Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - To Whom It May Concern.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTo Whom It May Concern.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 10>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 09:06
Originally posted by karpintero karpintero wrote:

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 
I oppose war inflicted by others on those who don't want it.  When I hear Valar say they don't want war and are willing to live and let live, I will be the first to speak for them.  (If The_Dude doesn't beat me to it.)

Your statement about "opposing war inflicted on others who dont want it" is kinda in conflict with the actions of your alliance. That is all.

Still haven't heard a single Valar say they want this war to end.  Are you in Valar?
Back to Top
karpintero View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 50 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 08:43
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 
I oppose war inflicted by others on those who don't want it.  When I hear Valar say they don't want war and are willing to live and let live, I will be the first to speak for them.  (If The_Dude doesn't beat me to it.)

Your statement about "opposing war inflicted on others who dont want it" is kinda in conflict with the actions of your alliance. That is all.
Back to Top
Aurordan View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar
Player Council - Ambassador

Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 07:12
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Originally posted by Aurordan Aurordan wrote:

It seems to me Valar is already fighting a losing war, so they don't really need to be checked.  I smell a bandwagon. 

Honestly, mCrow realize that we are opening ourselves up for this criticism by acting now.  Because of the time it took and the deliberation and discussion that occurred among alliance members, it took until now for us to be ready to declare.  However, we believe this is a matter of honor and of standing for principle.

It is better to me to act honorably and be perceived as dishonorable than to fail to act for fear of staining one's reputation.

Fair enough.  I see your point, and I'll withhold judgement.  
Back to Top
lorre View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Location: Groot Kortrijk
Status: Offline
Points: 446 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 01:23
Originally posted by Uno Uno wrote:

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 
Well, I might have STARTED by talking in gc about what I believe, and trying to dialogue with people.  I might have posted things on the forums and invited them to comment.  I might have talked with people from other alliances about their views and ask if they knew anyone who could intercede.  I might have messaged individual people I perceived as opposed to my ideas and told them that I value their contributions even though we didn't agree.

Oh wait ... I did all of those things.

And Valar ...  not so much.

I asked ScottFitz, anyways:
So, you just admitted that you used all tools that Diplomacy could allow you to use yet your conclusion was still that war is the only measure that can be taken against Valar. 
At the same time, you claim that Valar should have done the same you did YET come to another conclusion. Why? Why if you tried the diplomatic way and failed war is fair, but the same can't be true for Valar?

I could also ask how do you know that Valar didn't talk with third parties to see if someone could intercede and how do you know they didn't message individual people. But I'll pretend I didn't read those last lines, because to tell you the truth, they don't make you any right.

i suggest you browse the forums and read the topics on valar and read between the lines and not the propagenda from both sides (yes i know i contributed alot of that) and then come here and say the excact same thing as above. 
btw i am not only talking bout the recent ones.
The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies.
Napoleon Bonaparte
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 01:22
Diplomacy doesn't work when the other side won't talk to you.  I am only a teeny-tiny part of the "other side" from Valar (and although we are technically at war I don't see them as "enemies"), but I am available.  I would have tried.  I did try.  That's all I'm saying.

Edited to add:  There's still time.  My door is open.  I don't know what I can do, but I will do what I can.


Edited by Rill - 30 Sep 2011 at 01:23
Back to Top
Uno View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Location: Torino
Status: Offline
Points: 101 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 01:20
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 
Well, I might have STARTED by talking in gc about what I believe, and trying to dialogue with people.  I might have posted things on the forums and invited them to comment.  I might have talked with people from other alliances about their views and ask if they knew anyone who could intercede.  I might have messaged individual people I perceived as opposed to my ideas and told them that I value their contributions even though we didn't agree.

Oh wait ... I did all of those things.

And Valar ...  not so much.

I asked ScottFitz, anyways:
So, you just admitted that you used all tools that Diplomacy could allow you to use yet your conclusion was still that war is the only measure that can be taken against Valar. 
At the same time, you claim that Valar should have done the same you did YET come to another conclusion. Why? Why if you tried the diplomatic way and failed war is fair, but the same can't be true for Valar?

I could also ask how do you know that Valar didn't talk with third parties to see if someone could intercede and how do you know they didn't message individual people. But I'll pretend I didn't read those last lines, because to tell you the truth, they don't make you any right.
Eréc of Caer Uisc
King of Dyfneint
Indomiti Alliance
Back to Top
Lashka View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 29 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 89 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 01:04
Jude:

Did I get emotonal? Yes. But you see, I work on advocacy issues, so when people trot of the 'Hitler' memes, I get emotional.

Don't see where I called Qwazar a 'degenerate'; questioned them on posting the quote, yes. Questioned the appropriateness of the context.  Never said anything about them as a person. Addressing behavior vs. attacking a person.

And if you are not familiar with the quote, perhaps it is instructive to read a bit of its history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6

As to the genocide part - actually they did, by including the line about Jewish people. Perhaps 'equating' was a poor choice of words. 'Drawing a parallel to' genocide might be a more accurate term. Doesn't make it any less offensive of the context, a game.

Like I said in a longer note - I actually have no opinion on who wins this. I honestly don't. What I do have an opinion on is people keeping perspective about this game, and the fact that it is, in the end a game. 

If what you said about Amroth is true, then I'm truly sorry - that crosses a line. No one should be advocating suicide.

You called out my statement on potentially leaving. You asked why I would read this. You're right, I could just walk away. But I'm also hoping there's enough people, who like me, would prefer to keep things civil.

It takes a true class act to maintain the high road when the mud's flying. I guess I'm hoping to see more of that from both sides.

You know what? You're right; there is smack talk. But then there's also ad hominem attacks. And I'm sorry, people don't get a pass simply because they insinuate people are something without actually saying they are. 

As to why I would read these pages: I'm in an alliance, which as far as I know, has not taken a position. I read the forum to see how events might impact me as a player. Other than that, I take an interest in how the people I meet here process this event; it gives me insight into what I may expect from them in the future.

The only thing that ad hominem attacks expose is a person's inability to engage in a constructive debate. 

I understand this is an emotional issue for people, and that when people feel their back is up against a wall, they lash out. I understand how disheartening it is to see all your hard work crumble in front of you. I also understand that there are people who consider this an opportunity to eliminate rivals; there are those that see this as a justice issue, and there are those that are just itching to use their armies.

But that doesn't excuse ad hominem behavior - just because one person sinks to this level doesn't mean everyone has to, and it doesn't mean that once a person has done this they're marked forever. People can change, they can choose not to debase each other.

That doesn't mean all perspective has to go out the window. 

And you know what? I have yet to see anyone actually try to roleplay this - if people put less energy into smack, and more into creating an actual narrative - well that's something that might contribute to the game.

Also, maybe Exodus provides an opportunity to create that PvP space in one or more of the lands of Illyriad, where PvP could be the norm; maybe there could be Sandbox countries too. Maybe this doesn't need to be an all-or-nothing battle.

Just a thought.

 
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 00:55
Originally posted by Uno Uno wrote:

Originally posted by scottfitz scottfitz wrote:

Umm... Diplomatically.

First of all let me say this: since you felt the need to post your reasons for war, I'm genuinely trying to understand them. To sum this all up: as mCrow you decided that the best course of action, at least now, is war. The blame for this unwanted war, that apparently you strived to avoid, is all to put on Valar because they didn't solve an issue diplomatically but chose war instead. However, you're not willing to tell us what does this mean, what should have Valar done or not done so that half Illy didn't declare war on them? Did I understand something wrong? Correct my mistakes, if any.

This said, it's a bit too cheap to say "they should have solved it diplomatically" because I could say the same about mCrow, right? So why not tell Illyriad, if you were in Valar's shoes, how would you have solved diplomatically the issue that instead originated the whole war?

Well, I might have STARTED by talking in gc about what I believe, and trying to dialogue with people.  I might have posted things on the forums and invited them to comment.  I might have talked with people from other alliances about their views and ask if they knew anyone who could intercede.  I might have messaged individual people I perceived as opposed to my ideas and told them that I value their contributions even though we didn't agree.

Oh wait ... I did all of those things.

And Valar ...  not so much.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 00:52
Originally posted by StJude StJude wrote:

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

 
It simply took that long for us to come to a decision.  There were lots of voices to be heard.  We didn't rush into it.

So, mCrows had to decide if what VALAR was actually doing was wrong? Implying that.....they may not be the scumbags everyone says they are?

Because the OP sure didn't communicate that.

 From our declaration:

we do not condemn the Valar as inherently evil, nor do we wish to see them removed wholesale from the Illyriad landscape.

Seems to me that we made it clear that we don't think they are scumbags.  We'll be sure to mention next time that "not inherently evil" also means "not scumbags."
Back to Top
Uno View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Location: Torino
Status: Offline
Points: 101 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2011 at 00:41
Originally posted by scottfitz scottfitz wrote:

Umm... Diplomatically.

First of all let me say this: since you felt the need to post your reasons for war, I'm genuinely trying to understand them. To sum this all up: as mCrow you decided that the best course of action, at least now, is war. The blame for this unwanted war, that apparently you strived to avoid, is all to put on Valar because they didn't solve an issue diplomatically but chose war instead. However, you're not willing to tell us what does this mean, what should have Valar done or not done so that half Illy didn't declare war on them? Did I understand something wrong? Correct my mistakes, if any.

This said, it's a bit too cheap to say "they should have solved it diplomatically" because I could say the same about mCrow, right? So why not tell Illyriad, if you were in Valar's shoes, how would you have solved diplomatically the issue that instead originated the whole war?
Eréc of Caer Uisc
King of Dyfneint
Indomiti Alliance
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 10>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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