Augustus Autumn Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1329947105' post='2925735'] What happens if [i]your member[/i] approaches a member of an alliance not on that list and agrees to a tech deal, do you still feel they have the right to renege on any agreement made? In this instance the agreement would not be unsolicited but the party in question may not have been approved by your government. [/quote] Considering your stipulation that such a tech deal would, in fact, be solicited I don't think this policy would cover such a situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1329899730' post='2925507'] Probably as long as it takes to politically isolate TPF and its allies. [/quote] Two weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leet Guy Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 [quote name='Emperor Marx' timestamp='1329948736' post='2925754'] Two weeks. [/quote] Where can I bet on the under? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Emperor Marx' timestamp='1329948736' post='2925754'] Two weeks. [/quote] The destruction of Equestria would only take as long as necessary to get some poor sap to test the new policy. It is utterly indefensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memoryproblems Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1329933121' post='2925607'] Simple answer is that you don't have a sovereign right to wrongfully take other people's money, at least not one that anyone will recognize or care about. Tech deals are a contract. Offers to conduct tech deals are offers to make a contract. If you don't wish to do so, you just don't accept the offer. However, if you do take the money, its constructive acceptance to the terms of the underlying contract to produce tech and the engaging nation is bound to make good. Taking the money and not fulfilling the contract's terms is a breach, and any reasonable alliance will come to you seeking recompense for the cash taken, the members head, or war, giving absolutely no deference to whatever policy you may have that says you can do otherwise. It's a norm that's not worth getting yourself hurt over railing against, so if there are any reasonable minds in your government, the first time this policy is tested it will fold. If for some reason you don't have anyone there who can think with a clear head, you will end up getting burned to the ground for nothing at all. [/quote] I disagree. Ignorance is no excuse, and you would expect individuals to research with due diligence into the nations from which they are buying technology, to prevent being scammed. United Equestria has made their policy clear, and they have taken reasonable steps to make it available to those who would be affected by it. United Equestria has made this announcement here with the policy, and they have posted it on their off-site forums. They expect nations wishing to purchase tech from UE nations to be aware of these policies, and with that in mind, they expect that any nation which sends money with the intention of buying technology be aware of this policy and what might occur if they are not a member of a white-listed alliance. It is not theft, as UE has made reasonable attempts to notify the public of this policy. Again, ignorance is no excuse, however United Equestria has developed a refund policy to ensure that those who mistakenly send aid will have options through which to get their money back, provided that they take the appropriate steps. It is my understanding that this policy applies only to 'unsolicited tech deals', and that this policy would not be applicable to tech deals 1) with members of alliances on the white list, 2) solicited by members of UE or 3) agreed to by UE nations via message prior to sending of the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raasaa Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1329956255' post='2925890'] blah blah blah [/quote] all crap aside, they should focus on educating their membership on which alliances they can tech deal with. The moment they try and tell ppl outside their alliance to follow their rules/policies, hell breaks loose I did send out messages to members of UE prior to starting my tech deals with them. Quite a few members declined and said they cannot deal with me since i was a member of Umbrella. However, two nations did agree to tech deal with my nation. Unfortunately i dont have screenshots of the messages and was unaware of this crappy policy. [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=486364"]One of them[/url] has quit UE in recent times and moved to GPA and is still tech dealing with me. The [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=468012"]other one[/url] is still in UE and 18 days inactive, supposed to send me the first batch of 50 tech today. I just hope he wakes up and sends me tech quickly. So, some of your members were aware of this approved buyer alliances list, while some others were not. It would do you a LOT of good to put all your effort into educating your members Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o-dog Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) An absolute farce of a policy and I can't believe people are actually defending it. If a nation doesn't want to accept a speculative tech deal, all it has to do is decline the money. Simple. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. Edited February 23, 2012 by O-Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memoryproblems Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='raasaa' timestamp='1329958150' post='2925910'] all crap aside, they should focus on educating their membership on which alliances they can tech deal with. The moment they try and tell ppl outside their alliance to follow their rules/policies, hell breaks loose I did send out messages to members of UE prior to starting my tech deals with them. Quite a few members declined and said they cannot deal with me since i was a member of Umbrella. However, two nations did agree to tech deal with my nation. Unfortunately i dont have screenshots of the messages and was unaware of this crappy policy. [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=486364"]One of them[/url] has quit UE in recent times and moved to GPA and is still tech dealing with me. The [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=468012"]other one[/url] is still in UE and 18 days inactive, supposed to send me the first batch of 50 tech today. I just hope he wakes up and sends me tech quickly. So, some of your members were aware of this approved buyer alliances list, while some others were not. It would do you a LOT of good to put all your effort into educating your members [/quote] I agree, although from my understanding, there were other scenarios which this policy was meant to prevent, which I've been told is the larger piece of the puzzle here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o-dog Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1329956255' post='2925890'] I disagree. Ignorance is no excuse, and you would expect individuals to research with due diligence into the nations from which they are buying technology, to prevent being scammed. United Equestria has made their policy clear, and they have taken reasonable steps to make it available to those who would be affected by it. United Equestria has made this announcement here with the policy, and they have posted it on their off-site forums. They expect nations wishing to purchase tech from UE nations to be aware of these policies, and with that in mind, they expect that any nation which sends money with the intention of buying technology be aware of this policy and what might occur if they are not a member of a white-listed alliance. It is not theft, as UE has made reasonable attempts to notify the public of this policy. Again, ignorance is no excuse, however United Equestria has developed a refund policy to ensure that those who mistakenly send aid will have options through which to get their money back, provided that they take the appropriate steps. It is my understanding that this policy applies only to 'unsolicited tech deals', and that this policy would not be applicable to tech deals 1) with members of alliances on the white list, 2) solicited by members of UE or 3) agreed to by UE nations via message prior to sending of the money. [/quote] With respect, this is horse!@#$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Nukem Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 I like UE but this is just a horrible policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raasaa Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1329959289' post='2925927'] I agree, although from my understanding, there were other scenarios which this policy was meant to prevent, which I've been told is the larger piece of the puzzle here. [/quote] what other scenarios, whatever the scenario educating own members is far far easier to do than this crap. Also, if a UE member cancels my offer of 3mill, i wouldnt give a rat's arse. But if a UE gov tells me what i can or cannot do to get my tech deals, then i might get riled up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens of the desert Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1329898914' post='2925497'] How long until someone uses this as a reason to batter them? [/quote] When it is required and convenient, as has always been the case. Edited February 23, 2012 by Jens of the desert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1329923855' post='2925568'] So then, you think it's perfectly acceptable for them to codify in their charter/as a policy that shorting people on tech deals is fine? I'm of the belief that having an aid reason of "3m/100t" is a sufficient contract between two nations of what transaction is occurring. I also tell nations of the Mushroom Kingdom to go above and beyond this basic step and send a follow up message, with the quick instructions that if such a nation does not wish to enter into this contract, just cancel the deal and go back about your business.[/quote] Tech deals that are not directly organized by the alliance government have never been explicitly or implicitly by the alliance; they have always been a nation-nation thing. There are some alliances that go above-and-beyond and cover the odd lapsed deal, but that's exactly what they're doing: Going above and beyond. That's the oldest news around. [quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1329923855' post='2925568']Of course, any alliance could just add a short line into their own charter stating military action will be used to enforce tech deals are paid in a timely manner. [/quote] Knock yourself out. I'd personally love to watch the dominoes fall toward NPO and see which way they fall whilst MK flops around trying to sell a bad tech deal as a CB. There'll be finger foods and punch in Schloss Eggenberg while it plays on the bigscreen. Edited February 23, 2012 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeros Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 I this a bad time to point out you guys still owe me 50 tech from before the war started? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memoryproblems Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1329959360' post='2925929'] With respect, this is horse!@#$. [/quote] Well, you are of course entitled to your opinion. [quote name='raasaa' timestamp='1329959825' post='2925940'] what other scenarios, whatever the scenario educating own members is far far easier to do than this crap. Also, if a UE member cancels my offer of 3mill, i wouldnt give a rat's arse. But if a UE gov tells me what i can or cannot do to get my tech deals, then i might get riled up. [/quote] I will leave it to UE to explain the other scenarios to you if they would like, but I think one scenario that popped out to me was that if at some point, UE went on another recruiting drive and ended up with a large number of new nations coming in, if another alliance were to send massive amounts of aid to those new nations knowing that many of them would not remain active and thus be unable to fullfill their end of the agreement, they might then attempt to use that to exhort UE. Obviously this policy wasn't meant to be retroactive, which means that deals agreed to or money sent prior to its implementation are not subject to its terms, but going forward, you know the policy, and if you were to attempt to pursue unsolicited tech deals with UE members, you should know what result you could possibly receive. Its not as if this is a secret policy. If nations know about this policy and send money to UE nations for tech deals, then I would interpret that as consenting to the terms of the policy. If they don't know about the policy, well I think that is still on them because UE has taken the reasonable steps to ensure that people are aware of it. It would be an entirely different story if UE kept this policy a secret and tried to hold people to it when they didn't make every effort to inform people about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avery du Troiseau Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Wait. TLR are quality people. Were allies with many of your allies. We fought on the same side last war.... But If *I* send some of you burros money, and I get no tech, I'm !@#$ out of luck? Oh $%&@ that noise. This is !@#$ policy up and down, UE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raasaa Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1329964994' post='2926087'] I will leave it to UE to explain the other scenarios to you if they would like, but I think one scenario that popped out to me was that if at some point, UE went on another recruiting drive and ended up with a large number of new nations coming in, if another alliance were to send massive amounts of aid to those new nations knowing that many of them would not remain active and thus be unable to fullfill their end of the agreement, they might then attempt to use that to exhort UE. Obviously this policy wasn't meant to be retroactive, which means that deals agreed to or money sent prior to its implementation are not subject to its terms, but going forward, you know the policy, and if you were to attempt to pursue unsolicited tech deals with UE members, you should know what result you could possibly receive. Its not as if this is a secret policy. If nations know about this policy and send money to UE nations for tech deals, then I would interpret that as consenting to the terms of the policy. If they don't know about the policy, well I think that is still on them because UE has taken the reasonable steps to ensure that people are aware of it. It would be an entirely different story if UE kept this policy a secret and tried to hold people to it when they didn't make every effort to inform people about it. [/quote] erm, whatever the situation, if the member of the alliance cancels the foreign aid offer, thus declining a tech deal, no one is going to punish him for it :S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefspari Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1329941257' post='2925661'] They were going to. "Techbombing" it is called, it was explained to me how it works, and it's one of the most malicious abuses of good faith I've ever heard of. We decided to put our hoof down and stop it before it began. [/quote] So UE is so incapable of completing basic tech deals that they've decided to arbitrarily deem any tech deals they feel like as a donation. This can't [i]possibly[/i] backfire. [img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeris-_-L5.jpg[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattski133 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 no one will let you take their cash because you drafted up some papers. unless you get some alliances to sign this as an agreement, you're gonna be paying when the fiddler comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakamitai Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) I like this policy in principle, because it provides clarity and sets expectations about sending and receiving aid. However, in practice, someone will screw up and accept aid when they shouldn't, and there's a CB. If you were annoyed at people sending you unsolicited aid for tech deals, this wasn't the right way to show it. Edit: words Edited February 23, 2012 by bakamitai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Stuart Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) So UE members can't decline a transaction? Once a nation accepts that aid they either pay the amount of tech stipulated or they return the 3 million after letting the aid sender know. It has always been that way. Saying that, if you are looking for tech sellers, you really should at the very least discuss the matter with the potential seller before blindly sending aid. Plenty noobs stuff their first couple of tech deals up after all. Edited February 23, 2012 by Charles Stuart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1329971388' post='2926231'] So UE members can't decline a transaction? Once a nation accepts that aid they either pay the amount of tech stipulated or they return the 3 million after letting the aid sender know. It has always been that way. Saying that, if you are looking for tech sellers, you really should at the very least discuss the matter with the potential seller before blindly sending aid. Plenty noobs stuff their first couple of tech deals up after all. [/quote] GOONS will get to have some fun then if they get stiffed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 So have you retreated from this policy yet UE? It will eventually get you rolled if you refuse to do so. That is your sovereign right....to be rolled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 I've seen bad policy decisions from alliances and this is way up there. Legit question: Are you asking to be even further disliked or rolled? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1329963437' post='2926035'] Tech deals that are not directly organized by the alliance government have never been explicitly or implicitly by the alliance; they have always been a nation-nation thing. There are some alliances that go above-and-beyond and cover the odd lapsed deal, but that's exactly what they're doing: Going above and beyond. That's the oldest news around. [/quote] This is irrelevant to his point. The alliance is explicitly saying it's OK for their nations to renegade on tech deals. Edited February 23, 2012 by Azaghul 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.