Let’s see if you can spot the difference.

What you wrote: “Seraph IX Basarab has claimed that the leaders in the Casino War all credit him with being instrumental in the success that they had against The Imperium. ”

What I wrote: “You don’t have to tell me how Co2’s defection went down considering no one was more involved with it than me and Da Winci. Fact.”

In the first instance you said that I claimed leaders credit me. What I actually said was that I was primarily involved with the defection including Da Winci who was my predecessor as diplomat in CO2.

Not hitting every single point of your article doesn’t mean I’m agreeing with the rest. I’m simply addressing the point where my name stands. First let’s see if you can figure this part out then we can get to the rest.

So by your supposed logic “Seraph IX Basarab was, by his own extensive words, a major factor in the Casino War.” is all ok?

Anyhoo moving on, you have said that Co2 defecting was your work as “no one was more involved with it than me and Da Winci. Fact.”. You also stated “Boson only got semi involved maybe late Feb/March. I was talking to them in November specifically Da Winci their head diplomat at the time.”. You also wrote “Lastly most would agree that this was one of the key critical events that shaped the conflict and deserves to be documented and analyzed for the record itself. Lenny who funded much of the MBC referred to is as ‘the critical point where goons no longer felt they could fight the MBC.'”

But the best bit here is that you complain that I wrote “the leaders in the Casino War all credit him with being instrumental in the success they had against the Imperium”.

You wrote 4 separate articles detailing your supposed insight where you keep stating how important the back-stabbing by Co2 was and to get anyone with a pulse who would talk to you to back that point up.

In your first piece you compare a man who committed genocide to a chap who plays a video game, and you do this in all seriousness.

You mention;

Sabre A from Mercenary Cartel – “stopped the only major alliance fighting and in my opinion it was what won us the war at that point.”
Lex Arson from Psychotic Tendencies – “I think the only end-game effect it had was to reduce the amount of time it took Mittens to realize how fucked he was”
Carneros from Bastion – “Unquestionably relevant. I personally feel like it had a substantial effect on the conflict.”
Endie from Pandemic Legion – “robbed the Imperium of their most aggressive and competent EU force”
Grath Telkin from Pandemic Legion – “I would say it was pretty much the tipping point in the war.”
Lenny (Banned for RMT) Kravitz2 – “It was high on our priority list to get them to flip”

All of these are taken from the first piece alone. I did not even research all of the comments you have left elsewhere. There were simply too many of them and all too often with you claiming to be so superior to others. Your pseudo-intellectual silliness may work with others but I think it is a major failing of a diplomat who is supposed to be a good communicator.

Now it is important that I note that these “articles” were all written by yourself. There has not been any proof offered by you to substantiate your claims, no full logs or journalistic integrity at all. So if you wish me to correct the single sentence that has upset you so just send me all the logs and the like and I am more than willing to do so once I have reviewed them. But until then all that you have written on this matter is simply what you claim to have happened and nothing more.

But as you have already mentioned, you have only brought up the bit you took issue with. This just so happens to be the second to last sentence in that paragraph about you. Well I am very pleased to know that the rest of it was spot on.

Let me know what the next bit you take issue with is and we can work on that next.

I’m having a hard time communicating with you because either you are not listening or you’re so coked up in the hate4co2 koolaid all you can do is froth at the mouth about “RMT-Casinowar-bandofbackstabbers” nonsense. I mean right at the end of my comment I state quite clearly “Not hitting every single point of your article doesn’t mean I’m agreeing with the rest. I’m simply addressing the point where my name stands. First let’s see if you can figure this part out then we can get to the rest.” Then the first thing you say literally right after that is that “by your supposed logic X is okay because you didn’t mention anything about it.” I mean I literally JUST addressed that point.

My complaint was that you wrote that “SERAPH CLAIMED leaders credit him with x y and z.” I never claimed that. I simply quoted people regarding their opinion on the matter. And Grath, lenny and moxich are not “anyone with a pulse.” They were vital players in WWB. And these quotes themselves act as proof which you can ask anyone that I quoted if I lied about. The entire series I wrote was proof read by Co2’s head diplomat at the time, Da Winci, who handled the political decision of their defection at the time. It’s also a large part of the reason I happen to be in the current position I’m in. I’m not sure what further proof you need or what it has with the fact that you misrepresented what my claim was.

And your last comment is again stating now “But as you have already mentioned, you have only brought up the bit you took issue with. This just so happens to be the second to last sentence in that paragraph about you. Well I am very pleased to know that the rest of it was spot on.”

SO once again let me repeat myself since you seem to be having a hard time comprehending English: “Not hitting every single point of your article doesn’t mean I’m agreeing with the rest. I’m simply addressing the point where my name stands. First let’s see if you can figure this part out then we can get to the rest.”

I have given you an opportunity to prove what you claim but instead you reduced yourself to going right for an ad hominem attack. Kind of proves my point. You did make the claim as you wrote the articles. If a third party had written them I would have said “Mr X claimed”. It really is that simple to be honest. Hardly rocket science now is it. So anything else in my article you disagree with?

Show me where I claimed that all WWB leaders credit me. Show me where I made that claim as in me saying “all WWB leaders credit me.” Go ahead.

OK I will try to make this as simple as I possibly can. If someone else has written all the stuff you did on this I would have gone with “Mr X has claimed that the leaders in the Casino War all credit Seraph IX Basarab with being instrumental in the success that they had against The Imperium.”. This would be based on the comments from all the leaders in The Casino war stating that the Co2 back-stab was pivital and by your own words of being so involved in that.

It is surprising that this sentence seems to be upsetting you so. From what I have seen you are far from shy and if I had written it about someone else I am sure they would have been very happy with it.

I have answered all of your questions, so how about this one question from me; what else do you dispute in my article? You seem to be ignoring this for some reason.

You’re still not getting it. Let me try again. I’m not denying the fact that I was involved with Co2’s defection along with the former Co2 diplomat known as Da Winci. I’m not denying that it was, by the words of people heavily involved in WWB, a pivotal moment. None of that is incorrect. What is incorrect is the statement that I claimed that leaders credit me with everything. Now they may very well do that by their own words or maybe they think that privately. I don’t know/care. But I never claimed that they credit me. That’s where the problem is.

As for the rest of your article, it’s koolaid for your coalitions leaders. It’s void of any substance and it reads like you wrote it with the asshurt typical of your peers. Very little value added. You should learn from Dracos Rhagar if you want to write something with opinion and content.

Err I said “instrumental”. You do know what that means yes?

As for the rest of the article I assure you it was well researched and much of the information is either public domain, and often stated by the participants themselves, or pulled from Dotlan. Where there is speculation is is framed as such and not as a fact. I had only hoped that people would find it interesting and to promote conversation. Aside from your extensive, and quite honestly self obsessed, comments the piece has been well received.

Anyhoo thank you for your “valued input” and I look forward to more of it in the future. Would you like me to even do a special article all about you as I would love to write such a piece?

Again please quote me saying “Leaders consider me instrumental against the success of the Imperium.” Because if I didn’t say that you’re simply lying.

I think you writing a decent article would make it special. It could be your first one.

You really are missing the point here which is surprising given your supposed, albeit self professed, intellect. Oh well back to basics then and we shall see if you can work this out.

The bit you took exception with originally was “I never claimed that leaders in WWB ‘all credit’ me with ‘being instrumental in the success that they had.’ I quoted them giving their perspectives.”

This related directly to the sentence I wrote “Seraph IX Basarab has claimed that the leaders in the Casino War all credit him with being instrumental in the success that they had against The Imperium.”,

I then re-wrote this to show you what it would look like had all the stuff you wrote about the Co2 defection been written by someone else; “Mr X has claimed that the leaders in the Casino War all credit Seraph IX Basarab with being instrumental in the success that they had against The Imperium.”

This sentence is based on two things. The first being that I was unable to find a leader during The Casino war who did not think that the Co2 defection was pivotal/important. The second is by your own words that you were key in how that defection took place and none of the leaders had contradicted you that I could see. So with these two things in mind the sentence that you take issue with is perfectly correct.

Anyone with a basic grasp of English would understand that the sentence I wrote is perfectly fine. Especially after it had been explained and backed up in such detail. I can only guess as to why you would continue to take such exception to it.

By all means continue with the ad hominem attacks though. I did some research on you and the comments about you were a different level of what you have tried to do to me so far though. I think you need to “up your game”.

I would like to thank you on behalf of INN in giving us an opportunity to test the nested comments so rigorously.

You said that I CLAIMED leaders credit me. But “leaders thinking the co2 defection was pivotal”, and me “being involved in said defection” does NOT equate to me claiming that “all leaders credit me.” That’s what you’re still not getting.

My previous comment has addressed this point in great depth. I must confess I am surprised at your apparent inability to grasp this simple English. May I suggest you actually read the words rather than just take the approach you are taking. At this time you have not made one single decent argument that any of what I have written should be changed. It may surprise you but unlike many eve pundits I am more than happy to make corrections where necessary. This article went through peer review by more than one person and the finished article is as a result of that process. So just to re-iterate, everyone else understood this except you. So why is that do you think?

Your comment did not address it. You pointed out that I said I was involved in the defection and that leaders found the defection pivotal. But you have failed to actually show where I claimed that “all leaders credit me etc.” I won’t venture to assume why any of your work has passed anything that could even be mistaken as an editorial process.

If I had written “All leaders credit Seraph with winning The Casino War.” then you would have a point. I however did not write that so this merely seems to be a figment of your imagination. Nice to see you now also making attacks on the editorial process. You are one fine diplomat for sure. At this rate you will end up with no one wanting to talk to you at all, which as a diplomat is surely far from ideal.

Man it’s very simple. Either you show where I claim that all leaders credit me or you’re lying. End of discussion. I don’t need your mental gymnastics and reasoning behind it. Can you show me saying “all leaders credit me” for you to then say “Seraph claims all leaders credit him?” Yes or no?

‘for you to then say “Seraph claims all leaders credit him?”’

At no point have I written that either here or anywhere else. You can see this by using the browser search function yourself if you like. So you are lying here for certain.

The comment made by ER0X was very concise and is more than adequate in describing what you seem to be missing.

If you consider this to somehow be mental gymnastics then I would have to ask you who dresses you in the morning?

By all means continue with your lies and deceit as it only goes further to expose you for what you really are.

Literally your words: “Seraph IX Basarab has claimed that the leaders in the Casino War all credit him…”

gg

Again see the comment from ER0X. So I still call you out on being a deceitful liar.

I wrote some words. You got upset as you misunderstood what I wrote for whatever reason. The facts remain:

You wrote a lot of stuff about the Co2 defection – Fact
You have stated that no one else aside from DaWinci was more involved than you – Fact
All the leaders have said that the Co2 back stab was pivotal – Fact

So the sentence I wrote is fine. You can try and put words into my mouth but it only shows your true character, or lack of it.

So I am calling you out Seraph, you are a deceitful, scheming liar. I can only dread to think of what you are doing or plan to do to Co2.

And yet no where did I claim that leaders all credit me. If i did you could quote me saying so. I’ve lied about nothing.

Again you are dodging the very fine points made by ER0X and trying to spin all of this. Do you still disagree with the comment made by ER0X?

So as it stands you are still lying, spinning, being deceitful and pushing your own agenda. Are you incapable of admitting you are ever wrong?

erox hasn’t said anything useful. He just complained that I wrote a piece about something I was involved in. But no where do any of you show where I claimed “all leaders credit me.” That phrase was never uttered. Here let me draw a picture for you.

1. I’m a pizza chef. I made a pizza.

2. People eat the pizza. They like the Pizza. They say it’s a very good pizza.

3. I write on my cook blog about the pizza. I quote the people who ate it saying that they like the pizza.

Does this mean I am claiming that that the people who ate the pizza think I’m the greatest chef in the world?

Good grief!

No it doesn’t but it does make the claim indirectly that it is a very good pizza by using other people to do that. Regardless. The point is that because you wrote it… it is still self promotional.

Leaving the inane drivel of the pizza analogy behind. Although Moomins liar accusation is fairly strong, it is a possibility, but I’m not convinced that in this case its true. I think ignorance is at the root of the issue here along with an added flavour of grr gons saltiness.

First of all there is no direct quote from you in Moomin’s article for the simple reason that he doesn’t need to do that. He doesn’t quote you as saying x,y,z named or credited you personally because again he doesn’t have to. Why doesn’t he need a direct quote from you saying this? The clue is that its already there in the subtext. Hopefully we can shed a little light on that.

Lets say you weren’t involved on any level and it was only DaWinci. Then from the article you wrote Moomin could write Seraph claimed that all the leaders credited DaWinci because he was the sole operator of the defection. This isn’t directly referenced, nor does it need to be, because its contained within the subtext. However although DaWinci was another operator in the affair he is not central to your article. You are! The truth is that one of two protagonists, i.e. ‘You’, wrote the damn thing from your perspective. In the process you dilute DaWinci’s involvement relegating him to a simple bit part player. Therefore it becomes clear that you are using the quotes to highlight your successful petitioning of CO2’s leadership that brought about the defection from the Imperium NOT that of DaWinci. You know this because you knew what you were doing when you wrote the damn thing. Its a self promotional back slapping, thinly veiled behind some quotes, article with a little substance here and there to hold the reader.

What is astonishing to me is that you don’t seem to realise that Your whole article IS IN ITSELF a direct quote which can be referred to either in sections, targeted selections or from a cursory nod as a whole. Contrary to your apparent belief the EN24 article does not exist in a Seraph vacuum. EN24, although I do understand why you might think it, is not some Disneyland magical place where the laws of reasoning, deduction, inference and everything else cease to exist. Nor is it the Talmud, Bible or the Quran containing the word of God which cannot be mocked or questioned for fear of the vengeance of the Lord.

The article has a premise and apodosis which conveniently contains direct quotes from x,y and z praising the work of those who implemented the defection and since DaWinci has been relegated by you to a bit part player with little influence the article cant be about him. Again I reiterate You wrote the thing. The quotes are about you which I presume you included to show how great/crucial the defection was and by that inflating your position within the entire charade. You cant come crying after the fact when Moomin infers that you have claimed via that article to be the top boy. The very act of writing x,y,z’s quotes into your own article about how you orchestrated the defection does this for him.

So far I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt but after this any response other than OK I get it I’m considering an attempt to troll. Now give yourself a rest for fuck sake.

So here’s how you’re full of shit and should probably never post again.

1. Every article I posted on the subject, all four pieces to be specific, was reviewed by Da Winci himself.

2. Da Winci gets a full article by himself where I give him full credit for his part, and give him an interview to put everything in his own words.

3. The first article detailed the importance of the defection with relevant quotes. The second article is interviews with a number of other individuals.

Not only that but I wait until the 4th article to even really talk about any of my involvement on any meaningful level. So your whole little “you stole Da Winci’s credit and propped yourself up” makes me question if some of the paste you’ve ingested didn’t also get into your eye making it difficult for you to read.

My point stands. I never claimed that WWB leaders credit me. I quoted several people involved, some of them were aware of my involvement and made comment on it. Others were either not aware or didn’t make any such statement. So again where are you getting that I claim ALL leaders credit me? I never say those words. Those words are never implied.

Lastly, there’s nothing wrong with me writing about my experience and what involvement I had in it. The only ones that seem to care are asshurt little goonies mad I “stole” their single strongest ally while in denial that being a goon ally is shit. Co2 left, SMA left, EXE left, FCON left, Razor left.

At a certain point you guys just need to accept that maybe it’s you, not everyone else.

You keep claiming that you have logs and everything was reviewed but nothing ever comes of it. You also keep dodging questions, well not even dodging you simply ignore them.

ER0X again makes great points that you simply ignore and keep banging the same old drum in the hope that if you say something it will become true. This is not going to happen.

What is happening here though is that you are demonstrating how broken Co2 are. Their current situation makes the MMarlon debacle look positively tame. Not only has GigX failed in the defense of Tribute but they clamor to the apron strings of TEST as Co2 are unable to stand on their own. Co2 was all smoke and mirrors in The Imperium and continues to be so now. With hostiles seemingly in positions of power, this includes you Serpah, and directing Co2 to failure as evidenced by 20% of their members leaving.

GigX is like the mad king, with Seraph as the jester and Suas as the worm-tongued advisor looking to profit where ever they can.

So come on Seraph answer some questions. I know you are not shy in throwing your opinion out to anyone who will listen so this should be easy for you.

Nothing comes of what? What would you like me to do?

erox hasn’t made any good points and I think I just showed that much.

Your imagination is pretty funny regarding Co2. Tribute was unwinnable and everyone knew that. The question was how long it would take. 3 months defending sov against NCPL+ allies is pretty damn respectable and even our enemies have stated as much. I’m not sure what my role has been to cause us so many problems according to you but I’d like to see you tell me. Furthermore you greatly over-emphasize what SUAS is in Co2 probably because you guys want him to be some kind of problem he simply doesn’t even have to opportunity to be. Lastly we joined TEST because we stick by our allies…good allies. (Caveat there for you.)

Let me know if I can help you understand anything further. You could even get on discord but I guess from what people were saying you got hurt feelings and ran back to your safe space here. Oh well.

Again avoiding all the tough questions and spewing more nonsense in the process.

ER0X made very good points and I am not alone in thinking that. The fact that you are incapable of seeing them is very much an issue you have.

Your enemies only said that to try and get GigX to do a welp like he normally does. You are the problem within Co2. At the point Co2 accepted you into their folds in a position of supposedly representing their interests the writing was on the wall. As for Suas, well he likes to speak in your SotA and GigX does not reign him in. Also Suas was very keen to go and protect the Jayneleb Keepstar. Suas only does stuff for Suas and only a fool would think otherwise. He is a shrewd one though and will often play the long game. I do suspect he is making a fair bit of isk though from not one but two Co2 moves.

Co2 knows nothing about sticking with allies. Just today I watched Co2 bale out leaving Test behind. The best bit is that Co2 and Test outnumbered who they were fighting by around 2:1.

At this time I cannot think of a single thing I could learn from you. Your ignorance and delusion is simply too great for you to admit anything resembling truth.

As for discord, why on earth would I want to suffer your inane ramblings and insults in private? I want you to shame yourself in a more public forum which you are so kind to do with great fervor.

You keep avoiding questions; you are a deceitful, delusional liar. This whole comment chain is a testament to that and I am glad you have outed yourself in it. There will be no chance for you to delete these comments as you have deleted comments in the past. The day you were let into Co2 was the day that their fate was sealed. 20% membership lost and more to follow is something that Co2 will not come back from especially considering their most recent tactical displays. There is a trail of dead alliances in your past and soon Co2 will join those already fallen.

Obviously you have some strong feelings.

1. I don’t delete comments.

2. I’ve answered all the questions. If there are any feel free to list them and I will.

3. SUAS being politically shrewd is funny. He’s too nice of a person (to a fault) to be any of those things and you’re the one that’s delusional.

4. I asked to talk on discord IN PUBLIC. Not private. I simply left the options open for you. I think the formatting here is shit for discussion.

5. I had no leadership role until half way through the war in Tribute. When you lose space you lose members no matter what because some people are simply there for the space. You being from the CFC and losing Co2, SMA, Razor, Exe, and FCON along with Bastion and Lawn losing half or more of their members should have been obvious to you.

6. It’s nice that you think so much about me. I don’t really think about you at all.

1 – Going over your posting history it certainly looked like you did, especially on Reddit. But I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

2 – No you have not. You have skirted around many of them or just dismissed them completely. In one answer you say that the whole article is “koolaid” which is odd as many of the facts presented can easily be checked. This is far better than you saying “I have logs” but then you do not offer any. Weird that.

3 – Are you saying that Suas is not a competent leader then? As some political ability is essential to running a corp let alone an alliance. But if you think Suas is nice then that is your choice. Personally I am not inclined to trust him with something as trivial as looking after a titan.

4 – I am not inclined to go to a discord channel where you sling cheap insults that are mainly hidden from view. I am more than happy for a more public discussion of how right you think you are.

5 – Your corp only joined Co2 on 2016-08-27. The “Back stabber’s brawl” is a few months long at best. So you were able to attain a public front for Co2 within two months. This hardly seems a smart move, especially given your track record. The Imperium only lost dead weight and nothing else. I look forward to Co2 being able to settle a new home as quickly as the Imperium has.

6 – Whatever you need to believe to keep you happy at night and I think you think about me a lot.

1. Proof?

2. Okay then list the questions concisely and I’ll answer whatever you feel I have avoided.

3. I’m saying he’s not this devious Machiavelli type trying to sap power from Co2 leadership to strengthen himself.

4. Moomin if I wanted to insult you I’d do it here and now. If I think someone is stupid I’ve never been shy about expressing that.

5. You are confused. I said I only became diplo half way or so during the recent conflict in Tribute. Not WWB. And I’m not sure what my “track record” is that is so awful. Lastly it’s funny that when Goons lose half a dozen alliances as allies it’s “just dead weight” and you blow it off. But Co2’s membership loss…which considering many of the last thousand or so recruits were refugees from other CFC alliances, it is somehow indicative of some major failing. You’re not holding the same standard.

6. K.

1 – I said I would give you the benefit of the doubt. This means I am willing to believe that you did not delete comments. This is the root of the problem. I use words and then you change their meaning based on your perception. So how would you like me to prove that I give you the benefit of the doubt? I do suggest you do a Reddit search for your name though it is quite revealing.

2 – Is English your first language? When can I see all the logs you have mentioned? Have you ever posted on Reddit and under what name? What happened to DaWinci? When was the last time you corrected a stance you had with Eve Online? Was GigX AFK for the first Keepstar assault? Where is Co2 going to try and live? This will do for starters.

3 – I said “Shrewd” which means “having or showing sharp powers of judgement; astute.”. You then try to turn this into a completely different meaning by using the words “devious Machiavelli type” the definition being “using clever but often dishonest methods that deceive people so that you can win power or control”. Again here you are changing things in order to support your beliefs.

4 – You have been insulting me here, or at least trying to I guess. You are also insulting others. One could almost think that it is your sole purpose of being given the frequency in which you do it with anyone having a different view than your own. You have shown restraint though in the insults you are using which is quite telling.

5 – The “Back stabber’s brawl” was my name for your play war for Tribute. Again you are changing things. Your ability to read something and to then change it into something you want to believe is quite astounding. You also fail to say anything about less than 2 months to be the public face of your alliance. As for me not holding myself to the same standards as you, most certainly not. I have standards for starters and would not turn on allies in the disgusting manner that Co2 does or even be part of that process. You however crooned on about the Co2 backstab as if it was the best thing ever.

6 – I am glad you at last agree with me on something. Even more surprising that you have changed your mind on something. You do agree with this one right?

1. Then why even make the claim to begin with. Wasting time.

2. No it’s not my first language but I’m having an easier time with it than you it seems.

-Yes I post on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/user/Man_whosoldthe_world/

-Da Winci quit the game.

-Two days ago. I took arties off my Dramiel and use ACs instead.

-No gigx was not afk.

-None of your business where co2 is going to try to live.

3.This isn’t the first time you talk about SUAS. You’ve been trying to crucify him in your last articles as some problem. ~elite memettani psyops to divide the enemy~ i’m sure.

4. Okay.

5. Sorry I don’t know the North Korea name version of things everyone else calls something else. I didn’t know the “backstabber brawl” was the Tribute war. I thought you were talking about the battle before the Co2 defection. What should I say about being in leadership? Why do I have to justify it to you? And yeah Co2’s defection was probably one of the most important meta moves in this game. But again I am reminding you that not only did Co2 leave you but so did SMA, razor, fcon, and exe. So again…maybe it’s you guys. Try to take responsibility for your shitty policies and maybe people will actually stay and defend you. Or just keep blaming everyone else. I don’t really care.

6. No when I reply with “okay” or “k” it generally means you’re making an irrelevant point mostly based in your asshurt feelings and it’s worthless to discuss. Beyond laughing at you with everyone else you’re zilch of a blip on the radar for me. I argue for sport because I enjoy it but at this point I’m going to end up at the Hague.

1 – If you feel that way you are wasting your own time here. Already shown to have a limited understanding and are only to happy to emphasise that fact.

2 – Here is the arrogance that I have referred to, “I speak better than a native speaker”. You have shown that your grasp of English is limited and failed to look up any word you may not know as to do so would only show your weakness. Your answers, if you can call them that, again only serve to show your failings.

3 – I have been factually correct about Suas as he has stated himself on many occasions. Much of what I used came directly from Suas himself.

4 – Nice to see you have admitted the insults element. Progress of a sort I guess.

5 – Given that the section heading of the first part of this article is titled ‘The TL;DR of the “Backstabber’s Brawl”’ I think you have just proven many of my points with regard to your quite amazing ability to create your own understanding.

6 – So to treat this in a similar way to the way you treat things, can you prove that “everyone” is laughing at me? Did you just make a falsehood? You may want to note that a “falsehood” is comparable to a “lie”. More proof of you being the deceitful liar that you unashamedly are.

1. You’re right. I don’t understand stupidity masked by ad nauseam purple prose.

2. Well I’m sorry your English sucks. They offer tutors for that kind of thing. My answers were honest and I have nothing to feel bad about. Deal with it.

3. Yeah okay I strongly doubt that.

4. In case you doubt my commitment to insulting you, please do get fucked in every negative sense of the word. But please don’t pretend you haven’t been condescending and insulting the entire time as well.

5. Or your naming is just stupid and every time you use a “casino war” reference or something like it I get a rise out of just how asshurt you are.

6. When you can quote me saying that I claimed WWB leaders all credit me. You see how I played that one? I made you make a hypocritical demand. ezpz

All you are doing here is supporting what I am saying. You are a delusional, self-publicising, arrogant liar. This is now plain for all to see and I am glad that it will help others avoid the diplomatic efforts of Co2 as the utter sham that they are.

I ask you to quote where I said what you claim I said and you fail.

I answer your questions and you throw insults at me.

Then you whine about me saying mean things to you.

I’m sorry but your opinion means very little to me. A fact I’d venture to say applies to everyone you interact with.

Here is a quote for you from Grath Telkin:

“I thin you honestly need to go back and re read that in its entirety, I believe you’re missing a lot of the important bits there..”.

Now can you tell me who he was referring to in that statement?

Grath and I were discussing something almost three years ago in the comments section. Does this have a point?

The point is that you were determined that your own interpretation trumped that of the actual signatories. It is comparable to me saying “I am happy today” and you then saying that I am not. Totally baffling.

Any poor soul will also see that the insults were coming from you. I have stated that you are a liar, deceitful, self-publising and arrogant. All of this I think is proven quite well by your own words and actions.

You are very quick to accuse others of your own actions and somehow think that will stand the test of time. The more you write here the more evidence of the type of person you are is ever more apparent.

The single sentence you have taken issue with has been explained more than once, in great detail and not just by myself. So other English speakers can understand it but not you. Most confusing.

It is possible that even those who enter into agreements are not fully aware of how that my affect them. But unlike you I only shared my opinion…I didn’t lie and misquote someone.

I never quoted you. If I had quoted you it would be in quotation marks. So for you to say that I quoted you is in fact another lie. Well done you.

That’s my point. You never quoted me! You misquoted me by saying I claimed that all WWB leaders credit me when I’ve never said so. Finally we’re moving ahead. Congrats. I’m proud of you.

I never quoted you as I never asked you. The sentence that is causing you so much angst does not require a quote from you or even contain a quote from you. Please go back and re-read the comment from ER0X and keep in mind the advice given to you by Grath.

Your inability to admit you are wrong will prevent this from ever moving forwards. This is something I resigned myself to long ago but there is great value in seeing you demonstrate it with pathological fervour,

So where did you get it in your head that i claimed all leaders credit me? Why is it that me not admitting I’m wrong is pathological but you doing the exact same thing is ok?

You have failed, and continue to, understand the words that have been written. With this diminished understanding of yours you and your inability to admit that you are wrong you continue to expose yourself for what you are. I am in a position of being the writer of the sentence, a native English speaker and the comments from others support what I have written. You are however quite alone in your own belief.

Here’s a link for you to understand why your last statement is a joke:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

And here’s a link to help you understand why you’re a joke:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Thanks for seeing the light and acknowledging Casino War as the one true name. Having that done by the mastermind himself really means a lot!

This is an interesting discussion. However…

Sabre A from Mercenary Cartel – “stopped the only major alliance fighting and in my opinion it was what won us the war at that point.”

Lex Arson from Psychotic Tendencies – “I think the only end-game effect it had was to reduce the amount of time it took Mittens to realize how fucked he was”

Carneros from Bastion – “Unquestionably relevant. I personally feel like it had a substantial effect on the conflict.”

Endie from Pandemic Legion – “robbed the Imperium of their most aggressive and competent EU force”

Grath Telkin from Pandemic Legion – “I would say it was pretty much the tipping point in the war.”

Lenny (Banned for RMT) Kravitz2 – “It was high on our priority list to get them to flip”

Did you or did you not write these words? If you did then since they are in quotes we must assume they are direct statements by the person they are attributed to. However these quotes were not referenced anywhere else other than in your article. That means that at the time of printing they were unsubstantiated. What gives a degree of credibility to the quotes is that they were not refuted or denied. Therefore what is brought to light, among other things, from them is that they all attribute the defection of CO2 as pivotal implementing You as a major player in that defection along with another operator presumably that’s why you included them in the article in the first place.

Now if I had written this article on EN24 that contained quotes from x,y or z about something that You took a pivotal role in implementing. Then Moomins article would probably contain a statement along the lines of ER0X reported that x,y and z attributed the success of M event to YOU and that it was described as a crucial key event in the series of events needed to arrive at N conclusion. In addition since your role was pivotal to its success then it wouldn’t be unreasonable for Moomin to have written that I claimed implicitly via x,y,z’s quotes that you were pivotal in achieving the M event and its subsequent conclusion N either. This type of argument in its simplest form is often referred to as ‘inference’ and in particular the modus ponens condition of inference which is a perfectly valid argument.

However since You actually wrote the article on EN24 with the quotes from x,y,z, declaring the importance of event M in the grand scheme towards conclusion N which coincidentally implicitly praises your involvement no matter how indirectly. It matters little whether you’re named as the guy in any of the quotes or not because that was the position you were writing from. You were that guy. Now while you are the articles source, a source which attempts to refer to itself both by proxy and in the third person, the references to yourself within the subtext of the piece are somewhat disingenuous to the reader given that this subtext exposes your immediate involvement in event M and consequently conclusion N. It is then perfectly reasonable to suggest that you yourself claimed that x,y and z credited both event M and also YOU implicitly as being instrumental in reaching conclusion N.

Therefore it follows that since he has no other source for the quotes other than You all he has to go on are those unsubstantiated or proofed words written by You in Your EN24 article. Again Moomin tackles this glaring grandiose via a throw away tongue in cheek inference Q and its conditional modus ponens i.e. ‘You catalogued it in Your thinly veiled article that You wrote about You and Your involvement in Mittlers downfall’. Therefore YOU claimed it!

Is it that you don’t like this exposure as it paints a rather poor view of your character or is it simply a thin skinned throwing of the toys out the pram at Moomin for daring to be bold in highlighting self promotion?

The contra to the above is that if its not thin skin then what’s left is simply ignorance. If that is true then quite frankly for a journalist of any stature to be ignorant of such arguments is staggering, not only that, to suggest editorial staffers are also as unaware of ‘inference’ as you seem to be is bordering on unforgivable.

A very well thought out and communicated comment. I for one appreciate it greatly and could only hope to convey such eloquence myself. Have you considered becoming a diplomat?

You can go and ask each of those individuals yourself if what I quoted is true or not. I have the skype logs to back every single quote. However despite your rant I see no proof of showing me stating that “all leaders credit me.” I’m not taking issue with someone bringing up the fact that I’m saying I was involved. I’ll say that here. Yes I was involved and everything in the article is true. What I am taking issue with is you guys claiming that I said “all leaders credit me.” And of course I wrote about it. The only other person that could (Da Winci) stopped playing the game all together.

You really need to carefully read the comment from ER0X. Perhaps then you will have a better understanding.

Just a thought, DaWinci was a diplomat and then you became a diplomat. Did DaWinci leave the game so that they did not have to suffer your inane pseudo-logic?