TIVIUM and EAGLES

abstractdream wrote: ES2 wrote: abstractdream wrote:   We didn't leave to avoid hostilities, we left to avoided certain death (or as you put it, because we didn't like how it was handled.) Have you seen the size of Shade? Our former leader did not seem to care about us, so we left. While this thread has been amusing to be read through for some time, I'll step in right here.  A word of note to all, delivering propaganda was one of the first things you learned in TLR for leadership purposes, using it to defend the executive branch whenever possible and blame some other party IE "Fromfrak's crusade on Gemleys mine". Everything I know I learned from you...lol ES2 wrote: So in actuality, the war with Duke would never have been avoided, This fellow right here kept pressuring me to declare war on druids "This will be TLR's way to advance itself in the community", Bonfyr bypassed my military functions by telling my military squad leaders to inform him and not the military leader on their  todo's, Bypass, right. Just so everyone knows...at that time and for months preceding these events I was a sitter on EF, as he admits below...Why bother with all the subterfuge when I could take TLR away from it's glorious leader whenever I pleased? Because no one would followed a usurper with that tactic, you had to illustrate that you did everything possible but TLR was led by an erratic soul and you had to take action to preserve the work put in, why even our allies turned their backs... ES2 wrote: he was in contact with Nightbringers themselves debating on a coup on TLR ( we had sitting rights on each other and the others alts). I did indeed ask for council from my friend. No surprise, right? To me, TLR was family and I did not want to loose her. Looking back, I should have logged onto EF, had him quit TLR (many, many opportunities to do just that) and be done with it but I didn't. My mistake. And just as I had the opportunity to log onto your account and see your detailed messages planning a coup, I believe you and your lovely associates deemed me mentally unstable to lead an alliance.  ES2 wrote: Sure enough a NC player wipes TLR sieges on shade, Quite true. That NC member had a personal vendetta. Guess who that vendetta was against. You only get one guess. What a great moment for that vendetta, you pressure TLR members to actively fight Druids, Shade threatens war unless TLR backs off, TLR/Shade war and bam suddenly NC player wipes TLR sieges on a shade player. Pretty nice timing for that vendetta.  ES2 wrote: N refuses to help the ex ally TLR and the glorious messiah Bonfyr and his disciples escape through the red sea of digital blood to the promised land in Trivum all the while promising all TLR members at that time that I would send chariots after them in revenge. That, or rage quit. I must admit, your continued presence in Illy (in the EF account) surprised me. Well it reminded me of my old friend in illyriad by the name of Squill who was in a similiar situation. He left for a vacation and his executive members took over and left him nothing. Squilly was sad and quit but I looked on as a way to continue teaching the bountiful history of illy that I've acquired by staying in the game. So many vets have left, I'm sure you can understand why some stay.  ES2 wrote: I'm sure that will be dissected fully, but thats more or less the case. TVM meant to continue hostilities that originated in TLR. True. Have never denied it. From what I've been able to decipher you seem to deny responsibility for the attacks, that such attacks are not calling for return attacks by EE? ie "siege breaking is a tradition" Why is it so hard for so many players in a game which is focused on confrontation (military and otherwise) to understand that war is why we are here?

EDIT: This is in reply to EF's post, not Ryelle's. Her post is just silly.

Who would or wouldn't follow me is up for debate. The ones big enough to make a difference, have their heads in the right place. You know who they are. Your allies turned their backs. You seem to understand that my allies clearly did not do that.

I guess my attempt to seek counsel, my trying to make sense of the turmoil brought down on our heads by Capt. Bligh would look like mutiny to said Capt.

In your fevered mind, I somehow led and successfully carried out a massive conspiracy between myself, Shade and The Night Confed. You give me too much credit. I didn't pressure anyone, except for you and that didn't work out, now did it?

And now for a message from your sponsors: "From what I've been able to decipher you seem to deny responsibility for the attacks, that such attacks are not calling for return attacks by EE?"

That quote comes directly after this quote: "True. Have never denied it."

I think that pretty much illustrates my point.


Edited by abstractdream - 21 Jan 2013 at 22:49

ES2 wrote: abstractdream wrote: ES2 wrote: abstractdream wrote:   We didn't leave to avoid hostilities, we left to avoided certain death (or as you put it, because we didn't like how it was handled.) Have you seen the size of Shade? Our former leader did not seem to care about us, so we left. While this thread has been amusing to be read through for some time, I'll step in right here.  A word of note to all, delivering propaganda was one of the first things you learned in TLR for leadership purposes, using it to defend the executive branch whenever possible and blame some other party IE "Fromfrak's crusade on Gemleys mine". Everything I know I learned from you...lol ES2 wrote: So in actuality, the war with Duke would never have been avoided, This fellow right here kept pressuring me to declare war on druids "This will be TLR's way to advance itself in the community", Bonfyr bypassed my military functions by telling my military squad leaders to inform him and not the military leader on their  todo's, Bypass, right. Just so everyone knows...at that time and for months preceding these events I was a sitter on EF, as he admits below...Why bother with all the subterfuge when I could take TLR away from it's glorious leader whenever I pleased? Because no one would followed a usurper with that tactic, you had to illustrate that you did everything possible but TLR was led by an erratic soul and you had to take action to preserve the work put in, why even our allies turned their backs... ES2 wrote: he was in contact with Nightbringers themselves debating on a coup on TLR ( we had sitting rights on each other and the others alts). I did indeed ask for council from my friend. No surprise, right? To me, TLR was family and I did not want to loose her. Looking back, I should have logged onto EF, had him quit TLR (many, many opportunities to do just that) and be done with it but I didn't. My mistake. And just as I had the opportunity to log onto your account and see your detailed messages planning a coup, I believe you and your lovely associates deemed me mentally unstable to lead an alliance.  ES2 wrote: Sure enough a NC player wipes TLR sieges on shade, Quite true. That NC member had a personal vendetta. Guess who that vendetta was against. You only get one guess. What a great moment for that vendetta, you pressure TLR members to actively fight Druids, Shade threatens war unless TLR backs off, TLR/Shade war and bam suddenly NC player wipes TLR sieges on a shade player. Pretty nice timing for that vendetta.  ES2 wrote: N refuses to help the ex ally TLR and the glorious messiah Bonfyr and his disciples escape through the red sea of digital blood to the promised land in Trivum all the while promising all TLR members at that time that I would send chariots after them in revenge. That, or rage quit. I must admit, your continued presence in Illy (in the EF account) surprised me. Well it reminded me of my old friend in illyriad by the name of Squill who was in a similiar situation. He left for a vacation and his executive members took over and left him nothing. Squilly was sad and quit but I looked on as a way to continue teaching the bountiful history of illy that I've acquired by staying in the game. So many vets have left, I'm sure you can understand why some stay.  ES2 wrote: I'm sure that will be dissected fully, but thats more or less the case. TVM meant to continue hostilities that originated in TLR. True. Have never denied it. From what I've been able to decipher you seem to deny responsibility for the attacks, that such attacks are not calling for return attacks by EE? ie "siege breaking is a tradition" Why is it so hard for so many players in a game which is focused on confrontation (military and otherwise) to understand that war is why we are here? My answers are in a pretty pink. Now at the end of the day I don't really care who's leading what digital band of soldiers that have no value in the real world, I do care when someone is mudding the water.  I'm also done talking, I'm aware this can be dragged on and on, I'm happier in Ancient Air

War coulda been avoided easily- Bonfyr didnt ignore the mails i sent you over and over, and Beecks destroyed your seige. Look at her player history and you can see the ties she has. It was not a "NC" plot or a vendetta. The rest is between you guys but I wanted to clear this bit up

Anjire wrote: Rill wrote: Since name-calling is discouraged on the forum, I will not say what I think about Bonfyr's behavior.  Instead, I will simply thank him for showing himself for what he is.  Nice to have you lay it out for all to see. If anyone from Harmless? is reading this, I would point out the echoes of diablito right here.  And yet this person is your ally. Who have you become? In a like vein, I will not say what I think of your continued insistence to tie any and all actions of everyone's brother, sister, niece, nephew, uncle, aunt up to and including perfect strangers back to Harmless? My dealings with Bonfyr have all been both mature and rationale and from them I can bank that there will be an honest exchange of information in our discussions unlike with some obsessed individuals that frequent the forums.

Edited by Daefis - 22 Jan 2013 at 00:13