Jump to content

Get off your high horse


Josh of Clan Mason
 Share

Recommended Posts

CANT YOU SEE??!! NPO MAN BAD HE SLOW SERVER DOWN FOR HIS OWN BENEFIT!!! GUINEA PIG MAN BAD!! STOP HIM NOW BEFORE HE MAKES THE SERVERS AS SLOW AS THEY WERE WHEN DIAL UP STARTED

Edited by hope
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did you know my horse was high, OP? I suppose I don't really need to be riding it anywhere tonight...

Look, people-folk: everybody makes mistakes, even (especially) newcomers to the game like me. So let's all work together to stop making harmful mistakes at each others' expenses, please. Thanks! ?

  • Downvote 2

Improper-Request-2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Josh of Clan Mason said:

Let me preface this by saying I'm completely prepared and expecting to get downvoted to hell. Your red arrows mean nothing to me, I'm just here to speak my mind.


So, TL;DR: There are way too many people on here (especially Col. A) being extremely hypocritical.
There's no denying that lately there has been plenty of anti-Col. B threads floating around, really kinda starting with George's "plea", but the current sentiment around Col. B has been this way for a good while. Now, let me be clear: this is NOT in defense in Col. B. This whole post is against hypocrites and I'd be one myself if I didn't admit both I myself and Col. B members have made mistakes. I'm here to say that I'm sick of people on here acting like they'd never/never had done do/done anything wrong. There's plenty of people on here absolutely ragging on others for whatever, but then turning around and doing the same or other awful things. I'm making this post because of what my alliance leader, TheNG, revealed to me today. He was doxxed by Col. A members. While this wasn't a full doxxing (no address, phone number, etc. revealed) it's absolutely ridiculous that someone thought it was ok to leak DM's of him talking about OOC real life stuff. I've never seen this game as toxic as is it now and I've been playing off and on since May 2016. You guys - me included- need to get a hold of yourselves. Remind yourself that this is a browser game and there is no need to try to ruin it for others.
Again, this goes for everyone.

My message to @Alexis: Get control of this game back. I can't tell if you're just ignoring the problems or have selective hearing, but you appear to be responding when it's convenient or when certain people report something. The discord and these forums are both a mess and you combat them with vague responses, such as your cyber-bullying announcement earlier. I posted a comment on here a few days ago criticizing you and it got removed for "posting in a non-discussion forum", I've received that warning before and didn't have my post removed. There is loads of bias with several moderators and nothing is being done to combat that, let alone the state of the entire community.

The irony of you of all people posting this after your behavior the entire war.  I have a hard time taking your sudden realization serious when thrown in the context of how much you've celebrated your own toxicity.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5
Quote

Former leader of Chocolate Castle 4/1/2021

"It's pretty easy to get abused by Rosey without being a weirdo about it" - Betilius

"Rosey is everything I look for in a fighter" - partisan

"I’m very much not surprised that Lossi has you blocked tbh" - @MCMaster-095

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm seing from my position of reading things, talking to people and shouting is this: what's happened is a complete breakdown in civility, from both sides.

I'm not going to try and say anybody is innocent, or that leaking logs containing personally identifying information is acceptable, it completely isn't. However, when one coalition is coming from a position of actively trying to drive people out of the game, something is seriously broken.

 

This is a browser game, and wars in it should be conducted like what they are, activities in what should be a light-hearted game. Trashtalking one another is fine, it's all in the spirit of good sportsmanship to chat shit about your opponents; however, when you're trying to drive people from the game or are leaking personal info, it needs to stop. This war has gotten horribly toxic, and does not reflect what a game like this is supposed to be. Right now I think a white peace is the only way that both sides can put these things behind them, rebuild, and try to make things better in the future.

 

This is a small community of generally good people. Let's not ruin it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering no member of Coalition A leaked these logs, your talk of hypocrisy is bullshit.

Either you hastily posted accusing people of doxxing without verifying first, or you do know and are just trying to play with the truth for political reasons.

Either way you should take some of your own advice buddy.

 

  • Upvote 3

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sardonic said:

Civility is liberal hogwash and I'm glad it's gone.  Embrace materialism!

Do you think it's okay to force people from a game they've invested time, effort and sometimes money in for your coalitions own ends?

 

If not, why do you share a cause with those who do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, namukara said:

Do you think it's okay to force people from a game they've invested time, effort and sometimes money in for your coalitions own ends?

 

If not, why do you share a cause with those who do?

You clearly don't know GOONS, lol.

Destroying games is something they're proud of, and has been for a loooong time.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, namukara said:

Do you think it's okay to force people from a game they've invested time, effort and sometimes money in for your coalitions own ends?

 

If not, why do you share a cause with those who do?

Everyone is okay with forcing people from the game. Wars have been fought every single year in P&W which resulted in people quitting and everyone still declares war. It's a consequence of war. If you go to war you do so knowing that a side effect is forcing people to quit. 

War is also carried out to nullify a threat. What better way to do that than make sure members quit their alliance. In the perfect world these members take the individual surrender option and are free then to go to a different alliance not at war. Unfortunately some decide to quit and delete their Nations.

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Everyone is okay with forcing people from the game. Wars have been fought every single year in P&W which resulted in people quitting and everyone still declares war. It's a consequence of war. If you go to war you do so knowing that a side effect is forcing people to quit. 

War is also carried out to nullify a threat. What better way to do that than make sure members quit their alliance. In the perfect world these members take the individual surrender option and are free then to go to a different alliance not at war. Unfortunately some decide to quit and delete their Nations.

Aye, that wars often tend to result in people deleting is true, but the issue is that those wars were not declared with a final end goal of making people delete. This one, suggested at least by the logs that have been leaked, has making people delete a goal of the war, rather than merely as a consequence of such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, namukara said:

Do you think it's okay to force people from a game they've invested time, effort and sometimes money in for your coalitions own ends?

The pathway to peace exists.  The fact that the implicit preconditions of the peace are disagreeable to Col A does not disqualify that fact.  I have full faith that after the first wave of peace is reached, the second wave will be negotiated in due time.

Col A chose this path, stating that the cost of surrender was too high, betting that their leverage would improve with time.  They bet wrong.  You can tell they bet wrong because so many are falling back on this forced disbandment nonsense, as their alliances crumble to ash.

This is all based on accepting your framing of course.  Picking the key pieces out of your framing however, I have to say I completely disagree with them:

1. That the winning coalition is obligated to even provide peace to the losing coalition

2. That any player or alliance of the game has any responsibility to make the game 'fun' for any other player or alliance

3. That the fact that any player has spent time or money on the game changes the moral worth of their experience

4. That anybody can even be 'forced' to disband in the first place.

This is all academic anyway.  In my view Col B has been more than generous.

Edited by Sardonic
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sardonic said:

The pathway to peace exists.  The fact that the implicit preconditions of the peace are disagreeable to Col A does not disqualify that fact.  I have full faith that after the first wave of peace is reached, the second wave will be negotiated in due time.

Col A chose this path, stating that the cost of surrender was too high, betting that their leverage would improve with time.  They bet wrong.  You can tell they bet wrong because so many are falling back on this forced disbandment nonsense, as their alliances crumble to ash.

This is all based on accepting your framing of course.  Picking the key pieces out of your framing however, I have to say I completely disagree with them:

1. That the winning coalition is obligated to even provide peace to the losing coalition

2. That any player or alliance of the game has any responsibility to make the game 'fun' for any other player or alliance

3. That the fact that any player has spent time or money on the game changes the moral worth of their experience

4. That anybody can even be 'forced' to disband in the first place.

This is all academic anyway.  In my view Col B has been more than generous.

It has not existed for t$. Hopefully that will change.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sardonic said:

The pathway to peace exists.  The fact that the implicit preconditions of the peace are disagreeable to Col A does not disqualify that fact.  I have full faith that after the first wave of peace is reached, the second wave will be negotiated in due time.

Col A chose this path, stating that the cost of surrender was too high, betting that their leverage would improve with time.  They bet wrong.  You can tell they bet wrong because so many are falling back on this forced disbandment nonsense, as their alliances crumble to ash.

This is all based on accepting your framing of course.  Picking the key pieces out of your framing however, I have to say I completely disagree with them:

1. That the winning coalition is obligated to even provide peace to the losing coalition

2. That any player or alliance of the game has any responsibility to make the game 'fun' for any other player or alliance

3. That the fact that any player has spent time or money on the game changes the moral worth of their experience

4. That anybody can even be 'forced' to disband in the first place.

This is all academic anyway.  In my view Col B has been more than generous.

If the official negotiators from coalition B can confirm this is the current resolution being proposed, it would be most appreciated.

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cathy said:

Juss notice thars a lotta squirmn frum da sid that didn win

Nobody’s lost yet, that’s why we’re still fighting ?? 
Our leaders have expressed a willingness to admit defeat given acceptable conditions, though that is not the same thing as actually being defeated in the sense you’re alluding to.  In this war Co B has lost much, including credibility and respect (much more valuable than planes, and something that cannot be purchased).  In that sense we’re the winners.
The only squirming I see is from those whose lies have been exposed in the released logs!

Have a great day  ?

Celer Et Audax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Etatsorp said:

Nobody’s lost yet, that’s why we’re still fighting ?? 
Our leaders have expressed a willingness to admit defeat given acceptable conditions, though that is not the same thing as actually being defeated in the sense you’re alluding to.  In this war Co B has lost much, including credibility and respect (much more valuable than planes, and something that cannot be purchased).  In that sense we’re the winners.
The only squirming I see is from those whose lies have been exposed in the released logs!

Have a great day  ?

Dis cowz wonderin hw humanz can taco n so many circlz iss makin ma hoofs ake.

Plz post Goon liez I wanna reed 'em

free_vacation_coupon.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Considering no member of Coalition A leaked these logs, your talk of hypocrisy is bullshit.

Either you hastily posted accusing people of doxxing without verifying first, or you do know and are just trying to play with the truth for political reasons.

Either way you should take some of your own advice buddy.

 

A moderator literally confirmed it in this thread. 

Either you can't read, or you chose not to read the whole thread.

Either way, you should take some of your own advice buddy.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Josh of Clan Mason said:

A moderator literally confirmed it in this thread.

I will only intervene since it looks like my post caused some confusion.

I never stated from whom the leak was. I thought that was obvious. In case it isn't, you can just check the corresponding thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chief Wiggum said:

I will only intervene since it looks like my post caused some confusion.

I never stated from whom the leak was. I thought that was obvious. In case it isn't, you can just check the corresponding thread.

thnk u Chef Widegum 4 tha wisdum

free_vacation_coupon.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Josh of Clan Mason said:

A moderator literally confirmed it in this thread. 

Either you can't read, or you chose not to read the whole thread.

Either way, you should take some of your own advice buddy.

Jumping to conclusions again already only to be corrected again. You should read your own thread, people, even some from Col B, have already clarified the situation.

 You do realise that most people know who released the logs right? It was done on the forums, and sheepy deleted the thread later.

Like this isn't a mystery that needs solving, there was a whole forum thread about it. So you could have done some basic inquiries to figure out the reality.

Basic inquiries you apparently still haven't made. 

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cathy said:

Dis cowz wonderin hw humanz can taco n so many circlz iss makin ma hoofs ake.

Plz post Goon liez I wanna reed 'em

I'm not certain that cow English has the inherent depth and breadth of expression that would facilitate true understanding of the current issues under public scrutiny.  IC being a cow must be a curious experience though, and fits wonderfully with Co A's perception of Co B i.e. herd mentality and forum stampedes.

Have a nice day!!

Celer Et Audax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 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.