Valakias Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 They can't or won't address it because it would reveal their deceitful nature. It's truly astonishing how they continue to grasp at straws on this one. The treaty clearly doesn't say what they claim it does, and harping on it over and over again doesn't make it so. It only goes to show that they had this canned non-response ready to go because they were already planning to intentionally misinterpret a treaty they willingly signed and use it to their advantage to stab said ally in the back. I think it's safe to say that's their policy. Or perhaps they were dragged in unwillingly and had to found bogus justifications for it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooklyn666 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Or perhaps they were dragged in unwillingly and had to found bogus justifications for it Alright, I'll give the most of the rest of DEIC the benefit of the doubt on this one and restrict my previous comment to Clarke specifically. For the rest of you, come on. It should be clear by now that doubling down on your nonsense isn't working, so we're left with the possibility that either you're all just as full of it as Clarke is, or you know it's crap but are going along with it anyway. Not sure which one of those is more troubling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 They can't or won't address it because it would reveal their deceitful nature. It's truly astonishing how they continue to grasp at straws on this one. The treaty clearly doesn't say what they claim it does, and harping on it over and over again doesn't make it so. It only goes to show that they had this canned non-response ready to go because they were already planning to intentionally misinterpret a treaty they willingly signed and use it to their advantage to stab said ally in the back. I think it's safe to say that's their policy. You need to speak with Tenages about what the treaty does, you clearly haven't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooklyn666 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) You need to speak with Tenages about what the treaty does, you clearly haven't. Tenages has elaborated in excruciating detail the exact nature of the treaty in 3 separate threads on 3 separate forums, so I'm not exactly sure why you think I don't know that. You really can't even help yourself can you? Edited October 18, 2015 by Brooklyn666 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Snow Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 *sigh* Ok here goes. Tenages has already dropped logs of the treaty discussion with explanation as to what Article IV states. In those very same logs Mortimer, DEIC's then Commander in Chief/Leader/top govt posted in the DEIC govt forum with this explanation to get feedback and consent from the rest of DEIC govt. The treaty was then signed with the consent of DEIC govt. There was never any pressuring involved. (Btw the logs are on page 2? 3? Of UPN'S DoW.) The clause was drafted with thw intent and understanding that if UPN/Guardian (or another ally of the signatory alliances) attack the direct ally of SK/DEIC, the treaty would then be suspended so that the other could honor their treaties. This was agreed on as both parties of govt were concerned of what seemed to be a quite possible UPN/Guardian war and both understood that ths other had their closest ally in mind during treaty discussions. Read the logs. Read the discussions on your own forums. Finally, DEIC directly attacked an SK ally. This violated the spirit of the treaty and was done with the mindset of "oh look now we don't have to defend our ally". Never mind the fact that UPN hit us prior to this and activated our MDP prior to you acticating your own oA clause. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Well this is a shit storm and a half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bolivar Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) Yet again, someone who is posting without reading. I will repeat. He did his own thing, and did not represent the alliances official stance. I often encouraged him to stay clear of Partisan, and warned him that he was a snake in the grass. Looks like Ole doing his own thing was a better thing than whatever it is you have been doing. But on a serious note, you weren't concerned at all in regards to the logs partisan posted when Ole kept coming back to you with the information contained within these logs? Really expecting us to believe that Ole came to you on at least 3 occasions mentioning something about Partisan and tS and that each time your only action was to tell Ole that partisan was a snake in the grass? Or that you showed such little concern at all in regards to Ole freely conversing with partisan that you didn't even approach Partisan at all to state that Ole was acting on his own whim? Is that what you are truly expecting us to believe? That Ole would come to you, mention something about syndicate/partisan and you would reply "snake in the grass" only for ole to come back, mention partisan/syndicate and again state snake in the grass and have no concern whatsoever about what information ole was conveying? Of course not, that would simply be a ludicrous manner for two executive government officials to operate so I am going to give both UPN and Ole the benefit of the doubt and call you a liar. Edited October 18, 2015 by Charles the Tyrant 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 $yndicate and Seven Kingdoms Hirig trills in the forums? Whoo! I just extended a flamewar! Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isolatar Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 $yndicate and Seven Kingdoms Hirig trills in the forums? Whoo! I just extended a flamewar! Sure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 ITT: Ole gets thrown under the bus of UPN aggression. Saru can spin stories AND tires. Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Declaring aggressive wars against an MDP partner? By Sheepy's beard, that's low! Every alliance I respect in this game and consider my back up when I've finally had it with Tenages drunken groping turns out to be shitty. First TeST with the side-switch last war. Now DEIC. I understand UPN is your primary ally, and you're not joining a war on the other side. At least have the decency to warn us "Hey, we think someone is coming for SK" and then at least don't directly attack us. What kind of an ally attacks their ally in the midst of a huge gangbang where their side already has a huge strength advantage? All of this has been over the forums before,if you've ever aid attention but I'll restate them here and now: TEst only had your back because of Guardian. When SK threatened to destroy us if we didn't kick a member it burnt any good will that ever existed. We pocketed that ill-will out of respect for out long time ally,Guardian. Guardian had said they'd back us as did TC if it came to blows,but we ate crow because our dear friends requested it. Then when Shellhound got called out with a ring of multis and Tenages plotting a war we were never even privy to but they still managed to include us in their plans. We didn't want part of a beat down we had nothing to do with and the other side offered to let us off if we attacked SK,it all worked out well for us. We regret letting Guardian hand out to dry over that but that event was out of our hands and something we couldn't condone. We were involved in the plans tS had and we knew that this would later those chickens,like all others,would come home to roost. We accept that,its just the cost of doing business. So know this,if you're going to mention shitty allies,TEst should never be uttered in that same breadth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagnarBuliwyf Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 All of this has been over the forums before,if you've ever aid attention but I'll restate them here and now: TEst only had your back because of Guardian. When SK threatened to destroy us if we didn't kick a member it burnt any good will that ever existed. We pocketed that ill-will out of respect for out long time ally,Guardian. Guardian had said they'd back us as did TC if it came to blows,but we ate crow because our dear friends requested it. Then when Shellhound got called out with a ring of multis and Tenages plotting a war we were never even privy to but they still managed to include us in their plans. We didn't want part of a beat down we had nothing to do with and the other side offered to let us off if we attacked SK,it all worked out well for us. We regret letting Guardian hand out to dry over that but that event was out of our hands and something we couldn't condone. We were involved in the plans tS had and we knew that this would later those chickens,like all others,would come home to roost. We accept that,its just the cost of doing business. So know this,if you're going to mention shitty allies,TEst should never be uttered in that same breadth. Being screwed over by SK is a trait of the alliance. I'd have thought TEst would've learnt that months ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody K Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Being screwed over by SK is a trait of the alliance. I'd have thought TEst would've learnt that months ago. My name is Ragnar and I'm sad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Being screwed over by SK is a trait of the alliance. I'd have thought TEst would've learnt that months ago. These things go back a long time,so it was months ago. Still some people seem to be misinformed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valdoroth Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) Being screwed over by SK is a trait of the alliance. I'd have thought TEst would've learnt that months ago. Oh I'm sorry. I forgot the part where SK helped Vanguard (previously known as Guerilla Republik) build up and learn the ropes of the game. Yup we totally screwed them over. You lost your position because of your incompetence and lack of following what the alliance wanted. Don't bring YOUR failure into this. Edited October 18, 2015 by Valdoroth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 This is sad to see. DEIC, you are a competent alliance that had my highest respect for the way that it was ran, you were a shining beacon in this game. I hate for you to lose that over your corrupt and power hungry allies. I had greater respect for you than that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aksel Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Oh I'm sorry. I forgot the part where SK helped Vanguard (previously known as Guerilla Republik) build up and learn the ropes of the game. Yup we totally screwed them over. You lost your position because of your incompetence and lack of following what the alliance wanted. Don't bring YOUR failure into this. Hey now, Vanguard had a little bit of ESA sugar in there too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 ITT: Ole gets thrown under the bus of UPN aggression. Saru can spin stories AND tires. It's clear from that, that you haven't read what I actually said. Ole isn't the one primarily responsible for this war. As government members, we must all be accountable, but to varying degrees. Quote Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 ... Ole isn't the one primarily responsible for this war. As government members, we must all be accountable, but to varying degrees. I see what you did there. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filthy Fifths Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) moral of the story is... Don't lie to Mensa Don't pull a TEst on TEst Learn to let shit go. Edited October 20, 2015 by Filthy Fifths 4 Quote "In an honest service there is thin commons, low wages, and hard labor; in this, plenty and satiety, pleasure and ease, liberty and power; and who would not balance creditor on this side, when all the hazard that is run for it, at worst, is only a sour look or two at choking. No, a merry life and a short one, shall be my motto." - Bartholomew "Black Bart" Roberts Green Enforcement Agency will rise again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 This is sad to see. DEIC, you are a competent alliance that had my highest respect for the way that it was ran, you were a shining beacon in this game. I hate for you to lose that over your corrupt and power hungry allies. I had greater respect for you than that. Sometimes I forget how funny I can be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooklyn666 Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 $yndicate and Seven Kingdoms Hirig trills in the forums? Whoo! I just extended a flamewar! I have never read a single post of yours that was within 1000 miles of being coherent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 I have never read a single post of yours that was within 1000 miles of being coherent. Whoa come down, It was A Joke at the flamewar. Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bolivar Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 It's clear from that, that you haven't read what I actually said. Ole isn't the one primarily responsible for this war. As government members, we must all be accountable, but to varying degrees. Are you claiming responsibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooklyn666 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 DEIC keeping it 100 as always. We have slot filling AND Clarke defending a multi. All we need is some exploit abuse and I can fill my punch card. Quote 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.