Levonscott

That's pretty much it, right? Such a result of human nature is good for society IRL, but damn, if it's not boring as hell for a game! Most games typically have some function that actively pit one against another (in your Civilization example, a win condition - even one as boring as a diplomatic victory - result in competitiveness, and thus, the desire and need to crush your opponents); in CN, there is no real in-game impetus to go to war. There is no "end goal", other than the collection of pixels. Thus, any meaningful event is purely the result of the RP of individuals and their alliances. What's the easiest way to grow pixels? ODs, MDs, and Trade Agreements everywhere. All this to say... Admin needs to give us a reason to go to war. Otherwise, we're going to end up min-maxing the game (and thus making it unfun) in our human nature to cooperate, in order to get bigger pixels on a screen.

Not to get too philosophical, but I think this is a good demonstration of human nature. Perhaps this was the inevitable end result. I think we tend towards friendship and mutual cooperation, over aggression and destruction. The better different AAs get to know each other and interact, the closer they become, and then they sign a treaty. The more treaties, the more webby it all gets, and the less wars there are; that much is common sense. Much like in real life, where growing interconnectivity has lead to the effective abolition of war as a method of solving international disputes. Say what you will about the United Nations, but there hasn't been a world war in 70 years. So yes, I think this is the perfect demonstration of why there is so much inertia, you're quite right. But I also suggest it's the perfect demonstration of humanity itself (not great for the game, but such is life?). Or maybe I'm thinking into things too much?

I wouldn't call what I've managed to do there "untangling" it, by any stretch of the imagination... As critical as I was of the usability of the webpage (no pun intended!) itself, there's no doubt the result is quite pleasing. Good stuff, @Jazzy95!

Damn it, Velo. Every time. My 3D web is going to need to evolve into a fourth dimension shortly, if this keeps up.

Unfortunately, it's an empty threat, and he knows it. I wouldn't dare, as he's both a reliable tech sender and trade partner. Plus, all hell would break loose internally and that'd absolutely tank my election prospects.

This can be arranged.

Come now, you know we have a reputation to uphold!

A list of signatures four times as long as the peace text itself? It feels as if there must have been an overreaction here, somewhere along the line... That, or I'm getting better at writing more concise documents? That can't be!

It is my understanding that material was uncovered that demonstrates breaches of those other clauses, that occured during the duration of the NAP. However, these were not discovered until after the NAP expired, on the 1st of January. Thus, as I said, I feel (at least for NG), Clause 3 should have been utilised - even if the NAP had expired - since they occured during that time. From a strictly legal sense, however...?

As far as I'm aware, the NAP extension lapsed on the 1st of January, so fulfilling Clause 3 was not a legal requirement. Frankly, I do find myself disappointed that this was not done anyway, but I was only the drafter of the NAP, not MoFA. The powers that be have their reasoning. In any case, good luck and have fun, all. When the ashes clear, may we try yet another NAP?

As you can tell, GATO definitely had its hands on the drafting pen!

A thorough and inclusive document. I hope this peace lasts far beyond the 180 days! o/

While lacking in eloquence, Keres' statement basically sums up the general consensus quite well.

Well said.

Believe it or not, my application to TBC was non-influenced. I wasn't poached, and TBC poaching wasn't the reason I left MI6 or joined them. Shocking, I know!