OK. As of right now based on the evidence lets have the big player's with a neutral perspective their views and let's have them tell us what should be done.
Be sure to observe all the details and chat conversations.......
Juicylettuce wrote:OK. As of right now based on the evidence lets have the big player's with a neutral perspective their views and let's have them tell us what should be done.
Be sure to observe all the details and chat conversations.......
Random pandah wrote:i think roi needs to sniff juicy and come up with a plan once he comes off the high
Roileon wrote:I outsmarted you on taking IMO out of the truce, and you are cleverly responding with this. Nice , let's see what happens next.
Shaydo wrote:Roileon wrote:I outsmarted you on taking IMO out of the truce, and you are cleverly responding with this. Nice , let's see what happens next.
So would i be right in thinking you deliberately made sure IMO was not included in the truce, and made sure the official wording didn't include any mention of the IMO?
If so i'd assume that it was so you were free to attack IMO knowing you'd bound TMN by a truce and that they couldn't do there job and defend IMO members?
So you tried to make a truce with one of a pair of allies, hoping that truce would protect you from retribution should you attack their allie... Surely it would obvious that an alliance is worth more than a truce.
Shaydo wrote:Roileon wrote:I outsmarted you on taking IMO out of the truce, and you are cleverly responding with this. Nice , let's see what happens next.
So would i be right in thinking you deliberately made sure IMO was not included in the truce, and made sure the official wording didn't include any mention of the IMO?
If so i'd assume that it was so you were free to attack IMO knowing you'd bound TMN by a truce and that they couldn't do there job and defend IMO members?
So you tried to make a truce with one of a pair of allies, hoping that truce would protect you from retribution should you attack their allie... Surely it would obvious that an alliance is worth more than a truce.
Me: thats a lot of words
Me: so i will try to sum itup:
Me: Achillies messed up in writing the truce and didn't include IMO so Fox attacked some IMO (where they high fame players or newbies?)
juicylettuce: high fame
Me: ok so technically Fox did abide by the truce
juicylettuce: yes
Me: people who are saying Fox broke the truce because that chatroom mentioned not attacking IMO NEWBIES are wrong
Me: newbies are not high fame players that have been around for months
juicylettuce: yep
Me: so Achillies had a few options at that point: rewrite the truce, destroy the truce or muddy the waters by trying to say the truce included IMO the whole time
Me: it looks like he did the last option but that will only cause disagreement
juicylettuce: you are correct
Me: so now either the truce needs to be rewritten to include everything both sides want
Me: or the truce needs to be called over and go to war
juicylettuce: the only thing is achillies broke his own truce
juicylettuce: and he was supposed to wait 2 to 3 days before launching voodoo which he said
Me: right, i saw that he cast a ton of voodoo
Me: so that would mean the truce is over and a new one needs to be made asap so war doesnt restart
Me: or just slug it out
Me: also, Fox can't call an undefined number of its members "merchants" to exclude them from the war. If they need to do that then they need to list the participants before the war
Me: that's just my opinion
Me: good luck
.Shaydo wrote:Did i angrily accuse someone of something, you've lost me?
All i asked was a question in the hopes of ascertaining a fact, the wording of his post made it sound like keeping any wording of IMO out of the agreement was a plan from the start, if so there would need to be a reason, logic presented the most obvious one?