Hime Themis

Good The MVP I realize that facts have no meaning to you and I do not question the honour of any even those who feel the need to do so with ours rather than present a specific concern. So my friend I leave the field to you and your pleasant demeanor you have obviously beat me with your wit , wisdom and grasp of the true facts however hidden they may be from the rest of us mere mortals. Adieu Edit. Melt down oh my I must see to that I am obviously overcome by your magnificent repartee. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='The MVP' timestamp='1301020615' post='2675477'] Looks like you need to put words in my mouth in order to up yourselves as magnanimous gods of a higher order. No I don't believe you entering in Karma was a high risk and at the time you hit TORN that war was already a forgone conclusion. Whether or not you were going to stick by GR through thick and thin is a moot point. Test your metal in times of adversity instead of easy to win situations, you failed to do that before that war. Oh what amazing saints you are. Helping to rebuild allies. And oh so how fortunate you happened to find yourself defending an alliance who historically found themselves in mostly losing situations in the past but now are all of a sudden victorious with your help! You think GR needed you in those two wars as they needed you in previous wars? Probably not. Although I'm sure they appreciated the help, it's not like you've always been the steadfast allies you so desperately are trying to make yourselves out to be. It seems opportunistic more than anything and how highly you think of yourself is quite dramatic. Call against your honor? The treaty plotting and wording called into question your honor eh?.. no !@#$ it did! Your playing with words in the case a tough situation arose and you invoking technicalities in order to keep yourselves out of rough situations would not only destroy your "honor" but would see to it that you would be destroyed. [/quote] Good The MVP I would respond to each of your issues that seem to change as facts are presented that refute your comments but I shall simply respond to a couple which exemplifies your odd fixation with disdaining our alliance. Since you could find absolutely no example where we failed to respond to our allies call for support you choose to suggest we only band wagon in on a win. " at the time you hit TORN that war was already a forgone conclusion." Really I have not given you credit for the obvious prescience you posses. We posted our declaration of war 45 hours, yes hours after the initial declaration on C&G and less than 24 hours later than Greenland requested our assistance and that was three hours later than we would have but we always offer our formal declaration to our adversary in private before it is posted on the OWF and before we declare war on any of their nations. It took us this time to locate a government member of TORN and have them acknowledge our message. We promised at the DoW no reparations Then we fought for 49 days. Then accepted zero terms no surrender, no reps and no foolish terms. So yes if you were able to tell 45 hours into a war that we ceasfired only after 49 days and that lasted two weeks longer then by George my friend you are absolutely correct how could we have been so blind? I shall be sure to contact you the next time war rears its head so we may enjoy the foresight you provide. If this my friend is the factual reality of your opinion of us then sadly there is little that can make you see fact from fiction. But I am pleased to answer any real concerns you might run across. While GR has in fact fought on the losing side perhaps you might like to look up what a defensive treaty is. In addition for a time our Friends in GR chose a different path that we would not follow it was during this sad time they suffered and thus the reason that despite the risk we resigned the CSN BEFORE the Karma war another war that you obviously were able to foretell was a guaranteed win BEFORE it even happened well done. May be you can tell me about the next great war before it happens and who will win then we could keep our record intact. Deal? As to rebuilding our ally perhaps you might like to re-read the amount that was 450 Mill or 150% of the reps TORN was required to pay in the Easter Sunday Accords. I also note you managed to jump over the fact that we despite accepting no terms at all actually sent funds to both our opponents in both wars to get some of their nations out of bill lock after the end of hostilities. Of course that was a sneaky infra hugging plot like the aid to GR. Lastly please do not swear even with the !@$% it may make you feel all tough and cool but honestly it diminishes any real point you might have to make. Once again you choose to question our honour yet we still have not questioned yours, fine I really do not expect you will sign and obviously you would not be able to maintain the terms by your posting style so if I may ask why are you continuing? Respectfully Dame HIme Themis

Gentle Persons We would be sad to see a discussion of The Covenant fall to an exchange of insults. Good HeroofTime55 we do share many similar views. I must however respectfully disagree on some of your ideals. Does not make you wrong just a difference of where we stand. We wish all the best and hope we have helped clarify any questions. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300984223' post='2674728'] I never commented on the original posting, but here are my thoughts. All in all, surprisingly close to my ideals. But there are a number of areas which prohibit my signature, as I outlined above. I'd be willing to sign off on a document that is clarified and skimmed down in the appropriate areas. [/quote] Good HeroofTime55 I should like to address your specific issues. We Believe 7. Civility is not common, but should be. [b]No Yes. Civility does not require one to be a push over it requires those you disagree with the right to a polite and reasonable counter argument not name calling and flaming.[/b] 8. Civility does not suspend itself in times of war or peace. [b]from above, no From above even more so Yes The point of principles is not so they are easy to discard but so they help you stay strong in adversity. These will never be negotiable..[/b] 13. In the rare case where punishment is required for egregious actions, the penalty shall be distributed to unrelated small parties, to help build Digiterra. [b]Yes and no. It's certainly a nice gesture, but hardly something I'd agree to sign away permanently. Once again are we to accept a defensive war to gain from it? Sorry not the ideal here. If someone as acted in an incorrigible fashion then punish them but make it a penalty worthy of justice not avarice. Help build Digiterra if you feel the need to punish an egregious act.[/b] 16. Aggressive wars are not in our repertoire of actions. [b]What does this mean? Unprovoked attacks? If so I agree, otherwise it conflicts with item number one. We defined a defensive war. Everything else is an aggressive war.but yes you are on track. [/b] We do not believe: 3. That a request to help is automatic and without due thought to the cause of the request. [b]No. Honor is not hiding behind reasons to avoid a conflict.[/b] Sadly I see this word over used. I believe you actually mean the word Loyalty. For Us this is what honour means. A nice sense of what is right, just, and true, with course of life correspondent thereto; strict conformity to the duty imposed by conscience, position, or privilege; integrity; uprightness; trustworthness. [1913 Webster] [color="#a8397a"]to feel you must do something because it is [b]morally right[/b], even if you do not want to do it This means one does not support actions that are wrong regardless of friendship. Loyalty has been used by soldiers through out history in a admirable fashion BUT it has allowed unspeakable horrors to occur because loyalty trumped honour. Doing what is right is not hiding. I must respectfully disagree with this point.[/color] 5. That the friends of friend's actions are legitimate reason to approve military support. [b]No, but a friend's actions because of the aforementioned actions, are As shown above absolutely Not. You have proven your loyalty in wars that you were not winning and I respect that loyalty but if a friend chooses a way that is wrong then it cannot be supported though exactly how this might occur in a defensive treaty I am uncertain.[/b] 7. That information that pertains to another alliance should be withheld or used to advantage. [b]Unsure, it's too vague. I mean, you wouldn't tell me that I should start giving coalition secrets to our enemies, would you? This is meant to be pertinent in peace not war planning. If a spy brought us news even in war we would tell our adversaries. Why because it right. Does this loses us a tactical advantage of course. We believe that Karma actually has a value. [/b] 8. That spying is justified other than in its simple war mode in game mechanics. [b]Iffy on this because it can become justified in a sufficiently drawn-out war. NO, NO ,NO our principles are strong except if the going gets tough ??? If this is the case there is little purpose to stated principles. [/b] 9. That a group of 5 or more people with the same Alliance Affiliation and true desire to be seen as an alliance are any less an alliance than any other alliance. When in doubt ask. [b]No, it's 2 or more. Since we just masked a two player alliance on our forum yesterday we believe it is two. However the general consensus is 5. Nobody says you cannot display even greater ethics than the treaties you sign. I know this is a revolutionary concept for some on Digiterra but I am always excited to be surprised. [/b] 11. That rogue attacks are anything more than the act of the uncreative and cowardly. [b]Are you suggesting that alliances have additional sovereign rights not possessed by the people as individuals? Suggesting that if 64Digits drops below 4 members, we can no longer declare war? I am I suggesting it not in this clause but if you do not think they do then sadly you and we should all be happily safe sitting on none. How you determined that any alliance of any number may not declare war from this is honestly confusing to me. [/b] A rogue unlike the definition of others is the result of their actions not size. Those who give no heed to their nation or alliance and attack others for the sole purpose of hurting their attackers are rogues. Period. If I may be blunt any idiot with a nation can attack another nation or alliance if they do not care. It is oft used by those who are quiting the game and instead of bowing out with grace the inner 12 year old comes out who tosses the chess board when leaving a game they have not the fortitude to complete. Two finger clap to them. While we would love to have other alliances sign The Covenant we will not do the modification routine because frankly once more than two alliance want in on the writing we have seen the results. This is the reason we belong to no blocs. If everybody needs to feel completely happy the document often ends up saying nothing of merit. Perhaps this tells it all. [font="Verdana"][size="2"]If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking. [/size][/font][url="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_s_patton.html"][b][font="Verdana"][size="2"][color="#0000cc"]George S. Patton[/color][/size][/font][/b][/url] Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='The MVP' timestamp='1300943380' post='2674432'] Dear gentlest and noblest and kindest and kindred in heart pezstar, If I want a treacherous alliance that plots ins and outs of treaties, people already forgot about that expose?, I'll treaty with OBR. Until then I trust the likes of MK and GOONS fare more than them. And Hime Themis: I'm not the one with a plethora of "Writ de Excuse me as I use the whole I have allies on both sides" to get out of every war that could have involved me getting roughed up a bit. Last I checked the best you could do is support GR in your first war against TORN in a war with little risk. I guess because you all use such flowery language I should trust you all, indubitably! [/quote] Good The MVP From our beginning to later the Karma war we held Zero Aggressive and one Defensive treaty with Greenland Republic. So honestly I am uncertain how and when we could ever have used the " whole I have allies on both sides" to get out of every war that could have involved me getting roughed up a bit." Further to my amusement you seem to have a slightly faulty memory. We cancelled the WdC and reinstated the CSN with GR just days BEFORE the Karma war thus drawing us in AGAINST the largest Bloc on Digiterra at the time. Since you memory is somewhat .rusty you may have forgotten that at the time of the Karma war none was guaranteeing a NPO loss frankly we figured we might get pounded well but we had give our word to our Friends in GR we would not leave them to face the fire without us. Since we had TWO defensive alliances at the time of the preemptive attack on C&G by Duckroll and company not shockingly we once again fought on behalf of our ally in GR. Once again I do not believe ANYONE was guaranteeing an easy win for C&G. We exchange nukes with TORN for about a month and a half. They fought with respect as did we I am sorry you seek to diminish their war efforts along with ours. Having twice (yes not first war against TORN) come to the aid of our ally in GR in two separate wars and then aided in the rebuilding of GR AND our opponents in both of those conflicts I am saddened that this seems insufficient to be deemed worthy by some people. I believe our allies all” three” that we are treatied to know and understand that we have always provided support in their defence when it was requested. I also believe our opponents will attest that we have kept the bounds of our word to fight and seek cessation of war in an honest, fair and even handed manner. Never have we asked for reparations and in fact in the last two wars actually paid for some of the rebuilding of our honourable opponents (myself personal as well in both occasions) to remove their nations from bill lock ,even though we were fortunate enough to be on the side with the upper hand at the end. In addition after the Karma war we sent 450 mill in aid to our treaty partners in GR to help them rebuild. So I am unclear how we might have done more than fight for our ally, secured peace for them, rebuilt our ally and opponents with no request for reps nor admission of defeat from our opponents. I am sure this is not compatible with the grander tactical thought but it is/was/ and will be the way of the OBR. The Writ de Credo was a flowery well intentioned and flawed treaty whose terms were NEVER invoked against any treaty partner and even at its cancellation WE kept to the terms of the notice of cancellation. Most will not know that issues caused by the cute wording and the unnecessary call against our honour caused a far greater hurt internally for us than any of you might have any inkling of. For those with a shorter memory the fact that one prominent member of The Brain was a significant player in the debate against the WdC at the time is all the more reason we are pleased to have The Brain and that member as first signatories. The Covenant was written in plain unadorned language precisely to avoid any potential for interpretation or evasion. I thank you though for raising these concerns in an honest and clear measure.Please feel free to identify the flowery language in The Covenant that confuses you I shall be happy to clarify it for you. I am actually pleased to be included with MK and GOONS on the tape measure of trustworthiness. While we do not agree with certain of their FA choices I am unaware of even their current enemies ever questioning the loyalty of these alliances in keeping their treaty obligations. As to your "I should trust you all, indubitably" do or do not. We offer The Covenant if you do not wish to sign we are sad but we will seek to survive the disappointment. I do not question your integrity I am disappointed you choose to question ours. If you wish to question The Covenant I am willing to respond to any legitimate concerns. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis [quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' timestamp='1300947462' post='2674472'] Not monsters. It is just convenient, for all power structures, to tolerate the Rosular Kingdom and its little frivolities as they are because publicly attacking them for what they are is a waste of political capital and will ultimately lead to little gain. That's why they have always been given a free pass by the "powers that be", no matter who those were, when they refused to come to the help of that or that other "ally". Alliances have been flamed to hell and back for much less deceit and treachery. To each his own, I guess. It is no wonder that this Writ de Credo 2.0 isn't drawing crowds, though. [/quote] Good Yevgeni Luchenkov "always been given a free pass by the "powers that be", no matter who those were, when they refused to come to the help of that or that other "ally". Okay we appreciate the free pass now since we have never had more than 3 allies and have supported our defensive ally the two times they were attacked may I please ask . What ally did we refuse to come to the aid of? This seems a little harsh considering we fought with your C&G ally in the previous two major wars on the same side the only times our allies asked for defensive help. Did I miss a war? It is also mildly funny to see you label The Covenant as Writ de Credo 2.0 when our first signatory contains as a prominent member who was our BIGGEST critic of the WdC and was the one who approached us to consider signing The Covenant. As we stated clearly in the Covenant the treaty will have limited appeal it is not designed to be the broader appeal of the WdC. In fact we have stated there are other way that we respect. The Mushroom Kingdom does things in a very different was and we respect that it is simply not our way. I should also point out that there is no multi-alliance treaty that was never pre-solicited that has in two days had massive sign up. Please allow others to see it and judge if it is a style that appeals. If not that is fine we are stating our ideals if others join us it pleases us but it does not change the manner we will show respect to friends and adversaries in future. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Good The MVP We shall strive to do better and meet your enviable record for trustworthiness. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons We are pleased to announce the first alliance to honour the Order of the Black Rose by agreeing to the terms laid forth in The Covenant. The Brain has gone through a time of discontent with the general politics of Digiterra as they stand right now. We have known The Brain for a very long time and know many to be good, solid and mature leaders. While we are sad to see them leave their previous connections, sometimes a new beginning means re-examining ones future direction. We are honoured that the path set out in the Covenant appeals to such an alliance as The Brain. We are happy to add The Brain as the first alliance to sign on to The Covenant and look to find other alliances who would like to try the path laid out before us. The Central Nervous System mr3looc Shane-o theragu40 The Brain Trust Cerebellum: SamFisher202 Temporal Lobe: KitKatFox Brain Stem: JtiksPies Parietal Lobe: greg136 For the Rosular Kingdom and The Order of the Black Rose For Queen AterAtra, Sir Winslow Knight Protector The Knights Council The Covenant The signatories of this Covenant come together to share a style of values in the way they wish to conduct the business of interalliance affairs. This covenant is the easiest to join and the easiest to leave. We welcome all those alliances who share this set of principles to affix their signatures, to show how they wish to be judged on Digiterra. Failure to abide by them means that the alliance forfeits the benefit of this accord with like minded alliances. The Covenant is not meant as a judgment for those who choose a different path. It is meant to clearly outline the means to measure the signatories' future actions. Is our way the best way? Is our way the right way? Is our way the moral way? To all these, we answer: We do not know, but it is our way. We believe: 1. War is always an option, but it is the last option, not the first. 2. Diplomacy is more than threats or insults. 3. Neutrality in a conflict does not mean indifference. 4. Alliances do not need to be best buddies to respect each other. 5. Friends tell friends when they are acting badly. 6. Most actions are not a casus belli. 7. Civility is not common, but should be. 8. Civility does not suspend itself in times of war or peace. 9. Mistakes happen, and if respect is shared, resolution can be swift and fair. 10. Those who confirm these values by signing may always request, but not command, defensive help unless prohibited by official neutrality. 11. That financial support is what partners do when another is in need, including economic cooperation where desired. 12. Wars are fought to defend a principal or friend, not to acquire assets. 13. In the rare case where punishment is required for egregious actions, the penalty shall be distributed to unrelated small parties, to help build Digiterra. 14. Fighting a friend or foe can be done with dignity and honor, regardless of the eventual victor. 15. The niceties of formal written treaties is not required but desired. 16. Aggressive wars are not in our repertoire of actions. We do not believe: 1. That we dictate who the friends of our friends should be. 2. That we need to always agree on a course of action. 3. That a request to help is automatic and without due thought to the cause of the request. 4. That politics should determine if a request for help should be approved. 5. That the friends of friend's actions are legitimate reason to approve military support. 6. That the cancellation of a friendship or treaty is required or desired just because we find ourselves on opposite sides of a particular conflict. 7. That information that pertains to another alliance should be withheld or used to advantage. 8. That spying is justified other than in its simple war mode in game mechanics. 9. That a group of 5 or more people with the same Alliance Affiliation and true desire to be seen as an alliance are any less an alliance than any other alliance. When in doubt ask. 10. That PZI or EZI is justified. 11. That rogue attacks are anything more than the act of the uncreative and cowardly. 12. That OOC attacks or spread of OOC information can ever be justified or acceptable. 13. That racist, sexist, rude, salacious or personal attacks are ever justifiable. 14. That any comment or conversation not in a private area should be offered without being tempered with respect for the potential feelings of those who may not be as tough skinned as we are. 15. That something should be done because it can be done. 16. That we have the only way to do things right. This Covenant provides for a new form of agreement. It is a statement of principle. It is not a bloc. It has no cancellation notice. Violation of the terms removes a signatory. Voluntary withdrawal removes a signatory. Since the Order of the Black Rose and the Rosular Kingdom is the author there is no way for us to defer from the terms of the Covenant. There is for us no wiggle room. What is a defensive war? 1. An attack (spying or military) on a signatory alliance that has not declared an attack (war) that requests defensive assistance. What is an aggressive war? 1. Everything else.

Noble Grey Council 5 years of continued adherence to your principle particularly at -5 happiness just proves the strength of your convictions and solidarity of your membership. We wish continued success and fidelity. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons The OBR and PC do not share the same style of FA and never likely shall but we have worked together in peace and respect on trade circles and other activities. It proves that civility and respect may be found even when alliances do not pursue the same goals. Regardless of the reasons for the departures we offer our best wishes to the new government in this time of transition. May justice be found in the resolution of this issue. Our team in the Rosular Kingdom has found many of our PC contacts to be honest and diligent and we will hope that PC as we would with any alliances who finds their world turned upside down will come through all the better. We hope for an end to your conflict and a way forward. We shall be there. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Good AEsir We welcome.the dawn of a new serious alliance to the face of Digiterra. Having watched the progress of our Friend and former alliance mate Craven it pleases us to see him find a place of honour and leadership in this new alliance. I look forward to seeing all they may accomplish in future. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1299399864' post='2654256'] Maybe 15-20 would be a better number? Better to have something that people agree 100% with. What is anything less than a group of 5 people? A collection of rogues? [/quote] Good Mr. Muz This treaty is not designed to please everyone. We personally view any group of two people who wish to be considered an alliance and are most importantly willing to accept the consequences and support the actions of any on their AA to be an alliance. % happens to be the minimum number most feel comfortable with calling an alliance. Those who set the minimum much higher have their own reasons for doing so and honestly are highly unlikely to see merit in this treaty. As to rogues it was always our opinion that it is the actions of a nation or alliance not its numbers that determine if one is a rogue. Many much larger than 5 person alliances have gone rogue by their actions. /b/ comes to mind an I can assure you they had far more than 4 members. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='New Frontier' timestamp='1299371283' post='2653890'] Congratulations on having more four times the casualties of a nation far younger and far smaller than you. That truly shows the courage you claim to possess. And I may post more than you, but I certainly have never announced a self-righteous bloc containing no members other than my own alliance. [/quote] Good New Frontier I realize you may simply be posting without reading but to say we are "announcing a self-righteous bloc" does rather miss this particular point made in the post. This Covenant provides for a new form of agreement. It is a statement of principle. [b]It is not a bloc. [/b]You will note I did not call into question your courage. I simply pointed out that my nation some 33% older has 4 times the casualties. You can check up and down our roster and see we have fought hard or confirm with our honourable opponents who gave as good as they received in the last two major wars. Large Nation size is no sign worthy of respect but neither is a small nation size. I am sad you feel the need to belittle the efforts of others. I am sure you and your alliance have accomplished much that is deserving of recognition and I hope to have the opportunity soon to recognize those efforts publicly. I ask that you consider reserving the same civility towards our announcements. This is an offer to others to join not a pronouncement of an existing mechanism. I bid you well and hope you find other announcements that you may commend with more positive tones. We welcome all honest and fair questioning and hope that others will consider this our offer to support others of like mind. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='New Frontier' timestamp='1299275380' post='2652722'] Also, the simple fact that they [b]have[/b] five years of warchest, infra and tech leads me to believe they aren't exactly the most courageous of nations. [/quote] Gentle Persons Thank you for reading and understanding our words even if you do not fully agree. Good New Frontier We have actively engaged in both of the previous two major wars as may be attested too by our opponents OG and TORN and by the ally we defended GR. However perhaps you are better with numbers to aid your understanding. Ruler:Rorschach Nation Name:New Frontier Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars.122,411 Attacking + 113,196 Defending = 235,607 Casualties Casualty Rank:Ranked #6,234 of 20,635 Nations (30.21%) Ruler:Hime Themis Nation Name:Dulra Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars.487,674 Attacking + 490,480 Defending = 978,154 Casualties Casualty Rank:Ranked #2,704 of 20,635 Nations (13.10%) Now it is true throwing away resources fighting a war takes no courage or brains. It would however suggest that perhaps our allies have little need to question our commitment or courage. We believe that accomplishing our goal of removing our opponent from the fight with a minimum of damage to either side is actually more reasonable than diminishing our resources or our opponent who might be a future friend for the sake of macho crowing but perhaps you read a different book on tactics. Just as a last aside the idea that we "announce their every self-righteous bowel movement are able to truly appreciate". If I may you may wish to review my post count and the number of posts I have made in the last number of months and compare it to yours. I think you may find our movements litter far less of the OWF than yours. Of course we never begrudge any critic the oppourtunity to spout. It is one of those "moralistic" tendencies of ours. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='New Frontier' timestamp='1299214962' post='2651968'] I was just saying that we were about due for some obnoxious moralizing from the OBR. They should name a geyser after you. [/quote] Good New Frontier We will gladly accept Old Faithful. Being moral does not equate to moralizing but that is a small differentiation some seem unable to overcome. I understand that some see announcement of this nature as PR or forcing our moral stand on others but a few moments of reading what we actually said might dissuade you. There are other ways to go which we state and appreciate. We do not say our way is the moral or righteous way we say it is our way. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1299199709' post='2651721'] [font="Tahoma"]What do you gain from this document? I'm curious. Does it help you sleep better at night; knowing you've signed a document espousing these values and I'd presume uphold them (although I wouldn't be shocked to see various members in alliances breeching this covenant at varying points in the future) day in and day out on IRC private and public alike.[/font] [font="Tahoma"]I'm not against this type of agreement, but being realistic about it. I don't see how one can uphold this in good faith beyond public spectacle (meaning, I'd expect people to sign onto this for a positive image; and uphold it in public but privately conduct various affairs that are against the general sentiment of the document...) nor do I see it as being an agreement entirely enforceable by any parties involved. It raises the question that, is this meant for entire alliances to sign or individuals.[/font] [font="Tahoma"]Lastly, on a more personal note. Why must one signify their intent to follow a rigid doctrine of ideals rather then simply follow it through their day to day actions? There is, in my opinion much more merit from someone who simply carries themselves in a good manner quietly not asking or looking for attention. Then someone who signs a treaty claiming to uphold those same qualities making it a public notice so all my take note. It seems to have an air of "I'm better then you" because this paper had my name on it![/font] [font="Tahoma"](OOC - I don't mean to come off as lambasting, only inquisitive. I seldom have time to play this game anymore nor discuss things about it; so I thought I might as well give an honest opinion on this document. Seeing as you've posted it for public consumption it's only right that I digest it...and given the political nature of this game poke holes at it. Because I'm tired of surrender talks and terrible quality posts in every other topic; I thought I'd get this started on a decent path.)[/font] [/quote] Good Owned You Valid questions. What do we gain from this document.? Directly nothing. We have and will always follow these values. Indirectly we show other that may hold similar values that despite the current political climate that they are not alone. It offers a chance to find like minded alliances who may have felt isolated, Does it make us sleep better. Yes. We get a chance to actually publicly state something positive. To provide a different way to go.There have been almost daily alliance after alliance stating what rules do NOT apply to them. We are stating what rules we ARE to be judged by. There are daily post by alliances that , boast, berate , bully, flame, pontificate, reject or find themselves full of self justification for actions. We thought it might be a nice change to see if we could post a desire to live by a code of conduct that might provide an inspiration, solace and encouragement for others who feel the same. Enforcement is not in the treaty, violate it you are out, leave you are out. It is a statement of principle and support nothing more nothing less. If you do not wish to be held to that which you sign then all will see that. This treaty is not for everyone or most. It is hard not easy. Doing what you please is easy doing things in a confined fashion is hard. We prefer the difficult way not the easy. Why a treaty> So there is something specific to refer to as a guide and a standard to be judged by. Private actions set no model for others to follow as they are private. Why Public? So that one may not remain smug in ones self righteousness yet act in private in another way. A public statement stand as the measuring stick for ones actions. Some may suggest this is a PR move, frankly I do not believe our past actions or current behaviour require a PR gesture. Why bother to put oneself up to a higher public standard to be judged by if you want PR. This is to begin a measure between alliances . It seems to have an air of "I'm better then you" because this paper had my name on it! You may wish to review this statement. [b]The Covenant is not meant as a judgment for those who choose a different path. It is meant to clearly outline the means to measure the signatories’ future actions. Is our way the best way? Is our way the right way? Is our way the moral way? To all these, we answer: We do not know, but it is our way. No honest and reasonable question may ever be regarded as an insult. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis [/b]

Gentle Persons The Order of the Black Rose has always striven to provide a different approach to life on Digiterra. We follow a different beat as may be seen by our three part Rosular Kingdom. Even with three parts and the ever changing political landscape one thing has remained constant our belief in a set of principles and approach to peace and war on Digiterra. We feel it is time to once again state those ways in a public manner and to invite like minded alliances to join us in this statement. This is NOT a result of, nor commentary on any specific past or current conflicts. It IS a statement as to a measure of our way forward that reflects the values of our past and present. We offer to Digiterra our quill to join in this statement. The Covenant The signatories of this Covenant come together to share a style of values in the way they wish to conduct the business of interalliance affairs. This covenant is the easiest to join and the easiest to leave. We welcome all those alliances who share this set of principles to affix their signatures, to show how they wish to be judged on Digiterra. Failure to abide by them means that the alliance forfeits the benefit of this accord with like minded alliances. The Covenant is not meant as a judgment for those who choose a different path. It is meant to clearly outline the means to measure the signatories’ future actions. Is our way the best way? Is our way the right way? Is our way the moral way? To all these, we answer: We do not know, but it is our way. We believe: 1. War is always an option, but it is the last option, not the first. 2. Diplomacy is more than threats or insults. 3. Neutrality in a conflict does not mean indifference. 4. Alliances do not need to be best buddies to respect each other. 5. Friends tell friends when they are acting badly. 6. Most actions are not a casus belli. 7. Civility is not common, but should be. 8. Civility does not suspend itself in times of war or peace. 9. Mistakes happen, and if respect is shared, resolution can be swift and fair. 10. Those who confirm these values by signing may always request, but not command, defensive help unless prohibited by official neutrality. 11. That financial support is what partners do when another is in need, including economic cooperation where desired. 12. Wars are fought to defend a principal or friend, not to acquire assets. 13. In the rare case where punishment is required for egregious actions, the penalty shall be distributed to unrelated small parties, to help build Digiterra. 14. Fighting a friend or foe can be done with dignity and honour, regardless of the eventual victor. 15. The niceties of formal written treaties is not required but desired. 16. Aggressive wars are not in our repertoire of actions. We do not believe: 1. That we dictate who the friends of our friends should be. 2. That we need to always agree on a course of action. 3. That a request to help is automatic and without due thought to the cause of the request. 4. That politics should determine if a request for help should be approved. 5. That the friends of friend’s actions are legitimate reason to approve military support. 6. That the cancellation of a friendship or treaty is required or desired just because we find ourselves on opposite sides of a particular conflict. 7. That information that pertains to another alliance should be withheld or used to advantage. 8. That spying is justified other than in its simple war mode in game mechanics. 9. That a group of 5 or more people with the same Alliance Affiliation and true desire to be seen as an alliance are any less an alliance than any other alliance. When in doubt ask. 10. That PZI or EZI is justified. 11. That rogue attacks are anything more than the act of the uncreative and cowardly. 12. That OOC attacks or spread of OOC information can ever be justified or acceptable. 13. That racist, sexist, rude, salacious or personal attacks are ever justifiable. 14. That any comment or conversation not in a private area should be offered without being tempered with respect for the potential feelings of those who may not be as tough skinned as we are. 15. That something should be done because it can be done. 16. That we have the only way to do things right. This Covenant provides for a new form of agreement. It is a statement of principle. It is not a bloc. It has no cancellation notice. Violation of the terms removes a signatory. Voluntary withdrawal removes a signatory. Since the Order of the Black Rose and the Rosular Kingdom is the author there is no way for us to defer from the terms of the Covenant. There is for us no wiggle room. What is a defensive war? 1. An attack (spying or military) on a signatory alliance that has not declared an attack (war) that requests defensive assistance. What is an aggressive war? 1. Everything else. For Queen AterAtra, Sir Winslow Knight Protector The Knights Council Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle GPA I offer this a most unneutral expression of congratulations from the Order of the Black Rose. 5 Long years you have held your head high during good and hard times. That you have maintained this steadfast belief in Neutrality during some very trying times is a testament to the purity of belief of the founders and the remarkable resilience and character of your alliance. To my first home I offer my own personal thanks for fostering my early values and best wishes for your continued proud success. Respectfully Your friend(without neutrality) Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons I thought a clarification or two may be in order. The Rosular Kindom consists of three separate wings Realm of the Rose, Blackwater and the Order of the Black Rose but one alliance. This means that we would decide to intervene all together or not at all. We do have two ODPs with alliances on the DH side of the conflict but at this point we have not seen reason to intervene on either side. We are waiting for the perfect war so we may not only follow the magnificent example of our crazy RIA friends who fought on both sides but to one up them. At the time of the perfect war we are looking forward to having one division on either side and the third declaring neutrality. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[img]http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt360/KirkeMykonos/OBR_CourtChamber/OBR_Flag-1.jpg[/img] [img]http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn61/joey67500/Menotahflagcopy.jpg[/img] [font="Trebuchet MS"]Gentle Persons[/font] [font="Trebuchet MS"] Who can resist the call of friendship from one who works hard by your side. We have trusted the hard work and systems we have developed with few and have been rewarded with the pleasure of working with some of the very best. Normally those we work with come slowly to the fore but these our new friends took to the combined efforts like a duck to water. It is pleasing then to be able to recognize this in a way that tells all that we are comrades. [/font] [font="Trebuchet MS"]We are pleased then to offer this formal declaration.[/font] [font="Trebuchet MS"]Letter of Amity Signatories 1. Acknowledge a desire to further relations in a formal fashion. 2. Pledge special care in the positive discourse between members in all public venues. 3. Refrain from negative commentary or complaint in all public venues. 4. Agree to resolve all reasonable grievances in a private and cordial manner. 5. Will pursue broader social contact between members. 6. Open economic interests with each other 7. Share information or intelligence that is received that impacts the other. 8. Be open to enhancing the level of formal diplomatic relations where reasonable. 9. Refrain from any aggressive military action or spying efforts against the other. 10. Refrain from providing succour to an enemy of the other during war. 11. Will provide knowledge, advice and aid in reasonable measure as requested. 12. Maintain a formal active diplomatic post in the Alliance Forum of each other. Cancellation may be sadly accepted with 48 hours notice and a further 72 hours of NAP[/font][font="Trebuchet MS"]. [/font][font="Trebuchet MS"]Signed for Menotah, Joey67500, President Ezko, Vice President Fireblade, Prime Minister Bradford, Deputy Prime Minister danizduhman, Hero of Menotah[/font] [font="Trebuchet MS"] For The Order of the Black Rose Queen AterAtra Sir Winslow, Knight Protector The Knights Council Respectfully Dame Hime Themis [/font] [font="Times New Roman"][size="3"][/size][/font]

[img]http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt360/KirkeMykonos/OBR_CourtChamber/OBR_Flag-1.jpg[/img] [img]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070808040612/cybernations/images/0/02/TOOL.jpg[/img] Gentle Persons White and Black opposites. Not in the [i]Taijitu ( Yin and Yang). So it is with TOOL and OBR. We work together and share friendships. How then do we show this connection?[/i] [i]For a long time we have shared the ups and downs of Digiterra yet exist on different colours. We have shared time on IRC and on our respective forums and realized that we are friends. To show that we feel that there is more to Digiterra than conflict we are proud to share a formal declaration.[/i] Letter of Amity Signatories 1. Acknowledge a desire to further relations in a formal fashion. 2. Pledge special care in the positive discourse between members in all public venues. 3. Refrain from negative commentary or complaint in all public venues. 4. Agree to resolve all reasonable grievances in a private and cordial manner. 5. Will pursue broader social contact between members. 6. Open economic interests with each other 7. Share information or intelligence that is received that impacts the other. 8. Be open to enhancing the level of formal diplomatic relations where reasonable. 9. Refrain from any aggressive military action or spying efforts against the other. 10. Refrain from providing succour to an enemy of the other during war. 11. Will provide knowledge, advice and aid in reasonable measure as requested. 12. Maintain a formal active diplomatic post in the Alliance Forum of each other. Cancellation may be sadly accepted with 48 hours notice and a further 72 hours of NAP. For The Order of Light Lord Captain Commander, The Dakotans Amyrlin, Elderon White Lion, Afcash M'hael, Lureene Callandor, OVERLORD Ikaru Master of Ships, Dealmaster13 Inquisitors, FeigelInc, Tigersgo09 Council of Light For The Order of the Black Rose Queen AterAtra Sir Winslow, Knight Protector The Knights Council Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons I have met many alliance leaders in my time here on Digiterra and I have not found NS to equate to either good or bad leadership. Very often NS is a result of the alliance nature that one has chosen, good luck in trades and limited losses in war not brilliance. This does not suggest that one who ignores nation building is doing it right or wrong. I find it sad that we fail to appreciate that great alliance leaders provide the leadership of their alliance is a fashion that matches the styles and desires of its membership. Those leaders who have taken a warlike aggressive stance and led an alliance into numerous conflicts with the result being an enhanced stature and political improvement like Ragnarok are to be applauded, those that have kept their alliances out of war and strife and led their charges in peace and growth like GPA as they desired are to be equally congratulated. Those who have built monument alliance such as NPO or those who have provided steadfast leadership through conflict and pain such as MK and FAN are to be equally praised. Those who have established a broad community with large numbers such as MHA or a small tight knit community such as Creole have equal merit. May perhaps we spend too much time trying to assigned heroic stature without recognizing the marvelous diversity of leadership Digiterra has benefited from in alliances large and small, nations huge and tiny. Please ask yourself instead what am I offering to my alliances to help it achieve its goals? NS like any other statistic is but one small measure of what one offers Digiterra and is no more nor less important than the ability to provide leadership in other ways that complement the desires and needs of your alliance. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons All the top 250 save the occasional rogue are all so nice why would one ever want to attack them?? Glad our friend Fishguts has no need for our offered help. 7 days of Fishgut nukes should ZI this rogue. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

Gentle Persons At this time of year we remember the greatest gift one may enjoy is the gift of sharing. We present these offerings to the pleasure of all to partake. If there be some value to them then enhance that value by adding a further gift of your own favorites. To you all we wish the blessing of that which you hold dear. From the Rosular Kingdom may the season provide a warm hearth and the presence of those you cherish, in body or spirit may they keep you in their thoughts. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis [b][size="3"]Marzipan Bars[/size][/b] These sweet and colourful bars make a splendid holiday treat. Although not technically marzipan, the taste and texture are similar but the effort required is considerably less! BOTTOM LAYER Pastry for 9 inch (22 cm) pie shell Raspberry jam 1/4 cup 60 mL MIDDLE LAYER Butter (or hard margarine), softened 1/2 cup 125 mL Granulated sugar 2/3 cup 150 mL Large eggs 2 2 Rice flour 2/3 cup 150 mL Salt 1/4 tsp. 1 mL Drop of red liquid food coloring 1 1 Drop of green liquid food coloring 1 1 ALMOND ICING Icing (confectioner's) sugar 1 1/2 cups 375 mL Butter (or hard margarine), softened 3 tbsp. 50 mL Milk 1 1/2 tbsp. 25 mL Almond extract 1 tsp. 5 mL Bottom Layer: Press pastry into bottom of ungreased 9 x 9 inch (22 x 22 cm) pan. Spread jam over pastry. Middle Layer: Cream butter and sugar in medium bowl. Add eggs, 1 at a time, beating well after each addition until fluffy. Stir in rice flour and salt. Divide batter into 2 equal portions. Add red food colouring to 1 portion. Mix well. Add green food colouring to remaining portion. Mix well. Drop by rounded teaspoonfuls, alternating colours, over jam to make a checkerboard pattern. It will spread flat as it bakes. Bake on bottom rack in 375°F (190°C) oven for about 25 minutes until golden. Cool. Almond Icing: Beat all 4 ingredients in small bowl until smooth. Spread evenly over middle layer. Cuts into 36 squares. [size="3"][b]Cherry Nanaimo Bars Recipe[/b][/size] Ingredients: 2 cups graham cracker crumbs 1 cup flaked coconut 1/2 cup toasted chopped pecans 2/3 cup butter 1/3 cup sifted unsweetened cocoa powder 1/4 cup granulated sugar 1 egg, beaten CHERRY LAYER: 1/2 cup quartered maraschino cherries 2 cups icing sugar 1/4 cup butter, softened 2 tbsp. maraschino cherry liquid Dash-almond extract 2 tsp. grated orange rind CHOCOLATE TOPPING: 1/4 lb. semisweet chocolate 1 tbsp. butter Maraschino cherries, chopped Directions: In bowl, stir together crumbs, coconut and pecans. In small saucepan, gently heat together butter, cocoa and sugar until butter melts. Remove from heat; whisk in egg. Blend into crumb mixture. Press into greased 9-inch square cake pan; bake in 350 degree oven for 10 minutes. Let cool on rack. CHERRY LAYER: Pat cherries dry. In bowl, blend half of the icing sugar with butter, mix in cherry liquid, almond extract, remaining icing sugar, orange rind and cherries. Spread over base. CHOCOLATE TOPPING: Melt chocolate, stir in butter. Spread evenly over cherry layer; let cool. Cut into bars; garnish each with small piece of maraschino cherry. (Bars can be covered and refrigerated for up to 2 weeks or frozen for up to 2 months. Let bars soften slightly at room temperature before slicing. Makes about 4 dozen. [b][size="3"]Mint Chocolate Pinwheels[/size][/b] 3/4 cup butter, softened 1 cup granulated sugar 1 teaspoon baking powder 1 egg 1/4 teaspoon mint extract green McCormick food coloring 2-1/4 cups all-purpose flour 6 Oreo cookies (regular flavor), finely crushed 1/2 cup semi-sweet chocolate chips In a large mixing bowl, beat butter with an electric mixer for 30 seconds. Add sugar and baking powder and beat until combined. Beat in egg, mint extract, and a few drops of green food coloring until mixture reaches a mint green color. Stir in flour until well blended. Divide dough in half, wrap halves in plastic wrap and chill 1 hour or until somewhat firm. Roll one half of dough between two sheets of waxed paper into an 8x7-inch rectangle. Peel off the top sheet of waxed paper and sprinkle half of the crushed Oreo cookies over the dough, to within 1/4 inch of sides. Starting from the short side, roll up dough and pinch to seal. Repeat with remaining dough and crushed Oreos. Wrap rolls in plastic wrap and stand upright in tall drinking glasses, then chill about 4 hours or until very firm. Pre-heat oven to 375 F. Remove one roll of dough from refrigerator. Unwrap and slice into 1/4-inch slices. Place 2 inches apart on an ungreased baking sheet. Bake 8 to 9 minutes or until edges are firm but not brown. Cool on baking sheet for 1 minute then remove to wire rack to cool completely. Repeat with other roll. When cooled, melt chocolate chips in the top of a double boiler over hot (not boiling) water. Transfer melted chocolate to a resealable plastic bag and with a scissors, snip off a tiny corner of the bag. Drizzle melted chocolate over cookies. Allow chocolate to set and harden, then store in an airtight container in layers separated by waxed paper for up to 3 weeks. [size="3"][b]White Christmas Cake[/b][/size] A spice-free cake that does not use vine fruits and which is topped with glacé fruits and nuts. Ingredients per portions 125 g glacé cherries 125 g glacé pineapple 125 g shelled brazil nuts 350 g unsalted butter, softened 350 g caster sugar 4 large eggs 350 g plain flour 175 g ground almonds 1 tsp baking powder Method Preheat the oven to gas Mark 2, 150°C, 300°F. Grease and line an 9-inch, 22cm cake tin. Cream the butter and sugar in a large bowl until light and fluffy. Add the eggs, one at a time, beating well after each one. Should the mixture curdle, add a little of the flour. Sieve together the remaining flour and baking powder and beat into the mixture. Add the ground almonds and beat well. Spoon the mixture into the tin and level the top. Arrange the fruit in circular patterns around the top. Bake for 3 hours until golden and firm to the touch. If the top shows signs of burning, cover with foil. Allow to cool in tin for about 30 minutes before turning out onto a wire rack to cool completely. Remove lining when completely cold. Preparation time: ca. 20 min Resting time: ca. 2 hrs [size="3"][b]Dark Chocolate [/b][b]Orange[/b][b] Macaroons[/b][/size] Serves/Yields: 30 cookie 2/3 cup granulated sugar 1/4 cup flour 4 egg whites, unbeaten 1/2 cup chopped pecans 2 teaspoons vanilla extract 1 tablespoon orange zest 1/2 teaspoon salt 8 ounces dark chocolate Preheat oven to 325 degrees. Combine coconut, sugar, and flour in large bowl. Stir in egg whites, pecans, vanilla extract, orange zest, and salt. Form into tablespoon sized balls and place 2 inches apart on lightly greased cookie sheets. Press each cookie down slightly to flatten Bake 20 to 22 minutes until golden. Remove from pans and cool. Melt chocolate in double boiler, stirring until smooth. Drizzle chocolate in zig-zag fashion on tops of cookies. Makes: 30 cookies

Good Mila Amo and Monos Archein Many a forum have I traversed following you over these last three years. It is with sadness that after just wishing you well on your third birthday I did you adieu. I shall miss you but will see many at you new home at CSN. God speed. Respectfully Dame Hime Themis

[img]http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt360/KirkeMykonos/OBR_CourtChamber/OBR_Flag-1.jpg[/img][img]http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad204/PaxCorvus/Flag/PaxFlag3.jpg[/img] Gentle Persons What is a friend? Is it the person who goes out with you, parties hard and has your back when the night gets rough or is it the person who quietly works with you at the block garage sale, enjoys the book club choice you made and stand up with you when the values you both hold are challenged? The answer? Both. It is always good to have those who you will call upon in a good bar brawl but it is often much better to have that neighbour who invites you in for a morning coffee , helps you canvas for the local charity and works hard with you to improve the place you live. Pax Corvus and the Order of the Black Rose hold friendship and loyalty to mutual friends. We have worked together and hold many similar values. The way we do things may differ but what we believe is right and wrong is very familiar. It is thus a true pleasure to greet each other within the bounds of a treaty that declares this Amity in a meaningful fashion. Letter of Amity Signatories 1. Acknowledge a desire to further relations in a formal fashion. 2. Pledge special care in the positive discourse between members in all public venues. 3. Refrain from negative commentary or complaint in all public venues. 4. Agree to resolve all reasonable grievances in a private and cordial manner. 5. Will pursue broader social contact between members. 6. Open economic interests with each other 7. Share information or intelligence that is received that impacts the other. 8. Be open to enhancing the level of formal diplomatic relations where reasonable. 9. Refrain from any aggressive military action or spying efforts against the other. 10. Refrain from providing succour to an enemy of the other during war. 11. Will provide knowledge, advice and aid in reasonable measure as requested. 12. Maintain a formal active diplomatic post in the Alliance Forum of each other. Cancellation may be sadly accepted with 48 hours notice and a further 72 hours of NAP. For Pax Corvus Cerridwyn,[b] [/b][b]Chief of Pax Corvus[/b] For The Order of the Black Rose Queen AterAtra Sir Winslow, Knight Protector The Knights Council Respectfully Dame Hime Thermis