Phiney Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Valid points. Thank you for your well reasoned input, Tenages. If the policy is rethought it will undoubtedly be because of what you said, the way you behaved before, and the respect that we all hold for you as a voice of reason. Please lick his bum harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) Please lick his bum harder. I don't kiss ass. I didn't kiss TEst's ass when you were at my throat. I've never kissed Guardian's ass or Pre's ass, whose ass is so shiny from others' kissing that it would be most sanitary anyway. I think that when I pay compliments they have validity because I really do it so rarely. EDIT: If Tenages is sexually attractive, licking his !@#$ is a completely valid option, to be clear. Tenages, please give an unbiased rating of your sexual attractiveness on a scale of one to ten, one being I wouldn't go near your !@#$, ten being I'm up in there. the last person to have their !@#$ licked by me fainted briefly, so intense was the pleasure that I gave him. So keep that in mind when arriving at your rating. I'll give you time to deliberate. Thank you, Phiney, for raising this important issue. Edited February 19, 2015 by Ashland Quote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 One doth protest too much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) One doth protest too muchIf I accused you of doing or saying something you weren't you would respond with WAY more bitterness, I know for a fact because it's hapened. Die in a fire, etc. etc. I still love you <3 Edited February 19, 2015 by Ashland Quote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 If I accused you of doing or saying something you weren't you would respond with WAY more bitterness, I know for a fact because it's hapened. Die in a fire, etc. etc. I still love you <3 Calm down mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aksel Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) That's only because of your charming personality and all around likeability Speaker. I do have to say I think you guys were better off without the charter amendments you made. By better off, I mean more likely to achieve your stated goal of a high white color bonus (and your presumed goal of not having to go through an expensive war to move other alliances off.) For instance, if our situation from before had cropped up after this thread, with all of the chest thumping, machismo and threats thrown around by several members of your bloc in this thread, it's far less likely there would have been an amicable resolution. It's very probable we'd have stayed stayed just to teach a lesson to those strutting around the forums showing off their big swinging dicks (as I said to you in private during our discussion a few weeks ago). Your previous approach invited reasoned discussion and ultimately amicable resolution. This announcement, and the attitude taken by many CC members in the thread, invites belligerence and war. If that's what you want, well done. If it isn't, as Impero said, you may want to rethink the approach. That being said, wish you and ESA well, and hope CC continues to work out for all it's member alliances. Tenages - I enjoyed working with you - but you know I'm a grower not a show-er...no swinging !@#$ here. OD was awesome to deal with and the same approach we took with you is the same approach we took with and will take with any future alliances that pop up on white. I don't think we put a gun to your head - I'm sure each of my steps was diplomatic, probably a bit pestering to keep the line of communication open, but diplomacy was my ultimate goal - as it will be with the rest. As far as belligerence and war - I can most definitely understand where you are coming from. I believe the wording of the amendment seems a bit "big swinging dick-ish", but it all arose when you guys stated you didn't understand our actual hold on the White Sphere (this is all you fault! haha) I suppose we could have added some skittles, butterflies, and rainbows to the amendment - but the only difference from where we stood before is our strategy is just publicly outlined. It is true - I suppose we look like huge douches - but hey, if Sheepy can add dynamics to the game to push for war, why can't the general membership of the world add their own dynamics? I guess what it really comes down to is - does an alliance want to take the step to blatantly disrespect our stance on white? Same as does an alliance blatantly want to disrespect a neutrality stance of another alliance? I mean - when you put them together - they stand for something, we stand for something - its not too much of an apples and oranges type of discussion here. If anyone wants some skittles tho.....come find me. o/OD o/SK Please lick his bum harder. I volunteer as tribute! edit: somehow hit post without hitting post....? Edited February 19, 2015 by The Speaker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Calm down mate. I ended it with a <3 Now this post will end with a different heart. </3 Quote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eumirbago Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Section 5 seems very arrogant, even very naive, especially since one of the signatories showed how they can't even handle being raided by a noob AA. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aksel Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Section 5 seems very arrogant, even very naive, especially since one of the signatories showed how they can't even handle being raided by a noob AA. Yeah! Quit being so arrogant guys - and I can't believe they can't even handle noobs. pshhh. What pushovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Will be interesting to see how you deal with people moving over. You certainly put yourself in a tough position, and I predict that you will backpedal and make yourself look silly. Either way, interesting announcement. I guess we will see how serious you guys are pretty soon. Quote Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eumirbago Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Yeah! Quit being so arrogant guys - and I can't believe they can't even handle noobs. pshhh. What pushovers. I definitely agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 To be fair, the charter does allow us the flexibility to act as we see fit given the situation. As you said, it may very well be not worth the percentage points. And that's obviously something that would be considered before any action is taken. Pretty much my thoughts too. You don't need to chest puff about the white team. Just handle it informally. Color monopolies didn't work out for VoC/DEIC in the past and I doubt they do here either. Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) They actually worked out pretty well for VoC and Guardian, we both shared colors and enjoyed much success with tactics used right up until around the time the color system changed. This world is however different and the same is more difficult to do. And questionably not worth it either since those were bonuses of 20 - 30% compared 5 - 7 now at best. Edited February 23, 2015 by Diabolos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P2K Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I think the policy can and should just be adjusted a little to explain exactly what was meant a little better. I think that when the policy was wrote they just didn't go so deep into detail because they didn't realize how everyone was going to react to it. I think a lot of the people writing in this thread just wants to see the CC go to war. I personally do not think we need to at this moment. It was just completed and shown to the world. So as far as I am concerned I don't think it's that big of a deal to change it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooohu Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 As an expert in atoms, an avid philanthropist, accomplished author, pugilist, aviator, color bloc aficionado, legendary lover and political titan I'll say this; there are more ways to encourage cooperation and coordination for the purposes of controlling a sphere then the threat of force. But when the threat of force is the main component used to coerce people into agreement I guarantee you'll find plenty of others willing to take a challenge against it. Anyways would you like to see a magic trick kiddies? Kazaaaaaaaaaam! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eumirbago Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 If we cant own the swing sets thats fine. Time to leave the playground behind. Is it ok if we step away from our 12 yr old rl selves? What about my house? Can I own and defend that? So if someone breaks in and refuses to leave can I not put a missile up his ass? It is self defense if they kick in the door knowing it is locked. What about my white car, American history X shows us that you smash my window, curb be the word. But the car is on the public street. To bad. Still my car. Really who can claim anything. Just because you spent money on it? Your logic is saying that isnt good enough. We have a mutual agreement to defend what we worked to produce. Why is this so hard to understand? Why does everyone want to step up and smash my window? Im simply hanging a neighbourhood watch sign in the window. If everyone has such a big issue then just leave us be and we will never, ever have an issue. Any protectorate who doesnt follow orders from "dad" isnt a protectorate. If you allow them to do something we see as an act of war than it is indeed a defensive war for the citadel. Really if you want a reason to attack us just ask. Ill right the declaration for you. Maybe slap each other with a glove. Or we could even meet on a fair playing feild. Unless being fair isnt your cup of tea either? For a council seeking peace we sure are getting alot of threats Allot of talk for someone not going through with the walk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisonchocolate Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 The way I see it, the purpose of the Citadel was to band together alliances so that they would be more powerful together. This was so that the participating alliances can ensure prosperity among themselves. A major part of that is keeping that white economic bonus (along with also protecting against exterior threats to the participating alliances). In order to do both of those things, there needs to be a strict policy. Having a policy open to too much interpretation defeats the purpose of the policy. Think of it as a hole in a sock. Once you open up one hole, it easily grows until anything can get through. Infinite exceptions can be made once they start being made. A zero-tolerance policy is, in most cases, the best. And specifically in the context of this issue... An alliance that is confronted diplomatically will still have a chance to simply leave the white color sphere. It's akin to a public property, except there's no trespassing penalty. Anyone can come in as long as they're a citizen but there are police to arrest anyone who isn't. Except this time, you get a chance to simply leave and have no punishment. Now, none of this is consequential because of the recent leaving of the Council by ESA, but I just want to state my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) They actually worked out pretty well for VoC and Guardian, we both shared colors and enjoyed much success with tactics used right up until around the time the color system changed. This world is however different and the same is more difficult to do. And questionably not worth it either since those were bonuses of 20 - 30% compared 5 - 7 now at best. Those were the days Edited February 27, 2015 by underlordgc Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegoz Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) Those were the days RIP days when colours were useful :'( Edited February 27, 2015 by Keegoz Quote [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.