Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[ojiras ajeridas]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303322992' post='2694739']
TOP entered the BiPolar war on the side of NpO, an alliance you historically do not like. What guarantee does MK have that you will not pull something like that again? Solution for MK, sign a treaty with TOP.
[/quote]
Following your logic, MK and NPO should be treatied too.... but they aren't.

[Azaghul]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303322992' post='2694739']
TOP entered the BiPolar war on the side of NpO, an alliance you historically do not like. What guarantee does MK have that you will not pull something like that again? Solution for MK, sign a treaty with TOP.
[/quote]
The fact that when we started talking to them a lot, we discovered that we have a lot in common and would make good allies for each other. While those that they likely might ally with against us have screwed them over on more than one occasion.

[Daimos]

[quote name='Ojiras Ajeridas' timestamp='1303323276' post='2694742']
Following your logic, MK and NPO should be treatied too.... but they aren't.
[/quote]

snip

Edited April 20, 2011 by Daimos

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Ojiras Ajeridas' timestamp='1303317303' post='2694688']
Wait... let us put in the right order how things happened:

1. NpO was at war.
2. TOP asked if they wanted help.
3. TOP asked what NpO would say if TOP et. al. pre-empted MK.
4. NpO said they would welcome it.
5. NpO told MK that they would be attacked on date X.
[/quote]
You missed the following.

6. TOP attacked MK.
7. NpO hit TOP, who they had told to hit MK, in defense of MK.

[quote name='Blue Lightning' timestamp='1303319133' post='2694704']
Not everyone my alliance is at war with deserves to be treated like !@#$. I actually like and respect some of my opponents.
[/quote]
It's quite a jump to go from "respect" to wishing someone good health. I mean, if you're hoping that someone will continue to have a healthy nation, one good step is to, you know, not declare war against it.

[Daimos]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1303323284' post='2694743']
The fact that when we started talking to them a lot, we discovered that we have a lot in common and would make good allies for each other. While those that they likely might ally with against us have screwed them over on more than one occasion.
[/quote]

What would be that unique commonality that your alliances share between in each other that you have suddenly discovered after all this years?

[Letum]

[quote name='Ojiras Ajeridas' timestamp='1303323276' post='2694742']
Following your logic, MK and NPO should be treatied too.... but they aren't.
[/quote]

Shhh, don't give away the master plan.

[Daimos]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303323713' post='2694747']
snip
[/quote]

[Johnny Apocalypse]

Daimos; I know it's an alien concept to NPO to talk to alliances which have pounded the crap out of you but other alliances are capable of dialogue with their old opponents. It just so happens that when MK and TOP actually started talking they realised they got on with one another despite the vicious war they fought.

[ojiras ajeridas]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303324527' post='2694754']
What would be that unique commonality that your alliances share between in each other that you have suddenly discovered after all this years?
[/quote]
I think TOP and MK always had quite much in common. But hatred mostly closes your eyes. In that war, soon we found out that there was a huge respect from TOP to MK and from MK to TOP. And passing time, that respect became friendship. I mean, it's not that we signed 3 days after our pre-empting strike. It's not that the treaty was written before the war ended and we just waited until the end of reps to make it public.

[Richard Rahl]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303324527' post='2694754']
What would be that unique commonality that your alliances share between in each other that you have suddenly discovered after all this years?
[/quote]

At first, I thought your inquiries were genuine, but this question makes me feel otherwise. Are you honestly saying that the only reason a friendship between alliances can exist is due to a "unique commonality?" What's you unique commonality with Legion? At first I was going to say it was having forced them to have a Viceroy, but that was not unique to Legion. Maybe it was rolling them in battle. Again, not unique. So where is this special quality that allows you and Legion, with your shared history, to have a friendship, but not TOP and MK? Your entire line of thought is preposterous.

Also, you say that MK and TOP cannot trust each other because we have previously fought. By your own definition, you cannot trust Legion, and are just using them. Yours is a relationship of convenience that lacks friendship as a basis. Am I doing it right?

You want to know what unique commonality TOP based its friendship with MK on? It was competence. There are a handful of competent alliances, and MK and TOP are two of them. Unlike your relationship with Legion, that's actually unique quality. No other alliance was as worthy in battle, as prepared, as active, as deft at politics. We saw ourselves in MK and realized that with work we could forge a strong, long relationship. Thus the Unholy Alliance was born.

[SiCkO]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1303298402' post='2694520']
Yes, I am aware. It's still a weird thing to say to your enemy.
[/quote]

not really

I still Legion and most of the members in it, and really wish them the best

[flak attack]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1303282966' post='2694455']
It's extremely obvious to me that you, Archon and Arsenal (and possibly Londo, but I doubt it) had some sort of scheme going to bring down TOP that everyone else didn't know about for OPSEC reasons. I knew what was happening in #tfw and it wasn't discussed there, so clearly it was only discussed at the very highest levels. As for the fact that you wanted to prove to the world that NpO would follow through on its threats, that's what you told C&G when we asked you not to attack \m/, I'd be happy to provide exact quotations of what you said.

The only thing I can't work out is at what precise point in that war you set up the trap, but I'm far from clueless.
[/quote]
There was no grand conspiracy to bring down TOP. Yes, we did take actions to ensure that we would be able to defeat TOP if it came to that point, but there was no genuine desire to isolate TOP and kill them. We were aware that they would likely end up opposite in future wars, but we didn't go out of our ways to put them over there. There's no advantage to us to isolate and crush a close ally of several of our closest allies at the time (FOK, Gre, Umb specifically come to mind)

[quote name='Timberland' timestamp='1303303593' post='2694549']
The hit on MK and C&G last war was a strategic hit thats it. If we didn't hit them they would have hit us. TOP and MK are both mature enough to be able to put the war behind us. With all of our Q&A's we had on each others forums we found out we're not that much different.
[/quote]
tbh, I would say the war helped normalize relations more than any Q&A threads. It pretty much forced us to interact.

[NLights]

It doesn't seem like you really thought these arguments through, Daimos. If you had, you might have remembered that pesky Legion treaty NPO has.

Woo boy - another terrible NPO poster. Maybe give em some tips before they come out here and make fools of themselves, guys.

[Daimos]

[quote name='Richard Rahl' timestamp='1303326701' post='2694786']
At first, I thought your inquiries were genuine, but this question makes me feel otherwise. Are you honestly saying that the only reason a friendship between alliances can exist is due to a "unique commonality?" What's you unique commonality with Legion? At first I was going to say it was having forced them to have a Viceroy, but that was not unique to Legion. Maybe it was rolling them in battle. Again, not unique. So where is this special quality that allows you and Legion, with your shared history, to have a friendship, but not TOP and MK? Your entire line of thought is preposterous.

Also, you say that MK and TOP cannot trust each other because we have previously fought. By your own definition, you cannot trust Legion, and are just using them. Yours is a relationship of convenience that lacks friendship as a basis. Am I doing it right?

You want to know what unique commonality TOP based its friendship with MK on? It was competence. There are a handful of competent alliances, and MK and TOP are two of them. Unlike your relationship with Legion, that's actually unique quality. No other alliance was as worthy in battle, as prepared, as active, as deft at politics. We saw ourselves in MK and realized that with work we could forge a strong, long relationship. Thus the Unholy Alliance was born.
[/quote]

Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.

[NLights]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.
[/quote]

What [i]exactly[/i] is it based on then?!

[crazy canuck]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1303328399' post='2694800']
tbh, I would say the war helped normalize relations more than any Q&A threads. It pretty much forced us to interact.
[/quote]


That is an excellent point. The interaction allowed us to realize what had actually occured, showed us the skill and honour of those we fought against, the honour of those who stood with us and the perfidious nature of those who crossed us.

It was an exceptionally enlightening experience. Those who do not understand the lessons of that war are either wilfully blind or lack sufficient understanding.

[ojiras ajeridas]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.
[/quote]
You know, actually I begin to believe you're just jealous. Why else would you invest so much energy in denying that our relationship simply could be friendship?

[Richard Rahl]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. [b] A lot of competent alliance out there.[/b] I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.[/quote]

You must have an extremely loose definition of the word competence.

[quote]MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other.[/quote]

That you read what I wrote, and took that from it, speaks volumes about your intentions.

[quote]NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.[/quote]

What's it based on? No competent alliance (of which there are only a handful) wanted to sign a treaty with either NPO or Legion, so you treatied each other. Is it based on mutual loneliness? It's most likely based on NPO needing a meat shield, there is zero foundation of friendship there, and of course you don't trust them because you fought them before (see I can use the same "argument" you are using).

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.
[/quote]


Speaking as someone previously in the Mushroom Kingdom during the BiPolar war and after, I can safely say that you are wrong and you have no idea what you're talking about. Now; where does your expertise on the Diplomatic relations of TOP-MK come from exactly? What evidence do you have to back up your claim?

[Krunk the Great]

o/ TOP on this grand endeavour.

[greatmagnus]

This thread gets better and better as time goes on.

Reasoning: Many people are screaming at the fact that TOP attacked right when peace was about to happen, and yet as time goes on the other side has still not surrendered. The argument pretty much refutes itself as time passes.

[SiCkO]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.
[/quote]

ummm

NPO - Legion originally signed when NPO was the top dog and everyone was afraid of them, While I assume it has grown into a strong tie (though I never was a fan personally) It certainly didnt start that way

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Daimos' timestamp='1303329090' post='2694807']
Competence? Hardly unique. A lot of competent alliance out there. I doubt you will sign a treaty with all of them.

MK and TOP is a treaty to pacify a threat from each other. NPO and Legion treaty is not base on that.
[/quote]

No, Q was a treaty to pacify threats and consolidate power, in particular Gremlins and NPO at the time. MK and TOP was honestly a logical treaty truly based on two communities that were much more similar than different. I personally always pushed for a MK treaty or better relations pre-biPolar because I knew both groups quite well and knew they'd get along well. Both have a strong sense of independence, quality of membership, and are a bit more mature than the avg (yes I actually called MK mature) capable of discussion past the "No U" and other garbage that passes as alliance "friendship" and better relations.

Standard route:
Alliance 1: OMG I your guyz is awesome o/
Alliance 2: o/ to you too, you guyz rawk!
Alliance 1: I think I like you
Alliance 2: I like you too
Treaty gets signed

TOP/MK Route:
MK: Screw you
TOP: Screw you
TOP: Pre-emp
MK: Tricky moves and interesting propoganda that even TOP will laugh at that also happens to generate quality discussion
TOP: Great at war, see's that MK is great at war, mutual respect
MK: Discussion of all things awesome
TOP: Q&A that generates a lot of discussion, argument, meeting of the minds
MKonTOP: Treaty

Fact is we have two communities dedicated to preserving ideals and beliefs that are similar that actually like each other instead of the mindless discussion of what is considered politics that passes in many places.

Lastly, I'll say it again, it's not a treaty to nullify a mutual threat, heck if either one of us ever had an issue with each other that was big enough we'd cancel the treaty and blow each other up again, none of us fear losing the pixels.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' timestamp='1303334527' post='2694869']
No, Q was a treaty to pacify threats and consolidate power, in particular Gremlins and NPO at the time. MK and TOP was honestly a logical treaty truly based on two communities that were much more similar than different. I personally always pushed for a MK treaty or better relations pre-biPolar because I knew both groups quite well and knew they'd get along well. Both have a strong sense of independence, quality of membership, and are a bit more mature than the avg (yes I actually called MK mature) capable of discussion past the "No U" and other garbage that passes as alliance "friendship" and better relations.

Standard route:
Alliance 1: OMG I your guyz is awesome o/
Alliance 2: o/ to you too, you guyz rawk!
Alliance 1: I think I like you
Alliance 2: I like you too
Treaty gets signed

TOP/MK Route:
MK: Screw you
TOP: Screw you
TOP: Pre-emp
MK: Tricky moves and interesting propoganda that even TOP will laugh at that also happens to generate quality discussion
TOP: Great at war, see's that MK is great at war, mutual respect
MK: Discussion of all things awesome
TOP: Q&A that generates a lot of discussion, argument, meeting of the minds
MKonTOP: Treaty

Fact is we have two communities dedicated to preserving ideals and beliefs that are similar that actually like each other instead of the mindless discussion of what is considered politics that passes in many places.

Lastly, I'll say it again, it's not a treaty to nullify a mutual threat, heck if either one of us ever had an issue with each other that was big enough we'd cancel the treaty and blow each other up again, none of us fear losing the pixels.
[/quote]

What? Impossible!
Though I do love that TOP: Pre-emp

Also, good to see you around LM. We should catch up sometime.

[Ryuzaki]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' timestamp='1303334527' post='2694869']Both have a strong sense of independence, quality of membership, and are a bit more mature than the avg (yes I actually called MK mature) capable of discussion past the "No U" and other garbage that passes as alliance "friendship" and better relations.
[/quote]
Most people don't get to see the serious stuff MKers post.