part look at the people or person that gave u the logs and see what that person's own motives are and see if that person has more to gain.  NPO does not benefit as we are self sustaining and have the power within ourselves to forge forward.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, brucemna said:

I personally give ur side credit for wanting peace  but then because u think something is going to happen because ur handed logs by someone who themselves did not want the war to end possibly we are held in a status quo here. I would on ur part look at the people or person that gave u the logs and see what that person's own motives are and see if that person has more to gain.  NPO does not benefit as we are self sustaining and have the power within ourselves to forge forward.  

To clarify, logs were not the sole reason for leaving. We detailed all our reasons for leaving in the OP of this thread. We put forward a concentrated effort in the face of clear trolling and efforts to tank talks and tried our best to show that we were willing to negotiate and make concessions. The leaks we received back then and those that have emerged on here since have just clarified what we already suspected based on the behavior of your representatives - that they didn't want peace and had no serious intentions of entertaining us. So why should we waste our time trying to do all that if they don't have any intention of progressing towards peace? If that has changed and they're willing to earnestly engage with us, I'll repeat what we've been saying this whole time - we're here and willing to listen and work with them.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

To clarify, logs were not the sole reason for leaving. We detailed all our reasons for leaving in the OP of this thread. We put forward a concentrated effort in the face of clear trolling and efforts to tank talks and tried our best to show that we were willing to negotiate and make concessions. The leaks we received back then and those that have emerged on here since have just clarified what we already suspected based on the behavior of your representatives - that they didn't want peace and had no serious intentions of entertaining us. So why should we waste our time trying to do all that if they don't have any intention of progressing towards peace? If that has changed and they're willing to earnestly engage with us, I'll repeat what we've been saying this whole time - we're here and willing to listen and work with them.

I am not disputing a effort on ur part at the beginning at all. My side of it looks as if because one side is not getting what they want when they want it the narrative has been changed to a propaganda assault to try and restart the process. Sure being transparent is one thing dumping logs in the OP does not help with any process. If one wanted to the original OP could be cause of  the logs be taken as if u are redeclaring war or rescinding ur surrender to continue this war. Which is fine if u dont think if terms were actually given were not beneficial to all involved. But this was more of the process than any terms as my understanding is no one received terms. The op was delivered in Nov.  From what I cam see the logs posted come from the beginning of october above ... seems to me if I recall u surrendered in the beginning of november .. meaning between the october logs and November surrender the mood had changed and twenty days later after ur side stopped or walked however u would like to word it. Seems again without following the process to see the validity of the logs ur side posted publicly.  I see u used the words monthly as well. Meaning there was still 10 days til the end of the month and maybe 20 more days of patience would of given u a stronger arguement to what there is now. We are now in december and I would assume now cause of the logs posted after the OP sure this will prob keep going on.  There is no shame in calling out someone but when calling out dont shame.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, brucemna said:

I am not disputing a effort on ur part at the beginning at all. My side of it looks as if because one side is not getting what they want when they want it the narrative has been changed to a propaganda assault to try and restart the process. Sure being transparent is one thing dumping logs in the OP does not help with any process. If one wanted to the original OP could be cause of  the logs be taken as if u are redeclaring war or rescinding ur surrender to continue this war. Which is fine if u dont think if terms were actually given were not beneficial to all involved. But this was more of the process than any terms as my understanding is no one received terms. The op was delivered in Nov.  From what I cam see the logs posted come from the beginning of october above ... seems to me if I recall u surrendered in the beginning of november .. meaning between the october logs and November surrender the mood had changed and twenty days later after ur side stopped or walked however u would like to word it. Seems again without following the process to see the validity of the logs ur side posted publicly.  I see u used the words monthly as well. Meaning there was still 10 days til the end of the month and maybe 20 more days of patience would of given u a stronger arguement to what there is now. We are now in december and I would assume now cause of the logs posted after the OP sure this will prob keep going on.  There is no shame in calling out someone but when calling out dont shame.  

Your side of it my friend, seems to be a bit unwilling to recognize the logs for what they are: A clear proof of malignant intent. You seem to be searching for a way to deflect responsibility for peace delaying back to coalition A, when we have -logged and well- evidence that this was not the case.

 

We do want peace, and we are here, willing to sit back down and negotiate our terms of surrender the moment coalition B shows us that they are ready to seriously entertain it. If that desire is there then by all means, please do hit us up.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Your side of it my friend, seems to be a bit unwilling to recognize the logs for what they are: A clear proof of malignant intent. You seem to be searching for a way to deflect responsibility for peace delaying back to coalition A, when we have -logged and well- evidence that this was not the case.

 

We do want peace, and we are here, willing to sit back down and negotiate our terms of surrender the moment coalition B shows us that they are ready to seriously entertain it. If that desire is there then by all means, please do hit us up.

Something tells me though part of the conditions to start agian maybe to admit that this open forum stuff dumping and so forth may be the wrong avenue as well u may face separation in parts of coalition in talks and that publicly ... maybe offer in private that condition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Charles the Tyrant said:

There really is nothing more to it. If you want the toxicity present on forums to end which I admit is present on both sides to varying degrees, this war needs to end and in order to do so you need to put pressure on your own government to end this charade. Your gov does not listen to us but they are answerable to their own memberships at the end of the day.

Negotiations are done privately. Until CoA closes this public aspect how do you expect them to resume?   As for bitterness, resentment and grudges formed here, they're not going to disappear hen CoA chooses to resume negotiations in the traditional manner.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, brucemna said:

Something tells me though part of the conditions to start agian maybe to admit that this open forum stuff dumping and so forth may be the wrong avenue as well u may face separation in parts of coalition in talks and that publicly ... maybe offer in private that condition. 

The logs were necessary because your coalition's leadership was publicly blaming us for no progress being made in peace talks while in private were strategizing on how to drag out the peace process for as long as possible to make as many people quit out of boredom on our side as they could. It's not acceptable to gaslight somebody and expect them to just sit back and take the abuse. The blame here is on your leadership for developing a strategy specifically designed to pressure people out of the game. It's not on us for to standing up to people telling intentional lies. This war has been going on for like 7 months, there is no reason for anybody to believe that your coalition leadership was going to change their tactics when they were still lying about what they were doing. Keep in mind that during the period that you are saying we should have still been trying to negotiate they were still trying to think of ways to drag the war out. The only option we had left when shown that your leadership was trying to delay talks to get everybody to quit was at least show what they were saying isn't true. 

Edited by Smith
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Smith said:

The logs were necessary because your coalition's leadership was publicly blaming us for no progress being made in peace talks while in private were strategizing on how to drag out the peace process for as long as possible to make as many people quit out of boredom on our side as they could. It's not acceptable to gaslight somebody and expect them to just sit back and take the abuse. The blame here is on your leadership for developing a strategy specifically designed to pressure people out of the game. It's not for us to standing up to people telling intentional lies. This war has been going on for like 7 months, there is no reason for anybody to believe that your coalition leadership was going to change their tactics when they were still lying about what they were doing. Keep in mind that during the period that you are saying we should have still been trying to negotiate they were still trying to think of ways to drag the war out. 

Let's see here. U dont want to negotiate or walk away from talks cause a third party supplied u with logs that may or may not want peace talks cause they are part of the war or not a d may benefit the war continuing ?  Seriously .. dont u think there comes a point where someone may have played ur side and they got the best of u. U say my side wants to prolong this but yet u keep dumping logs pushing ur opponent away to talk ? Personally if logs like this were posted in the public forum and used as propaganda to make r side look bad like this u think I would actually come and give u a chance to get out of a losing situation. From what I see ur making this harder on urself than anything. Agian I never would of walked away cause I feel or get third party information of any kind. It would make me more cautious yes but I would keep moving forward until I was certain that whatever evidence u may have considers with the mood of the talks.  Meaning say for example we gave ur coalition white peace but then came back with terms that will make people quit from TS then ya u would have the terms to say,hey this is wrong we dont accept. But what u have is logs from a month before ur offer of surrender was made.  The views of October may habe changed a month later but now u will or may  not know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

Negotiations are done privately. Until CoA closes this public aspect how do you expect them to resume?   As for bitterness, resentment and grudges formed here, they're not going to disappear hen CoA chooses to resume negotiations in the traditional manner.

It's very normal for there to be public announcements and informal arguments on these forums over peace terms in addition to formal discussions taking place privately.  Especially when they are stalled, and these are more stalled than most because your side was/is deliberately stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, brucemna said:

But what u have is logs from a month before ur offer of surrender was made.

 

12 hours ago, ArcKnox said:
Quote

    underlordgc11/3/2019, 7:56:43 AM
    And we can just stall them by saying we want people to get organized or some random bs like that

 

Announcement made on November the 2nd.

Literally the day after.

You really should read before trying to argue.

And as a side note, they came from people who were Coal B, or are still in it but are disgruntled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Smith said:

No coalition has ever held people at war for 7 months and expressed excitement over people quitting before. I'm not sure what you would expect to see in our coalition channel since we aren't in a position to do what your side has been doing and when we were in that position in past wars we didn't do it

The war length, no, but the excitement over getting people to quit, is a Thanos go to.  He gleefully loves it, and that love did not start this war.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

 

Announcement made on November the 2nd.

Literally the day after.

You really should read before trying to argue.

And as a side note, they came from people who were Coal B, or are still in it but are disgruntled.

Well, the ones you're citing now are from Gorge specifically who was fine with everything until it conflicted with his itinerary. Some of the lower level ones might be leaks from people still in, but the ones are definitely from Gorge. inb4 not relevant but it is worth pointing it out

Share this post


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

Negotiations are done privately. Until CoA closes this public aspect how do you expect them to resume?   As for bitterness, resentment and grudges formed here, they're not going to disappear hen CoA chooses to resume negotiations in the traditional manner.

So we're supposed to continue working in private despite clear evidence that y'all have no desire for peace?  And when we go public about these troubling facts, its our fault for preventing the peace process?  

Which is it, buddy?  Do you want peace or not?  We honestly don't have time to sit here and be gaslighted.  

 Whether they be TKR, NPO, GOONS, T$ or otherwise, our members don't deserve this.  But obviously our systemic "bitterness, resentment and grudges" is more important than acting in their interests.  Man up or quiet down.  It's clear you have no intention of resolving this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Well, the ones you're citing now are from Gorge specifically who was fine with everything until it conflicted with his itinerary. Some of the lower level ones might be leaks from people still in, but the ones are definitely from Gorge. inb4 not relevant but it is worth pointing it out

I'm aware. He had said so himself:
 

Quote

₲ɆØⱤ₲Ɇ11/3/2019, 1:01:11 AM
And I can understand war to this point, like I’m on board however really past this point we’re overdoing it

However, him having his own motives does nothing to change the content within the logs themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, brucemna said:

Let's see here. U dont want to negotiate or walk away from talks cause a third party supplied u with logs that may or may not want peace talks cause they are part of the war or not a d may benefit the war continuing ?  Seriously .. dont u think there comes a point where someone may have played ur side and they got the best of u. U say my side wants to prolong this but yet u keep dumping logs pushing ur opponent away to talk ? Personally if logs like this were posted in the public forum and used as propaganda to make r side look bad like this u think I would actually come and give u a chance to get out of a losing situation. From what I see ur making this harder on urself than anything. Agian I never would of walked away cause I feel or get third party information of any kind. It would make me more cautious yes but I would keep moving forward until I was certain that whatever evidence u may have considers with the mood of the talks.  Meaning say for example we gave ur coalition white peace but then came back with terms that will make people quit from TS then ya u would have the terms to say,hey this is wrong we dont accept. But what u have is logs from a month before ur offer of surrender was made.  The views of October may habe changed a month later but now u will or may  not know.

The "third party" was a member of your coalition leadership which actually makes him a first party as he was directly involved.

It is not "may or may not" as they directly say they don't want the war to end. 

We know their views did not change after October because we have logs in November which is when this thread was created showing they were still trying to stall peace. And again, while they were doing this in private they were publicly blaming us for peace not progressing.

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.