Jump to content

A plea to consider Co A line members


Guest John Q Listener
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Roquentin said:

Why does everything have to get logdumped to be real? It's been acknowledged multiple times that  some core alliances in Coalition A asked people to help beat on BK well before the war because they wanted a big coalition because they thought BKsphere with all of the smaller alliances/rpots was so big. It can't be denied because it's what actually transpired and fit with the public rhetoric espoused at the time. 

Because you lie?

Now this is a case of deja vu ?

 

Edited by Charles the Tyrant
  • Upvote 1

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhantomThiefB
6 hours ago, Prefonteen said:

Oh! Oh! I can answer this one!


Things have to be logdumped because certain parties in coalition B keep lying about events which transpire in backchannels, as proven by the logs we dumped.

 

See: The TEst situation.

Damn your right. Because you've never told a lie in orbis. Ever. Perfect human's over there in Coalition A, yessir. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SleepingNinja said:

Damn your right. Because you've never told a lie in orbis. Ever. Perfect human's over there in Coalition A, yessir. 

Hence evidence being needed for anything to be even slightly trusted... ever.

Sure we're liars, but we've got stuff backing up our words. All you've got backing up your rhetoric is airplanes... how's that working for you? It's gonna take a lot more airstrikes to constitute an argument, m8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhantomThiefB
14 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Hence evidence being needed for anything to be even slightly trusted... ever.

Sure we're liars, but we've got stuff backing up our words. All you've got backing up your rhetoric is airplanes... how's that working for you? It's gonna take a lot more airstrikes to constitute an argument, m8.

I wouldn't call it an argument, you've admitted to the point I was making, so thanks. I mean I also don't really have a rhetoric either, I don't care to debate anything with coal A, what do I gain from it really? Also it's completely understandable to provide evidence to back up claims but that's not the problem I've got here. The problem is you guys pretend your a bunch of saints that have never said anything wrong before when everyone knows that's completely false. There's like what, 3 years of dirty laundry I could dig for just from you if I wanted to. I could find crap on every single person in your coalition if I committed to it. So spare us the angel rhetoric, yall aren't innocent either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, SleepingNinja said:

I wouldn't call it an argument, you've admitted to the point I was making, so thanks. I mean I also don't really have a rhetoric either, I don't care to debate anything with coal A, what do I gain from it really? Also it's completely understandable to provide evidence to back up claims but that's not the problem I've got here. The problem is you guys pretend your a bunch of saints that have never said anything wrong before when everyone knows that's completely false. There's like what, 3 years of dirty laundry I could dig for just from you if I wanted to. I could find crap on every single person in your coalition if I committed to it. So spare us the angel rhetoric, yall aren't innocent either.

Don't remind them of that! It's all NPO bad man and these folks have been nothing but altruistic great players, while openly lying about things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Don't remind them of that! It's all NPO bad man and these folks have been nothing but altruistic great players, while openly lying about things. 

Is that why more than half the alliances that were on your side eventually bailed out, at which you attacked them for doing so?

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

2 hours ago, SleepingNinja said:

Damn your right. Because you've never told a lie in orbis. Ever. Perfect human's over there in Coalition A, yessir. 

 

2 hours ago, SleepingNinja said:

I wouldn't call it an argument, you've admitted to the point I was making, so thanks. I mean I also don't really have a rhetoric either, I don't care to debate anything with coal A, what do I gain from it really? Also it's completely understandable to provide evidence to back up claims but that's not the problem I've got here. The problem is you guys pretend your a bunch of saints that have never said anything wrong before when everyone knows that's completely false. There's like what, 3 years of dirty laundry I could dig for just from you if I wanted to. I could find crap on every single person in your coalition if I committed to it. So spare us the angel rhetoric, yall aren't innocent either.

 

1 hour ago, Shadowthrone said:

Don't remind them of that! It's all NPO bad man and these folks have been nothing but altruistic great players, while openly lying about things. 

Roq asked "things had to be public". I let him know why.

You can try to deflect from that by flipping to the laziest "no u" i've seen in a while, but that doesn't really have any relevance to the fact that logs are merely being publicized to combat a set of structural lies concerning the nature and ongoings of this war.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhantomThiefB
2 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

 

 

Roq asked "things had to be public". I let him know why.

You can try to deflect from that by flipping to the laziest "no u" i've seen in a while, but that doesn't really have any relevance to the fact that logs are merely being publicized to combat a set of structural lies concerning the nature and ongoings of this war.

I see your still selectively reading everything. Could you please comprise a list of words you normally gloss over or simply don't understand so I can avoid which words these are in the future?

Why does everything have to get logdumped to be real?

Was the question. Not "things had to be public" Please attempt again after re-reading this post about 10 times. Just to make sure you didn't miss any key words that might change the context of a post. Thanks, friend.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SleepingNinja said:

I see your still selectively reading everything. Could you please comprise a list of words you normally gloss over or simply don't understand so I can avoid which words these are in the future?

Why does everything have to get logdumped to be real?

Was the question. Not "things had to be public" Please attempt again after re-reading this post about 10 times. Just to make sure you didn't miss any key words that might change the context of a post. Thanks, friend.?

Alright. I'll rephrase the answer I suppose:

Things don't have to be logdumped to be real- they're real regardless of whether or not that occurs.

They do have to be logdumped to be accepted as fact by people on your side, given that without log validation you'll just keep shouting shit. ;)

With that said... even with the vindication of proof having been brought to the table, you seem determined to just shift the narrative to finding other novel ways to blame us hehe.

  • Upvote 2

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhantomThiefB
7 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Alright. I'll rephrase the answer I suppose:

Things don't have to be logdumped to be real- they're real regardless of whether or not that occurs.

They do have to be logdumped to be accepted as fact by people on your side, given that without log validation you'll just keep shouting shit. ;)

With that said... even with the vindication of proof having been brought to the table, you seem determined to just shift the narrative to finding other novel ways to blame us hehe.

I never claimed innocence, besides I didn't have access to that channel. Think the bottom line I was making was it takes 2 to tango and now we're on the same page.

That said it may have come off like I was playing innocent, it was unintentional, sorry to have misled you like that, friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SleepingNinja said:

I never claimed innocence, besides I didn't have access to that channel. Think the bottom line I was making was it takes 2 to tango and now we're on the same page.

That said it may have come off like I was playing innocent, it was unintentional, sorry to have misled you like that, friend.

I've been speaking in the royal you. Apologies if that wasn't clear :P.

Gov parties on your side have claimed innocence, and I- being the champion of truthfinding that I am- will always stand up against the darkness of duplicity.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Hence evidence being needed for anything to be even slightly trusted... ever.

Sure we're liars, but we've got stuff backing up our words. All you've got backing up your rhetoric is airplanes... how's that working for you? It's gonna take a lot more airstrikes to constitute an argument, m8.

The planes are working out extremely well, actually. It's why we've won this war already.

  • Upvote 1

GICjEwp.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SleepingNinja said:

There's like what, 3 years of dirty laundry I could dig for just from you if I wanted to. I could find crap on every single person in your coalition if I committed to it. So spare us the angel rhetoric, yall aren't innocent either.

Please find some dirt on me besides that Keshav will now forever miss my downvotes. 

 

11 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Don't remind them of that! It's all NPO bad man and these folks have been nothing but altruistic great players, while openly lying about things. 

I'm going to miss being able to not reply to your strawman and red herrings by pressing a button instead of having to engage directly with your self-circlejerk. 

  • Upvote 1

Bottom_Border Siggy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Q Listener
13 hours ago, Prefonteen said:

 

 

Roq asked "things had to be public". I let him know why.

You can try to deflect from that by flipping to the laziest "no u" i've seen in a while, but that doesn't really have any relevance to the fact that logs are merely being publicized to combat a set of structural lies concerning the nature and ongoings of this war.

The difference between us is that while we both acknowledge the existence of the logs, you are still really hung up about it whereas I really don't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, John Q Listener said:

The difference between us is that while we both acknowledge the existence of the logs, you are still really hung up about it whereas I really don't care.

You remind me of a younger, less eloquent Milton at times. You'll get there :)

  • Haha 1

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Prefonteen said:

Oh! Oh! I can answer this one!


Things have to be logdumped because certain parties in coalition B keep lying about events which transpire in backchannels, as proven by the logs we dumped.

 

See: The TEst situation.

Then it still won't  be dumped anyway. It's a fact that Kayser was approached by people to hit BK well before the war. You know it at this point as well. 

 

15 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Is that why more than half the alliances that were on your side eventually bailed out, at which you attacked them for doing so?

Um, they bailed out because they couldn't cope with a real war. If it had been easy street the entire time and they didn't take damage, they wouldn't have.  No one besides Empyrea dropped out of Knightfall for instance. The nationcounts you and others attributed to BK were just paper and those alliances had no intention of ever fighting for real. They were micros that disbanded  or just severely unprepared alliances that can't cope with war.  It has nothing to do with us ultimately except that we expect people to not ditch if they have to fight for real. Your political goal of isolating BK by saying "this is what you get for being allied to BK and Covenant" was operative and people took it to be the case. They just don't like to fight especially not people like EM lol who wanted to just be left alone to grow forever to 50 or whatever.  They wanted greener pastures.  Keep pretending it has anything to do with good guys vs bad guys.

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Surely, it's got nothing to do with being NKVD' by your own allies. Nope.

Nope. Carthago complained about not having stuff. People helped. Most if not all of the exiters all wanted to just collect stats in peace and they need to rid themselves of the albatross of their ally to do it if possible. The micros didn't even try. Valorizing pixel huggers because it suits you is par for the course.

Edited by Roquentin
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

The planes are working out extremely well, actually. It's why we've won this war already.

And that still doesn't constitute an actual argument, just the numbers on some spreadsheets. No amount of planes will actually change the truth, no matter how much you'd like to believe it; that's why you're desperate to be toxic and thus do the damage that your planes never could.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Beet said:

Thinking that you win wars via forum arguments rather than wars in game is a pretty bold strategy. 

On a scale of 1-10 how well would you say it's worked out for you?

About as well as our private overtures but with the added benefit of the public mask finally having dropped.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

And that still doesn't constitute an actual argument, just the numbers on some spreadsheets. No amount of planes will actually change the truth, no matter how much you'd like to believe it; that's why you're desperate to be toxic and thus do the damage that your planes never could.

It's not an argument. The game is a database of numeric values.  We have greater values due to reducing the other side's values.  We thus have won.  If you thought the forums affected that you could literally create your own forums and have your own game.

  • Upvote 3

GICjEwp.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Q Listener

 

On 12/12/2019 at 4:41 PM, Sir Scarfalot said:

And that still doesn't constitute an actual argument, just the numbers on some spreadsheets. No amount of planes will actually change the truth, no matter how much you'd like to believe it; that's why you're desperate to be toxic and thus do the damage that your planes never could.

How is the forums strategy working out for you?

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.