crazy canuck

[quote name='Fallen Fool' date='07 July 2010 - 05:09 PM' timestamp='1278547766' post='2362918'] The entire OP is written in such a way as to evoke the image of TOP as a victim of great tragedy who lumbers on anyway in order to fulfill its duty. The reality is less romantic. TOP's leader violated the basic laws of existence. In response TOP did what was expected and required by those same laws. In doing so they did not become a hero, they just kept from becoming a scumbag. [/quote] People seem to appreciate that we did the right thing. I am not sure why you think less of them for that. It makes you look a bit petty. Perhaps you will do something in the near future that will move people to congratulate you on doing the right thing. If that day comes I will congratulate you along with everyone else. Until then people will only be able to judge you on this kind of behaviour. You may have noticed that a few people posted negative comments about us in this thread. The majority of the posts could have been negative. But they were not. That is why we have expressed our thanks to all those who have supported us in this very difficult time. If you see something wrong with that then I suggest that says more about you then anything else.

[quote name='Penkala' date='06 July 2010 - 04:14 PM' timestamp='1278458038' post='2361685'] Like I said, more to it than black and white. [/quote] I am not sure that you can get more black and white then this. Berith broke the rules. TOP dealt with it the only way it could given the sacred law of the almighty Admin, who is second in power only to the God of Thunder and Rock and Roll. If you are implying that some other blasphemy ought to have been carried out contrary to the sacred law then I will pray for the souls of the citizens of your nation. I would encourage all other TOPers to steer clear of discussion of such a blasphemy or you may have to undergo the rite of purification. Feanor might enjoy such rites but I am sure no one else does.

[quote name='SynthFG' date='06 July 2010 - 11:19 AM' timestamp='1278440347' post='2361273'] Also if you go back and look at the war stat threads you will find that for the first couple of weeks things were alot closer than some would make out in terms of NS, close enough that activity levels, skill levels and generalship also played a factor [/quote] It was close on paper but the writing was always on the wall after the events of the night war was declared. You are right about the skill levels though. We put up a good fight but CnG was really very well coordinated and did some serious damage even early on. There were a couple of times when the citizens of CrazyCanuckistan thought someone would mess up with a stagger or a coordinated attack to allow our brave soldiers some breathing room to regroup and counter attack but it never happened. The CnG war effort was precise and devestating. Almost like it had been planning it for some time.....

[quote name='Kubla Khan' date='06 July 2010 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1278439538' post='2361262'] On a serious note: Where, pray tell, were these multis located? Should any of us be worried about our own boards that these multis might be registered at? More information is required. Sucks, sorry guys [/quote] That is a fair question. To my knowledge Berith did not try to infiltrate any alliances with his multiple accounts. I would think that if TOP did learn of that we would inform the alliances in question promptly.

[quote name='Alterego' date='06 July 2010 - 10:29 AM' timestamp='1278437361' post='2361225'] It wasnt as innocent as you make out. Jumping the gun would be announcing it early not making a statement that the people mentioned never even heard of. He was absolutely clear that all the governments were 100% behind this. It was clearly an attempt to deceive people. Ram isnt a noob alliance leader and he seems to consider anything fair game including misrepresenting their "friends" and speaking for other governments without their approval or knowledge. If only there was a treaty to drop after this betrayal of C&Gs trust. [/quote] I was being subtle I think everyone here knows what Ram was up to. But it isnt for me to tell MK whether they should be upset with Ram for being disengenius with them. That is something they will work out for themselves.

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='06 July 2010 - 09:14 AM' timestamp='1278432880' post='2361165'] Kings, triums, presidents I don't really care what system you put up in place. The point stays the same, you (TOP) backstabbed your own kind and that speaks volumes about your fine alliance. Maybe it's just me, or my Dutch mentality that is preventing me from ever doing such a horrible thing (truth be told, I was never put in the situation, so at best it's speculation). I can just not simply stand here and congratulate you on something I get the creeps from. It is not cool. However, I also understand that not everyone has the same norms and values as me. To each their own I guess. [/quote] Given your Dutch mentality I would have thought that you would easily be able to distinguish between a King and a person who is democratically elected every three months. You might also want to reflect on the fact that TOP has frequent elections. We have been criticized to some extent for that but one thing we have never been accused of is the need for a coup to remove a leader. By the way, best of luck in today's game. My neighbours - a family from Amersterdam and my family (cheering for the Germans) are hoping for Germany Netherlands final. If that happens we are closing our street to traffic and holding a huge street party to watch the game.

[quote name='TypoNinja' date='05 July 2010 - 06:32 PM' timestamp='1278379951' post='2360650'] No, I'm saying you can't go paperless without being rabidly isolationist as well. You can't take part in politics while trying to ignore the system its founded on. Its like saying you love swimming but hate getting wet, the two just don't work. [/quote] In the current context I think you are right. It would take a dramatic paradigm shift for such a thing to work. Certainly Gramlins under Ram were not the ones to bring about such a paradigm shift.

[quote name='amad123' date='06 July 2010 - 08:23 AM' timestamp='1278429771' post='2361118'] No it is not wrong to want IRON to surrender unconditionally, you just aren't going to achieve it. You can propose whatever amendment you like, we enjoy a good laugh as much as the next alliance. Yes, IRON & DAWN were deliberate in responding to NpO's call for help in their war. Just as deliberate as Gramlins was in countering IRON. You don't want white peace, perfect, we will soon meet on the battlefield where we can exchange nukes.[/quote] That is really the point. Matthew's plea that there was nothing "wrong" with demanding an unconditional surrender assumes that there is some written code setting out what and what is not acceptable. There is no such thing but what we do have is a situation where people need to act reasonably. That is what they did not do and that is why they are wrong. Matthew - do you need proof of just how wrong you were? Compare your membership and NS from say a year ago and now. As I have said a number of times, at the end of the day, every alliance can be said to be democratic because people are not stupid (particularly in this community) they will vote with their feet and leave or just delete if they see that their alliance leadership is making decision with which they disagree. That is the true measure of the Gre failure and why you are so fundatmentally and irretrievably wrong.

[quote name='SirWilliam' date='06 July 2010 - 07:22 AM' timestamp='1278426154' post='2361081'] I could have, and probably should have, been a bit clearer here. It wasn't my intent to state or imply that Ramirus lied about MK (officially) supporting his proposed amendment. He may very well have spoken with someone else in MK government. I, however, never signed off on anything of the sort, informally or otherwise, and don't entirely have much interest in doing so (seeing as how, for the reason I previously mentioned, I don't see much of a point). [/quote] Thank you for the clarification. It seems that Ram et al. jumped the gun when they said that everyone was supporting an amendment.

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' date='06 July 2010 - 08:31 AM' timestamp='1278430286' post='2361127'] I was unaware that we had Kings. The more you know. [/quote] I just havent gotten around to telling you about my secret coronation. I plan on running a paperless monarchy. No amendment to our charter is required.

[quote name='Titus Pullo' date='06 July 2010 - 04:29 AM' timestamp='1278415756' post='2361025'] THIS IS PURE BLASPHEMY! JOHAN, GOD OF THUNDER AND ROCK AND ROLL, SHALL SMITE YOU FOR SUCH IRREVERENCE! Johan Andersson is but the mortal earth-bound incarnation of the great Johan whom we revere. [/quote] Agreed. When Crymson next tries to play Hearts of Iron his computer will die a terrible and painful death. More importantly, thank you to all of you for your understanding and support for the difficult decision our hospitallers had to make. Berith was indeed very well respected within and outside TOP. However, there was no other choice but to proceed honestly and honourably.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='05 July 2010 - 07:26 AM' timestamp='1278339995' post='2360235'] ... which is pretty much precisely what I said in the "New Gremlins" thread. [/quote] The only thing you are doing now is trying to make a martyr out of yourself and Gre. The problem with that course of action is that people have to care about the cause for which the martyr gives their pixels. But nobody cares about this and the more you and Ram try to spin this the more ridiculous your position becomes. Indeed, the more upset your paperless relationships may become as untruths are said about them. Face facts. You were wrong to demand an unconditional surrender. You are wrong to demand an amendment to a peace agreement that has been made and which is well on the way to being performed. You need to face reality and grasp the olive branch extended by IRON. Can you give one sane reason why Ram will not do that?

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='05 July 2010 - 11:46 AM' timestamp='1278355596' post='2360407'] That's also a problem. This world needs more death and destruction. Not less. And please, cut the crap about "THE ODDS WERE AGAINST US FROM THE START!!!!!!!11!". CnG had the war won right when TOP declared. [/quote] You are correct that once Gremlins decided to pile on the die was already cast. Gremlins went on this "moral crusade" with very little risk to themselves. That is until Ram et al decided it was a good idea to demand separate unreasonable terms of IRON and turned a certain victory into a certain defeat.

[quote name='SynthFG' date='05 July 2010 - 04:24 AM' timestamp='1278329030' post='2360187'] The experiment didn't fail tho Paper or paperless has absolutly nothing to do with what Gre are trying to pull now, The insane idea off demanding UC surrender when not one of the primary parties in the conflict was never going to work, especialy when the allies won't support it and you do not have the strenght to impose it yourself It was an interesting idea, but it should have gone back into the draw as soon as MK rejected and never been suggested yet alone demanded of IRON, [/quote] This part you got right. One thing I am interested in is why Ram didnt see the sense of your position. I assume you or people like you tried to explain this to him at the time. @typoninja, I think you and Synth may be saying the same thing. To go the paperless route you need to have exceptional leadership who can be trusted not to make stupid decision once they are free of formal public treaties and everything can be justified. Also, I would say that to be successful there has to be a very good external understanding of the position of the alliance. Otherwise there will be a great deal of distrust as to who they are making back deals with and who they are stabbing in the back Gremlins certainly were not in that position. They have had leaders make terrible mistakes and they did this during a period of extreme change in their relationships with other alliances. In the end it was a failure but because of how they did it. There come a time in CN history when someone can pull it off successfully. But I dont see that occuring anytime soon.

[quote name='Ramirus Maximus' date='04 July 2010 - 12:15 AM' timestamp='1278227691' post='2359350'] Maybe you should've surrendered on March 27th. You would've been been out of terms and had full peace in under a week. [/quote] This best represents best why it is that the Gramlins position is so, what is the word... idiotic. Here we are with a once respected alliance ground into dust; losing so many members it barely qualifies as an actualy alliance; and the megolomaniac who lead them to this is telling others they should have surrendered!

[quote name='flak attack' date='01 July 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1278013530' post='2356951'] I believe most of the signatories have pretty much said they are fine with the amendment if Gre and IRON are fine with it. [/quote] Really? Does CnG really want to open up negotiations on the peace agreement and if so why? @ matthew, so you are saying you have been thinking about this for a month but you are only now suggesting it. Do you really think that is helping your argument that this has nothing to do with Ram taking damage rather then just watching the rest of his alliance burn.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='01 July 2010 - 08:12 AM' timestamp='1277997130' post='2356633'] I know, from our discussions, that you personally do not feel that you have done anything wrong. However, I do not believe the general consensus to be the same. In light of that, it is *not* humiliating to admit when you've done something wrong. It should be, in fact, empowering and honorable. [/quote] An admirable job of attempting to change the subject but I dont think you will get away with it. Try to stay on topic and explain why it is that days after Ram actally enters the war there is suddenly talk of ending the war by amending a peace agreement that has already been agreed to by the relevant parties. Also, please explain to me how it is that in your world the losing side (surely you must recognize that you must make peace or be destroyed) can dicatate peace terms. Further, explain to me how a once rational alliance does not simply accept the very generous offer of a white peace offered to you by IRON?

[quote name='Ramirus Maximus' date='30 June 2010 - 09:54 PM' timestamp='1277960025' post='2356275'] Schatt, looks like someone actually DID read at least "The Prince" (unless this interpretation is in a Wiki article somewhere...that's where most of you get your information from). Canuck, good start...PM me if you'd like a summer reading list to continue your studies. [/quote] A wise Zombie has already made the point in that this community has a large number of highly educated people. I know it is against your nature but you should heed that advice.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='30 June 2010 - 09:40 PM' timestamp='1277959192' post='2356260'] I'm familiar. You are also correct in your analysis of The Prince for the most part. However, one should not downplay Machiavelli's belief that while one should avoid cruelty, there is a time and a place to be ruthless: "a prince may be perceived to be merciful, faithful, humane, frank, and religious, but he must only seem to have these qualities". Put in the context of Planet Bob, Ramirus fails Machiavelli's tests in a number of ways. I'll not renumerate them here for a variety of reasons. Suffice to say that I would not have been above relieving him of his command had I been in Gramlins, using whatever IC means was necessary to accomplish the task. Fortunately, I already have a better home. [/quote] I agree completely on both counts. One of the great historical tragedies of CN is that the Ramirus was able to take over the Gramlins and twist them into his own image.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='30 June 2010 - 04:38 PM' timestamp='1277941082' post='2355925'] [list] [*]use cunning and deception [b][size="5"]√[/size] Check[/b] [*]fraud is acceptable when it attains positive ends [b][size="5"]√[/size] Check[/b] [*]si guarda al fine [b][size="5"]√[/size] Check[/b] [/list] I'll let it count. [/quote] Actually he was highly critical of fraud and corruption particularly in relation to the Church in that particular satire. In my view the lesson in the Prince is not power at any price - which is usually the interpretation given to it. It is how to be a good Prince and how to hold on to power for the good of the realm. A nuance which is often missed. You have to remember the context in which he was writing. Politics in the Italian States in that period makes CN look downright civilized.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='30 June 2010 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1277938556' post='2355884'] Does it count if I've read La Mandragola and not Il Principe? [/quote] Probably, if you can understand the meaning behind his satire you are definitely invited to the club.

[quote name='Zombie Glaucon' date='30 June 2010 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1277935291' post='2355807'] I think getting Machiavelli & Smith in an state-run education system is unlikely (unless you specifically go for classes with them at the University level), but it's foolish to assume that a community populated by politics and economics nerds doesn't have a few members here or there that have bothered to read original, relevant works. [/quote] I would hope so. But I have seen some highly educated politicians etc mangle the usage so I am not sure why we wouldnt expect that of highly educated CN politicians etc.

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1277869676' post='2354811'] I doubt anyone commenting on the Machiavelli comment has ever read 5 lines of Machiavelli. [/quote] I agree for the most part. Although I would like to the think that education systems are a bit better than that so at least some people who invoke the name have actually read at least part of his work. Machiavelli and Adam Smith are similar in that their names are often invoked but usually for things the authors probably would never have agreed to.

[quote name='King Chill I' date='30 June 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1277931570' post='2355679'] You have access to the thread. You can go re-read it at your convenience. [/quote] I think you misunderstand me. I take your word that you yourself did not apologize. Even if I was to go back through that very lengthy thread to search for all your posts and found out that you had misremembered what you said that would not prove anything other then you have a bad memory. I am not interested in that. I trust that you are accurate in your recollection of what you personally said. What I am more interested in is the point that a lot of Gramlins came to us in that thread and said they understood why we were very upset, they acknowledged the breach and they said they were sorry but they hoped that we understood that they thought they were doing the right thing. Your argument is that Ram isnt trying to rewrite history but at the very least he is trying his best to ignore it.

[quote name='King Chill I' date='30 June 2010 - 12:47 PM' timestamp='1277927250' post='2355504'] Once again Ram is not rewriting anything. He has held that point of view from day one. Just because he didnt publicize it to everyone doesnt mean he just made it up now. Initially it was Boondock and I that came over to explain things. Also as Praetor at the time i dont think i apologized for doing what we did since there was nothing wrong with it, I said i was sorry we had to do it (Boondock might have apologized but he wasnt gov). [/quote] You may not have apologized. But a great deal of others did because of course they all thought there was something to apologize for. One thing is for sure, at no time did you step in to try to correct everyone else that was coming to us to apologize. If what you are now saying is accurate then at the very least you let us believe that the heart felt apologies that your members were giving us was a reflection of the way Gramlins felt about the situation. That seems a tad dishonest to me. But at the very least I am beginning to better understand how things fell apart between our two alliances.