Jump to content

Possible Conclusions on Global War 16's genesis and continuation


Phoenyx
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know there are those who don't like my posts. To them I say, sure, put me on ignore or what have you. If you keep on reading, though, then clearly there is -something- about them that is keeping you here. So, as mentioned yesterday in a post, I think I may have reached some final conclusions as to the genesis and continuation of Global War 16.

 

I believe that at best, it started due to a misunderstanding on Boyce's part, with his notion that HM/TCW/Swamp was going to attack soon, possibly in early December. Quack decided Boyce words could be trusted and that it would be for them to strike first. From everything I've read, it would seem Boyce misunderstood plans for a defensive Coalition and instead took them for plans for an offensive Coalition. Boyce and Partisan may have since begun to have doubts as to the veracity of this, but they may feel that it's best to continue onward with this CB then admit they may have been mistaken.

 

Some time after Partisan made a CB thread that included Boyce's statement of the afore mentioned forces allegedly conspiring to attack Quack, Ronnie stated that Swamp had approached HM, suggesting that they attack Quack. I believe his memory of events might have been influenced by Partisan's CB. When Ronnie explained to me that he hadn't actually spoken to anyone in Swamp and showed me the log of his conversation with a fellow HM leader, which was much more ambiguous than Ronnie's statement, I came to the conclusion that Ronnie's fellow HM leader was simply referring to the defensive Coalition that Swamp et al have made no bones about creating. Initially, I thought it should be a simple matter for Ronnie to get clarification from his fellow HM leader as to what he meant and I asked him if he'd do so. Ronnie never responded to this line of questioning, however. For a while, this frustrated me- why wouldn't he want to clear this up? I finally came up with a theory that may fit- he may have realized that he'd made a mistake and that his fellow HM leader had indeed only been referring to the defensive Coalition that in fact occurred. However, for him to admit that might make his judgement not look so good and so he decided it would be better to just remain silent on the issue.

 

That's pretty much it.

Edited by Phoenyx
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phoenyx said:

suggesting that they attack Quack. I believe his memory of events might have been influenced by Partisan's CB.

This is absolutely not true. SRD discussed this very thing with Grumpy, as he stated. Its not like he saw that comment and filed it away to be misconstrued. 

And, at least for me, that log is as clear as day. 

It seems you won't stop posting, and won't stop digging, so I'd like to point you in a direction that would actually be interesting. SRD and Hedge seem to think they've said enough on this topic (and I 100% agree)... but the real question is: Why did Rose join? And why would Hedge not know Rose was joining? At the end of the day, Rose-Cam are the only ones without a CB, but yet they're what made a fun war into a stomp. Go bug azazel or epi or someone and find out how much of a tie there really is. You might even get a pat on the head from partisan if you find anything :)

Hey Krampus, the signature edit is under account settings. Actually, here's the link.

https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/settings/signature/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, zigbigadorlou said:

This is absolutely not true. SRD discussed this very thing with Grumpy, as he stated. Its not like he saw that comment and filed it away to be misconstrued. 

And, at least for me, that log is as clear as day. 

It seems you won't stop posting, and won't stop digging, so I'd like to point you in a direction that would actually be interesting. SRD and Hedge seem to think they've said enough on this topic (and I 100% agree)... but the real question is: Why did Rose join? And why would Hedge not know Rose was joining? At the end of the day, Rose-Cam are the only ones without a CB, but yet they're what made a fun war into a stomp. Go bug azazel or epi or someone and find out how much of a tie there really is. You might even get a pat on the head from partisan if you find anything :)

 

While I was briefly in Rose, I am back in Swamp. If people want to figure out why Rose got involved, they are welcome to do as you say. I wrote this thread to state my current conclusions as to how this war started and why it continues. In any case, I see that no one seems interested in asking the HM leader as to what he meant. You can continue to ignore the fact that Ronnie's statement as to what he thought Swamp wanted to do (offensive strike apparently) and Tyrion/Kaz's statements as to what Swamp was actually doing (defensive plan) don't match, but I won't. 

4 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I banned him on the grumpy discord for posting spam.  The largest regret I have had this war, was the mistake of actually talking to this dude, which will never happen again.

 

And still, you refuse to answer the questions I asked you 2 weeks ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

And still, you refuse to answer the questions I asked you 2 weeks ago. 

 

5 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I banned him on the grumpy discord for posting spam.  The largest regret I have had this war, was the mistake of actually talking to this dude, which will never happen again.

 

Captain-Picard-Facepalm.jpg.c2ae932cf1309df0ec4b22a6e7352e86.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Adrienne said:

 

 

Captain-Picard-Facepalm.jpg.c2ae932cf1309df0ec4b22a6e7352e86.jpg

 

I just think it's rather convenient that he's labelled me as someone not worth talking or responding to. Hopefully, I won't be the only one to raise the discrepancy between his take as to what Swamp was planning and Swamp's statements on what they were planning. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Adrienne said:

It's not "convenient". If you want people to talk to you, you don't throw up every last thing they said up on the OWF and spam topics.

 

I don't. I'm sure SRD would be the first person to tell you that our conversation was pretty short. However, I felt that what he said really had to be shared, so I shared it. Now do you at least agree that the fact that SRD essentially agreed with Partisan that Swamp wanted to attack Quack didn't help Tyrion's denial that there was such a plan? It seems like a no brainer to me. Now, had I been Tyrion, I would have been on SRD concerning this from day 1. I certainly was when I saw the importance of this. And to SRD's credit, he shared his source. He now says he deeply regrets it. I admit I'm not sure why. What I -am- sure about is that I still think I did the right thing. And the question still needs to be asked- what did Ronnie's HM leader source mean? Did he mean that Swamp was planning a defensive Coalition as Swamp claims or that Swamp was planning an offensive first strike as Partisan claims and as Ronnie seemed to be saying. Now, unlike the ad that Quack put up, Ronnie -also- said that after a week, he heard nothing further about this alleged attack plan. My contention is that he heard nothing further about it because there was never such an attack plan to begin with- it was just confusion for what the real plan was, which was a defensive one. But since he refuses to question his source, all I can do is speculate as to -why- he won't do this. The best I could come up with is that he doesn't want it public knowledge that he made a mistake and that said HM source was actually only talking about Swamp's defensive coalition plan. 

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

 

I don't. I'm sure SRD would be the first person to tell you that our conversation was pretty short. However, I felt that what he said really had to be shared, so I shared it. Now do you at least agree that the fact that SRD essentially agreed with Partisan that Swamp wanted to attack Quack didn't help Tyrion's denial that there was such a plan? It seems like a no brainer to me. Now, had I been Tyrion, I would have been on SRD concerning this from day 1. I certainly was when I saw the importance of this. And to SRD's credit, he shared his source. He now says he deeply regrets it. I admit I'm not sure why. What I -am- sure about is that I still think I did the right thing. And the question still needs to be asked- what did Ronnie's HM leader source mean? Did he mean that Swamp was planning a defensive Coalition as Swamp claims or that Swamp was planning an offensive first strike as Partisan claims and as Ronnie seemed to be saying. Now, unlike the ad that Quack put up, Ronnie -also- said that after a week, he heard nothing further about this alleged attack plan. My contention is that he heard nothing further about it because there was never such an attack plan to begin with- it was just confusion for what the real plan was, which was a defensive one. But since he refuses to question his source, all I can do is speculate as to -why- he won't do this. The best I could come up with is that he doesn't want it public knowledge that he made a mistake and that said HM source was actually only talking about Swamp's defensive coalition plan. 

This is prolly a waste of time but mate, you were just told no one wants to talk about this further WITH YOU because you have no sense of discretion, are persistent to the point of being annoying and are way too convinced in Swamp's innocence in all of this to even foster a fair discussion.

I don't mind or care that you keep making these threads... but why are you still trying to have people engage with you about the war, when all they said to deserve this response was this:

Quote

It's not "convenient". If you want people to talk to you, you don't throw up every last thing they said up on the OWF and spam topics.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phoenyx said:

Everyone else must be lying because Tyrion would never lie to me~~~

Outside looking in, there are two probabilities. Influential elements of Tyrion’s own sphere left him completely in the dark while conspiring with HM and Rose, or he’s lying.

I know what my money is on.

Edited by Sisyphus

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arric II Vysera said:

This is prolly a waste of time but mate, you were just told no one wants to talk about this further WITH YOU because you have no sense of discretion, are persistent to the point of being annoying and are way too convinced in Swamp's innocence in all of this to even foster a fair discussion.

I don't mind or care that you keep making these threads... but why are you still trying to have people engage with you about the war, when all they said to deserve this response was this:

 

 

Life isn't always convenient. Anyway, I am still taking to people, and not all my conversations are in the forum. I am one of the few voices here who has made it clear that I believe Tyrion and Kaz when they say they had no plans to attack Quack and so have put attention to the main sources that have suggested otherwise. Boyce, being on Quack's side, I can kind of understand. They wouldn't want their whole CB toppling down, so ofcourse they would to loathe to question his bonafides in this. But Ronnie? I mean, Tyrion and Kaz came to HM's defense. One would think that he would return the favour and try to sort out this discrepancy. I will allow that perhaps this HM leader talked to a smaller Alliance within Swamp that did indeed want to attack Quack first, but this is the type of thing that I really think should have been cleared up long ago, before I even arrived on the scene. 

Just now, Sisyphus said:

Outside looking in, there are two probabilities.Influential elements of Tyrion’s own sphere left him completely in the dark while conspiring with HM and Rose, or he’s lying.

I know what my money is on.

 

Or Ronnie misunderstood. But I could believe the possibility that it was some in Tyrion's own sphere who left him in the dark. Ronnie has the power to find out which of these 3 possibilities is true. The question is, will he? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

Life isn't always convenient. Anyway, I am still taking to people, and not all my conversations are in the forum. I am one of the few voices here who has made it clear that I believe Tyrion and Kaz when they say they had no plans to attack Quack and so have put attention to the main sources that have suggested otherwise. Boyce, being on Quack's side, I can kind of understand. They wouldn't want their whole CB toppling down, so ofcourse they would to loathe to question his bonafides in this. But Ronnie? I mean, Tyrion and Kaz came to HM's defense. One would think that he would return the favour and try to sort out this discrepancy. I will allow that perhaps this HM leader talked to a smaller Alliance within Swamp that did indeed want to attack Quack first, but this is the type of thing that I really think should have been cleared up long ago, before I even arrived on the scene. 

> I tell you to stop trying to start discussions with people who have no interest discussing the war, like you did when Ronny and Adrienne only brought up the fact people won't talk to you because of your conduct.

> You proceed to try and start discussion about the war with me, when all I did was criticize your conduct.

I'm banking on the hope you'll finally recognize what I'm getting at here for the second time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Arric II Vysera said:

> I tell you to stop trying to start discussions with people who have no interest discussing the war, like you did when Ronny and Adrienne only brought up the fact people won't talk to you because of your conduct.

> You proceed to try and start discussion about the war with me, when all I did was criticize your conduct.

I'm banking on the hope you'll finally recognize what I'm getting at here for the second time.

 

You are assuming that you are my only audience when I am responding to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

 

You are assuming that you are my only audience when I am responding to you.

Problem is, aside from Patrick in Eclipse, the rest of your "audience" agrees with Arric here. You don't seem to realize that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

 

You are assuming that you are my only audience when I am responding to you.

That does raise the question, if not in fact actually beg the question of who the actual heck your intended audience even is.

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.