Heft Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 That's a cool flag. Also you seem to have something against IRON in particular. Or I just didn't read the rest of it so it came off that way. That must have taken a lot of work, though. Man. You spent your time on this and not the histery of sybernetyuns? pah fun though, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is the part I put in bold in my first quote. April 18 and April 22 cannot both be 2 days removed from the same day. After isn't the same thing as before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is the part I put in bold in my first quote. April 18 and April 22 cannot both be 2 days removed from the same day. 18 + 2 = 20 22 - 2 = 20 If there is a different way to calculate dates I have not heard of it, but it changes basically everything so please educate me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchh Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 18 + 2 = 2022 - 2 = 20 If there is a different way to calculate dates I have not heard of it, but it changes basically everything so please educate me. feels dumb. Carry on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Noted, I know FARK wasn't in continuum, an error while formatting it for posting unfortunately. Apologies go out to FARK, and corrections have been made. Not good enough! as a former Farker i demand payment for my suffering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingClassRuler Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Lol get your facts straight Diorno. I don't mind calling a spade a spade but make sure you know what you're talking about. Continuum was notified of our departure 5 days before the Karma War started as per the 72 hour notification period. They were also aware of our dissatisfaction and desires to leave prior to our notice and prior to the 5-7 days of discussion and voting required via internal laws to cancel the treaty. The posting of the "evidence" by TPF occurred after our departure notice. You should also check the definition of Defense and specifically Defense Treaty. NPO,TORN and NATO all declared Aggressive wars. We had no obligation to defend them at all, and nor would we given the CB, poor attempts at negotiations, continual dismissal of our calls for peace, previously stated lack of support, state of relations, and positions taken by the majority of our treaty partners - especially our Harmlin brothers. Facts ftw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 DIdn't Sparta drop tC on the 15th of April? That would be 5 days before. Please update to include this. I think it will vault your allies up the list. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Lol get your facts straight Diorno. I don't mind calling a spade a spade but make sure you know what you're talking about. Continuum was notified of our departure 5 days before the Karma War started as per the 72 hour notification period. They were also aware of our dissatisfaction and desires to leave prior to our notice and prior to the 5-7 days of discussion and voting required via internal laws to cancel the treaty. The posting of the "evidence" by TPF occurred after our departure notice. You should also check the definition of Defense and specifically Defense Treaty. NPO,TORN and NATO all declared Aggressive wars. We had no obligation to defend them at all, and nor would we given the CB, poor attempts at negotiations, continual dismissal of our calls for peace, previously stated lack of support, state of relations, and positions taken by the majority of our treaty partners - especially our Harmlin brothers. Facts ftw http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54712 On april 21st MHA announced that "72 hours ago continuum was informed.." 72 hours is 3 days, that makes it april 18th that you informed the continuum of your departure, April 21st that you had officially been released from the continuum, NPO declared war on OV on April the 20th. Also, a defense treaty is a defense treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 DIdn't Sparta drop tC on the 15th of April?That would be 5 days before. Please update to include this. I think it will vault your allies up the list. Thanks. Sparta informed Continuum they were withdrawing 7 days before the war started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 is that why you picked 5? instead of a more normal 7? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogeWilliam Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) Good basic summary of TOP foreign policy. So we have allies on both sides of a conflict that was really muddied and, remember people, we were trying to prevent happening because we wanted peace on Planet Bob and yes we had allies both sides. How mind you could we have fought on both sides? I'm just wondering. Edited October 13, 2009 by DogeWilliam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54712On april 21st MHA announced that "72 hours ago continuum was informed.." 72 hours is 3 days, that makes it april 18th that you informed the continuum of your departure, April 21st that you had officially been released from the continuum, NPO declared war on OV on April the 20th. Also, a defense treaty is a defense treaty. I think what he's saying is that it's not a defensive treaty activation if NPO is attacked as a result of their own aggressive actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 is that why you picked 5? instead of a more normal 7? Who is to say which is more normal? If i wanted to spare my allies from looking bad in this thread, I wouldn't of made it in the first place. Crushtania who is a triumvir of MHA and a very close friend to me is ranked 2nd, Sparta is right up there, ODN who I respect a lot is also up there. 5 digits on my hand so I chose 5, simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willirica Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 18 + 2 = 2022 - 2 = 20 If there is a different way to calculate dates I have not heard of it, but it changes basically everything so please educate me. TOP has used their superior levels of technology to develop calculators which disprove these primitive maths; however i'm afraid your tiny little brain wouldn't be able to comprehend them. duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty McFly Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Polaris' treaty with the NPO and Valhalla did not activate due to the non-chaining clauses in both treaties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 So we have allies on both sides of a conflict that was really muddied and, remember people, we were trying to prevent happening because we wanted peace on Planet Bob and yes we had allies both sides. How mind you could we have fought on both sides? I'm just wondering. Funny how that's worked out every war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) Funny how that's worked out every war. War of the Coalition? Great War 2/3? edit: Also, itt TOP collects more stats. Edited October 13, 2009 by President Obama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchh Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 TOP has used their superior levels of technology to develop calculators which disprove these primitive maths; however i'm afraid your tiny little brain wouldn't be able to comprehend them. duh. But of course. It must also be your lacking technology that has prevented the invention of eye glasses and vision of my post acknowledging my lack of comprehension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingClassRuler Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54712On april 21st MHA announced that "72 hours ago continuum was informed.." 72 hours is 3 days, that makes it april 18th that you informed the continuum of your departure, April 21st that you had officially been released from the continuum, NPO declared war on OV on April the 20th. Also, a defense treaty is a defense treaty. ...which proves that we were already out the door prior to both NPO's war declaration and the start of the Karma War. We did not drop Continuum because of NPO's war or because of the Karma War. Neither had occured before we started the official cancellation discussion, vote, then notification and thus cannot be used against us in your funny little race. And rsoxbronco is correct. If NPO had been attacked then it would've been a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Knowing Jack Diorno I'm not taking this that seriously. Otherwise, I think Working_Class_Ruler has it covered pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogeWilliam Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) Funny how that's worked out every war. Funny how you don't answer my question. How does 1 alliance fight on both sides of a conflict? This is not a stat thread. It's a joke. Completely throwing out the reality of the Karma War/Treaty Cancellations. Edited October 13, 2009 by DogeWilliam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coursca Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 What's your point? A lot of people were placed in some tough positions that war. TOP made a decision and rolled with the majority of their Citadel partners as several leaders in Karma very much wanted, if I recall correctly. I suppose if you sling enough mud some of it will stick no matter how nonsensical it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 So we have allies on both sides of a conflict that was really muddied and, remember people, we were trying to prevent happening because we wanted peace on Planet Bob and yes we had allies both sides. How mind you could we have fought on both sides? I'm just wondering. Let me think about this. This is quite difficult. Oh wait, how about choosing your treaties and not signing them with everyone and then canceling when it gets time to honor them? http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=55190 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 They obviously, wanted us to ignore all of our treaties and declare on both sides with MHA. Yet, this still doesn't make them happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) The Order of the ParadoxCancelled within 5 days of partner being attacked MDoAP with TPF, IRON, OG, NPO, MCXA, NATO, Valhalla - Continuum http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54723 Notified of cancellation on Apr 18 2009 – 2 days before Karma war starts with NPO’s DoW MDoAP with Valhalla - The Crown of the North Compact http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54926 Notified of cancellation on Apr 22 2009 – 2 days after Karma war starts with NPO’s DoW Treaty partner attacked, no assistance provided MDoAP Old Guard – Citadel No forum link Available MDP with Old Guard – MDP (another separate treaty) No forum link Available MDoAP - MCXA http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=55476 Notified of cancellation on Apr 26 2009 – 6 days after Karma war starts with NPO’s DoW Total treaty violated/cancelled: 5 Total Alliances violated/cancelled: 7 As I was leader of TOP throughout the Karma War, I'm happy to address this; our common policy is to avoid engaging in discussion with those we feel are simply slandering us rather than attempting to encourage any legitimate discussion, but I'll provide information on the pertinent points of discussion for those who care to see fact-based claims rather than the blase conjecture provided by the OP. Regarding Q: Discussions regarding our departure from Q had been underway for weeks before the Karma War. Departure from Q required 72 hours notice; our notice was posted before the issue between OV and TPF/NPO erupted, and it was related to our desire to pursue a different direction and not at all to any threat of war that we were seeking to avoid. Given that there was no threat at the time we served our notice of intent to withdraw, I find it hard to believe that any connection can be drawn. Feel free to contact our former allies in Q to confirm this. Beyond this, I suggest you check your math, as 72 hours previous to April 20th equals April 17th, not April 18th. Regarding Old Guard: OG was in the war as a result of an MADP with the NPO and treaty obligations via the Continuum, as I recall. As such, activation of our MDP with that alliance was inapplicable; they were in the war as a result of other treaty obligations, and our treaty with Old Guard did not chain. This is the pertinent section of the treaty: 3. Neither signatory is required to provide assistance should either signatory initiate hostilities, either unilaterally or as a result of honoring of outside agreements, with a foreign body. Attacks against said signatory resulting from these hostilities are likewise not subject to the requirements of Article 2.1. Further, Old Guard did even not at any point attempt to activate said MDP, thus making your point utterly wrong. Regarding Valhalla: As with the Mobius Accords (Q), discussions within TOP on cancellation of this treaty had begun well before the Karma War erupted, as our relations with Valhalla were sparse and there was a general feeling that we shared nothing in common with them so far as goals and priorities were concerned. Valhalla agreed to waive the seven-day cancellation clause on the treaty. Further, this MDP could only have been activated on the basis of chaining, and---you'll notice that this is a common theme in our treaties---a no-chaining clause was present in the treaty text. It is as follows: 4. Defense obligations shall not be triggered should the one signatory become defensively engaged via any of the following: as a result of other offensive military action, as a result of spying, or as a result of clear severe provocation of another alliance. These shall all be deemed as action having resulted from offensive action by that signatory, and thus Article 2.1 will not apply; entry into the conflict will be optional, as per article 2.6. Given that any obligation to enter the conflict on Valhalla's behalf could virtually only have been a result of chaining, I'd call rather silly any implication that we canceled this MDP in order to avoid having to avoid war based on treaty obligations. Regarding MCXA: I'll here mostly be repeating my paragraphs concerning our MDP with Valhalla, as the situations were virtually identical: as with the Mobius Accords (Q), discussions within TOP on cancellation of this treaty had begun well before the Karma War erupted, as our relations with MCXA were sparse and there was a general feeling that we shared nothing in common with them so far as goals and priorities were concerned; it is worth mention that this was in part due to the exodus of members from MCXA to what would become TSO, as amongst this group was virtually everyone with whom we had ever worked in diplomacy with MCXA. Further, this MDP could only have been activated on the basis of chaining, and---you'll notice that this is a common theme in our treaties---a no-chaining clause was present in the treaty text. It is as follows: A declaration on War:We, the undersigned, do reserve our right to partake in all military actions, including offensive military actions, that the other is party to. The signatories may, at their sole discretion, provide whatever aid they deem necessary, up to and including joining a military action. It is asserted that while a party may call the other to arms for a offensive military operation that assistance is not mandatory. Conflict arising from the activation of other treaties shall not be just cause for mandatory defence. As with Valhalla, given that any obligation to enter the conflict on MCXA behalf could virtually only have been a result of chaining, I'd call rather silly any implication that we canceled this MDP in order to avoid having to avoid war based on treaty obligations. To summarize: I believe the evidence presented above proves that there was no violation of any of the treaties listed above, and that nor did we cancel any of them in order to avoid war. The sad reality is that you---likely knowingly---created this thread with absolutely nothing on which to base your claims besides superficial information, and with an apparent utter lack of effort to gather any information on the topic. I can only assume that this was a deliberate, utterly conjecture-based attempt to sully our name. If you're really interested in putting forth valid points, rather than simple assumptive insults, best try to do your research before your next attempt. o7 TOP Edited October 13, 2009 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.