Jump to content
Prefonteen

An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

Have you noticed how little has been leaked so far?  It's weird to have that happen. No one's ever done peace negotiations in public and we're not doing it this time either.

I've indeed noticed that more has been let out than what Yammie took in from Skate.

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi

Share this post


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

That we got terms (plural) is a lie. We got 1 term. Out of 12. With no idea what the rest of the terms are, how can you expect negotiations? 

If you weren't to be entirely factual, you did receive terms. You accepted term 1 and received term 2. So plural works here. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

You titled it "An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks." As tS is not in CoA, this thread can't be about tS.

not according to NPO and the rest of the game.

33 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

No one's ever done peace negotiations in public and we're not doing it this time either.

irrelevant to the point, but ok.

Also if you define CoB’s entire war discord as “little”, you’re dumb.

35 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

Have you noticed how little has been leaked so far?  

 

35 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

Nope. While we have our reasons we see no reason to make them public as this is a private matter.

Pretty sure he(she?) was talking about the terms in private. Your coalition refused to present all the terms, and as such we assumed they were bullshit.

Share this post


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

f you weren't to be entirely factual, you did receive terms. You accepted term 1 and received term 2. So plural works here. 

This is kind of disingenuous, since term 1 was the official surrender, which we did prior to negotiations. But if you want to count it so you can save face, sure I’ll rephrase that.

 

 NPO only presented one term after we agreed to surrender.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CandyShi said:

This is kind of disingenuous, since term 1 was the official surrender, which we did prior to negotiations. But if you want to count it so you can save face, sure I’ll rephrase that.

 

 NPO only presented one term after we agreed to surrender.

 

You accepted to surrender and we presented to you the entire surrender term as Term 1. Term 2 went into different things, Term 3 etc etc. The fact that we only achieved a discussion on Term 1 is on you not us really, given how we were willing to continue going forward through the terms one by one, as clearly outlined before we opened the first round of negotiations. 

That's not really disingenuous. That's the process. You started it and then chose to walk away. That's all documented fact. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

You accepted to surrender and we presented to you the entire surrender term as Term 1. Term 2 went into different things, Term 3 etc etc. The fact that we only achieved a discussion on Term 1 is on you not us really, given how we were willing to continue going forward through the terms one by one, as clearly outlined before we opened the first round of negotiations. 

That's not really disingenuous. That's the process. You started it and then chose to walk away. That's all documented fact. 

>completely omits the part about us not knowing about the rest of the terms, along with t$ not being includes, being the reasons cited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

So.... not the first time.

First time in this world though.  And NPO has been desperate to convey the idea that they aren't the same as they are in other worlds and should be given a clean slate in this world.

If that was the case, they wouldn't be acting in a way that is so unprecedented in this world and unique to them in other worlds.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

You titled it "An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks." As tS is not in CoA, this thread can't be about tS.

Have you noticed how little has been leaked so far?  It's weird to have that happen. No one's ever done peace negotiations in public and we're not doing it this time either.

Nope. While we have our reasons we see no reason to make them public as this is a private matter.

 

3ixp86.jpg

Is this really what we have to argue against?

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's their new method of stalling talks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

That's their new method of stalling talks.

Yeah we're pretty creative ?

Share this post


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

Because it bears repeating: This is the first time in this world that anyone has tried to insist on doing terms this way.

I've seen it done by NPO (and only NPO) in other worlds, but that's it.

Sure and things change.... 

5 hours ago, CandyShi said:

not according to NPO and the rest of the game.

irrelevant to the point, but ok.

Also if you define CoB’s entire war discord as “little”, you’re dumb.

 

Pretty sure he(she?) was talking about the terms in private. Your coalition refused to present all the terms, and as such we assumed they were bullshit.

AND WE HAVE A WINNER .... the word assumed ... never assume hence why ua all in this position 

Share this post


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

Sure and things change.... 

AND WE HAVE A WINNER .... the word assumed ... never assume hence why ua all in this position 

Pretty sure you missed the part earlier where I say “I’m not a representative of CoA”.

 

This is all my speculation.

 

Aside from that, nice attempt at victim blaming. “Oh you assumed that there was malicious intent because of sketchy circumstances, that’s your fault”. 

Share this post


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

Pretty sure you missed the part earlier where I say “I’m not a representative of CoA”.

 

This is all my speculation.

 

Aside from that, nice attempt at victim blaming. “Oh you assumed that there was malicious intent because of sketchy circumstances, that’s your fault”. 

And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny. Just speculation though.

Share this post


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

Pretty sure you missed the part earlier where I say “I’m not a representative of CoA”.

 

This is all my speculation.

 

Aside from that, nice attempt at victim blaming. “Oh you assumed that there was malicious intent because of sketchy circumstances, that’s your fault”. 

Well when u use the word we it tends to put u in the pack. Refer back to ur post 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tiberius said:

And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny. Just speculation though.

You're stalling because you're trying to drag out this war to maximize attrition and disbandment.  It's been clearly evidence in the logs that this is your strategy due to personal grudges against coalition A and some corruption of realpolitik ad absurdum.  

If you don't think you're stalling, I don't know what world you are living in.  I mean your mouthpieces are here arguing about whether T$ is in coalition A, presenting laughable terms, ignoring/trolling our reps and not engaging in real negotiations.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cooper_ said:

You're stalling because you're trying to drag out this war to maximize attrition and disbandment.  It's been clearly evidence in the logs that this is your strategy due to personal grudges against coalition A and some corruption of realpolitik ad absurdum.  

If you don't think you're stalling, I don't know what world you are living in.  I mean your mouthpieces are here arguing about whether T$ is in coalition A, presenting laughable terms, ignoring/trolling our reps and not engaging in real negotiations.  

Mouthpieces? Seriously ... and your side wonders why no one wants to forge ahead when ur saying these things? Lol .. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone explain what the war was about before the sort of surrender post? From august until that moment?

Share this post


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

Could someone explain what the war was about before the sort of surrender post? From august until that moment?

Roq being paranoid.

Edited by Charles the Tyrant
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Curufinwe
7 hours ago, Cooper_ said:

You're stalling because you're trying to drag out this war to maximize attrition and disbandment.  It's been clearly evidence in the logs that this is your strategy due to personal grudges against coalition A and some corruption of realpolitik ad absurdum.  

If you don't think you're stalling, I don't know what world you are living in.  I mean your mouthpieces are here arguing about whether T$ is in coalition A, presenting laughable terms, ignoring/trolling our reps and not engaging in real negotiations.  

 

Share this post


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

You're stalling because you're trying to drag out this war to maximize attrition and disbandment.  It's been clearly evidence in the logs that this is your strategy due to personal grudges against coalition A and some corruption of realpolitik ad absurdum.  

If you don't think you're stalling, I don't know what world you are living in.  I mean your mouthpieces are here arguing about whether T$ is in coalition A, presenting laughable terms, ignoring/trolling our reps and not engaging in real negotiations.  

Nice rant there over something I didn't say. 

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

Let's be real here  Coops, we are incredibly immature, childish, victorious, glorious and we get kicks out of you crying on the forums. We are making Politics and War great again, and theres nothing you can do about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Nice rant there over something I didn't say. 

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

"And I assume we are still stalling you because it's funny."

Let's be real here  Coops, we are incredibly immature, childish, victorious, glorious and we get kicks out of you crying on the forums. We are making Politics and War great again, and theres nothing you can do about it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkk9gvTmCXY

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.