H? and The Crows

Darkwords wrote: But  this merely exemplifies one way in which Kumo attempts to spin matters, by alluding to things in a way that allows him to stand back and say he meant something different when questioned.

Actually if you read it in whole it has 2 'you's which alludes to the idea that I was in someway responsible. If it only had 'you all' then obviously it would only be directed at the alliance as a whole if we forgive the pedantics that 'you' relates to something in existence (which the alliance no longer is).

But  this merely exemplifies one way in which Kumo attempts to spin matters, by alluding to things in a way that allows him to stand back and say he meant something different when questioned.

LOL it is hardly just me that is being revisionist KP, you and your alliance keep claiming they have all this 'evidence' to back up their claims, strange how you never publish any of it and how your take on matters differs to so many, including those that are neutral in this war.

And my post was as I said from my personal experience and views.  Do I claim anywhere that I am 100% correct?... no, and I never do, because I am human and I am knowledgeable enough to recognise that what I have seen or experienced is not necessarily the concrete reality for all involved.

I would say this is the main division within our dialectics, that you and your allies seem to think that there can only be a single truth to a situation, when there are always many sides to every matter.

Simply claiming someone is revisionist because you disagree with their views, or their take on it is very amateur and honestly I would expect better.  People experience situations in very different ways, so in effect anyone's take on a past situation is revisionist according to another, as their views on the history of the situation will differ.

Now can you explain why Kumo tried to claim that I in someway was aggresively trying to make this game like Travian?  Or why he seems to think that other experienced players views are irrelevant to this game?  Or any of the other matters that have been addressed?  Rather than bouncing around words that you may think make you sound intellectual but infact have very little meaning or relevance at all.

Darkwords wrote: Sorry but not sure how you ordering your allies to attack Crow allies and then using our defense of our allies as propaganda against us, surmounts to a 'grudgalition' against you?

We have never ordered our allies to do anything.  We have never even asked them to attack anyone - it is you who is making a poor attempt at spin - much like your attempt at revisionist history earlier in this thread.

The difference between you and I is that I still have all the forum posts, IRC chat logs and IGM's from the actual alliance leader to alliance leader conversations at the time - while you just have baseless speculation.

Kumomoto wrote: Sorry for the use of "real" SF. It just feels like some are true to the original ideals and others I don't recognize. Dark-- you are completely wrong. Our war against white/black was because you you all were aggressively trying to turn this game into Travian. We've always been fine with mercs. And Rill-- I find it interesting that someone whose involvement for the last several months seems to be limited to talking about how horrible Illy is and the last couple years trying to discredit H? Feels that suddenly her opinion is relevant. Either play the game or don't. But have the guts for once to be honest, forthright and direct. And nice try on trying to get Dlords to not like us. The bottom line is we have NOT changed. This grudgalition against us is exactly the kind of force we have always resisted.

Ill give you the war on white was well deserved, but you have changed since then. ANd Kumo - I find it interesting your able to say that to rill when your very own Honored Mule posted that hes not been on much but hes the one to post H? all new war policy