Drai Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Hi, Drai! We're also up for the challenge! Makes things interesting. Also, how is it sharing an office with Doc Fresh? I heard he has BO? True? Definitely. Not the first time we've shared an office, but I think it's gotten worse... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Definitely. Not the first time we've shared an office, but I think it's gotten worse... huh. Makes the name rather ironic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 It's not a blue unity treaty with 2 colors on it, that's an inter-team treaty. A blue unity treaty requires blue signatories doing what is best for the blue team. At the point where it's an inter-team treaty, it would be required to compromise with the other color and thus do good for both, but not what is specifically best for blue.Right now, you're relying on the power of a red alliance to keep the blue alliances you won't allow in (I can think of a few) in check. There's no real other reason for them to be there but to be your muscle. Very well, feel free to explain me why a inter-team treaty cannot aim for the unity of one of the teams in that treaty. Second, since when doing what is good for blue team makes it authomatically bad for red team and vice-versa? Third and last, if you go up there read your first quote, we just cleared that all blue team alliances are free to apply since we have no restrictions - which pretty much kills your point of "blue alliances we won't let in". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Third and last, if you go up there read your first quote, we just cleared that all blue team alliances are free to apply since we have no restrictions - which pretty much kills your point of "blue alliances we won't let in". Applying, and being accepted are two different things, which is what I think he was getting at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Wow. Make more stuff up, won't you?All alliances are welcome to apply with Agora. There is an open door. Read the OP. Then why are they there? No one has adequately explained it with anything but diplomatic doublespeak, which is essentially what you're saying in your OP about openness. You never flat out say you have an open door policy, "restrictions on applicants" is not the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Applying, and being accepted are two different things, which is what I think he was getting at. GR's application has been accepted. Come on over! Play Triyun in Tetris! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 (edited) Applying, and being accepted are two different things, which is what I think he was getting at. Considering none of the other blue team alliances ever applied, I think what he is getting at can be named as prejudice EDIT: sorry, wrong word Edited February 13, 2009 by Lusitan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Considering neither of the other blue team alliances ever applied, I think what he is getting at can be named as prejudice Neither? There's more than 2 other blue team alliances. As for what he was getting at, I could only make a guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 (edited) Very well, feel free to explain me why a inter-team treaty cannot aim for the unity of one of the teams in that treaty.Second, since when doing what is good for blue team makes it authomatically bad for red team and vice-versa? Third and last, if you go up there read your first quote, we just cleared that all blue team alliances are free to apply since we have no restrictions - which pretty much kills your point of "blue alliances we won't let in". Alright, lets use an easy-to-understand example: Agora, as an economic bloc, organizes tech trades. It is in the best interest of the blue team to grow their small nations with money from tech trades. If tech trades are organized through an inter-team treaty, tech trades from blue nations can, will, and are being used to grow red team nations as well as blue team nations. The blue team would benefit MORE from tech trades within the blue sphere rather than allowing them to go cross-color. That example should explain the second objection as well, and my post above addresses your third point. The wider point I'm making is there is no economic reason to have a red team alliance in a "blue unity" bloc. It's an absurd notion unless there's an underlying issue that you won't admit to, and I'm calling you out on one. Edited February 13, 2009 by deth2munkies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Neither? There's more than 2 other blue team alliances. As for what he was getting at, I could only make a guess. You're right, my mistake, for some reason typed the wrong word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eeyore Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 latter points were terrible jokes.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Alright, lets use an easy-to-understand example:Agora, as an economic bloc, organizes tech trades. It is in the best interest of the blue team to grow their small nations with money from tech trades. If tech trades are organized through an inter-team treaty, tech trades from blue nations can, will, and are being used to grow red team nations as well as blue team nations. The blue team would benefit MORE from tech trades within the blue sphere rather than allowing them to go cross-color. That example should explain the second objection as well, and my post above addresses your third point. The wider point I'm making is there is no economic reason to have a red team alliance in a "blue unity" bloc. It's an absurd notion unless there's an underlying issue that you won't admit to, and I'm calling you out on one. Please pay attention. I already answered this. even in Tetris, NPO dominates our bloc We're slaves... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Alright, lets use an easy-to-understand example:Agora, as an economic bloc, organizes tech trades. It is in the best interest of the blue team to grow their small nations with money from tech trades. If tech trades are organized through an inter-team treaty, tech trades from blue nations can, will, and are being used to grow red team nations as well as blue team nations. The blue team would benefit MORE from tech trades within the blue sphere rather than allowing them to go cross-color. That example should explain the second objection as well, and my post above addresses your third point. The wider point I'm making is there is no economic reason to have a red team nation in a "blue unity" bloc. It's an absurd notion unless there's an underlying issue that you won't admit to, and I'm calling you out on one. Agora facilitates economic transactions between alliances. It provides an easy meeting point for negotiation of larger tech deal operations. Pacifica being there allows it to enjoy the advantage of acquiring tech contracts more easily, however, it's always up to the alliance who's selling the technology the choice on who and how much to sell. If Pacifica wasn't there would it stop Agora signatories from selling them tech? Not at all. Each alliance keeps its sovereign right to decide with whom it does business. Agora provides a friendly and easier enviromment. That's all. As for your last sentence, Blue unity being one of Agora's goals does not make it exclusively a Blue Unity bloc. Agora is a blue and red economic bloc where each signatory looks to obtain economic advantages. There are alliances with excess technology to sell. Pacifica is interested in buying. I believe this constitutes enough economic reason for Pacifica to be there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qaianna Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Alternately, it could be a block promoting unity on both Blue and Red. Granted, one of those is easier to attain than the other, but let's hope that someday all the inter-Red fighting can end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Alternately, it could be a block promoting unity on both Blue and Red. Granted, one of those is easier to attain than the other, but let's hope that someday all the inter-Red fighting can end. URGENT UPDATE!!! I just checked, and Agora has now succeeded in achieving Red Sphere unity!!! And the people rejoice - We now turn to the blue sphere. Agora - 1 Trading Spheres - 0 The Bee Gees - 1 Billion Trillion what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GearHead Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Awesome stuff here. Great job, UBD. o/ Barbeques B) o/ Blue Unity with a touch of red Good riddance MCXA Oh, and can't forget my own TFD Senator! o/ Firebolt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Agora facilitates economic transactions between alliances. It provides an easy meeting point for negotiation of larger tech deal operations. Pacifica being there allows it to enjoy the advantage of acquiring tech contracts more easily, however, it's always up to the alliance who's selling the technology the choice on who and how much to sell. If Pacifica wasn't there would it stop Agora signatories from selling them tech? Not at all. Each alliance keeps its sovereign right to decide with whom it does business. Agora provides a friendly and easier enviromment. That's all.As for your last sentence, Blue unity being one of Agora's goals does not make it exclusively a Blue Unity bloc. Agora is a blue and red economic bloc where each signatory looks to obtain economic advantages. There are alliances with excess technology to sell. Pacifica is interested in buying. I believe this constitutes enough economic reason for Pacifica to be there. Wait, you're saying you can't find tech BUYERS? Damn, send that crap my way, oh wait, that'd be counter-productive to your goal of blue unity, right? Look, there's no possible way you're getting too many sellers and not enough buyers. With the demographics of the game as a whole and especially the blue team, it's just not a feasible claim. If the point of this is to make a "friendly environment" for the blue team, it could easily be accomplished within the blue team. Blue unity isn't something you just "do" as a side note to a treaty. Blue unity is something that the team has to do for themselves, having to use a red team alliance as a crutch is counter-productive to team unity, as is having them in this economic bloc. The entire thing is a sad joke, there is no compelling reason you'd be willing to admit that the red team needs to be involved with this bloc. The fact that your comrades have to resort to sarcastic posts without any content whatsoever does nothing but reinforce this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 lol I still find it funny that a blue economic bloc has the NPO in it, w00t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 The fact that your comrades have to resort to sarcastic posts without any content whatsoever does nothing but reinforce this point. So, what are you saying? Would you like to come play Tetris? We've explained in multiple threads, NPO's involvement. You say "bah!" Then, whenI admit that we are slaves to the Pacifican Viceroys, you say "sarcasm!" I'm at a lost for what to tell you. So, I will explain it to you in simpler terms. NPO thinks we're cool. We think NPO is cool. Agora - "Hey, NPO, wanna join our cool bloc?" NPO- "Sure. Can I have Tech?" Agora - "No." NPO- "Can I play in your arcade?" Agora - "Sure, I guess. But don't hog it." NPO - "OK, I'll join." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Soooo...is NADC cool with its members joining non-Agora trade circles, in the interest of Blue Unity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Soooo...is NADC cool with its members joining non-Agora trade circles, in the interest of Blue Unity? My Trade Circle: WTF NpO Ech Ravyns =WE= I guess that is a "yes" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Whimsical Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 It is not complete without polaris. If blue were to attain unity, it would need ALL blue alliance such as what orange did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 My Trade Circle:WTF NpO Ech Ravyns =WE= I guess that is a "yes" Ah, sorry. I didn't mean to sound antagonistic, but one of our trade directors um...received an interesting message from an um...member of NADC government regarding a trade circle. I had interpreted it as NADC policy, and as it isn't, I'll take the business from the announcement. I'll send the response to you privately. Best of luck with your announcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinite Narwhal Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Having a red team signatory does not help blue unity at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 (edited) As an aqua nation in a blue team alliance, I humbly request negotiations commence for an Aqua/Blue economic bloc. Or even an Aqua/Blue/Red, if the NPO wants to play Pac-Man on our as yet unestablished forums. Edited February 13, 2009 by Sal Paradise 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.