Schattenmann Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1311020945' post='2758632'] I was going to stay quiet about this, however it seems Polaris's idiocy makes itself noted again. GATO has been long been IAA's allies and we know how they are. Meaning they are a close group of friends you can count on during any rough times and will always rise to the occasion to help an ally in need. If IAA came to us and told us they were going to downgrade our treaty to a ODP or just MDP level, we for sure wouldn't kick them to the curb. We respect IAA's decision in what they do and keep our friendship going no matter what level a silly treaty is. However, in this case, IAA wanted to downgrade with Polaris and likely for very logical reasons, yet wanted to remain your friend. Polaris didn't want to keep the treaty because it was not MD level? Really? How extremely foolish of you. How even dare you say IAA doesn't respect Polaris or the treaty when the last war they [i]burned[/i] for your idiocy of starting another global conflict. You are saying that IAA is not good enough for Polaris because they don't want to follow your every single one of your actions played out in the Political Landscape. This only means you want IAA to be a meatshield and when IAA says no, you toss them aside and look elsewhere. If this is how you see your friends, then shame on you for you are one terrible friend to have. Friends are people who will stand by each other no matter the arising conflict at hand whether it be internal or external. It would seem that you cannot handle one friend's disagreement and that's a real shame because you lost some great friends in IAA. It would seem that there is a reason for every war leading up to thus far to why it leads to Polaris getting rolled. These things that you make clear with this post is to why the OWF considers you to be the scum of Planet Bob. So keeping on rolling along Polaris, and when one day you find yourself without friends, then you will truly be put in agony. o/ IAA [/quote] Your "friends" diplomacy is outmoded and childish. Treaties are political unions, not fifth-grade love notes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laslo Kenez Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 I suppose that's why being an insufferable loudmouth has gone spectacularly well for you, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg23 Posted July 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='RandomInterrupt' timestamp='1311021113' post='2758635'] I'm sure it was just a mix-up. No big deal. I really do wish the best for the IAA in the future. They informed us that they were considering voting on a downgrade. We advised them that our treaty did not allow a downgrade and we were not interested in mutually agreeing to one. Later they came to us and informed us that they had downgraded our treaty, and we advised them at that we would there cancel. In the IAA's defense, they did keep us informed as they moved through the process. They just didn't seem to understand that it was a one-sided process that had no valid basis based on the treaty. They kept us updated on their actions, but did not want our input on them. [/quote] For some reason there are people who want to make this worse and start a fight. IAA hold no ill-will towards NpO and wish them the best. We also did not race to the OWF to try to spin this, all of this happened 5 days ago, we waited for the cancellation period of the treaty. I'd hardly call this a race and I apologize for the misunderstanding to outside of how this all went down. We believe it was a mix-up and I am sure Random and others at NpO would agree there is no problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjaminperdomo Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311021224' post='2758637'] Your "friends" diplomacy is outmoded and childish. Treaties are political unions, not fifth-grade love notes. [/quote] GATO <3 IAA Please pass the note Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheListener Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311021224' post='2758637'] Your "friends" diplomacy is outmoded and childish. Treaties are political unions, not fifth-grade love notes. [/quote] Schatt doesn't like us... I feel dirty now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Congratulations IAA on this excellent move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoADarthCyfe6 Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='TheListener' timestamp='1311021618' post='2758645'] Schatt doesn't like us... I feel dirty now. [/quote] Wanna get jiggy with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311021574' post='2758643'] For some reason there are people who want to make this worse and start a fight. IAA hold no ill-will towards NpO and wish them the best. We also did not race to the OWF to try to spin this, all of this happened 5 days ago, we waited for the cancellation period of the treaty. I'd hardly call this a race and I apologize for the misunderstanding to outside of how this all went down. We believe it was a mix-up and I am sure Random and others at NpO would agree there is no problem. [/quote] Good show greg. Considering what Polaris and IAA have been through historically there is no need for mud slinging in this cancellation. Though it's pretty funny to watch people squabble at each other (GATOan's included.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheListener Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1311021921' post='2758650'] Wanna get jiggy with it? [/quote] na na na na na nah? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 I like this, good work, IAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnsey Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Polar, it's cool. You still have Legion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krunk the Great Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Congratulations IAA on an intelligent FA decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Laslo Kenez' timestamp='1311021428' post='2758641'] I suppose that's why being an insufferable loudmouth has gone spectacularly well for you, then. [/quote] It worked well enough when I decided to tear UPS 2.0 apart. The simple fact of the matter is that IAA decided that they weren't on the same page as Polaris anymore, and Polaris decided if that was the case then it was idiotic to fool with an optional treaty. If GATO thinks that makes IAA some kind of heroes, then you're perfectly welcome to sit in your 5th year of isolation and cheer your only good allies on. When it comes to war, Polaris--like every alliance--needs allies, not "fwiends." Edited July 18, 2011 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311021574' post='2758643'] For some reason there are people who want to make this worse and start a fight. IAA hold no ill-will towards NpO and wish them the best. [/quote] Indeed, talking to some IAA gov through Sirius I haven't seen any real unhappiness or animosity, however some people with grudges against NpO will try inflate this no doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallen Fool Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1311020945' post='2758632']GATO has been long been IAA's allies and we know how they are. Meaning they are a close group of friends you can count on during any rough times and will always rise to the occasion to help an ally in need. If IAA came to us and told us they were going to downgrade our treaty to a ODP or just MDP level, we for sure wouldn't kick them to the curb. We respect IAA's decision in what they do and keep our friendship going no matter what level a silly treaty is. However, in this case, IAA wanted to downgrade with Polaris and likely for very logical reasons, yet wanted to remain your friend. [/quote]So when IAA wants to change a treaty it's the act of a friend, but when Polar wants to change a treaty it's the act of an abdominal monster. I see... [quote]You are saying that IAA is not good enough for Polaris because they don't want to follow your every single one of your actions played out in the Political Landscape. This only means you want IAA to be a meatshield and when IAA says no, you toss them aside and look elsewhere. If this is how you see your friends, then shame on you for you are one terrible friend to have.[/quote]A compelling argument if we cancelled because IAA didn't do something we asked of them. Thing is we didn't ask them to do anything... [quote]Friends are people who will stand by each other no matter the arising conflict at hand whether it be internal or external. It would seem that you cannot handle one friend's disagreement and that's a real shame because you lost some great friends in IAA.[/quote]You realize if friendship is a willingness to stand by one another and damn the consequences then, by that very definition, IAA is not Polar's friend since they wanted to invalidate the part of a legal document which required them to do so. [quote]It would seem that there is a reason for every war leading up to thus far to why it leads to Polaris getting rolled.[/quote]GATO's been rolled many, many, [b]many[/b] more times then Polar you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brehon Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Based on what was said by both sides, best to both. In the end seems like this is what is best for each alliance. What I really like it the open talk about it (after some community prodding). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenann Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Fun and interesting moves. Good luck to both parties on their futures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Fallen Fool' timestamp='1311022356' post='2758661'] You realize if friendship is a willingness to stand by one another and damn the consequences then, by that very definition, IAA is not Polar's friend since they wanted to invalidate the part of a legal document which required them to do so. [/quote] I would disagree, there are many friendships in CN that exist, but aren't represented by a treaty because they are not politically expedient. Think about it this way most alliances have friendships that are really just between the governments of said alliances. Now should a leader treaty some one based on that leader's personal relationships when that doesn't put their membership in a good place? I don't think that would be very good leadership. We should be friends with all our treaty partners, but not treaty partners with all our friends pretty much sums it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1311022631' post='2758667'] I would disagree, there are many friendships in CN that exist, but aren't represented by a treaty because they are not politically expedient. Think about it this way most alliances have friendships that are really just between the governments of said alliances. Now should a leader treaty some one based on that leader's personal relationships when that doesn't put their membership in a good place? I don't think that would be very good leadership. We should be friends with all our treaty partners, but not treaty partners with all our friends pretty much sums it up. [/quote] SCY, he's responding to a post that argues that you can't be friends if you're not treaty partners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laslo Kenez Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311022263' post='2758658'] It worked well enough when I decided to tear UPS 2.0 apart. The simple fact of the matter is that IAA decided that they weren't on the same page as Polaris anymore, and Polaris decided if that was the case then it was idiotic to fool with an optional treaty. If GATO thinks that makes IAA some kind of heroes, then you're perfectly welcome to sit in your 5th year of isolation and cheer your only good allies on. When it comes to war, Polaris--like every alliance--needs allies, not "fwiends." [/quote] IAA were already heroes to us, but I'm perfectly happy to cheer joined-up thinking. Your e-consternation over this is equally cheer-worthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311022749' post='2758670'] SCY, he's responding to a post that argues that you can't be friends if you're not treaty partners. [/quote] Yeah, you got me. You wouldn't have a small foot I could borrow would you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallen Fool Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1311022631' post='2758667'] I would disagree, there are many friendships in CN that exist, but aren't represented by a treaty because they are not politically expedient. Think about it this way most alliances have friendships that are really just between the governments of said alliances. Now should a leader treaty some one based on that leader's personal relationships when that doesn't put their membership in a good place? I don't think that would be very good leadership. We should be friends with all our treaty partners, but not treaty partners with all our friends pretty much sums it up. [/quote]My post was in reference to the definition of friendship SoADarthCyfe6 provided in his post, wherein friends fight and die together no matter the odds. My own definition of friendship, and how it fits into politics, mirrors your own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHiott Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 [quote name='Anger' timestamp='1311022222' post='2758656'] Polar, it's cool. You still have Legion. [/quote] I like the way you think, always looking at the positive side of things! All is not lost for NpO. Can we turn this into a tv show? I can see it now, on TrueLife: Who cancelled first? NpO vs. IAA - The Real Story. Either way, <3 IAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manis B Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Im requesting that all non gov GATO members respect our "5 years of isolation" and not post in this thread. <3 IAA o/ Polar everyone else, go home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaoshawk Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Congratulations on relatively departing away amicably compared to the end of some long term relationships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.