Re: For Lasting Peace

tacoman · by tacoman on Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:51 am

i'm srry but thos att on me where on like the 20-30 sep and my records only go back to 2 oct but by memory (yull probebly not belev this) was like
atter ??? Kuwal stolen 5,100,000 lost solder for enimy 0 lost solder for me 8 somthing like that.

Jiro · by Jiro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:27 am

It is a bit late to be posting on this topic, since war has broken out. If I read your post, Ian, there are some elements that strike me as having not been conductive to a peacefull resolution:
1) The allegation that Kenzu, and a handful of other WR players were busy telling the server I want to eliminate world republic as a major power/ oppossition to The Imperium Empire. Is that true? From what I've seen, there have been messages, asking for support if it ever came to that.
2) The idea that WR needs to be brought to heel. That is something you do to a dog, not a fellow group of people. No wonder they and me bristled at the thought.
3) The focus on details that may have been incomplete or inaccurate or misunderstandings and calling people serial liars because of it.
Also, you confuse me. On one hand you say you were trying for peace and on the other hand you say that the purpose of the discussions was to convince TIE members to start a war. It may be just wording.
I hope all people involved stay out of the RL diplomatic service, because this was unnecessary.

slambot#4 · by slambot#4 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:44 am

My this took along time to read, I might have to avoid going on 2 day absences again by the look of it.

And I must say, I'm feeling neutral on this.

Kenzu isn't trying to move forward, and has planted his feet denying any spies. Ian however is planting his feet in the exact opposite direction of this, claiming kenzu has lied from the beginning, but takes offense if kenzu questions his honor.

Just saying, both of you questioning each others trust is fine. What isn't fine is nuking one another over it. You may be honest, but until you earn it from the other and prove it with out a doubt, the moral high ground cannot be yours and yours alone.

That being said, I don't think that its over a simple spy or lies, This is about crushing kenzu, and bystanders that just happen to get in the way. This, at least, is how the thread feels, with special agent 47 talking about leaving his alliance to crush players. This isn't only him, but it felt like the best example of it at the moment.

As much as I would like to think everyone was keeping a level head on this, there are obviously some loose cannons here that should be contained, as the server as a whole will feel the repercussions of this thread. (Many of which aren't even fully aware that it even exists)

So, on the hopes of this being fixed sooner, rather then having any more blood shed from this, please loosen up guys. Stop the accusations, stop the huge amounts of ultimatums changing so much. Stop fighting each other and ignoring the others points. Lets work through this and get things to the better game people in general want to enjoy.

And finally, please stop quoting quotes about other quotes. This thread is already long enough as it is Smile

darkshield · by darkshield on Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:26 am

i agree on the quotes bit. Smile

now for my inflammatory comment. we both agree that this war has obviously been started by both alliances. kenzu for lying about having a spy and ian for taking offense (both reasonable) however isn't it a bit weak for kenzu to hide his alliance. this can only mean that kenzu knows he wont win and TIE did offer him peace on certain conditions.
good there is an alliance war (between the big ones) will liven up the game. will also allow smaller players chance to catch up a bit as well. long live TIE

souldog · by souldog on Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:45 pm

kenzu told me one day he will stop posting at the main forum because he is making things worse what did he do post something to offend us all . i was being friendly to kenzu i wasn't looking for spies ! i just wanted info because i never believed he has 80-90 % active people (80 % had logged in within 24 hours he said) like he said ! i got a memberlist and when i check only 60 % of his members had logged in in the last 11 days . so from that point it proved to me he is a liar ! for that reason i believe ian a fully 100 % and kenzu like 0.01 % :p. from that moment on i wanted to crush him if we didn't go to war i would probably found a way to do it anyway ! maybe throu leaving tie if that was what it takes !

Jiro · by Jiro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:11 pm

If each time someone tells you something that is inaccurate or not true, you want to crush him as a result, your war experience will go up quickly.
What is the point about the inactive members anyway?

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:12 pm

WR has always tried to defend their inactive members from farming by others. That's a problem.

slambot#4 · by slambot#4 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:31 pm

though in the past this was true, WR has been kicking inactives as of late, and clearly stated that farming raids are fine as long as assassinations and sab. do not take place in the process.

Can we really just focus on present day matters and avoid staring in the past at faults?

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:11 pm

No. WR has separate responses to small and large accounts. Where as large accounts are "allowed" to farm, smaller accounts may be bullied out of it through hostile actions. I've seen it happen.

souldog · by souldog on Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:52 pm

jiro the point is not that he has inactive my points is that i believe ian and everything he says and i don't believe kenzu because of that ! once a liar always a liar ! ...

Jiro · by Jiro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:41 pm

So souldog, all I have to do is find one lie by Ian and you'll never trust him again? I'd be more charitable if I were you.
@Sandwalker: if the farming by smaller accounts of WR is the problem, then tackle that problem instead of focusing on having them (continuously) kick inactives. Much of the thread has been backward looking instead of forward looking. Towards past problems (and punishment), not future solutions. No wonder no solutions were found.

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:10 pm

Jiro wrote:So souldog, all I have to do is find one lie by Ian and you'll never trust him again? I'd be more charitable if I were you.
@Sandwalker: if the farming by smaller accounts of WR is the problem, then tackle that problem instead of focusing on having them (continuously) kick inactives. Much of the thread has been backward looking instead of forward looking. Towards past problems (and punishment), not future solutions. No wonder no solutions were found.

I dont care what WR does to fix it or how they end up running their alliance. But when a small player is told "don't farm/raid our inactives or we'll kick your ass. Only WR members are allowed to farm/raid our inactives." I tend to have a problem with that approach. Unfortunately for WR, it was all of TIE that had a problem with that approach.

Now stop looking for explanations and solutions and let's enjoy this war. Also, if I were you, I'd press the breaks a little on all the questioning and attempts at showing people how to solve conflicts. Last time I looked, most people have a problem with being told what to do. That's just some friendly advice, I like your overall approach at debating things, but you've accelerated the rate at which you post and at the same time you've shifted your stance from neutral to red. TIE is blue.

slambot#4 · by slambot#4 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:09 pm

jiro brings valid points to the tables guys, all this has been is backwards looking, if you ask an alliance to change its views, and they did, you aren't right to plow in and attack because you didn't like there views awhile ago. Thats like Britain and the US going and invading Germany randomly today because they didn't like WWII

ian · by ian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:28 pm

slambot#4 wrote:jiro brings valid points to the tables guys, all this has been is backwards looking, if you ask an alliance to change its views, and they did, you aren't right to plow in and attack because you didn't like there views awhile ago. Thats like Britain and the US going and invading Germany randomly today because they didn't like WWII

Reality check: The Imperium didn't start the war - that would be world republic literally firing the first shots. Its a bit like the US threatening iran over not coming clean about its nucleur program (much like the imperium was threatening kenzu and WR over their not coming clean about having vance as a "spy") - and its probable that if Iran doesn't comply and continues progressing towards having nukes...that the USA (or israel for that matter) will make it very very clear military force will be resorted to eventually if diplomacy really does completely fail.

In this example - world republic massing me is basically like iran declaring war on the USA over its threats/ diplomatic pressure placed on Iran to make it conform to western standards.

I don't know what world you guys are living in (and i think it was Jiro who said he hopes neither me or Kenzu goes onto be diplomats) - but diplomacy isn't just about preserving peace - its about getting what you want - its merely another weapon in the arsenal of any self respectable nation (or alliance). Little history lesson for those of you who think the world is a really nice place - Britain's entire foreign policy for the last 300 years has been "gunboat" diplomacy... meaning if the enemy doesn't conform, go and park a nice big gunboat on their shore - and if they still don't conform... use it. Britain to this day still uses gunboat diplomacy - comprising of lots of nucleur attack subs, surface warships and carriers. The USA obviously does so on a even greater extent.

Diplomacy isn't about peace - its about wielding other forms of weaponry to achieve your desired outcome - much like covert operations and espionage is merely another weapon in the arsenal of an alliance/ government - something Kenzu understands very well and very clearly (which btw Kenzu - had you never turned that weapon on The Company and then tried to enlist Commonwealth members, we wouldn't be where we are now). Anyone who thinks diplomacy is about a peaceful and fair outcome is sadly living in a fantasy world. However - in this situation, its merely about making World Republic conform to Imperium standards (which we ourselves follow btw - so we aren't being hypocritical), and to cease its covert/ espionage war-front against us. Whether this is a loss of sovereign rights for World Republic is down to everyone to decide.... but thats just the way it is i m afraid. Its world republic's right to use force to resist what it views as unfair demands - just like its now The Imperium's right to retaliate to this use of force to enforce what we view as fair demands.

Its all subjective - The Imperium think's its right, World Republic think's its right. The only way this situation will now be resolved is simply if both alliances drop their allegations on the other, and agree to not slander eithier one - and then agree a set of rules for interaction between the alliances, and then a final set of rules for dealings with players outside the alliances. I m sure it ll be resolved eventually - but not before kismet, lord pegasus and kenzu come off PPT to play Smile

Special Agent 47 · by Special Agent 47 on Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:42 am

slambot#4 wrote:jiro brings valid points to the tables guys, all this has been is backwards looking, if you ask an alliance to change its views, and they did, you aren't right to plow in and attack because you didn't like there views awhile ago. Thats like Britain and the US going and invading Germany randomly today because they didn't like WWII

Then let me ask you this, How can any forward thinking/looking ever happen if A. Kenzu refuses to fess up to what he did, nor stop lieing, nor follow his own code of conduct, and B Wont stop making post on main forums both attacking our leaders, and trying to make us look bad as an alliance?

Have you actually read some of the threads? The tackless shadow one? The one where Kenzu athorized the assasination of a player with a full standing Defense? you know, the thing he said people shouldn't be doing to new or small accounts in his own code of conduct? Have you actually seen where he himself admits to sending the mass mailing to find spies in our alliances? and admits its sole intent was to cause paranoia and internal conflict? In an alliance that was their friend??? in an alliance that fought the good fight against GD not only for ourselves but for WR as well?

To all those now calling us bully's, don't come calling when a force such as GD rises again. Those in WR, don't become that which you claim you hate.

What all of you do not realise is my "conviction" when speaking to Kenzu was based solely on the fact I was tired of the SLOW burocratic red tape that Reaper and Ian were going through. This has been going on for weeks, it started for me on or about Aug 6 to the 10th. With the massing of Tackless shadow by Kenzu. More and more people wanted to step in but Ian and Reaper said the overall stability and health of the game demanded we did not act but let nature take its course.

As for some general information, Someone has been deleting/editing some posts, more then likely the authors, but some altercations are happening.