You are so devoted to your allies you seem to forget to discredit their recruitment as well.
Why on earth would I discredit my allies?
It is disappointing that you would do a dual recruitment session where MM and W2V together took a large portion of T members right behind MoM. Disappointing they were more than happy to join but the irritating thing is all this time MoM even when it just had 18 members were still slandered for its mass recruitment... Yet double standards exist right though?
It is clear you are trying to force this world to close as fast a possible which is fine however to not expect to get a backlash would be ignorant. MoM is 11.5k in villages while the MM and W2V alliance now reaches 56k, quite a large portion of which were through recruiting many of the very players you insulted, called out or generally came across as disliking. I have a feeling that even members in W2V aren't all that happy from some of the recruits but as a P&P representation you have changed your tune to "They're worthy" "They'll prove themselves" etc... Prove themselves through a gang bang. Genuinely there are no sour grapes in MoM, only a shed of disappointment mainly towards the T recruits who now have meant a tribe 1k thick is now entirely surrounded. It was a tactical move not one of respect unless the insults were all a fad and you wish to reveal the previous to now hypocrisy. I cannot criticizes you for the recruits you took, it has completely annihilated us having any back to support with at all, but when an alliance already massively out weighing the small opponents to then not be discredited by ourselves? Would be bazaar to expect that :L.
Tell me if any of the above is untrue and explain why before you call me full of sour grapes. At the moment I'm just spotting hypocrisy and things not greatly worthy our respect.
1. Where have I, or people I am directly responsible for, called MoM mass recruiters when they were at 18 members? MoM has mass-recruited in only one period of its lifespan, and that is during the CODE era.
2. This means there are no double standards. It is commonly agreed that MoM invited more than they should during that time. It does not match up to W2V recruitment.
3. Who says I did not expect a backlash? I do, however, expect valid points to be made. Will a future war be unfair? Definitely. Will it matter how good or bad MoM plays in this war? Unlikely. Did we recruit to speed things up? Sure. Does that mean we slipped on standards..? Does that mean W2V is suddenly mass-recruiting..? Does that mean W2V is hypocritical for inviting [T] members..? No, no, no.
4. Again, cite me on players I have insulted. I will readily admit to having disliked most, but I am nothing if not pragmatic and realise that personal dislike does not always make policy. That, and someone like sidd plainly won me over: I thought he was a git, I was wrong.
5. Why would we invite anyone if we did not think them worthwhile? Again, do we have a track-record of inviting meatshields? No.
6. I will respectfully disagree with the no sour grapes comment, but that is a matter of perception. I will say this: Had [T] in its early days consented to merging into MoM, I would have given even odds on it happening. Had Baron and co elected to join MoM instead (or FBTB et al), I would have given even odds of you happily accepting them.
7. "All the insults", my my. It is no secret that the PnP resolves around equal mixtures of trash talking and posturing. Am I a hypocrite for proclaiming that T was filled with non-participating trash? I would be, if I invited the majority of [T]. I did not. Unless you can point me towards posts of mine where I have said that FBTB was useless?
8. As far as I can tell, the stretch of your post is: You should not have recruited because this means MoM is even more outnumbered. I'm sorry, should that have been a consideration for me not to recruit? :icon_neutral:
