thanks, you too buddy

shall we also send you our jumpplans, cores and fleet numbers while at it?

ban m - reason : spamming.

adds 3201 to target list hey nw

i htink, tobes, that you need some more info before you start posting fake threads. Mods, please close and remove.

Pitbull ->

'This cancellation is the result of bad leadership of former leaders of my fam ( 16) and 26.
3018 are former allies and left because they refused to be bullied by Mangoza.
Had i been leader at the time i would have given them a P-nap and none of this would be happening now.'

Well, i wasnt going to comment on all this, but i think a lil background doesnt hurt in this case. First indeed, we left the alliance with 26/16 coz of BlackIce and Mangoza bullying us around and thinking themselves way too good for us, since we know what we're worth, we refused to accept such treatment and left. Despite the treatment we got, i tried to talk things through on irc with 26/16 and asked for P-naps, which THEY refused, obviously planning on taking us on later. So a 48h nap was set up with core clauses. A lil while after that, we started recovering from a strat gone wrong early and actually overtaking the ex-allies, and suddenly we werent a future farm anymore, but a threat, so Mangoza goes IA'ing and planning to give 23 a heap of shares on us so they can rape us. Which also failed, exit Mangoza. Then lately, we suffer a couple attacks from 26 which we ask comp for and gotten part of those, and find out their main attacker is in the middle of our core, systems included in the core clause, so we ask him to give up the planet(s), which he refuses. Since at least one  system only held one small attacker we HAD to figrun him to remove him - this wouldve been napbreak anyways, so we decided to void the NAP based on all the previous shit that happened. On a sidenote, we cancelled on 16 too and gave them 48h as was in nap. Draw your own conclusions.

im still in hugmode so go hug yourself cougar

on a sidenote - since i dont play dota i had no clue what imba meant. So either he was giving away ingame info OR accusing of illegal alliance, hence i posted both. I hereby humbly withdraw the possibility of glue falsely accusing anyone. My excuses, daniel

2. No harassment
Harassment is not necessarily limited to the type of language used, but the intent. This includes both clear and implied language that refers to violence in any capacity that is not directly related to the game. This further includes the distribution, release or discussion of any real-life, personal, or private information both real life and game related about other players or moderators of Imperial Conflict. For example, posting phone numbers, home addresses, planet lists, battle reports, family forum content etc. is not allowed. Repeatedly targeting a specific player or persons with harassment will lead to further action.

<- this also includes the private ingame info relating to alliances

13. Do not make public accusations of rule breaking and do not discuss certain blocks in the forum
To improve the mood in the forums, public discussions of the above are not allowed. Issues and questions regarding rule breaking and blocks should be addressed to the moderators (ways to contact mods are listed in the FAQ).

<- yeah

ah, lets not be haters eh? *giggles*

well you posted the explanation yourself. 26 is another matter, but due to new rule WE couldnt hit you. This means you attacked us first - actually you even attacked one of our bankers. You were offering up your planets, we're just happy to oblige. Its not like you can attack our bankers and then expect us to just let you sit there with a heap of shares. So we had to make the effort, could as well get a few planets while at it. And btw, its just one attacker thats on your case.

can we please get back on topic? im really not interested in who of you has the biggest one ...