LIGHTS Leadership not trust worthy

[DeletedUser]

Yes, I gathered you'd say as much. Attempt to degrade my argument by pointing out I'm not well known and you (apparently) are, therefore your argument automatically is superior to mine. (This seems to be acceptable logic on numerous forums, not just TribalWars).

You then follow up by stating you don't have to prove anything, which is another incredibly weak point. You're not a religion, people aren't going to believe you just because you say something - they're going to (for the most part) need some proof. Though, again, I gathered you'd say as much, hence my "he-said she-said" comment in the previous post.

Truth is an odd thing. If you keep telling yourself a lie often enough it sometimes appears to be the truth. I'm going to go ahead and find mynameisluke's version of the "truth" more reliable/persuasive, and assume since you both know "the truth", that you're agreeing with mynameisluke, and we can end this rather pointless debate here.

You might want to find some better posting "technique" though. It appears that incompetency on the forums is survivable early on, but it does tend to have an impact later in the game; as does being seen as an untrustworthy tribe who breaks their agreements (without reason).

I shall eagerly await your next (rather shoddy) attempt at degrading my argument, though really I care too little to get involved in a drawn out debate. My point was simply that trust is a valuable thing later in the game, and it may do you well to show proof why you broke your agreements, otherwise people may actually begin to doubt your tribe's trustworthiness.

This man speaks the truth! wow you just got verbally destroyed (Bcardi).

Save yourself the embarrassment and stop posting.

And no: i actually have no idea who he is.

 

[DeletedUser]

Sorry which player were we stacking? The only player we stacked was Nerrad. because he was surrounded by Addict members...

Sorry, because I do actually like you. But I do think you're clutching at straws to save your reputation.

I already wrote down the three reasons for those who(hint hint EternallyForever) keep asking for them again and again. There were three reasons for the breaking of the NAP, you(mynameisluke) conveniently forgot to mention the most important one.

1) You recruited our noble target without asking. That broke the nap then and there. I won't give you a 3 days headsup that I am about to noble this person. Sorry. :icon_razz:

2) The last skype chat we had where you tried to turn us against Addict when they recruited Mooning. Yea you really stopped planning :icon_rolleyes: :icon_eek:

3) When you "tried" to go behind our backs to Addict.

As for me clutching straws to save my reputation, I don't care much. I will do what's best for the tribe and our closest allies no matter what my reputation looks like.

@Eternal's post - I see nothing worthwhile in your post other than you arguing about the semantics of posting. Bcardi might need some working on his technique in your opinion. No one is perfect, Duh. :icon_eek: And you might need to work on your reading skills since you conveniently didn't read the reasons already mentioned in the thread about the breaking of the NAP. But As I said, No one is perfect eh? :icon_wink: As for you finding Luke's version more truthful, Go ahead and believe. See us losing our sleep over it. :icon_cry: If there might be consequences later on in the world, We will be happy to face them head on :icon_smile: But But... I am not gonna post some skype chats and screenshots over issues raised by anything that moves, Sorry to disappoint you, but we won't bother. As you said Truth is an odd word and this Eternal, is the Truth. :icon_redface: Btw What did Mario do to you in W43 that you are so sour? :icon_razz:

 

[DeletedUser]

I already wrote down the three reasons for those who(hint hint EternallyForever) keep asking for them again and again. There were three reasons for the breaking of the NAP, you(mynameisluke) conveniently forgot to mention the most important one.

1) You recruited our noble target without asking. That broke the nap then and there. I won't give you a 3 days headsup that I am about to noble this person. Sorry. :icon_razz:

2) The last skype chat we had where you tried to turn us against Addict when they recruited Mooning. Yea you really stopped planning :icon_rolleyes: :icon_eek:

Minor question or two, as a neutral bystander in this:

1) How were they meant to know they were recruiting your noble target if you didn't tell them you were nobling them? Were they meant to ask you every time they wanted to recruit someone?

2) Given that you see recruiting someone as grounds for breaking an NAP, does the same thing not hold for them? If addict recruited someone that they didn't want them recruiting, is that not grounds for war pretty much by your own reasons?

Now, to be honest, this is a war game. If you want to attack someone you have an NAP with, feel free to go ahead and do it, so long as you're willing to face the consequences of doing so. That's what propaganda is all about: making enough friends on the forum and ingame that people will side with you in these situations and not with the person you... "surprised", using greater reputation and influence to cover any backhand deals you pull off. It's definitely part of the game, and while it might not be "honourable", more power to the people who can pull it off and still maintain solid alliances with those who they want to keep as friends. There are a number of instances throughout the history of .net of a couple of tribes in an alliance who have played around with other tribes in order to strengthen the position of the whole, not caring how badly their reputation was hit, because they knew the alliance they wanted to keep was solid.

However, if you're going to give "reasons" they should really be to some extent plausible. The reasons given here seem almost contradictory, and are paper thin even if they weren't. It's like your boss firing you because you didn't do the thing that he didn't ask you to do because "he shouldn't have to tell you in advance", and given the reactions to these reasons, I'm pretty sure both sides are fully aware of this.

 

[DeletedUser]

Minor question or two, as a neutral bystander in this:

1) How were they meant to know they were recruiting your noble target if you didn't tell them you were nobling them? Were they meant to ask you every time they wanted to recruit someone?

2) Given that you see recruiting someone as grounds for breaking an NAP, does the same thing not hold for them? If addict recruited someone that they didn't want them recruiting, is that not grounds for war pretty much by your own reasons?

Now, to be honest, this is a war game. If you want to attack someone you have an NAP with, feel free to go ahead and do it, so long as you're willing to face the consequences of doing so. That's what propaganda is all about: making enough friends on the forum and ingame that people will side with you in these situations and not with the person you... "surprised", using greater reputation and influence to cover any backhand deals you pull off. It's definitely part of the game, and while it might not be "honourable", more power to the people who can pull it off and still maintain solid alliances with those who they want to keep as friends. There are a number of instances throughout the history of .net of a couple of tribes in an alliance who have played around with other tribes in order to strengthen the position of the whole, not caring how badly their reputation was hit, because they knew the alliance they wanted to keep was solid.

However, if you're going to give "reasons" they should really be to some extent plausible. The reasons given here seem almost contradictory, and are paper thin even if they weren't. It's like your boss firing you because you didn't do the thing that he didn't ask you to do because "he shouldn't have to tell you in advance", and given the reactions to these reasons, I'm pretty sure both sides are fully aware of this.

1) I assume its common courtesy to ask a NAP tribe before you recruit inside them *can't even say next to them lol*. (The concerned guy was far away from the rest of there tribe and perfectly at our centre kinda)

2) Addict can recruit anyone they want without asking Mine since they didn't have any diplomatic relations with Mine.

As I said earlier, even if these reasons are not enough to satisfy you, We don't care much then. We are not here to satisfy everyone on the forums. The reasons are plausible enough for me and our tribe and hence we decided to break the NAP. As for the consequences? Everyone has to face them and we are ready for however feeble they may be. Mynameisluke got catted down and shifted accounts, Mine no longer exists, This is nothing but his attempts to hmm "get back" at us. Kinda lame that the tribe fell down just after one account got nobled, another restarted cuz of it and the leader got catted.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ah, fair enough. I hadn't realised the player in question was inside your cluster. If that was the case, there was a slight breach of courtesy on their part there. I've seen much worse started on the back of that situation! That said, I will wait to see what the other side have to say as well

 

[DeletedUser]

I already wrote down the three reasons for those who(hint hint EternallyForever) keep asking for them again and again. There were three reasons for the breaking of the NAP, you(mynameisluke) conveniently forgot to mention the most important one.

1) You recruited our noble target without asking. That broke the nap then and there. I won't give you a 3 days headsup that I am about to noble this person. Sorry. :icon_razz:

2) The last skype chat we had where you tried to turn us against Addict when they recruited Mooning. Yea you really stopped planning :icon_rolleyes: :icon_eek:

3) When you "tried" to go behind our backs to Addict.

As for me clutching straws to save my reputation, I don't care much. I will do what's best for the tribe and our closest allies no matter what my reputation looks like.

@Eternal's post - I see nothing worthwhile in your post other than you arguing about the semantics of posting. Bcardi might need some working on his technique in your opinion. No one is perfect, Duh. :icon_eek: And you might need to work on your reading skills since you conveniently didn't read the reasons already mentioned in the thread about the breaking of the NAP. But As I said, No one is perfect eh? :icon_wink: As for you finding Luke's version more truthful, Go ahead and believe. See us losing our sleep over it. :icon_cry: If there might be consequences later on in the world, We will be happy to face them head on :icon_smile: But But... I am not gonna post some skype chats and screenshots over issues raised by anything that moves, Sorry to disappoint you, but we won't bother. As you said Truth is an odd word and this Eternal, is the Truth. :icon_redface: Btw What did Mario do to you in W43 that you are so sour? :icon_razz:

1) He was 6 and a half hours away from you, not exactly right next to you. Fair enough that you broke it because of that, but not giving the 3 days that we had both agreed on, in fact you had suggested, demonstrates that you broke what we agreed upon because you wanted a bit of personal gain... again, why people should not trust you.

2) Like I said in our last skype chat, all we wanted was your help not the demise of Lights. And we needed it, since Addict actually are a decent tribe!

3) I think I have answered this before, I wanted to build relations with SAB so that I had the possibility of a merge if things didn't quite work out... Just because I ask to speak to your allies does not mean I am trying to get them against you :icon_rolleyes:

I didn't think that I could trust Mario, and for me, I was proven right.

 

[DeletedUser]

1) He was 6 and a half hours away from you, not exactly right next to you. Fair enough that you broke it because of that, but not giving the 3 days that we had both agreed on, in fact you had suggested, demonstrates that you broke what we agreed upon because you wanted a bit of personal gain... again, why people should not trust you.

2) Like I said in our last skype chat, all we wanted was your help not the demise of Lights. And we needed it, since Addict actually are a decent tribe!

3) I think I have answered this before, I wanted to build relations with SAB so that I had the possibility of a merge if things didn't quite work out... Just because I ask to speak to your allies does not mean I am trying to get them against you :icon_rolleyes:

I didn't think that I could trust Mario, and for me, I was proven right.

1) Why would i give you 3 days to stack the guy you recruited in our middle? :icon_idea:

2) You wanted us to turn on our allies and are now accusing us of being untrustworthy. Nice :icon_eek:

3) The timing was awesome. Trying to get us to turn on them and intending to make them to merge with you. Nice again. :icon_eek:

 

[DeletedUser]

1) Why would i give you 3 days to stack the guy you recruited in our middle? :icon_idea:

2) You wanted us to turn on our allies and are now accusing us of being untrustworthy. Nice :icon_eek:

3) The timing was awesome. Trying to get us to turn on them and intending to make them to merge with you. Nice again. :icon_eek:

Maybe you should have added that to the NAP in the first place. It was not in the initial agreement, besides like Mario said to me, we were only NAPs. But why is trying to turn you on your allies making US untrustworthy? We were already fighting them, trying to make you fight with us. It's worth a try in my opinion :icon_razz:

 

[DeletedUser]

Maybe you should have added that to the NAP in the first place. It was not in the initial agreement, besides like Mario said to me, we were only NAPs. But why is trying to turn you on your allies making US untrustworthy? We were already fighting them, trying to make you fight with us. It's worth a try in my opinion :icon_razz:

You are gonna keep picking on the agreement. I am not gonna make a full contract. No, Never! :icon_razz:

 

[-M A R I O-]

Jag is a very nice guy, but if talking about Mario, then I think it is a fair judgement to say that he is not trustworthy. We, being MINE, had a NAP agreement, of which was stated that the tribe breaking the NAP had to give 3 days notice before attacking our members. When they attacked us, with no notice whatsoever, without breaking the NAP, this was the reasoning:

[08/07/2011 00:51:16] mynameisluke/bye bye: I know you had a couple of reasons to break the NAP, but which was it?
[08/07/2011 00:52:02] Jag/Sh@dey/Pawelk83pl/-GuidingLight-: hmm talking to addict our allies and the last talks of you with mario

1) We did not talk to Addict. I requested chats with their duke to contemplate a merge but since SAB. never got back to me, we stuck it out! This was a lie, made up from Lights as reasoning to break the NAP
2) Another... a personal vendetta. Not altogether a viable reason to break a NAP.

With MINE, I tried to make a tribe that did not mass recruit. I think Addict are also one of these tribes, and they will go far. But for Lights - not respecting a diplomatic agreement, with no good reason... All I say, is that if they have diplomacy with you, it does not mean they won't attack you.

Luke out.

Luke are you kidding me you go to mooning and try to get him to play us to have us and addict turn on each other for your own benefit. And yet you think that I have to tell you that a nap is off after that? Do you want me to dig up all the mails of you and skype chats of you trying to screw lights over?

You come on here like its our fault your tribe failed and that the NAP was broken. You screwed up our relations by your own inadequate decisions to try and screw us over by getting us to war Addict just so that you could survive. Now tell me if i would have done that to you that you wouldnt have ended the NAP immediately. Fact is luke you are the one that cannot be trusted and if you dont believe it then how about you look through your skype convos with mooning and the mails and then try to tell me that its my fault. You got played while trying to play us and while trying to pull one over on us.

As for shah i dont have anything to say to you that i havent already said.

As for endless whatever your name is i have no idea who you are and you can say all you want about me. Fact is pnp will always throw people into the mud when they make decisions to protect their tribes, and if you like to believe in the opinions and statments of others about situations that you have no idea or information on then that is your problem not mine as i could really care less what you think about me.

 

[DeletedUser]

I can't be bothered with the same argument again! You can ask Addict...we were fighting them at the time and wanted to get you to help. If anyone, we were trying to screw up Addict not you! If it offended you, that I was making last ditch attempts to save MINE, then fine.

To be honest, if a dying tribe tried to get me against allies, and I knew about it, I would either tell them I have broken it, or I would just let them die in peace. If you were in my position, and this was the only hope of survival I am sure you would have tried the same as me.

I never said I just wanted you to help us because I wanted to screw you over, it may not have even screwed you over for all you know.

I am not one to hold a grudge though, and we will never agree on this so I am just going to leave it here. Think what you want Mario, my goal was to keep MINE in the world, not to screw over Lights.

 

[DeletedUser]

No. No matter how old you are, this game - is a game.
^ Tribalwars.

My Question was in responce to your followingt post.


Quote: If deception is by deceiving people in tactics, like showing u would attack from a North and in the end attacking from West, it is fine.

If deseption is lying, I do not think so it is right. But people have diffrent standards and for some that might be right, for others it is not honourable. For me it is not, I do not care what Sun Tzu said or really ment.

You do know, this is a game? Right?

What i ment was for kids they do not have the understanding of thimgs or they are not mature enough. Kids are not totally responsible for their actions, they can say it is a game. But for adults they are totally responsible for they action so if they lie it is their responsibility.

The rules for kids and adults are not same.

Simply, if a kid think it is a game and he lies in the game, he should not be considered a lier, but he should be corrected and taught the right way of thinking. If an adult do it he is lying and should be considered a lier.

 

[Khan The Master]

My Question was in responce to your followingt post.


Quote: If deception is by deceiving people in tactics, like showing u would attack from a North and in the end attacking from West, it is fine.

If deseption is lying, I do not think so it is right. But people have diffrent standards and for some that might be right, for others it is not honourable. For me it is not, I do not care what Sun Tzu said or really ment.

You do know, this is a game? Right?

What i ment was for kids they do not have the understanding of thimgs or they are not mature enough. Kids are not totally responsible for their actions, they can say it is a game. But for adults they are totally responsible for they action so if they lie it is their responsibility.

The rules for kids and adults are not same.

Simply, if a kid think it is a game and he lies in the game, he should not be considered a lier, but he should be corrected and taught the right way of thinking. If an adult do it he is lying and should be considered a lier.

dude this thread is dead stop trying to resurrect it. No one is interested

 

[DeletedUser]

Shade,

I never said I didn't read the reasons. I actually did, hence the debate. You hardly think I'm debating the reasons without reading them? Unfortunately, I'm not psychic, so I have to waste precious time reading before posting (annoying, I know!) However, what I did say was that it would be beneficial from a "public trust" point of view to post evidence for these reasons. I didn't say the reasons didn't exist nor did I give any hint I hadn't read them.

Mario did nothing to me in W43. I was in his tribe actually, hence how I know of his "untrustworthiness", as I witnessed it first hard and it eventually backfired on him and the entire tribe.

Mario,

I'm glad you have no idea who I am. That's kinda the purpose of an alias.

I base my opinions based on first hand interactions with you in previous worlds, not on the opinions and statements of others. These opinions/statements of others, however, merely support my view that you have not changed.

Regards.

 

[Bcardi]

Shade,

I never said I didn't read the reasons. I actually did, hence the debate. You hardly think I'm debating the reasons without reading them? Unfortunately, I'm not psychic, so I have to waste precious time reading before posting (annoying, I know!) However, what I did say was that it would be beneficial from a "public trust" point of view to post evidence for these reasons. I didn't say the reasons didn't exist nor did I give any hint I hadn't read them.

Mario did nothing to me in W43. I was in his tribe actually, hence how I know of his "untrustworthiness", as I witnessed it first hard and it eventually backfired on him and the entire tribe.

Mario,

I'm glad you have no idea who I am. That's kinda the purpose of an alias.

I base my opinions based on first hand interactions with you in previous worlds, not on the opinions and statements of others. These opinions/statements of others, however, merely support my view that you have not changed.

Regards.

Wow, you went to the 2nd page of forums to find this thread and post another useless post.

Can we please just let this stupid thread die.

 

[DeletedUser]

Lights sucks, the end. :|

 

[DeletedUser]

Wow, you went to the 2nd page of forums to find this thread and post another useless post.

Can we please just let this stupid thread die.

ROFL.

Rather than commenting let the thread die.

Seriously Bcardi, it was a joke or a serious comment.

 

[DeletedUser99805]

Shade,

I never said I didn't read the reasons. I actually did, hence the debate. You hardly think I'm debating the reasons without reading them? Unfortunately, I'm not psychic, so I have to waste precious time reading before posting (annoying, I know!) However, what I did say was that it would be beneficial from a "public trust" point of view to post evidence for these reasons. I didn't say the reasons didn't exist nor did I give any hint I hadn't read them.

Mario did nothing to me in W43. I was in his tribe actually, hence how I know of his "untrustworthiness", as I witnessed it first hard and it eventually backfired on him and the entire tribe.

Mario,

I'm glad you have no idea who I am. That's kinda the purpose of an alias.

I base my opinions based on first hand interactions with you in previous worlds, not on the opinions and statements of others. These opinions/statements of others, however, merely support my view that you have not changed.

Regards.

I have played in a few tribes were mario has held leadership roles. If I am honest, I don't get on at all with him...but one thing he is not is untrustworthy he always tries and puts the tribes needs before his own and always does what he thinks is best for the tribe.

 

[DeletedUser]

I never said he didn't. Putting the tribe's needs before your own / doing whatever is necessary for the good of the tribe makes you a leader. It does not determine whether you are trustworthy or not.

It was his actions "for the benefit of the tribe" when I played with him that made him untrustworthy. I never said he's a bad leader or anything, just untrustworthy. Also, when I say "untrustworthy", I mean in terms of diplomatic agreements etc ("externally" untrustworthy, if you wish.) I by no means doubt his dedication to his tribe.

 

[DeletedUser]

I came to this PnP after looking at my old started threads. I had a re-read of the main post, I guess guidinglight kind of mislead Bigevan3.

In reality he was not planning to offer anything. eventhough he stated that but in reality he never ment to offer anything.

This PnP was posted solely because he was not trust worthy and other should know that he is not trust worthy.

But in TW their are more worst leaders than that, that even backstab their allies, but i beleive on good level tribes are normally true to their words as they know if they are not true it would bring them bad repute.