H? sieging small players nowhere near thier cities

Createure wrote: The way you are talking StJude it almost sounds like you think you have a strong position to negotiate from.

StJude wrote: The_Dude wrote: troll feeding this thread should be locked.   No, this is quite simple. H? "objects" to our "pooping" cities in "their backyard" Rather than seek a diplomatic solution, they launch armies and sieges. I don't trust H? or any of their directors as I see them as being duplicitous and hypocritical. Therefore, I am willing to engage in negotiation, but ONLY in full view of the public. This is not an unreasonable request if H? has nothing to hide. The ball is in H?'s court, they can reject the terms by ignoring them or they can put their money where their mouth is and have a civil discussion where BOTH parties can compromise, and not just one. Otherwise, quit trying to justify their aggression and just call a spade a spade.

It is quite simple: 

StJude, et al declare war on H?
StJude, et al starts setting up cities on an island near a large base of H? cities
H? informs StJude, et al that this was not going to be allowed
H? acts removing the cities on the island
StJude, et al enact their diplomatic skills sending messages of the nature I stated in my last post.
Borg from one side of his mouth attempts to negotiate for his city on the island with one Director saying he will exodus it off the island, while out of the other side of his mouth derides a different Directer as he attempts to set up on a separate island.
StJude and Borg set up on a two square island (see other thread about the various Exodus quarks uncovered throughout the various sieges).  StJude, et al abandon an alt account and create a new account to teleport to the opened square which has H? troops now occupying the square. (once again many oddities arose with Exodus and the peace of camp rules to the frustration of both H? and ICON).
StJude, et al start setting up on a different island (7 squares), H? moves to once again thwart such a set up. 

I find it interesting Jude - that you imagine H? feels like it has something to lose by not taking your public forum bait.

Rather than interpreting the inevitable abscence of KP+HM from this discussion as dishonesty from H? I have no doubt that everyone whos opinion H? might care about will draw the obvious conclusion - and that is that the leaders of H? have normal busy lives like everyone else and have practically zero time or concern for the whims of a guy who has shown them nothing but abject hostility in the public forum since the date of his account creation.

Why should HM or anyone else in charge have to bow to your personal whims?

If you want to have a discussion you'll do it through the same channels that are open to everyone. If you don't want a discussion you will continue your hollow posturing on here and you will continue to be ignored.

HM plays the "i have a life" card.
all previous posts lose 80% of credibility and any petty and childish replays are negated for the next turn.  all your cards got reshuffled.

I guess I get to be the childish one...

From a strictly neutral viewpoint what I see is ICON attempting to build a base for use against H? who is endeavoring to prevent this. Both approaches are intelligent strategies, and both parties are using perfectly reasonable responses to the other's tactics. All this is fine. Then what I see is some propaganda on ICON's part, some angry responses from players not in H?, and some yawns from H? Leadership.

Now we must ask ourselves this: why must this thread's legnthly commentary exist? Both sides of the conflict can exist in a state of war WITHOUT neutral players going "blah blah blah".

Yes, I know, "spirit of debate" and all that, but what if we debated about something that actually affected us, like the suggestions forum? Let the involved people work it out.