Jump to content

KanaX

Banned
  • Posts

    229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by KanaX

  1. Of all the gov I've ever served under or been a part of, I'd say the only one that was not overrated was Elysium-TPF-gov-thingy, which in some form survives to this day (and is very much underrated, IMO).

    Every government of FCO during my time there (though, this probably doesn't concern anyone from outside FCO) had some major flaw (my own included), I couldn't get a hang of ODN's gov (though, this doesn't say much, might be just me) and most of the Legion's members of gov during my time there (from early 2007 to Legion disbandment crisis) were either bickering amongst themselves, incompetent or handicapped by the incompetence of others.

  2. Thank you all for your support and love (especially Agnu, I still have one slot open in case you're interested). I'd also like to thank NoR for graciously supplying me with additional nuke targets (declaring on me is rather counterproductive, wouldn't you say?). You guys are the best!

    but to mix their current government into this is asinine.

    And funnily enough, the current upper gov is practically the same as the one during Q-NoV-war.

  3. So you have 2 rogues do planing and another member Decker supporting it by supplying a secret uranium trade as a current member of FCO. I'd say there was more support to this internally in FCO than just those 2 rogues taking their current course.

    You might notice that I also have full trade circle. :o

  4. Yeah that's a good question. I'm finding it really odd that 2 "former" gov members quit at the same time and then go rogue on the same alliance. Is there more to this ?

    For clarification: The last time Napilon was gov was probably when FCO was still in BLEU. I resigned two weeks ago, as it's been stated in the op. So former gov is the correct definition. And my quitting is more of a reaction to Napilon's than anything else. Of course, since I "planned" the whole thing according to some sources, I don't expect anyone to believe me.

  5. on one hand this may allow alliances to protect the innocent

    on the other hand this may allow alliances to bandwagon to the winning side

    So you needed a permission to do these things before? I'm not surprised NSO is the alliance doing this move, but I can say I'm surprised that it didn't happen before. If NSO wants to defend someone from someone else, I don't think they need some treaty in order to do it.

×
×
  • Create New...