greatplacetolive
-
Posts
110 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by greatplacetolive
-
-
Wow, this is just sad. FAN is reduced to going over treaties with a fine toothed comb and squabbling about the wording. FAN has turned into a bunch of E-lawyers. Who would have thought it'd come down to this?
Who would have thought it would be necessary, except that NPO and its allies violated the wording of the peace treaty, after breaking it themselves, to launch war against FAN.
-
I'm so confused. I coulda swore there was only one yellow alliance.
Now you're telling me there are at least 4 others?!?!?
Wow. You're gonna have to give me a sec to comprehend and absorb this shocking development...
Ok, I think I got it now.
So, now that I've gotten past the shock and awe of learning of the existence of yellow alliances not named FAN, Congrats on your treaty. lets hope it ends better than YN5.
I've seen this sentiment pop up a few times. Yes, FAN is the largest and most noticed yellow alliance. Believe it or not, there's even OTHER yellow alliances out there, that are not part of this agreement. I can't speak for the signatories as to whether or not they were approached, or would be in the future.
-
Perhaps this is a good treaty for greatplace2live to do some pro-bono work on, sorta to get his street cred up and his name out there.
Yeah, this treaty has a TON of work that would need to be done on it. I mean, here's just one thing I found:
"All signatories will consider each other to be preferred trading partners."
What does "preferred trading partner" mean? What happens if a trade is offered and refused? Is there weight given to the benefit of trades, the order in which offers are received, and other factors?
Guys, if you want me to look it over in full, let me know!
-
All I see is FAN and GOLD.
FAN is not a party to this agreement, although we wish them the best.
I'm missing where GOLD is a party.
-
If we crave war, why do we squeal when we bring it to you? That's a legitimate question.
War? Bring it on. No problem. Here's an analogy though. A long long time ago, when gentlemen had disputes, they would have a duel. Cap & pistol, in certain ages. They would line up back to back, step off 10 paces, turn and fire. Once in a while, someone would turn at 9 paces and shoot the other in the back. That was referred to as cowardice.
1 more week, it would have been war. This was cowardice.
-
Wait a minute, why is NPO getting 100% of the blame for this? IRON, GGA, TPF, and NpO are also at war with you as well, but you have no choice words for them. Are you just so lazy as to stick with the easy and obvious target?
Their reasons are NPOs reasons. But thank you for admitting NPO is an "easy and obvious target". Thanks. Maybe we could message them and let them know you've thrown in the towel.
-
I can read, you apparently can't.
No, he didn't say that NPO wasn't communicating, he didn't say that NPO was not letting you know stuff. He didn't offer any explanation other than that.
He says that NPO was working on a conspiracy.
The screenshot also does not make it possible to acquire a date.
12/14 is my time/date stamp on the photo, and also the date of a thread I started on the FAN forums passing the info on. Of course, if NPO would reopen that forum to us, we could further prove the date. Clearly NPO had to be in the planning stages of their attack when this post was made. What does it prove? Treachery and deceit over diplomacy and communications, beyond any doubt.
-
OK. How about this.
Response percentage of the NPO: 19%
See. I can make up arbitrary stats too.
Good point. Hundreds and hundreds of NPO nations did not respond to the FAN attacks within 24 hours. NPO's compliance rate was thus 2%.
-
And what were those screenshots supposed to prove, exactly?
Dood, reading comprehension FTW
-
Image 1.
NPO has PMed the guy and wants to give him a chance to declare peace. Not an attempt to damage FAN, but to be reasonable to all sides.
Image 2
NPO confirming part of the terms. This doesn't support FAN conspiracies at all.
"During this three (3) month period, FAN will be a protectorate of the New Pacific Order. As such, any nation or alliance who attacks a member or members of FAN without provocation shall be subject to retaliatory action by the NPO. NPO must respond within 24 hours after being notified of any such attack on FAN."
A PM counts as retaliatory action?
There would be more if NPO would allow access to the forum where we report attacks on FAN.
-
NPO refusing to attack within 24 hours of a reported attack on a FAN nation, in violation of their treaty requirements.
NPO duplicity - pretending all was well, and peace terms were going to end on schedule, while planning the attack on FAN
-
Because we're at war?
What in this forum would hurt your war effort, other than showing the lack of response to several attacks on FAN, in violation of your treaty requirements?
-
It seems to have gotten lost about 6 pages ago, but I pointed out that NPO clearly violated THEIR requirements under the treaty, to defend FAN within 24 hours of an attack. I have called on NPO to reopen the FAN reporting portion of their forums, but have been met with silence. I leave it to you to explain why.
-
Is that why he was under the Alliance Affiliation of None at the time of attacks.
http://cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?se...p;search=chubby
He had prior aid as NPO, and was acknowledged & kicked on the NPO board. Nice try though.
-
If we were planning on attacking you the whole time. Please tell me, why did three very strong nations or ours just get nuked for the sake of FAN?
One of your guys jumped the gun obviously, you ate a few nukes to maintain the appearance of a protectorate while you finished the plans for your attack.
-
Proof would be welcome.
Reopen your forum where we report attacks on FAN and let me screenshot.
-
and every single one of those conditions was fulfilled to the letter by the NPO
Except for the part about responding to attacks on FAN within 24 hours. Which was your only responsibility.
-
It's fun to argue about the peace terms. Any little violation voids them, some people are saying. OK, so when NPO did a crappy job of enforcing it's protectorate in violation of the terms, we should have not been bound by the terms.
Or, does it take SYSTEMIC violations of the terms, to void the treaty? A few nations with factories or military is not systemic. You have to stretch down to the guys with 21, 22% military to get the hyped up 1/3 number, which is complete and utter BS. Any precdent of any other peace treaty that I have seen on CN has never been interpreted this way, there was nothing to suggest that it would be. So add in the guys with 70%, 60%, you still have less than 10% of FAN in violation of the terms.
Besides, why would they want to beef up their military, days before the term expired... right after our 3 largest nations were jumped by an NPO rogue.... http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.as...&Extended=1
-
Explains the effed up poll numbers.
Farung, please go away.
Ah, the Florida voters defense. The voters are stupid, no one can actually read the question and then decide for themselves, they have to read the thread first and then get told how to vote?
-
Here's the TL;DR:
BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.
No, if I was going to go that route, I could complain about NPOs reluctant, laggard and defiant sometimes-enforcement of our protectorate status. In violation of the ToS.
-
Quoted for great truth.
Oh come on, is that really relevant? Saying that is worse than complaining about someone's grammar or spelling when they have something important to say. Besides, I think his signature clearly states he is a Proud FAN member, and a member of the FAN Congress.
Thank you for your support. To be fair, I added that to my sig after the subsequent posts.
-
It would be nice to post that somewhere in either your Sig. or the actual post, because if don't people could think that your some crazy noob and we wouldn't want that.
Good point, thank you.
-
Can I ask who are you?
FAN Congress.
-
NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.
The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.
I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.
This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.
And people are figuring it out for themselves now.
The Phoenix Federation Declares war on FAN
in Alliance Politics
Posted
Eh, I think we're doing a bit better at it these days.
Yeah, attacking protectorates is bad, I suppose. Know anyone who has done that recently?
That was the point of the last war, and was debated then - plus in the end more damage was done overall. FAN has always been the point man in any of our alliance wars, there is NO doubt of that.
Oh, I doubt THAT. We have concrete proof NPO violated the treaty first, and the whole world has seen it now.