open All Channels
seplocked Intergalactic Summit
blankseplocked [Ushra'khan] Simulcast of the Wildlands & Beyond
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8

Author Topic

Thorvik
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 16:43:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Nykitah
... we ain't forcin' anyone to apply our standings to themselves.


What we do got a problem with is if ya gonna start workin' with our enemies right infront of us 'cuz I gotta say, yer gonna get called a ****in' hypocrite if ya cry for others to stand for freedom and **** while shootin' anyone part of a CVA fleet just 'cuz they were in a CVA fleet or defend CVA pilots that might've been in their fleet.


In the first sentence you say you do not force people to apply the same standings as you and in the following statements you have a problem with organizations shooting at people that are blue to you.

Interesting. So if they have fired upon us and made themselves red to us we will not be able to shoot them because they are blue to you?

Sounds like you are trying to dictate who we may and may not shoot at.

Nykitah
Posted - 2010.11.10 17:07:00 - [122]
 

Hey, if we're judging 30 minutes of Corp history mate, wouldn't wanna be in an Alliance whose diplomat was part of PIE Inc. yet claims to be fightin' for the Matari.

Thorvik
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 17:14:00 - [123]
 

Originally by: Nykitah
Hey, if we're judging 30 minutes of Corp history mate, wouldn't wanna be in an Alliance whose diplomat was part of PIE Inc. yet claims to be fightin' for the Matari.


There is where we differ. We don't take the moral high ground. We have individual Capsuleers in our alliance that were once slavers and even some that were pirates. They have seen the error of their ways and are now fighting for the cause of freedom. We give everyone a second, and even a third chance to show us that they have changed. We knew coming into GW that elements within RE-AL were once FND but we chose still to try and work it out with you. You showed us that you canít be trusted. We are willing to give you another chance but as the old saying goes.

Quote:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.



Ugleb
Minmatar
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 18:26:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Altaen

I really do wish RE-AL had adequate diplomats, or at least PR people of their own to convey this properly. Since they do not, they have found themselves fighting a pointless conflict, when there is much, much more important work to be done in the Great Wildlands.

The problem, Ushra'Khan, is that you have sided with known pirates. You, who claim to be champions of the Minmatar people, are entirely too lazy with your diplomacy and standings to think that there might be better qualifications for blues than "they won't shoot us, cool!"

(Come to think of it, RE-AL has also become quite lazy in this regard...but I'll leave that talk to a diplomat.)

I think what Victorick was trying to express is that it's sad to see such a narrow view as to what it means to support the Minmatar people. I'll give you a hint It involves shooting scum like - V -, not setting them blue.


You, the bold Ushra'Khan, may care little for the Republic government...but many of our people live and work and try to safely raise families in the Republic.
They are suffering and dying because of the very pirates you have decided are worthy to negotiate non-aggression pacts with.


But, the fault is not entirely your own. RE-AL has utterly failed at diplomacy and general pilot discipline here. Not only does it seem clear they weren't even mildly persuasive in attempting to make Ushra'Khan aware of their standings error, but in a great show of unprofessionalism, some of their pilots think it would be funny to smack in local about Vitoc and being slavers.
Let me tell you, that's not funny.

What is funny, however, is U'K being childish enough to try to spin it into a legitimate reason to turn Minmatar opinion against RE-AL, and to make the ridiculous suggestion that RE-AL has any Amarr or Ammatar affiliation whatsoever.

This is absolutely pitiful. I have lost alot of respect for both organizations.



We have been through this before, and doubtless will again. I would have hoped that the opening statement of this discussion would have highlighted our priorities.

We are not an anti-piracy organisation. We are an anti-slavery organisation. We choose to focus on the greater evil of this world, and cannot afford the distraction of attempting to extinguish the lesser one.

It will take more resources than we alone have to overcome the practice of slavery, we cannot also be the enforcers of 'law and order', by whatever standard you care to define it.

Yes, we have in the past worked alongside so-called capsuleer pirates. In fact, the defence of Unity Station against the rising Amarrian Providence was a rogues gallery of 'pirate' organisations working together to resist the spread of Imperialism, for a time successfully. We fight alongside those with whom we find common cause, even if only for a time.

But today we are talking about -V- aren't we? Are you aware that they are 'blue' to member corps of the Tribal Liberation Force? And yes, not to others. But that same statement applies equally to Republic Alliance, blue to some, red to others. Confusing, isn't it?

I think that you will find the reality is not as black and white as some would like to paint it. In my experience we live surrounded by dirty, murky waters, and some of us are prepared to descend into it if that means we come just a few steps closer to furthering our cause. Keeping your boots clean is nice, but there's only so much you can do standing on the high and dry ground.

We need to do more.

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2010.11.10 19:25:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine
We (SF+UK in this case) believe that you cannot stand for freedom while telling 3rd parties how to conduct their diplomacy and enforcing their standings.


Ushra'Khan sets groups red for working with CVA, for obvious reasons. They do tell others how to conduct their diplomacy, and that is good.

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 19:40:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: Arkady Sadik
Originally by: Jade Constantine
We (SF+UK in this case) believe that you cannot stand for freedom while telling 3rd parties how to conduct their diplomacy and enforcing their standings.


Ushra'Khan sets groups red for working with CVA, for obvious reasons. They do tell others how to conduct their diplomacy, and that is good.

No, there is a distinction to be made here. We set groups red who co-operate with our slavers because that makes them our enemies. We don't tell people who should be their friends, we react to their choices.

Kazzzi
Amarr
Heathen Legion
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 20:29:00 - [127]
 

Originally by: Nykitah

A neutral alliance or corp get a choice - they can accept our standings and work together with us and our local allies or they don't gotta apply our standings and they can remain neutral. We don't care, they can live in the Wildlands if they wanna.


Oh?

Nykitah > You want to live in the Wildlands and be NRDS with a different list of standings than our own - you're pretty much challenging our hold over it mate. >.>

Didn't even start discussions with your enemies til after you started talking like this.

Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
Posted - 2010.11.10 20:41:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Borza Slavak
Originally by: Arkady Sadik
Ushra'Khan sets groups red for working with CVA, for obvious reasons. They do tell others how to conduct their diplomacy, and that is good.

No, there is a distinction to be made here. We set groups red who co-operate with our slavers because that makes them our enemies. We don't tell people who should be their friends, we react to their choices.


Of course, if you tell them (or otherwise broadcast) what your reactions will be, the distinction between stating what actions will have negative consequences and "telling" becomes pretty fine, doesn't it?

So fine, I'd suggest, as to be fictitious.

Then again, Ethan Verone and I got into quite the little dispute a while back over an identical "distinction," so maybe reasonable minds can differ.

Maybe.

Syyl'ara
Gallente
Intaki Prosperity Initiative
Posted - 2010.11.10 21:16:00 - [129]
 

Edited by: Syyl''ara on 10/11/2010 21:18:14
Originally by: Thorvik
We don't take the moral high ground.


You guys always demand the moral high ground!

Nearly every other post from a U'K member goes on and on about how it is the moral imperative of your organization that excuses everything else. It seems like anyone U'K ever shoots was the cousin of a next-door-neighbor of someone who was marginally involved in a business deal with someone who sat next to a slaver at a symphony 5 years ago or something.

Did you even read how your corp-mate opened the discussion with a chest-thumping list of the accomplishments of all your moral crusading?

Originally by: Aria Jenneth
So maybe reasonable minds can differ.

Maybe.


We could test that theory if only there were reasonable minds to observe on this issue.

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.10 21:39:00 - [130]
 

There is more than one moral high-ground. We follow our moral imperative of opposing slavery as best we can, but will readily admit we do things other see morally questionable in order to do so.

Hori To
Masuat'aa Matari
Posted - 2010.11.10 23:28:00 - [131]
 

standings and old grudges are tricky business.

If I compare -V- / RE-AL relationship, it is my understanding that there is alot of bad blood, with UNITY / CVA relationship, this mess makes sense to me.

In a years time we will know who was the stronger of us, so no need to argue about it now.


Hello Dame Death o/

Karn Mithralia
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 01:09:00 - [132]
 

You can cut through 90% of the rubbish in this thread with a factual razor, the remaining 10% is just differences of opinion.

1) RE-AL set U'K red, not the other way around. And they did that with no notice mind you, lacking even the courtesy a Goon might have granted us back in the day.
2) U'K always has and always will maintain its right to determine its standings as it sees fit. The fact U'K is NRDS in the Great Wildlands is a good sign of her intentions there.
3) The Great Wildlands is Thukker space, not RE-AL space, not U'K space, Thukker space. U'K have as much right to be there as anyone else who can dock.

That's the facts of the matter from where I sit.

Facts aside, this was to be expected.

RE-AL are no more lovers of freedom than their previous alliance FDN. They are isk-miners dressed up in republican finery. I'll never forget catching two FDN haulers in YWS0 laden with war supplies headed to CVA held 9UY. War supplies hauled in to profit on the slavers market. I'll never forget the diplomatic storm they tried to create after I vented their traitorous arses to space, and how quick they were to label me pirate and set U'K red over it.

Anyway, recollections of a pirate aside, I suspect that U'K diplomats would still be willing to talk peace should RE-AL be able to find someone capable of discussion to represent them. I say 'suspect' as this lone-ranger doesn't pay that much attention to the details anymore.


CCP Jericho

Posted - 2010.11.11 02:39:00 - [133]
 

Off-topic posts removed.

zoolkhan
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 07:31:00 - [134]
 

Edited by: zoolkhan on 11/11/2010 07:34:51
Originally by: Karn Mithralia
You can cut through 90% of the rubbish in this thread with a factual razor, the remaining 10% is just differences of opinion.


..."the church is brought back into the village center", if i may quote an old amarrian priest.

Maybe we get to see something new,exciting, fact based and so far unsaid content in return.

I am a optimist at heart. ...on every odd weekday. Laughing


time 3290
Unforeseen Consequences.
THE UNTHINKABLES
Posted - 2010.11.11 10:44:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Karn Mithralia
You can cut through 90% of the rubbish in this thread with a factual razor, the remaining 10% is just differences of opinion.

1) RE-AL set U'K red, not the other way around. And they did that with no notice mind you, lacking even the courtesy a Goon might have granted us back in the day.
2) U'K always has and always will maintain its right to determine its standings as it sees fit. The fact U'K is NRDS in the Great Wildlands is a good sign of her intentions there.
3) The Great Wildlands is Thukker space, not RE-AL space, not U'K space, Thukker space. U'K have as much right to be there as anyone else who can dock.

That's the facts of the matter from where I sit.

Facts aside, this was to be expected.

RE-AL are no more lovers of freedom than their previous alliance FDN. They are isk-miners dressed up in republican finery. I'll never forget catching two FDN haulers in YWS0 laden with war supplies headed to CVA held 9UY. War supplies hauled in to profit on the slavers market. I'll never forget the diplomatic storm they tried to create after I vented their traitorous arses to space, and how quick they were to label me pirate and set U'K red over it.

Anyway, recollections of a pirate aside, I suspect that U'K diplomats would still be willing to talk peace should RE-AL be able to find someone capable of discussion to represent them. I say 'suspect' as this lone-ranger doesn't pay that much attention to the details anymore.




Yes we did set U'k red first they opend fire on a RE-AL fleet http://republicalliance.killmail.org/?a=kill_related&kll_id=7917025

We was both blue and they attack us for what they said we attack one of there fleet members who was a member of Thukker Tribe Mercebaries who was sat on a gate on his own and is RED to RE-AL and has been for a very long time, for all you guys who like to look a facts look when Thukker Tribe was made funny they made an ally called that the same time U'K said there coming to GW to help you out here is them before the made this sad alliance
http://republicalliance.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=7809069 13-10-2010 oh......

But this is not why you was set red you was set red for setting most of the NBSI alliances in GW blue but the best one was you set -V- blue without telling us trying to play both sides is fine if thats what you like to do...

I keep on seeing we set you red without telling you!!! mails was sent and you was told in local but the best part is 10 mins after we set you red a U'K Loki started to attack offline guns on a pos if you did not know you was red why was he attacking a Blue/neut pos?
http://republicalliance.killmail.org/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=7967108

So it comes down to you tryed to play both side so you could make your isk and try and save U'K from falling apart.
And here it is you attack our fleet attack our blue who all fly NRDS in GW you set our reds blue tell me why was you set red again i might of miss somthing?

Dame Death
Minmatar
Core Impulse
Posted - 2010.11.11 10:50:00 - [136]
 

Edited by: Dame Death on 11/11/2010 10:55:06
Originally by: Hori To
Hello Dame Death o/


If you know me you know better then to call me that. *Eliza smirks* But hi.

Also Thorvik glad to see someone sees what I was getting at.

Astroyka
Caldari
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 11:24:00 - [137]
 

Originally by: time 3290
Incoherent babble


Seems even the data services you point us to are unable to verify your version of events either:

Quote:
500 - Internal Server Error



Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 12:26:00 - [138]
 

Originally by: time 3290

But this is not why you was set red you was set red for setting most of the NBSI alliances in GW blue but the best one was you set -V- blue


After hours of excavation and translation I managed to extract the 'point' from his post. Though you left out the other part of the reason which your furred colleague so eloquently put:
Quote:
Nykitah > You want to live in the Wildlands and be NRDS with a different list of standings than our own - you're pretty much challenging our hold over it mate. >.>

time 3290
Unforeseen Consequences.
THE UNTHINKABLES
Posted - 2010.11.11 12:28:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Astroyka
Originally by: time 3290
Incoherent babble


Seems even the data services you point us to are unable to verify your version of events either:

Quote:
500 - Internal Server Error





Works ok for everyone else try again and all what was said is true there so much drama in U'K you miss the point on why you was set red and why you are -V- pets.......

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 12:41:00 - [140]
 

Edited by: Borza Slavak on 11/11/2010 12:41:14
Originally by: time 3290
you miss the point on why you was set red


No, not at all
Quote:
Nykitah > You want to live in the Wildlands and be NRDS with a different list of standings than our own - you're pretty much challenging our hold over it mate. >.>


Nuknuk made it perfectly clear.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.11.11 13:32:00 - [141]
 

Originally by: Borza Slavak
Originally by: Arkady Sadik
Originally by: Jade Constantine
We (SF+UK in this case) believe that you cannot stand for freedom while telling 3rd parties how to conduct their diplomacy and enforcing their standings.


Ushra'Khan sets groups red for working with CVA, for obvious reasons. They do tell others how to conduct their diplomacy, and that is good.

No, there is a distinction to be made here. We set groups red who co-operate with our slavers because that makes them our enemies. We don't tell people who should be their friends, we react to their choices.

So you do exactly the same as CVA/RE-AL do. They also dont tell who should be their friends, they just react to their choices (by shooting them).

The funny part obviously is that SF who claims to be against this sides with UK (really people, enclosurism is just not an existing word), while under CVA controlled providence it was never a problem to be blue with our enemies, just as long as you didnt attack our friends or in any way helped reds that attacked us. But for example quite some atlas renters were neutral and accepted in providence, while they obviously were allied to an enemy.
The only difference then is that SF just doesnt care if you shoot neutrals or not, and happily allies themselves with NBSI alliances (and when they get backstabbed by them they suddenly see this as a problem, while in their history they have mainly been allied with nbsi entities), while CVA/RE-AL style NRDS sees neutrals as (potential) friends, and they dont appreciate it if you shoot their friends.

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 13:48:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Borza Slavak on 11/11/2010 13:48:50
Originally by: Furb Killer

So you do exactly the same as CVA/RE-AL do. They also dont tell who should be their friends, they just react to their choices (by shooting them).

Wrong.
RE-AL demand that anyone who wants to be part of their little gang (or even just live in Great Wildlands) share their NRDS rules of engagement and their entire standings lists, both who they set red and who they have blue. Effectively you must give up control of you own corporation or alliance's diplomacy.
We simply treat those groups who are friends with our enemies as hostile.

You're either deliberately trying to mislead or you're a cretin. Perhaps both.

papal knight
Posted - 2010.11.11 14:54:00 - [143]
 

Its funny how everyone is wrong apart from U'K its easy RE-AL have a red list why???????

1, They come to GW and fly NBSI
2, Come in to take over GW and fly NBSI (same as number 1)
3, Fly with our reds in GW and kill our blues or neuts (same as number 1)

Some once again you attack a blue fleet to your standings you attack NEUTS to youe standings
new alliance you could not of had them red and they had not attack U'K
and you fly with -V- shoot our blues so let me see thats 1,2 and 3 rules but im wrong i guess even tho i have killboard links and convo with your diplo says U'K have some hot heads and they will try and sort them out hmmmmmm

CONCORD OOC censor applied. Zymurgist

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 15:32:00 - [144]
 

We set nobody red in GW who didn't aggress us first actually. Including Zero-Navigation and YARRR. I think you coalition's pilots don't all stick to NRDS as well as they are meant to Embarassed

papal knight
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:00:00 - [145]
 

Oh is this so....... so why did you have -V- RED? why did you fly in RE-AL fleets and kill RE-AL REDS?
Why the same day we set U'K back to neut to set -V- who was RED to BLUE hmmmm i wounder why?

Nightshade Mary
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:06:00 - [146]
 

Originally by: papal knight
Its funny how everyone is wrong apart from U'K its easy RE-AL have a red list why???????

1, They come to GW and fly NBSI
2, Come in to take over GW and fly NBSI (same as number 1)
3, Fly with our reds in GW and kill our blues or neuts (same as number 1)

Some once again you attack a blue fleet to your standings you attack NEUTS to youe standings
http://www.ushrakhan.org/edk/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=5392 off your own killboard new alliance you could not of had them red and they had not attack U'K
and you fly with -V- shoot our blues so let me see thats 1,2 and 3 rules but im wrong i guess even tho i have killboard links and convo with your diplo says U'K have some hot heads and they will try and sort them out hmmmmmm

1. Wrong, we fly NRDS in GW. We will of course react to hostilities. NBSI would make life for us diplomats so much easier.
2. Not here to take over, we're here for R&R with our Thukker buddies, the owners of this space. The rest is answered by 1.
3. We fly with whomever we wish to fly with. We do not have to discuss this with you. Of course, should the Thukker tribes have issues with us, our diplomats would be happy to discuss things with them. Furthermore, if your blues or neutrals fire upon us, fire will be returned.

As for that link, our scout was looking for a red in system, entered the anomaly and got attacked. The two ships, you missed one there, were destroyed as a response.

No hotheads involved, only the facts.

Nightshade Mary
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:10:00 - [147]
 

Originally by: papal knight
Oh is this so....... so why did you have -V- RED? why did you fly in RE-AL fleets and kill RE-AL REDS?
Why the same day we set U'K back to neut to set -V- who was RED to BLUE hmmmm i wounder why?


Why do you shout so much? Lack of self control?

Anyway, you might wonder why we do what we do, but since I doubt you'd take any explanation for it's worth, I suggest you head to the -V- diplomats. I trust you know the way.

papal knight
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:18:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Nightshade Mary
Originally by: papal knight
Oh is this so....... so why did you have -V- RED? why did you fly in RE-AL fleets and kill RE-AL REDS?
Why the same day we set U'K back to neut to set -V- who was RED to BLUE hmmmm i wounder why?


Why do you shout so much? Lack of self control?

Anyway, you might wonder why we do what we do, but since I doubt you'd take any explanation for it's worth, I suggest you head to the -V- diplomats. I trust you know the way.


Hang on you fly NRDS in GW but you fly in NBSI fleets? hmmmm got to give to you all as you sure dont know what your doing or flying. DRAMA Shocked

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:25:00 - [149]
 

Originally by: papal knight
Oh is this so....... so why did you have -V- RED? why did you fly in RE-AL fleets and kill RE-AL REDS?
Why the same day we set U'K back to neut to set -V- who was RED to BLUE hmmmm i wounder why?

-V- were red from a long long time ago. After a while in GW we spoke to them and set them blue. We never shot RE-AL reds who weren't also ours. In fact we had -V- blue prior to RE-AL setting us neutral.

Really do we have to go into labyrinthine detail of all the standings we've ever had simply because uninformed people have an axe to grind or want to try and make it seem as if we don't follow our own RoE?
You don't like us for some reason, we get it.

Nightshade Mary
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.11.11 16:27:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: papal knight
Originally by: Nightshade Mary
Originally by: papal knight
Oh is this so....... so why did you have -V- RED? why did you fly in RE-AL fleets and kill RE-AL REDS?
Why the same day we set U'K back to neut to set -V- who was RED to BLUE hmmmm i wounder why?


Why do you shout so much? Lack of self control?

Anyway, you might wonder why we do what we do, but since I doubt you'd take any explanation for it's worth, I suggest you head to the -V- diplomats. I trust you know the way.


Hang on you fly NRDS in GW but you fly in NBSI fleets? hmmmm got to give to you all as you sure dont know what your doing or flying. DRAMA Shocked


Drama? To be honest, we have only seen RE-AL drama so far. We do indeed fly in NBSI fleets. Our pilots have been instructed not to fire at neutrals whilst in these fleets. Our friends who organize these fleets know and accept this limitation.

It complicates things somewhat, yes, but flying true NRDS is nothing new for us. Perhaps you'd care to try it instead of your CVA model? Just contact one of us and we'll be happy to explain things to you.

Removed OOC reference. - Adida


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only