Byron Orpheus
-
Posts
463 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Byron Orpheus
-
-
[quote name='im317' date='01 June 2010 - 11:04 PM' timestamp='1275429851' post='2319663']
don't you need to have a nation capable of running for senate first? [url="http://www.cybernations.net/allNations_display_teams.asp?Page=4&Order=DESC&Field=Strength&Team=Green"]147th is the top GGA nation[/url]
[/quote]
Then it should be even less of a problem, shouldn't it? I know that the spirit of your post was an extremely original jab at GGA, but if anything you have helped me to prove my point. -
Congratulations to the new Congress for our friends in GATO.
-
This is as good an announcement as any to discuss these things.
[quote]What are GGA's plans for green?[/quote] GGA's plans for green remain what they have always been; harmonious co-existence and communication. I believe the former IRC ban wars from both sides have ended, so there are even less obstacles.
[quote]What are GGA's plans in regard to UJA?[/quote] What exactly should our plans be? Everyone keeps talking as if UJA is some complicated treaty that takes constant attention, as opposed to a color-wide NAP with an IRC channel where no one talks, a forum no one uses, and spreadsheets no one updates. If anyone actually bothers to read the UJA text, please point to me how our own policies are in any way in conflict, despite not being a signatory. As per the first accord, we will not sanction anyone, we will settle things through diplomatic means (when we are allowed to), we certainly frown on spying, we believe in free trade.
If we run a nation for senator, as in the second accord, we are bound to follow the accord whether we are signatories or not, so that is even more of a moot point than the first.
We are not a neutral alliance, so the third accord does not even apply to us.
The fourth accord also does not really concern us, although admittedly because we are not signatories and therefore it is not our place to support a team-sponsored protectorate through UJA (though we may choose to support them through private means).
The fifth accord is just about acceptance and resignation.
The sixth accord, interestingly, is an accord that we seem to follow, despite not being signatories, but certain other, actual signatories seem to struggle with constantly-- "i. All signatories of this treaty fully recognize the need to forever remember and reflect on all past horrors that have occurred on the sphere, in a universal commitment to prevent any of these atrocities from reoccurring. Furthermore, the undersigned do agree to forever embody the loving spirit that created the United Green Legislation, the Sphere of Win Treaty, and these Accords in everything they do."
[quote]What are GGA's plans in regard to VE?[/quote] Peaceful coexistence. VE is another alliance on the planet, but apparently many forget that there are hundreds of alliances that are not VE. As great as the members of VE are, our world does not revolve around them, but I am sure that when our paths cross we will be just as courteous and respectful as the members of VE.
[quote]Should those logs be interpreted as your true feelings because they were behind closed doors, or were you just being a follower of JB?[/quote]
Those logs should be interpreted as neither. Something taken out of context in moments of anger from weeks ago no more accurately reflect the true feelings or policies of government members than a spam thread reflects good diplomacy. The easy route out of this, obviously, would to blame JB...but that would be the easy way out. If the world wants to continue making a spectacle because it thinks it smells blood in the water, that is up to it. I suggest picking up some other hobby, however, because frankly all this obsessive attention is starting to feel a little desperate. -
[quote name='Felix von Agnu' date='01 June 2010 - 04:39 AM' timestamp='1275363546' post='2318582']
Sitting in your own corner of green while you have your rather lame doctrine of Non-Aggression is hardly cooperation. It is actually quite the opposite.
[/quote]
How are we in a corner? We still trade with everyone else, we still are at peace. The isolationist rhetoric is coming from outside the GGA, not internally. We aren't isolationists just because you say it is so. -
[quote name='SonOfHoward' date='01 June 2010 - 04:23 AM' timestamp='1275362600' post='2318553']
Looks like nothing has changed in your attitude. You were just as well off with Brookbank in office.
[/quote]
I sincerely hope that the majority of the community recognizes the difference between being open-minded and being a door mat. You will not find any blind rage here, nor will you find vendetta. However, you will also find that our charter has not been amended to be run by global opinion, and that we will, as we always have, make decisions based on what we feel is best and necessary for the alliance, not what will be a meaningless PR band-aid that will leave no one in a better position. Just as GGA has the best interests of Green at heart without being a signatory of UJA, I am sure that VE and the other signatories radiate good faith for the green community under the flag of UJA whether an alliance is a signatory or not. That is, after all, the spirit, is it not? -
[quote name='Felix von Agnu' date='01 June 2010 - 01:15 AM' timestamp='1275351326' post='2318296']
symbolic value
[/quote]
[quote]the appearance of cooperation.
[/quote]
Well, that would be were we disagree. I am after actual value and actual cooperation, not symbols or appearances. As I said, we are quite fine with playing nice with the other green alliances-- if anything it seems uncooperative to me that their cooperation depends on our being a member of UJA...it seems to me that the real spirit of green unity would to be unified no matter what paper allegiances say. -
[quote name='Andre27' date='31 May 2010 - 06:25 PM' timestamp='1275326702' post='2317904']
Why on earth would you want to cooperate with other alliances to show your dedication to the green team when you can show it through a unilateral doctrine.
[/quote]
What exactly would joining change, including our level of cooperation? Trades and peace are the only things that UJA really accomplished in the first place, and we are managing just fine on our own with both.
That doesn't mean they are our enemies, it simply means there is no reason for us to rejoin. -
[quote name='Barnaby von Farter' date='31 May 2010 - 04:49 PM' timestamp='1275320961' post='2317816']
Sounds like a good plan, unless your back-up plan is to allow the ODN to annex your alliance.
[/quote]
The prodigal son returns, eh? -
[quote name='Barnaby von Farter' date='31 May 2010 - 04:46 PM' timestamp='1275320751' post='2317811']
Y'all are OLD.
[/quote]
And plan, although we are aware that it messes with the world's collective office pools, to become much older. -
[quote name='pezstar' date='30 May 2010 - 08:14 PM' timestamp='1275246823' post='2316897']
I would be like to believe that most people in GGA capable of independent thought and well formed ideas left long ago.
[/quote]
Who are you, again? -
[quote name='Baltus' date='31 May 2010 - 04:11 PM' timestamp='1275318670' post='2317761']
Good luck GGA. Hopefully, you will rejoin UJA.
[/quote]
Hopefully someone will give us a reason to. -
Our dear friends in MASH-- no one knows better than us that sometimes change is necessary in order to get your house in order. As Dementual said, we are always behind you.
-
Enjoy your retirement, magicninja. It is a shame we weren't able to work together more.
-
Congratulations to both parties.
-
Congratulations, Nordreich.
-
[quote name='Enrage' date='24 April 2010 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1272141186' post='2273311']
alliance
[/quote]
See, you keep using that word again, even though when it was first created it had one member, and the next day had two members. GGA can't be blamed for thinking that it was dealing with two members that had left less than amicably and then finding itself in the midst of some sort of international incident just because, apparently, wF is of the opinion that two people (who were already on green) would somehow improve the trading sphere. Again, though, I'm curious why exactly this is remaining such an issue, when we have made it abundantly clear that there isn't going to be some sort of crazy war just because wF chooses to spend its time with frivolities.
edit: grammar -
[quote name='Enrage' date='24 April 2010 - 09:04 PM' timestamp='1272139467' post='2273287']
Why is it that every time someone criticizes the gov or leaves the alliance they get threatened to ZI?
Your leader publicly stated war against RGN on #wF
Doesn't your alliance doctrine state:
[/quote]
I can't speak about the past, considering I was not a member of the government up until the Liberation. I believe our leader was upset about the manner in which they left, not the fact that they left-- as I said, this has been a long-standing policy, a policy much older than your alliance, and a policy that has existed through all incarnation of the GGA. It is strange that it is all the sudden an issue now that it has some how become the concern of wF.
Why this is still an argument is the most confusing thing to me, since GGA has repeatedly said that we are not going to pursue action against the two members that left (I feel silly saying that we "declared war," since two members does not an alliance make, unless you are Methrage). -
[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='24 April 2010 - 07:35 PM' timestamp='1272134121' post='2273195']
No, no it wasn't. We simply require a resignation post, like every other normal alliance, no approval needed.
[/quote]
Then I will be sure to get rid of our entirely ceremonial approval so that our conditions are identical. -
[quote name='Ardus' date='24 April 2010 - 04:59 PM' timestamp='1272124746' post='2273031']
It sounds as though you should consider reviewing your "blood oath" policy. The capacity of individual nations to vote with their feet is not only beneficial to individuals, but to groups.[/quote]
I don't believe we forcibly keep people any more than any other alliance. Was VE's charter not quoted earlier containing a similar clause? Perhaps it is an antiquated notion in today's world, but in GGA loyalty is still supposed to mean something. Insofar as the blood oath is concerned, that something is the common courtesy to send a letter of resignation to our leader (or, in the past, one of our leaders)-- five seconds worth of effort on the part of the individual leaving. I'm not sure what the employment conditions are like in other nations, but this is similar to the common practice on Orphesia of providing two weeks notice to an employer before leaving-- except that in the case of the GGA, you may provide two minutes notice.
[quote]
That you will not be "pursuing this matter further" is the wisest and, let's be honest, only course of action you have here.
[/quote]
While it is not the only option (there is never only one option), it is certainly the wisest, and, despite the popular opinion floating around about the GGA, we are not so unintelligent that we required the peanut gallery to inform us of our options. GGA wishes this new alliance (I forgot the name) all the success in the world, and I hope that they accept our blessing, considering that it will take lots of luck for a two nation alliance to make it, particularly once their "protectorate" status no longer functions in an antagonistic capacity and wF realizes it would be simpler to just accept them as members. -
[quote name='Haflinger' date='23 April 2010 - 01:57 PM' timestamp='1272027415' post='2271964']
You mean, apart from leave UJA. I did wonder about that.
[/quote]
I believe that occurred before this incident. By "believe," I mean that I know, because I am an actual member. -
While obviously the GGA isn't going to become involved in some international incident over a couple of members, I think people are ignoring the fact that GGA has, and has always had, a blood oath that requires permission to leave the alliance. This is mostly a formality, as I'm not sure anyone has ever been denied permission, but on the other hand the oath has always been in existence, and new members take it knowing full well what it says.
That being said, I don't believe GGA will be pursuing this matter further, whether or not we do have valid grievances. -
[quote name='The Big Bad' date='22 April 2010 - 05:54 AM' timestamp='1271912069' post='2270294']
The only active people are ones that are leaving.
[/quote]
Not true. -
Congratulations on the new alliance and its protectorate status. I know that it will help you to grow to be more than two members if someone is watching over you.
Good luck. -
[quote name='DerekJones' date='23 March 2010 - 05:50 AM' timestamp='1269319823' post='2233971']
Such is the world around us. Nobody wants their hands tied because of unforeseen circumstances, hence the flexibility aspect. But, back to your original post, Geoffron is very far from wrong.
[/quote]
And here I thought GGA's interpretation of the text was all that was important, considering it is the GGA's doctrine.
Official Announcement from the Sovereign
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
[quote name='Andre27' date='02 June 2010 - 12:10 AM' timestamp='1275433836' post='2319748']
Stating a fact =/= taking a jab.
Look at it as a challenge without taking offense at first sight.
[/quote]
I didn't take offense, and we can motivate ourselves just fine without outside influence. You could always start saying the same tired old "handle your internal stuff" line, and make it just as vague (it has to be vague, because no one spouting that advice seems to know what exactly is wrong internally).