japan77

the three are this guy, the guy that decided to do it during the last global, and Mosquito from several globals ago.

well, that's 3 people deciding to solo dec on TKR over the years....why do we get these and no one else does?

This. 100% this. The rules are sometimes vague, and as such it may be hard to know if something's allowed. TKR's rather infamous trade bot, was fully cleared by alex because we asked him if it was okay to do it, did it, and then had him check that it was within rules.

Just being curious, is the core issue that they were creating a bunch of inactive tax farms or the fact that they were restricting access to manhwa based on people playing pnw or both? Anyways, thanks for bothering with doing a thorough track down of evidence before making a decision and presenting all of it.

well then. This is just going to increase toxicity or forum bans. lots of people downvote instead of responding because quite frankly, they want to say things that would be very impolite to state in public. You forcing them to respond instead is almost certainly going to result in much more offensive and OOC attacks because surprise, people are !@#$.

cool. Apparently, claims made by 3rd parties are relevant. Alright, time to leave our AAs, state outright absurd things and have them accepted as evidence.

This may be news to you, as you are new here, but spying actions in this game are commonly considered an act of war, and have been cited in RoHs and DoWs in the past.

For D,E,F, there was a set of publicly posted logs that literally contained all of those. As for A, given that any and all OWF postings were made months after negotiations were attempted,. This happened before anything was posting. As for B, agreed upon mainly because yet again, we're trying to communicate and will take any offer to communicate if it's available. As for C, yet again, we've trying to communicate and obtain terms for months, and yet again we've gotten nothing beyond the basic surrender term (we literally found out about more terms from leaks than from your official negotiators). As such, please go educate yourself on what's actually happening instead of parroting random talking points like a broken speechbot.

From publicly available information, this is straight up false. (For reference, Go see T$'s entire post on this issue)

"Patience is a virtue" There's patience and then there's waiting around for a miracle to happen. In this case it's the latter, as we can see from publicly available information. A. Any and all attempts to negotiate have been trolled B. Only happen on the first of every month C. Despite surrenders on the OWF, no terms have been offered and no attempts to have communication between parties has been established properly (t$ literally hasn't gotten a server and has been kicked out of one) D. ColB leadership wishes for disbandment of ColA alliances. (No alliance in this game is every going to voluntarily disband from an external mandate, this is not CN) E. Apparently despite having literal months at this point, ColB hasn't figured out what terms it wants F. ColB leadership believes that T$ hasn't fought long enough and wants to continue the war against them And there's more, but I'm not going to bother with it since I have other things to do.

Ah yes. Another mosquito incident. Why are we the only alliance that manages to get these?

Let's be very explicitly clear here. Chaos+KETOG+Rose literally had less fire power than BK-sphere on its own. The way that power separated after knightfall was problematic in the sense of there being two huge blocs (N$O and BK-sphere), two smaller spheres (Chaos, KETOG), and one very small sphere (Rose). The last three had to team up if they ever wanted to beat one of the big two from a sheer numbers perspective (Skill can make up a difference, but it's rather limited due to how this game is designed). Honestly Rose-sphere's firepower isn't so much a sphere as Rose and a few friends. Ideally, T$ would've anchored a different sphere from NPO, and similar so for BK and TCW. So there would've been 7 spheres, but I digress. As soon as it became evident via leaks that BK-sphere planned to roll us with their literal 3:1 city advantage, we had two options, either ask for help rolling them or roll over and die. We did the former because that's rational. I believe we did reach out to someone in N$O with regards to this. We're merely stating that you had the opportunity to convince the world that N$O and BK-sphere were not allied in any way. Given your literal treaty obligations pre-war, there's no MD-level treaties for your entrance, and you never claimed entrance off your OD-level treaty with Polaris, which is the only treaty joining the two spheres, the world would have a 3+sphere system. (Let's not forget that KETOG and Chaos were happy beating up each other until the leaks happened). Your alliance's actions single-handily returned the world to a 2-sphere system. While you could and you appear to be arguing that Chaos's actions reduced the world from a 5-sphere thing down to 3, as I pointed out earlier, in terms of fire power, it was already that. For there to have been truly more than 3 spheres, BK-sphere and N$O would have had to be smaller. Thanks for confirmation that your interests literally placed a non-treaty partner over a MD-level partner. It's very enlightening, and makes it apparent that unless your name is BK, one should not even bother with considering NPO as an ally, as otherwise they'll stab you in the back if your actions threaten BK.

the definition of the term surrender is "cease resistance to an enemy or opponent and submit to their authority." So to be clear, you're asking for an admission of defeat, not a surrender. So, we could still keep fighting after admitting defeat? are you really trying to emulate the allies handling of the central powers in ww1? lmao. we all know that was effectively an unconditional surrender in all but name. Basically, your stance is that it isn't a "unconditional surrender" on a very minor technicality since if we admit defeat, how exactly are we supposed to oppose terms we don't like? fight?

So we'd be surrendering, then getting the terms of surrender yes? We have no guarantees of what those terms could be. You could literally insert "All of you disband and delete" as a surrendering term, and because we surrendered, we'd have to abide by it. Also, there's literally no reason You couldn't make one of the terms "I now control your armies and I get to reorganize your alliances any way I want". That's pretty clearly an unconditional surrender.

Literally the first line of the wikipedia article: An unconditional surrender is a surrender in which no guarantees are given to the surrendering party. We literally have no guarantees of what terms you're going to put down in terms, and you're asking for our surrender before outlining the terms. By definition of the term its unconditional.