jerdge
-
Posts
5,860 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by jerdge
-
-
(wall of text)
Thank you for your answer.
-
I'm sorry, probably my question went unnoticed. Anyway, since I have a second and a third one, I'll repeat the first one also, trying to better explain myself.
-
Is this a "joke Announcement"?
According to what the NPO government said this far (until today), I believed that the NPO was in all honesty willing to get peace with FAN, when they signed the Surrender Terms.
This Announcement, on the other hand, seems to imply that there was a secret plot to (A) sabotage FAN and made impossible for them to keep to the Terms, and (B) to convert FAN in a "baby reservoir".
Maybe, was the NPO sure (or had proof) that FAN wouldn't anyway have been able to keep to the terms / was secretly planning to break them, and thus (the NPO) decided to (at least) take advantage of the situation?
Or, I probably didn't understand something.
(I'd thank anybody that will be able to explain it to me, since I can't work this out on my own). -
Is the retrovirus in control?
I will assume that this Announcement isn't a "joke", and that the news about this frightening weapon are correct.
According to this Announcement, the retrovirus is "highly contagious, highly potent (in fact nearly 100% effective)". What are the measures the NPO took to prevent it to spread around the planet, both in and ouside the NPO Nations? How can we be sure that said measures are effective? -
What about the prevention of a pandemic?
What are the prevention technologies, health protocols and directives (etc.) that the NPO can provide to the international community (to us Nation Rulers and Alliance Leaders), for our better protection against the effects of this biological weapon?
I'm sure that every responsible leader shares our concerns about the second and third point. As a National leader I have the duty to stay cool, but I admit that some advisors of mine already dropped to the hysteria of seeing in many OWF posts the "proof" of the spreading of this retrovirus.
Let's hope that this weapon doesn't backfire on all of us.
(Thank you very much for your attention).
-
Is this a "joke Announcement"?
-
Nice read, thanks.
Is this a 100% "joke Announcement"?
-
I may agree that some of the members of the Alliances that form the Continuum are arrogant. However, it has yet to be proven that they have more arrogants than the other Alliances.
I think that two (very different) phenomena make up that (partially apparent) "arrogance" that is seen (on these forums):
- "Unexperienced" members of powerful Alliances, that brag about what they were not important in building. These are just "kids" (as can be found in almost any Alliance), and there's no need to worry too much about them (they quite often look silly without the need of external "help").
They're not typical of the dominant powers in themselves, but will be always found in the dominant powers, whatever they are. - "Professional trolls" that continue the wars through "diplomatic" means (one of the best examples is Josef Thorne).
These are doing exactly what they're supposed to do (often, with outstanding skill), and I don't see why they should stop it, as it's part of the political, diplomatic and propaganda "game".
I admit that I still have little experience of the political aspects of this planet. However, my experience tells me that these "dominant powers" are all but rude or arrogant, when they're not dealing with some propaganda war.
IRON, to say one, is full of exquisite people, and (even) in the so-called "evil NPO", there are people like Philosopher, that I'm forced to call a superior gentleman (in lack of better words).
- "Unexperienced" members of powerful Alliances, that brag about what they were not important in building. These are just "kids" (as can be found in almost any Alliance), and there's no need to worry too much about them (they quite often look silly without the need of external "help").
-
The "Some Drama, finally, no matter how dull" war.
OOC: lol, nice one Sharpe.
IC: I'm pretty sure that BAPS are relevant. Weren't them involved in the initial Casus Belli of the Unjust War?
-
I wish more nations and alliances supported unaligned rights.
I support this statement.
I actually wish that more Nations and Alliances supported every Nation's right of not being attacked by Nations that just want to steal their resources. It's a shame that civilian and soldiers have to die just for a handful of resources, that pale in comparison with what any Nation in a half-decent Alliance can/should get.
(And, I include the unaligned Nations in the concept of "every Nation"...)
-
Let me express my personal satisfaction for having - for once - seen a "three weeks/temp-ZI" sentence, rather than the often abused "Perma-ZI" one.
I and AHEAD hope that this is just the first example of lenient and human terms against an enemy: this world seriously needs this kind of Evolution.
-
My thought is that FAN launched the "Operation Camerone" (see some of the DoWs).
Battle of Camarón (Bataille de Camerone):
The Battle of Camarón occurred on 30 April 1863, between the French Foreign Legion and the Mexican army. In this battle the French Foreign Legion made its legend. A small infantry patrol led by Capitaine Danjou, Sous-Lieutenant Maudet and Sous-Lieutenant Vilain, numbering 62 soldiers and 3 officers was attacked and besieged by more than a thousand Mexican infantry and cavalry units organized into 3 battalions, and was forced to make a defensive stand at the nearby Hacienda Camarón, in Camarón de Tejeda, Veracruz, Mexico.[...]
While his legionnaires prepared to defend the inn, the Mexican commander, Colonel Milan, demanded that Danjou and soldiers surrender, noting the Mexican Army's numeric superiority. Danjou replied: "We have munitions. We will not surrender." He then swore to fight to the death, and had his men seconded the oath.
[...]
When the last two survivors were asked to surrender, they insisted that Mexican soldiers allow them safe passage home, to keep their flag, and to escort the body of Captain Danjou. To that, the Mexican commander commented, "What can I do with such men? No, these are not men, they are devils," and, out of respect, agreed to these terms.
Link.
I think that FAN is giving the "We have munitions. We will not surrender" message.
-
Another variation of the same design (I didn't put the border):
(nvm HoT
) -
IRON CONGRATULATIONS!
TAB -
Duplicitous Orders Unite to Create Hegemony Exploiting Broken Agreements & Glorifying Selves
This is really funny.
Some time ago I was working on acronyms... These are the "joke" ones I came up with:
-
FREE
Free Renaissance of Exceptional Elegance
Free Republic of Euphoric Ethylists -
FRISBEE
Fantastic Renaissance, Insanely Sexy, Beyond the Edge of Evolution -
NEUTRAL
Not Entirely Unadvisable, Terrific Acronym of Lol! -
UNITE
Union of Nations Integrated with Thrilling Elegance -
UNITY
Universal Neo-Idealist Team of Youth / Yippee / Youngsters / Youngish / Yuppies
Universal Network Immensely Talented in Yowling
Unique Nerds in Implausible Tights, and Yantsy
My favourite however is not a word:
NAA - Not An Acronym
-
FREE
-
it was our little joke, we didn't know what to call the treaty, so i suggested "we hate peace" or something, and it got translated into italian.
And what you got - though literally meaningless - can mean something similar to "they hate our peace"...
-
When you decide to take this out in this way, without even attempting to contact us in a private channel, just to start something that can only be considered as a smear campaign, it reeks of someone that only wish to hurt the GPA in times of trouble.
Should I have wanted to hurt the GPA in times of trouble, I would have done it back in OOCtober, or in November. Obviously, this isn't the case. I publicly talked only now because only now I knew that you GPA threatened us for something you didn't really care of.
If you however had done the polite thing to start with, we might have been inclined to work something out here.We admired and we still admire the GPA, but your decision to "protect" your sovereignty over "anything else along the oder of 'xxxxxxx Protection Agency'" was clearly in conflict with our own sovereignty. The fact that The Neutral Alliance was the one having that "imposing" attitude over us just made harder to understand and to swallow it (the so-called "ebil NPO", to say one, was much nicer and friendly with us when we were doing something they didn't like; while some of my Alliance's members found the GPA more similar to a certain "raid-for-teh-lulz" Alliance, we also had troubles with. Go figure.)
However, let me clearly state that the at-the-time GPA's decisions over our sovereignty were a big burden for us, but we accepted them as a necessary consequence of your might and prestige, and of our weakness. What I cannot accept, and the reason I posted here for, is below.
When you choose to take it down this path, three months later, without even bothering to notify us about your concern, then you have a losing case.I cannot silently accept that the GPA knowingly publicly encourages a "xxxxxxx Protection Agency", three months later they interfered with our sovereignty for an equivalent name.
Your encouragment and simpathy for the BPA (simpathy that - by the way - I share) are public, so my protest is public. Would have it been only for me, I wouldn't have bothered to speak. But my Alliance's Membership don't deserve less than a public protest to your stance, that publicy denounce that you threatened us for something you don't really care of.
The fact that your threats were private are of little importance for our membership, that is what I'm defending here and that knows about that affair. The publicity I wanted is that in front of the AHEAD (the general public doesn't care of this issue; in fact, almost only me and you two GPA bothered to consider it.)
Anyway, bottom line, I fully take the responsibility for my decision to "take it down this path".
If you want to speak to us in private, please do so. The door will always be open.You're right that my previous statement was rude. Unfortunately, I had only a few minutes to write it down and I didn't want to come back on that issue after several pages of congratulations to the BPA (and also, our issue quite obviously didn't require a thread of its own). Please consider my rudeness as a side effect of an attempt to give to this affair a bit of understatement.
Anyway, when I'm rude I surely need to apologize, so here I am: I apologize for the inappropriate language I used.
As to TUPA issue - The Universal Protection Agency made it sound like it is an umbrella organization that we are underWe were 8-10 Nations, around 40k overall NS. The idea that you could have been "under our umbrella" can only be called ridiculous, in lack of a better word. I'm fairly sure that that wasn't the concern.
(Note: "ridiculous" is the idea, not you.)
whereas we are we would clearly not be under a Blue Protection Agency since we are all, well, Green!I believe that "Blue Protection Agency" classifies under the category "xxxxxxx Protection Agency" that AS6 "invited" us to avoid, to avoid "consequences".
He was therefore also right that we would probably have to publicly disassociate, and that would not necessarily be the best thing for a new alliance (though there was a ugly time there for us when it would probably have been to your benefit (
).You weren't in troubles yet.
I remember that whole transaction, and the discussions on your flag with our general membership, and I hope you can agree that while the wording of AS6 was left to be desired, our intentions as an alliance as a whole were fairly innocuous.These are two separate things, and both are different from the issue that made me post. Your intentions as an Alliance were to have us change our name, by saying that you would have done your best to discredit us, and that you would have probably attracted Raiders on us. The flag thread was a completely nice issue that - luckily - had nothing to do with this.
However, the whole point is that you actually didn't have that big issue with the "xxxxxxx Protection Agency", as we learnt today.
I am honestly surprised, and disheartened that you chose to make such a big deal of this when there have been so many positive interactions with our alliances after this statement? You noted that it was better for you in the long run.... are you really that upset with us? Really? If so.... why?I tried to do it a public deal but not "such a big deal". Probably I failed in keeping this in control. My bad.
No, I'm not "that upset with you": should I have wanted to help discrediting you, I would have talked of this earlier.
My objective was to publicy state my protest, and to explain it so that there wasn't any misunderstanding with regard to the BPA. No more than that.
I share the thought that the remaining of this (if any) should be held privately. For this reason I won't post here about it any further (we hitchhiked this thread enough...)
-
We are going to have a (insert color) Protection Agency on every sphere at this rate, GPA, OPA and now BPA.
No. Orange Protection Alliance.
__________________________________________________
[...] we still wish them luck..Now I know how it feels when our name is so popular
I protest this above.
My Alliance, at the time about 10 Nations wide, was named "The Universal Protection Agency", and that had been decided with the knowledge of the GPA's MoFA (Mason11987); later, I received this message from the next GPA's MoFA:
[...] Though we are flattered by your wishing to emulate our alliance, we must insist on you not using anything resembling our name including the one you are currently using or anything else along the oder of 'xxxxxxx Protection Agency'. If you do we may feel forced to formally disclaim you in the Cyber Nations Forums. Such notariety may be disadvantageous for a very small alliance still in its formative stages. [...]When I said that Mason had been aware of our name, and that we didn't think that "TUPA" could be confused with "GPA", I received this:
We are quite disappointed and most "unsatisfied" that you have chosen to take this approach. I have been authorized by the elected leadership of the GPA, which includes both the president and the minister of defense, to inform you that your alliance's choice of names is most unsatisfactory. It infringes upon our own, long establish name and it will be confusing to others both in and out of the neutrality shere of influence. We must insist that you cease and desist in using any name that brings to mind or has any similarity to the Green Protection Agency. We do not wish to harm your cause. Equally important we do not wish you to take steps which we feel will harm the cause of the GPA. We strongly feel that having a name which is easily confused or associated with the GPA's name harms our cause. Again I would think you would not wish to have your small alliance spotlighted in the glare of negative publicity, as we explain our disappoval. I strongly urge you to consider using a name which is totally unique and distict from that of the GPA. I hope I have made my point sufficiently clear.Let me say that I have nothing to say against AS6, that I believe is an excellent person and that also later helped me with our new flag. Actually, I believe that changing name did us only good.
But, you GPA people really need to decide yourselves about what you mean and think your sovereignty is.
At this point, after the GPA's President comment on the newly created BPA (to which I send all my best wishes), I think that the bare minimum is an (even private) apology, for having interfered with our sovereignty, back in October.
-
I hadn't much time, but I tried to throw in an idea. It can be elaborated upon request:
It's pretty self-explanatory. Of course, the five central stripes represent the five original Alliances that merged. The overall design recalls a bit (but only a bit) the Shadowhood flag.
Actually, I would have liked it even more simple, and without the stars. Something that would be much easily recognized. Something like this:
(After all, I think that is the Alliance that makes the flag awesome, not the other way round... but maybe you guys don't like it that much).
Also, I took the blue from your forums. But a darker blue may look better.
Finally, I don't like Zeds... (At least, not in flags!)
-
I voted "I don't really care." Then I realized that the answer was supposed to be about the NPO, not the poll.
Doh!
[/kidding]
-
I don't think there's any Italian-based Alliance, let alone an Itailian one [/joke].
About IC aspects, I have to say that the RL US Mafia was (is) probably much more famous than the "original" Italian one; or at least, (worldwide) most heard of Al Capone, "Lucky" Luciano or John Gotti, and much less of Vizzini, Riina or Provenzano. I'm not sure that The (CN) Mafia can be classified as "Italian", even IC.
The Ndrangheta CN Alliance, on the other hand, have a name that clearly resembles that of the Calabrian Mafia, the 'Ndrangheta...
However, if having an Italian government makes your Alliance "Italian", AHEAD è un'Alleanza Italiana, o almeno così credo... Sto scherzando![1]
[1] "AHEAD is an Italian Alliance, or at least I believe so... I'm kidding!"
-
AS6's first proposal was by far the best flag into this thread (no offence to anybody else). Only, I think the center-right star should not be "inclined" like that, but "straight", like the five on the left.
I can see why AS6 made it like that, but it could suggest the idea that the "merged" Alliance was born "unstable", unlike the five original ones.
I'd completely drop the black-blue design: it's too much dark and have an unsufficient contrast: wouldn't be clearly distinguished at a distance, on a real flag.
Also, the ones really thinking that the NPO and/or NpO flags resemble to anything AS6 posted - even by far - really need to check their vision with a specialist... I find silly that AS6 had to lose his time to give explanations that were completely unneeded.
-
I am now requesting this thread to be locked
[OOC]
The best way to have your Thread locked is to make a post in this forum:
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showforum=21
There are many examples already, so you will soon figure out what to put in your request.
Also, you can use IRC with Firefox+Chatzilla (the combo I use); basically, if you have browser access to the Internet, and Administrative rights on your machine, you can use it. Please send me a PM if you need help (not that I'm an expert, but I can at least tell how to start it up).
[/OOC]
-
[OOC]
The correct name is: 'Ndrangheta
(not "merely" Ndrangheta...)
[/OOC]
-
[OOC]
Interesting idea. Only, I'm unsure whether recruiters can be encouraged with cash.
I'd be interested in knowing about the results of your experiment. May I ask to you to keep informed the AHEAD Diplomat at VE?
[/OOC]
-
Congratulations to 'Ndrangheta and to IRON for this Pact.
We're much happy to see a new "brother" under the mighty protection of IRON!
! ORANGE ! -
We're much glad that we don't appear on that list!
AHEAD (Actually, it can't be a surprise!)
Trying to catch a bit of your attention, noble Mistress, we dare add that we're also hoping that you're working on an answer to our last question (that via in-game PM, on December, 22nd. Should we add the question in the AHEAD Embassy, by the way?)
Fixed.
:awesome: DarkMistress :awesome:
-
Happy Holidays to the Mods, the Admin(s), and the players.
None would be here without the others.
)
).
IRON Change of Command
in Alliance Politics
Posted
We AHEAD are honoured to have established our links with IRON during your term, bay102174.
It's sad that you have to diminish your activity, anyway I'm confident that Meterman will be able to continue the excellent work that IRON did this far.