@ Wrath: You hit the nail on the head for some of the points I was getting at. This post should serve as a solid follow up to the truth behind those attacks, though almost everything in this post has already been posted elsewhere at some point. So not much new to it. I will say this however, you and Bad both asked if this whole debate was over the theoretic attacks, but for me it has not been for some time. It has been a debate over whether or not I was ever referencing
Acvenne when referring to said attacks to begin with, and it is that very point that I continue to debate now.
@ TT: This was never a situation of smoke and daggers, and I resent the implication for deception, as I truly was acting on a misconception that I believed was fact. Further, Decide never even got involved in this. I did, and some DN did, but Decide never touched it.
@ Bad: I really don't have time to continue this, and I felt that I already responded to everything you wrote in the first post, every single post you made except that last one, which you never brought over into this thread, as I suggested. However, I wanted to see it ended, so I went back over the entire damn thing, and I had an epiphany. I realized where we both went astray, and discovered how redundant this debate truly is.
If you want it broken down in short, I will try my best.
All of my statements regarding my thoughts of BD's honor are based on the idea of BD attacking Decide as a tribe shortly after they went to war with Green. I discovered my info was wrong, that they were
not attacking Decide, and I publicly apologized for this misinformation. I did, however, state that
had BD attacked Decide in reality, then I would stand by my logic. The point of this was to say, you can flame me for wrong information, but you cannot flame my logic. It was a matter of opinion, one I still stand by. However, since BD weren't attacking, they retained their honor and everything was hunky dory, and any further debate would be a matter of opinion, and not honor. Yet somehow, there have been a plethora of posts all questioning my own honor since I announced the mistake, most of it unrelated to the actual debate. There was one aspect that was related to the debate, and it is the idea that I was originally debating for a refugee. This is not true, and I will focus on this topic now.
To begin clarifying this fiasco, I will give you this: the player in question
was the cross nobling (skyhawk). My point of not saying his name was to reiterate how redundant the name would be, given that I never deviated from referring to a non-Acvenne player. Just saying non-Acvenne should be enough to denote "not Acvenne" when the matter was pressed.
Now, not knowing about the cross nobling, I can easily see where you, Bad, would have misinterpreted my points and posts. I was vague about the attacks at first, not being specific, because I thought you guys were aware of the attacks, and therefore had no need to. Likewise, I was having a side debate (as mentioned) with Gicusan involving a refugee at the same time. So if you really believe what you are arguing Bad, I will not see it as a personal attack, but merely a misunderstanding, and a valid one at that.
In any event, when I stated multiple members were being hit, that was because that was what I was told at first. I heard something I didn't like, I jumped out there of my own accord, and I stated what I thought. Then I later discovered that that was an exaggeration, and that it was just one player on top of Acvenne, and that the one player was just a cross nobling incident. When I found out this truth, I was pissed to have started such a stink over nothing, knowing I just made an ass of myself. I admitted to it immediately. I was very clear about the misunderstanding, and apologized for acting hastily on faulty information, and while rrespect has gone to other people involved, like TT, this fact has gone completely overlooked by my political asailants. I am not sure what more you can expect from me on that as far as honor goes.
This debate has been a waste of time because as far as I can tell Bad, your debates have either been an intentional misconstruction, or an unintentional misunderstanding debating my own misunderstanding. In this, we are both wrong, and I would just as soon see an end to the confusion.
Now, back to our debate. You believe that I was never referring to a third party, but instead was referring to Acvenne. You have stood by your "proof," and have challenged me to respond to that truth. And while I feel I have in my own way, you have been unsatisfied. So I will post something on it now just so you cannot say that I avoided it yet again, though I am still certain it is redundant, given the focus of this post.
[spoil]About Acvenne: my reasoning was never about it being just her. While it would seem opportunistic to wait until Decide were at war to launch full scale attacks on her as well, it would not be wrong in my eyes, as she was a refugee. But that was never the focus of my debate. It was all about BD attacking Decide. Not Acvenne, but other players, as I thought you were, and using Decide having recruited Acvenne as an excuse when the timing was so close to the declaration time, which again, is what I thought was going on.
Having said all of that, here's to your debate. You claimed to have proved me wrong about Acvenne with this:
really, you were? Then why was only his name mentioned? I just combed through this entire thread. I found not a single other name. Not one.
1.
TT bringing up how we're attacking DECIDE
2.
TT yet again
3.
this guy is on fire
Those are all things TT said, not me.
do note that up to there no names are mentioned. But wait ... what happens now?
4.
Chamica bringing up the player in question.
5. (note: i added bold)
Something ChamichA said, not me.
Yup, that's you running with the Acvenne name.
No, that's other people running with her name, not me. These are not things I wrote. But you did quote me following number 5, so lets get on to that.
This is what you quoted to use against me, highlighting Acvenne as if it matters:
1. There is a very distinct difference between claiming a refugee, and claiming a breach of an agreement. You accused Decide of being dishonorable for breaking an agreement that we neither made, nor broke. You and I talked about it, yes, but to the best of my knowledge, it was never agreed upon, and even so, those talks came after Acvenne joined. If you CBA to get your facts straight, then I'd say you're poorly representing your tribe.
Note: Read over that passage again. It had nothing to do with our debate Bad, this is directly related to the separate debate where Gicusan questioned Decide's honor for breaking an agreement to not recruit MF, an agreement that was never made. Further, I was reminding him that Acvenne had been recruited before there were even talks of the agreement. It was in that context, and that alone that Acvenne was referenced.
So when I said you were twisting my words, and using other people's words to put things in my mouth, this was just one part of what I meant. However, if you honestly did misunderstand me, then I suppose it wasn't a twist so much as confusion.[/spoil]
No, I'm not going to address the other points you asked for three reasons: because I feel it would be more effective to address each point one at a time, but more importantly, because they are all either related to this fact, or this debate, and by ending this debate, I am confident that I can successfully prove the others moot. Further, I feel I have already addressed them in other posts, and I simply don't have time to go any further into reiterating those points right now. But I will give you and other readers this, however:
[spoil]To those that don't know, the other questions were pretty much asking why I would think Acvenne isn't a refugee (which I do think she is and clarified this); how attacking her is different then DN attacking their refugees (which I was never basing my debate on BD attacking her to begin with, so that is how); and other such matters essentially based on the intricacies of DN's combat with Green, and Acvenne, all of which unrelated to the topic of my debate, which, if I haven't said it enough times, was about BD attacking a non-Acvenne Decide member, which in the end, they were not. Shmexy, huh?[/spoil]
Now again, you only have one thing on me Bad, and that is that I didn't specify the other player until it was pressed. This is a circumstantial thing that can be used to accuse me of changing my points, which is what you have done, but it is not the case. I have proven time and again during this debate that I am willing to admit when I am wrong, anything past that is just people intentionally attacking me with total disregard to my nature and character, if not even the facts at hand.
I assumed when I referred to Decide being attacked, BD would know who I was referring to. You can say what you want about it, but my logic was never based on Acvenne getting attacked. However, if you do want to continue to accuse me of this, then I will continue to debate it insomuch as I am able, and certainly look forward to more "proof."
In closing, everything about our debate was a misconception. I was wrong about BD attacking Decide. You were wrong about me basing my debate on a refugee, or even debating her status as such, and everything that spawned from that fact. Further, I am not a representative of Decide, and in no way represented them during this debate, and as such, Decide was never even involved in this mess. Personally, it seems like a fair place to leave the matter in my eyes.
So I think we can resolve it by this: I will admit again that I was wrong to stir the debate in the first place, but I will reiterate that all the subsequent wrongs from all parties (DN and BD members alike) that followed did not make a right either.
Cliff notes?
Regarding my debate with Badlapje:
I was wrong at the beginning of my debate about BD attacking, and admitted it.
Bad was wrong about the point behind my debates revolving around Acvenne.
We were all wrong because of a series of misunderstandings (unless of course, he was intending the misconstructions, without a response I have no way of knowing).
BD has not lost honor as far as I am concerned regarding this debate, nor has Decide.
However, all the other debating, flaming and trolling of this thread is another story altogether. :icon_biggrin: