Messages - webDiplomacy

Chat archive

...

12 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2008: I dont normally write global messages, but since bc seems to be trying to twist my words into something else. I will write my position here. Bc is to move the fleet in the ARC Ocean back to ANC or we will be at war. I urge everyone else to protect themselves before this next phase against this backstabbing action and join me in attacking him unless he does move back to ANC. I am not suggesting attacking him until he either moves against me or moves back. Is that clear enough?
12 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2008: You are laughable, Quebec. This entire game I have been honorable with every player on the board - to include California, with whom I offered to let survive so he could get a survival point. What we all know is this: YOU are the one trying to stir up trouble. You are the one angling to split and divide. It will not work. You do not get to dictate my move or any other players' move. I have been in Kansas for ages now - directly across from Missouri - and yet, Heartland still owns it. So - explain to us again: how is someone a "traitorous backstabber" when he has to take a single SC from an ally?? We await your response and will do our best not to giggle. ~ Eadan
12 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2008: Fact You are moving against me. I am stating fact and what you need to do to avoid conflict between us. Your actions speak for themselves. Talking about Kansas is an attempt to distract from the point. Your words are worthless. Your next move will prove the worth of your words.
12 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2008: Please, you are embarrassing yourself now. Worse, you are sitting anything but fact. But please - do clarify. To which "us" do you refer? Do you refer to Heartland - with whom I've worked flawlessly this game? Or, do you refer to Peru - with whom I've worked flawlessly this game? And sorry, but Kansas is EXACTLY the point: it shows that two players can have units next to each others' SCs and not have to worry. YOU are the only one crying about it.
13 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2008: Quebec. You called me a traitorous backstabber for placing a unit next to your SC, yet, you still hold that SC, even though I could have taken it. Worse, you cried about me placing a unit next to your SC, yet you just tried to place a unit in Arctic Ocean, the very same square that you bitched about when I put a unit there. Why the double standard? Just so everyone - including you - knows, you and I are not allies, we have no NAP, and there is not DMZ. Any future diplomacy with you will be done in Global. I could have stabbed you. I didn't.
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Stop bitching
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Quebec I feel like jumping on the negotiations in global train too
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: HAHA!! Enjoy!
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Enjoy winning? Yeah its pretty enjoyable
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: When you willing lie and sleep with the devil and still feel good about yourself, just know you are not the good person you proclaim to be in life. If you are ok with that, then yes enjoy your successes. May they all be bittersweet.
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Someone needs to tap Quebec on the shoulder and remind him that it's just a game. Invoking devils and Kantian ethics just makes him look silly.
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: First of all this game is about lying and cheating. Second of all that's what you and Cuba have been doing all game
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Peru, if there is one thing I've learned on this site, it's this: you know you have defeated a player - maybe not won the game - but you have defeated a player when he or she takes to Global and starts crying. You've played a good game, Peru, especially given your experience level. Quebec is just upset because he made two critical errors: first, he misread the board and built far too many fleets. Second, and this was probably just hubris on his part, he assumed everyone would cringe and buckle when he took to Global to issue his threats. Now, he's just being a poor sport and making everyone wait on his moves, all while spewing more bitter vitriol in Global. Pay him no heed: you did well.
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Haha, Peru are you also starting?? Miserable little pitiful idiot you are !! You do not know the rules it eems because NOT keeping an agreement is completely within the rules and let me remind you : YOU YOURSELVES broke our agreement by attacking 2 of my countries in the 2nd or 3rd move!! ok I am finished with you guys, with thks game, will not play anymore, cause I am here for fun and you guys are not normal!!!
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: cough cough rage quit
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Cuba - awfully poor form to walk away from a game still in progress.
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: And I never betrayed you. I moved there to assist in the war. Also those were going to ne given to me after the war anyways. You then took a miscommunication to mean total war. Whu would I openly say 'hey I'm going through your land to help in a war against Mexico' if I wanted to invade you
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: If I was going to attack you I wouldn't have told you
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: I'm not stupid
15 Apr 15 UTC	Autumn, 2010: Actually Peru. I have not lied to you or anyone else once. I challenge you to show me any occasion where I have. I have also not cheated or been false with any action. You can ask anyone. I wouldnt count BC as being normal, but even with him, I never lied. No matter how he would like to twist things there is nothing he could ever bring up that would show that I either lied or cheated in word, action or spirit. It doesnt mean I havent in other games, but I never had the need or occasion that it was worth it in this one. If you cant find an occasion where i did, then you should take back your accusation.

...