TIE and WR treaty failure FACTS

GeIveI2aL wrote:Arn't soldiers suppose to find wars to protect the civilians?

What you guys are doing is no more better then terrorism, attacking members of WR.

You probally fully aware WR has strike teams, soldiers, but insist on killing people WHO WILL NOT fight back. Hardly a fair or just way of fighting.

TIE want Kenzu removed, thats upto the alliance he has leadership within and IF he choses NOT to back down from leadership, its a dictatorship. Myself like many others wouldn't follow a Dictator.

So really does TIE have any right to order that, without be willing to go through that themselfs. I.e WR leader removed, TIE leader removed.

Balance, peace and Equal Rights to one and all. Shouldn't everyone (WR, TIE, other alliances or lone people) have the right to these?

GeIveI2aL wrote:An order might have been a tad irrelavent, what about a THREAT if kenzu wasn't remove WR would pay?
yIt is not a threat, it is a reality. Sorry but it is true. As I will show later in this post this has been coming a long time, and every attempt we, TIE, have made to stop or detour Kenzu has failed. That is why we are where we are now.
Hardly makes you better.
As far as I know no member of TIE nor an representative of TIE has EVER claimed to be "better" or "morally superior" only Kenzu has.
What have you done to fuel this war eh? TIE hasn't been an angel in all this.
No sir, TIE are no angels, and as far as I know have not claimed to be. Have "We" done some things? I know I have, I fully admit to it. But I backed off when peace was found, Kenzu did not. TIE did not start the war, nor fire the first shots in either wave of attacks during the war. Kenzu fired the first shots, and WR came in behind GD in the second wave of attacks. This was done after 3 weeks of little to no attacks with me on these forums asking for a diplomat from WR so peace could be found.
All I've asked is not to make the members, the civilizations, within WR pay for all this.
Then give me your opinion of how to end this and find peace? We massed Kenzu. Tactic failed Kenzu continues. We massed his core group and strike groups. Tactic failed, Kenzu continues. We signed a full peace treaty and had peace. Tactic failed, Kenzu continued, not even letting the ink dry on the peace treaty before he started slandering and defiling our name again. So now we are were we are. So G please tell us what it is we should try next?

GeIveI2aL wrote:Arn't soldiers suppose to find wars to protect the civilians?
This is a weak comparison because if you believe this to be true then it means you would have never farmed for kewal, raided for UU, or done any "attack" of any kind. Means the only military force you ever used was having a defense. If everyone played this way then its not much of a game is it?
What you guys are doing is no more better then terrorism, attacking members of WR.
WOAHHHHHH wait a minute? Terrorism? OK explain to me a few things by all means
1. Kenzu attacked us, that's ok? we attack you, we are terrorist?
2. Kenzu did not attack "military" accounts in the war, but chose "target of opportunity" or "ME Farms", and that's ok? But we use the same tactic on you and we are terrorist?
3. Kenzu took his alliance to "secret mode" and that's OK? but when we do it to you its terrorism?

Also I would like you to explain why you do not feel some of the publicly recorded actions of Kenzu are not considered terrorism. These are the things that started, heated, and still continue this conflict. So just answer yes or no if you think these things kenzu has done are right and just
1. The massing of Tackless shadow with NO attempt at diplomacy and no warning. TS was a defender to a WR aggressor, he took the fight to the WR. Kenzu massed him with no attempt at diplomacy.
2. The "hording" of inactive accounts in WR and anyone (Noobs especially) who farmed them were threatened and intimidated.
3. The mass mailing of a large % of the TIE membership looking for spies and claiming to already have spies in the alliance. He later openly admits it was done intentionally to cause strife in TIE
4. WR and TIE worked together to fight GD as they were aggressively farming the entire server, after the GD conflict WR stabs us in the back, turns on us, and joins GD the very alliance they funded us to fight.
5. Kenzu has admitted that Pheonix was his friend and did give him info, call him a spy, call him an informant, call him what ever, but one of the terms of the peace treaty was the removal of spies, and he admits he did not remove him.
6. While pheonix was in TIE he started the most topics in forums wanting to wage war on GD. He even committed attacks on him "To see their defensive strength". Shortly after this GD joins the war due to "an emanate attack on GD from TIE". All a coincident that Kenzu's spy in TIE was at the root of all this?
7. Talk is talk and all it is, is talk. Kenzu fired the first shot and started the war with TIE. We massed him his core group and his strike team. We spent 2/3 weeks with little to no military action as I myself begged for a diplomat to come forward. No diplomat ever emerged but Kenzu lead another attack against TIE with the aid of GD. In this attack he did not target military accounts, but account with high miner counts. These are "ME farms" or targets of opportunity. The same tactic when used against you, you claim are terrorist tactics.
8. when the peace treaty was signed and went into effect, Kenzu didn't even let the ink dry before he resumed his slanderous smear campaign against us in his recruitment messages.

I would like a response to each, and each are recorded as fact here on these forums
You probally fully aware WR has strike teams, soldiers, but insist on killing people WHO WILL NOT fight back. Hardly a fair or just way of fighting.
So as stated above, using the exact same tactics Kenzu used on us is fine for him, but a terrorist tactic if we use it? We massed WR strike teams, we massed kenzu, we massed the WR core membership, all failed to achieve what we seek, so now every account in WR is a potential target. Give me some ideas that we have not tried and we will see if they work. I am open to suggestions.
TIE want Kenzu removed, thats upto the alliance he has leadership within and IF he choses NOT to back down from leadership, its a dictatorship. Myself like many others wouldn't follow a Dictator.
Please define your definition of a dictator because ours seem to be far different. To me if an alliance memeberbase of 80/90% want a leader to step down, and he refuses then he is a dictator. A leader will listen to and accept what the majority of his followers want and feel is right. So please define a dictator because to me you statement is a contradiction.
So really does TIE have any right to order that, without be willing to go through that themselfs. I.e WR leader removed, TIE leader removed.
Ian does not act like Kenzu. Why should he be removed? And it is not an "Order". It is a suggestion of how to stop all military aggression against WR. One thing I can guarantee you, if 80% of TIE asked Ian to step down, 1 of 2 things would follow. 1. He would respect our decision and step down. 2. 80% of the alliance would leave. PERIOD, plain and simple.
Balance, peace and Equal Rights to one and all. Shouldn't everyone (WR, TIE, other alliances or lone people) have the right to these?
Yes. 100% agree.
So why is it you expect us to sit and take Kenzu's BS? why are we to sit and accept his lies? his half truths? his smear campaigns, and his turning alliances against us with deceits? When we had peace why couldn't Kenzu shut up, let bygones be bygones, and let us all go on with the game? Why did he have to start slandering and aggression against us before the ink dried on the peace treaty? Basicly why is it ok for our right, TIE rights to be battered and abused?

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Last visit: Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:16 pm

Kismet, Last visit: unknown

Yesterday at 6:56 am(Dec 25th)

Special Agent 47 wrote:GeIveI2aL, If its ok with you I'm going to call you G as I have a difficult time spelling you name correctly. Now I am going to be straight with you, and I hope you can be straight with me. I'll rebuttle each of your points listed here best I can, and I expect you to answer each of my rebuttles. This only works if we are both honest, and do this with maturity.
(My name is Dave but G would be fine and I will try to do whats asked)

GeIveI2aL wrote:An order might have been a tad irrelavent, what about a THREAT if kenzu wasn't remove WR would pay?
yIt is not a threat, it is a reality. Sorry but it is true. As I will show later in this post this has been coming a long time, and every attempt we, TIE, have made to stop or detour Kenzu has failed. That is why we are where we are now.
One may ask, how did Kenzu come to act like this towards TIE? I will ask Kenzu on his side of this. For purposes of being even.

Hardly makes you better.
As far as I know no member of TIE nor an representative of TIE has EVER claimed to be "better" or "morally superior" only Kenzu has.
1. Never said that you 'said' your better, just to clarify that. 2. Again back to Kenzu. 3. With power comes great respnsibility (Yea i know its a quote from spider-man but it has relavence to EVERYONE)

What have you done to fuel this war eh? TIE hasn't been an angel in all this.
No sir, TIE are no angels, and as far as I know have not claimed to be. Have "We" done some things? I know I have, I fully admit to it. But I backed off when peace was found, Kenzu did not. TIE did not start the war, nor fire the first shots in either wave of attacks during the war. Kenzu fired the first shots, and WR came in behind GD in the second wave of attacks. This was done after 3 weeks of little to no attacks with me on these forums asking for a diplomat from WR so peace could be found.
This is something I cannot change, nor can anyone, as what has been done has been done. Breaking peace treaties is as big an insult to myself, as to the people unlucky enough to have it broken on them. My remark my have been made whilst slightly irratated too, so am sorry there. But my point is - blame doesnt all go to Kenzu (Even if you feel 80% of does...)

All I've asked is not to make the members, the civilizations, within WR pay for all this.
Then give me your opinion of how to end this and find peace? We massed Kenzu. Tactic failed Kenzu continues. We massed his core group and strike groups. Tactic failed, Kenzu continues. We signed a full peace treaty and had peace. Tactic failed, Kenzu continued, not even letting the ink dry on the peace treaty before he started slandering and defiling our name again. So now we are were we are. So G please tell us what it is we should try next?

My Sole purpose in trying to help sort this, my one motivation was; Protect the people in WR which are there to play, grow and have fun. The people who are not threats to anyone or any alliance. As things have come this far, can't TIE show respect for those type of players even if they carry WR banners? TIE would certainly look alot better in my eyes, as with anyone else new to the game.

GeIveI2aL wrote:Arn't soldiers suppose to find wars to protect the civilians?
This is a weak comparison because if you believe this to be true then it means you would have never farmed for kewal, raided for UU, or done any "attack" of any kind. Means the only military force you ever used was having a defense. If everyone played this way then its not much of a game is it?
Actually I made 3 attacks for kuwal in my whole time on AW, all of which on an inactive player.(Or so I think) WHY? I try to grow by my own resources, why steal anyone elses as this wouldn't be your own work. This is my way of playing, as war only succeeds in destroying both friendly and foe's resources for no gain.

What you guys are doing is no more better then terrorism, attacking members of WR.
WOAHHHHHH wait a minute? Terrorism? OK explain to me a few things by all means
1. Kenzu attacked us, that's ok? we attack you, we are terrorist?
2. Kenzu did not attack "military" accounts in the war, but chose "target of opportunity" or "ME Farms", and that's ok? But we use the same tactic on you and we are terrorist?
3. Kenzu took his alliance to "secret mode" and that's OK? but when we do it to you its terrorism?

Also I would like you to explain why you do not feel some of the publicly recorded actions of Kenzu are not considered terrorism. These are the things that started, heated, and still continue this conflict. So just answer yes or no if you think these things kenzu has done are right and just
1. The massing of Tackless shadow with NO attempt at diplomacy and no warning. TS was a defender to a WR aggressor, he took the fight to the WR. Kenzu massed him with no attempt at diplomacy.
2. The "hording" of inactive accounts in WR and anyone (Noobs especially) who farmed them were threatened and intimidated.
3. The mass mailing of a large % of the TIE membership looking for spies and claiming to already have spies in the alliance. He later openly admits it was done intentionally to cause strife in TIE
4. WR and TIE worked together to fight GD as they were aggressively farming the entire server, after the GD conflict WR stabs us in the back, turns on us, and joins GD the very alliance they funded us to fight.
5. Kenzu has admitted that Pheonix was his friend and did give him info, call him a spy, call him an informant, call him what ever, but one of the terms of the peace treaty was the removal of spies, and he admits he did not remove him.
6. While pheonix was in TIE he started the most topics in forums wanting to wage war on GD. He even committed attacks on him "To see their defensive strength". Shortly after this GD joins the war due to "an emanate attack on GD from TIE". All a coincident that Kenzu's spy in TIE was at the root of all this?
7. Talk is talk and all it is, is talk. Kenzu fired the first shot and started the war with TIE. We massed him his core group and his strike team. We spent 2/3 weeks with little to no military action as I myself begged for a diplomat to come forward. No diplomat ever emerged but Kenzu lead another attack against TIE with the aid of GD. In this attack he did not target military accounts, but account with high miner counts. These are "ME farms" or targets of opportunity. The same tactic when used against you, you claim are terrorist tactics.
8. when the peace treaty was signed and went into effect, Kenzu didn't even let the ink dry before he resumed his slanderous smear campaign against us in his recruitment messages.
Did I say it was ok for Kenzu to act the way he has? I have no control over that and nor would I try to control anybody, RL or not. My input could only make one think twice about any actions. I see my statement was a tad single-minded, I do apologise. I can't (Although try) to remain neutral.

I would like a response to each, and each are recorded as fact here on these forums
You probally fully aware WR has strike teams, soldiers, but insist on killing people WHO WILL NOT fight back. Hardly a fair or just way of fighting.
So as stated above, using the exact same tactics Kenzu used on us is fine for him, but a terrorist tactic if we use it? We massed WR strike teams, we massed kenzu, we massed the WR core membership, all failed to achieve what we seek, so now every account in WR is a potential target. Give me some ideas that we have not tried and we will see if they work. I am open to suggestions.
As hard as it may be, sometimes one side has to back down, to make the other see some sense or to think about the actions they have just taken. At the current time, is there no responce from WR? (IF there is, I havn't been made aware of it)

TIE want Kenzu removed, thats upto the alliance he has leadership within and IF he choses NOT to back down from leadership, its a dictatorship. Myself like many others wouldn't follow a Dictator.
Please define your definition of a dictator because ours seem to be far different. To me if an alliance memeberbase of 80/90% want a leader to step down, and he refuses then he is a dictator. A leader will listen to and accept what the majority of his followers want and feel is right. So please define a dictator because to me you statement is a contradiction.
Thats effectively what I said, apologises if it was a little mis-understood.

So really does TIE have any right to order that, without be willing to go through that themselfs. I.e WR leader removed, TIE leader removed.
Ian does not act like Kenzu. Why should he be removed? And it is not an "Order". It is a suggestion of how to stop all military aggression against WR. One thing I can guarantee you, if 80% of TIE asked Ian to step down, 1 of 2 things would follow. 1. He would respect our decision and step down. 2. 80% of the alliance would leave. PERIOD, plain and simple.
So you agree (Input of previous point needed) that its 'Upto the alliance to remove ones leader, if a majority of the members deem this the right action. Really shouldn't of put this but it does confirm that we do follow our leaders, though not blindly.

Balance, peace and Equal Rights to one and all. Shouldn't everyone (WR, TIE, other alliances or lone people) have the right to these?
Yes. 100% agree.
So why is it you expect us to sit and take Kenzu's BS? why are we to sit and accept his lies? his half truths? his smear campaigns, and his turning alliances against us with deceits? When we had peace why couldn't Kenzu shut up, let bygones be bygones, and let us all go on with the game? Why did he have to start slandering and aggression against us before the ink dried on the peace treaty? Basicly why is it ok for our right, TIE rights to be battered and abused?
Nobody's rights should be abused nor have I said its ok for TIE's to. Everybody is equal, even ones enemy. Understandably, TIE hold Kenzu responsible for breaking this, which as a neutral, I am neither confirming or denying at this point.

I welcome any points you want to bring up or need clarification on.

Let me make my personal stance clear. Kenzu needs to shut his mouth. TIE has done everything we know to do diplomatically, and with military force to accomplish this goal with no success as of yet. We are not trying to stop anyone from saying anything they want to say, we are just making it know there are consequences. Yes 99% of the conflict is based around Kenzu, but massing him, his strikers, his core group, diplomatic negotiation, and the signing of a full peace treaty, has not changed his malicious acts in the least. Hence the only option I see we have left is to squeeze that which he holds dear. If showing WR all the trouble he brings on them gets what we want then so be it.

GeIveI2aL wrote:
If Kenzu had a personal speaker (and/or diplomats) on matters regarding diplomacy, alliance relations related topics and not Kenzu directly, would TIE be happy with this?
(Only way I can see this working is from now and in the future. This doesn't apply to Kenzu still playing a part in diplomacy and having his 'private' input but to have trust within WR diplomats and his speaker to take care of any needed actions.)

Spoiler:

GeIveI2aL wrote:Have Kenzu removed from any WR affairs concerning TIE, a member of TIE or Chit-chat about TIE. (Leaving Diplomats ONLY at ANY given point in time)

Am going to propose this;

If Kenzu had a personal speaker (and/or diplomats) on matters regarding diplomacy, alliance relations related topics and not Kenzu directly, would TIE be happy with this?

So I came to your second proposal... which was to basically make Kenzu STFU or as near to as possible.

Kismet wrote:SA47:

I was at my father's house when I typed all that. We haven't had an easy holiday here. It's worn me out, physically but more emotionally.
That I can most definitely understand. I know the timing of ingame relations and real life holidays are not the best.
I do acknowledge what you've said. That said, you keep saying the same things over and over. You want kenzu gone. He cannot be forced out. You wanted a diplomat, as I got better, I did step up. G doesn't speak FOR WR.
I don't want Kenzu gone. I want him to stay in the leadership of WR. All I want is for him to shut his damn mouth, stop slandering, stop telling half truths, stop telling bold faced lies, stop saying one thing and doing to opposite, and stop condemning us for actions he himself uses. What removing Kenzu would do is save WR from Kenzu's actions. You seem to have misunderstood that.

As for you getting better, I am glad, but the infuriating issue is that Kenzu named you diplomat KNOWING you couldn't for fill your diplomat responsibility. Kenzu also said on these forums that you and G could speak for WR. You might want to clarify that.
Netbooks have such a small keyboard *ugh* (just a comment)
Yes my smart phone keypad can be a real @*%%$

Kenzu did stop posting on here; he has stopped his anti-TIE recruitment message. There have been some changes. Perhaps not as fast as you'd have liked, but they're steps in a positive direction.
How would we know that? You haven't stated you have put a gag order on him, nor have you stated that you plan to enact nor enforce any action against Kenzu. Plain and simple truth of life, if its not documented, it didn't happen. If you are going to put a gag order on Kenzu then friggan say it!!!!

And to counter your "point" of "Kenzu has stopped" it was in the last few hours Kenzu changed his message of the day. Up until the last few hours Kenzu continued pushing his slander via his "message of the day"

You still do not condemn any of his action, nor do you publicly state any "action" against him


Now to the massings/attacks: we have had some members attacked. While TIE is a "secret" alliance, we aren't sure if those people attacking are TIE or not. If we attack those people back, how are we assured those people are NOT attacking on behalf of TIE? Then if they are members of TIE, suddenly we become the ones pressing the issue of war and not peace. The solution to that would be for TIE to no longer be "secret." These people WERE TIE, but are they still? Ian had said some people left so they could do such things, but that still isn't answering the question - are they TIE or are they not? I remember reading somewhere that TIE will always support members and former members. It's been awhile since that was said, does it still hold true?
You all seem to be missing something. Let me explain.
If you get hit or massed then you can mass back(hitting the ones who hit you)
If you just start massing TIE members indiscriminately, TIE will act as one.


I've also said that on some things in public I have to be vague. Concrete negotiations are not held in a public forum, but through messages. I do know 1 of your main demands: Kenzu being removed from WR, not just to a lower position but completely out of WR. As I have said before, that's something Kenzu has to come to terms with. I've discussed Kenzu being moved down to member for awhile and the person I talked to said that would probably work for awhile. I'm not naming names in a public forum (again).
Then my only suggestion is speak to Ian, and move faster. The entire point is we. TIE, have not seen a single action against Kenzu, and not a single person say they feel he was wrong. Only conclusion that can be drawn is simple.

GeIveI2aL wrote:DONT YOU DARE CRITICISE ME AND SAY AM NOT TALKING FOR WR KISMET!

Nerve and cheek when Kenzu HIMSELF said WE were going to try and deal with this.

My neutral stance my change if you dont start accepting your NOT doing this on your own.

My respect is for Kenzu and the people of WR who wouldn't fight back, as I've said several times the second part.

GeIveI2aL wrote:Really all this is just Ian Vs. Kenzu.

Kismet posted her negotations.
I can see Ian will most likely say no, no and no.

We shall see.

Also Kismet knew what she was doing, so did I.

GeIveI2aL wrote:Really all this is just Ian Vs. Kenzu.

Kismet posted her negotations.
I can see Ian will most likely say no, no and no.

We shall see.

Also Kismet knew what she was doing, so did I.

GeIveI2aL wrote:Really all this is just Ian Vs. Kenzu.

GeIveI2aL wrote:Also just to put out, I ment this was about Ian's hatred for Kenzu and visa versa.

Kenzu reacted in the way he did because of this hatred.

So surely this was fueled by (Allbeit one mans) Hatred.

Am I a liar or spot on there?

Correction, I dont think anyone can demand anything off anyone
(From my narrow viewed neutrality stance)... hence my so quick and easy view of kismets 'negotations' failing.

Demanding is another way of just pushing back a bully, bully getting a response, will just do the same.
(Literally playing with words to describe a situation, am not callin either TIE or WR bullies.)