Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - This is where I stand (H/C war)
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThis is where I stand (H/C war)
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 2 Votes, Average 2.50  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 20:14
Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:


Originally posted by KillerPoodle KillerPoodle wrote:

Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:


Again...I don't disagree with you, but also, I don't see why the backlash OF those actions seems to have caught you off guard.  It seems to me to be an entirely predictable response to a chosen course of action, no?


I don't think the fact that we didn't advertise our diplo relationships is a significant part of whatever anti-h? sentiment is being expressed.

I know...you guys have expressly said that you're a military alliance.  That diplo isn't something you care much for, or put a lot of time into, so I totally understand that you don't think the way in which you guys entered into the war has any particular bearing.

That is incorrect, but I completely understand how you arrived at the conclusion.  ;)


Still disagree - I don't think anyone has been dissing us for supporting RHY.

The main complaint seems to be the kind of response - not that there was a response to support an ally.

The type of response has nothing to do with the secrecy or otherwise of our diplo relationship.
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
BlindScribe View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 12 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 168 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 20:10

Originally posted by KillerPoodle KillerPoodle wrote:

Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:


Again...I don't disagree with you, but also, I don't see why the backlash OF those actions seems to have caught you off guard.  It seems to me to be an entirely predictable response to a chosen course of action, no?


I don't think the fact that we didn't advertise our diplo relationships is a significant part of whatever anti-h? sentiment is being expressed.

I know...you guys have expressly said that you're a military alliance.  That diplo isn't something you care much for, or put a lot of time into, so I totally understand that you don't think the way in which you entered into the war (specifically to encompass the "uber top secret confed") has any particular bearing.

That is incorrect, but I completely understand how you arrived at the conclusion.  ;)


Edited by BlindScribe - 16 Oct 2012 at 20:14
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 20:06
Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:


Again...I don't disagree with you, but also, I don't see why the backlash OF those actions seems to have caught you off guard.  It seems to me to be an entirely predictable response to a chosen course of action, no?



I don't think the fact that we didn't advertise our diplo relationships is a significant part of whatever anti-h? sentiment is being expressed.
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 19:37
LoL (^_^) Glad to be of help with that.  
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
Gossip Boy View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 259 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 19:36
This decision was of my own accord.  I acted out of place by making this post.  I fully acknowledge this, and Harmless and I have parted with no ill feelings. 


Another Feast for crows i guess Wink





Edited by Gossip Boy - 16 Oct 2012 at 19:37
Elessar2
[08:34]<Rill> when you've just had part of your brain taken out, you lack a certain amount of credibility
<KillerPoodle> I can say anything I like and it is impossible to prove or disprove
Back to Top
Darmon View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 315 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 19:21
Originally posted by SunStorm SunStorm wrote:

Originally posted by Darmon Darmon wrote:

. . . does anyone know if there's an actual term for some sort of an inverted "fair-weather friend"?

Originally posted by <a href=http://www.urbandictionary.com/ target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.urbandictionary.com</a> http://www.urbandictionary.com wrote:

The opposite of a fair-weather friend, a foul-weather friend only seeks you out if they have a problem, need a shoulder to cry on, a ride to town or someone to watch their dog, but otherwise they act as if they don't even know you. They're only your chum when they're glum.

That delights me on a number of levels!
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 18:32
Originally posted by Darmon Darmon wrote:

. . . does anyone know if there's an actual term for some sort of an inverted "fair-weather friend"?

Originally posted by <a href=http://www.urbandictionary.com/ target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.urbandictionary.com</a> http://www.urbandictionary.com wrote:

The opposite of a fair-weather friend, a foul-weather friend only seeks you out if they have a problem, need a shoulder to cry on, a ride to town or someone to watch their dog, but otherwise they act as if they don't even know you. They're only your chum when they're glum.
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
Darmon View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 315 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 18:01
Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:

Originally posted by KillerPoodle KillerPoodle wrote:

Despite the fact that this game allows it there is no requirement that you make the number and strength of your allegiances public - especially if not doing so gives you an advantage. Information is power.

I agree with this 100%.

Having said that, if you choose to go that route, a number of natural consequences follow, right?

By definition, in order to keep it a secret, it means that large segments of your own membership have to be kept in the dark (ref the earlier "large sections aren't even allowed to know who the alliance's friends are"), and this could lead to bad blood when it (inevitably) comes out later.

The second natural consequence would be the public perception of such skullduggery, which you're seeing now, in the form of...oh, about 9 threads and counting.

Again...I don't disagree with you, but also, I don't see why the backlash OF those actions seems to have caught you off guard.  It seems to me to be an entirely predictable response to a chosen course of action, no?


I assume they wanted to be on the irrefutably "right" side of this conflict (I mean, who wouldn't?), and that doesn't seem to be the way it's turned out (more shades of grey, at the very least).  If you go around acting shady, people will probably suspect that you're up to no good.  Also, does anyone know if there's an actual term for some sort of an inverted "fair-weather friend"?
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 17:41
Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:

- He found out that the alliance wasn't what he thought it was, he voiced his dissent, and now, is leaving.
Originally posted by Gossip Boy Gossip Boy wrote:

So was it a mutual agreement to part ways or sunstorm left on his own accord?
This decision was of my own accord.  I acted out of place by making this post.  I fully acknowledge this, and Harmless and I have parted with no ill feelings. 
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
BlindScribe View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 12 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 168 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 17:32
Originally posted by KillerPoodle KillerPoodle wrote:

Despite the fact that this game allows it there is no requirement that you make the number and strength of your allegiances public - especially if not doing so gives you an advantage. Information is power.

I agree with this 100%.

Having said that, if you choose to go that route, a number of natural consequences follow, right?

By definition, in order to keep it a secret, it means that large segments of your own membership have to be kept in the dark (ref the earlier "large sections aren't even allowed to know who the alliance's friends are"), and this could lead to bad blood when it (inevitably) comes out later.

The second natural consequence would be the public perception of such skullduggery, which you're seeing now, in the form of...oh, about 9 threads and counting.

Again...I don't disagree with you, but also, I don't see why the backlash OF those actions seems to have caught you off guard.  It seems to me to be an entirely predictable response to a chosen course of action, no?



Edited by BlindScribe - 16 Oct 2012 at 17:34
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.