A Cancellation

[potato]

It's politics 101 that the word of the leader of a democratic alliance only carries so much weight. Usually, said leader is right if he promises his alliance will do X or Y. This is one of the times where he wasn't.

[Charles Stuart]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1348139333' post='3032212']
I dont think they are a MK puppet. They hate MK.
[/quote]

I would hate having a hand up my posterior too.

[sir pwnage]

The true government of The International is Congress. If you didn't speak to us, you didn't speak to INT. What Trotsky said was his best guess as to how the Congress (or war council) of The International would vote. He was wrong. Oops. Happens. It sucks that this is how it went down, but if LSF had actually ventured for from their own forums and tried to get a feel for the general opinion of INT, as well as our allies on whom they were depending for support, this might have gone a bit better for them.

[Hereno]

[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1348144299' post='3032232']
The true government of The International is Congress. If you didn't speak to us, you didn't speak to INT. What Trotsky said was his best guess as to how the Congress (or war council) of The International would vote. He was wrong. Oops. Happens. It sucks that this is how it went down, but if LSF had actually ventured for from their own forums and tried to get a feel for the general opinion of INT, as well as our allies on whom they were depending for support, this might have gone a bit better for them.
[/quote]

Oh shut up. You and I both know the planning/brainstorming/etc. stage for this was over a period of months, and I know for a fact that none of this blindsided INT in the least. Tetris knew about it before we even signed with LSF as part of the due diligence and such that takes place before a treaty is signed. I don't have any particular desire to send INT 'round the ringer, but if you're going to sit there and scapegoat Trotsky now that he's left and then lay everything else at the feet of the LSF, I'm going to have to correct that.

[Charles Stuart]

[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1348144299' post='3032232']
The true government of The International is Congress. If you didn't speak to us, you didn't speak to INT. What Trotsky said was his best guess as to how the Congress (or war council) of The International would vote. He was wrong. Oops. Happens. It sucks that this is how it went down, but if LSF had actually ventured for from their own forums and tried to get a feel for the general opinion of INT, as well as our allies on whom they were depending for support, this might have gone a bit better for them.
[/quote]

Your sig says otherwise.

[Sabcat]

Trotsky has left Int. Best move he ever made, I'd have liked to see him come back to LSF, he might have over stepped his powers in Int but what he really did was get it where the rest of Int didn't.

[Grigoris Lambrakis]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348144722' post='3032234']
Oh shut up. You and I both know the planning/brainstorming/etc. stage for this was over a period of months, and I know for a fact that none of this blindsided INT in the least. Tetris knew about it before we even signed with LSF as part of the due diligence and such that takes place before a treaty is signed. I don't have any particular desire to send INT 'round the ringer, but if you're going to sit there and scapegoat Trotsky now that he's left and then lay everything else at the feet of the LSF, I'm going to have to correct that.
[/quote]

No one is "scapegoating Trotsky now that he's left". Trotsky left [i]because[/i] of the [i]justified[/i] criticism he received. And in a week we also have elections. That's how democracies work, when the government fails to deliver, you replace them. If Trotsky was not removed, you would be all over the place going "if he failed you, then why is he still gencom?". But I guess hatters gonna hate.

[Vanilla Bapalm]

[quote name='Rigas' timestamp='1348145983' post='3032243']
No one is "scapegoating Trotsky now that he's left". Trotsky left [i]because[/i] of the [i]justified[/i] criticism he received. And in a week we also have elections. That's how democracies work, when the government fails to deliver, you replace them. If Trotsky was not removed, you would be all over the place going "if he failed you, then why is he still gencom?". But I guess hatters gonna hate.
[/quote]
How did he fail? Did he forget an announcement?

[Hereno]

[quote name='Rigas' timestamp='1348145983' post='3032243']
No one is "scapegoating Trotsky now that he's left". Trotsky left [i]because[/i] of the [i]justified[/i] criticism he received. And in a week we also have elections. That's how democracies work, when the government fails to deliver, you replace them. If Trotsky was not removed, you would be all over the place going "if he failed you, then why is he still gencom?". But I guess hatters gonna hate.
[/quote]

No I actually would not, because despite his mistakes, I know that he actually did want to go in for LSF. And I know that he tried to do so right up until the peace was actually signed. Something something about democracy getting in the way. I really don't care if INT wants to come on here and spin this way or that to try to alleviate some of the guilt on them, because that's how the OWF works. But I'm not going to allow it at the expense of the reputation of my friends who I feel are being unnecessarily criticized. That INT's big idea is to play the victim that never knew anything about LSF going to war until the week of the actual action, and then blame LSF and Trotsky for incompetence, while not wanting to take any blame themselves, while INT's democratic votes are what killed the idea of war - not the words of Trotsky - is dishonest, and that kind of !@#$%^&* behavior is exactly why everybody is pissed at you guys. So maybe, after all, INT sans-Trotsky and an LSF treaty really does fit into the CNG bloc. I know that your perspective is unique, having fought in LSF yourself, but c'mon man. This is bogus, and wrong, and you know it.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1348145946' post='3032242']
Trotsky has left Int. Best move he ever made, I'd have liked to see him come back to LSF, he might have over stepped his powers in Int but what he really did was get it where the rest of Int didn't.
[/quote]

The funny thing about "getting it"... it really only applies to a singular point of view. How arrogant of you to think you , above all others, are the alliance, or the individual that "gets it." You may or may not like the political game that most folks here on CN play, but for you to insinuate that somehow your way is better, because you, and you alone say it is, speaks volumes of the arrogance that you possess. You sir, do NOT get it.

[White Chocolate]

INT & LSF probably had no choice other than to announce this in a public thread since the situation leading up to the cancellation was public and a popular source of gossip.

Having said that, this thread is a excellent example of why I'm not a fan of announcing cancellations on the OWF. So INT and LSF are no longer allies. Alliances drop treaties with other alliances. It's a fact of politics and happens on a regular basis for a variety of reasons. Thanks for the public notice. Enough said.

[Sabcat]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1348147198' post='3032247']
The funny thing about "getting it"... it really only applies to a singular point of view. How arrogant of you to think you , above all others, are the alliance, or the individual that "gets it." You may or may not like the political game that most folks here on CN play, but for you to insinuate that somehow your way is better, because you, and you alone say it is, speaks volumes of the arrogance that you possess. You sir, do NOT get it.
[/quote]

I said all of those things? Have a lie down, Rush. You're flustered.

There is only one singular point of view when it comes to LSF treaties, the view of the LSF. The same is, or should be, true for all alliances. These singular ideas are what makes an alliance, an alliance. The shared history of allies are what defines the relationships that they have. Trotsky understood the basis of the LSF and it seems misunderstood the basis of Int, which is odd, as they elected him to some position or other that means something or other.

We are no longer allied with Int. The treaty between us was shown to have no basis whatsoever in either shared values or mutual respect. That treaty has come to an end.

I for one could not tell you what Int are or what they stand for, I really don't understand them at all. It would appear that you do, Rush, it's good that you are allied to them and LSF are not. When we're talking about Int, I don't get it.

[Grigoris Lambrakis]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348146974' post='3032246']
all that
[/quote]

I don't want to drag Trotsky in the mud. No one deserves this. So I won't go on about him. After all, if you want to discuss his role, you know where to find me. But you can't hold Int's membership responsible about any of this. You see the membership votes based on the info the government decides to disclose, so, practically, the membership can only vote what the government wants them to vote.

You do know where to find me about any and all of this. So if you sincerely want answers, ask me on in private. All you can achieve here is drag in the mud the only good alliance the Left has left. You know as well as I that truths are never told in OWF.

[sir pwnage]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348144722' post='3032234']
Oh shut up. You and I both know the planning/brainstorming/etc. stage for this was over a period of months, and I know for a fact that none of this blindsided INT in the least. Tetris knew about it before we even signed with LSF as part of the due diligence and such that takes place before a treaty is signed. I don't have any particular desire to send INT 'round the ringer, but if you're going to sit there and scapegoat Trotsky now that he's left and then lay everything else at the feet of the LSF, I'm going to have to correct that.
[/quote]

Where in that post did I scapegoat Trotsky? He did what he thought was right every step of the way. Whether they were the best actions or not... well, hindsight is 20/20. I talked to him often during this period and I know that he never had anything but INT and our allies' best interests at heart. As for us getting blindsided, yes, we did know that LSF was going to provoke NoR. BUT, we (as in Congress) didn't know about the Dave War until we read about it on the OWF. Same goes for the GATO/TLR - R&R hit. So did we know about what was generally going to happen? Sure. But the specifics blindsided 99% of the alliance, as they often do. A lot of things unrolled in a way that we didn't expect. Which we should have expected but... well, at that point you just get paralyzed with indecision trying to think of every way a situation should go, and that just makes things worse. Heck, it's the reason LSF was at war for a month longer than they needed to be.

[Samus]

Two awful alliances, splitting up.

Beautiful.

[Hereno]

[quote name='Rigas' timestamp='1348149666' post='3032257']
I don't want to drag Trotsky in the mud. No one deserves this. So I won't go on about him. After all, if you want to discuss his role, you know where to find me. But you can't hold Int's membership responsible about any of this. You see the membership votes based on the info the government decides to disclose, so, practically, the membership can only vote what the government wants them to vote.

You do know where to find me about any and all of this. So if you sincerely want answers, ask me on in private. All you can achieve here is drag in the mud the only good alliance the Left has left. You know as well as I that truths are never told in OWF.
[/quote]


[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1348149858' post='3032259']
Where in that post did I scapegoat Trotsky? He did what he thought was right every step of the way. Whether they were the best actions or not... well, hindsight is 20/20. I talked to him often during this period and I know that he never had anything but INT and our allies' best interests at heart. As for us getting blindsided, yes, we did know that LSF was going to provoke NoR. BUT, we (as in Congress) didn't know about the Dave War until we read about it on the OWF. Same goes for the GATO/TLR - R&R hit. So did we know about what was generally going to happen? Sure. But the specifics blindsided 99% of the alliance, as they often do. A lot of things unrolled in a way that we didn't expect. Which we should have expected but... well, at that point you just get paralyzed with indecision trying to think of every way a situation should go, and that just makes things worse. Heck, it's the reason LSF was at war for a month longer than they needed to be.
[/quote]

@Rigas specifically: INT is an alliance of leftists, not a leftist alliance. That's what I keep being told when I bring up ideological solidarity in the CN left, so I'm going to bring it up here and watch the flip flopping.

@Both of you: See, I don't get it. You guys say that everything is up to the membership and that INT is essentially an LSF who chooses to say it has a government, but then you turn right around and say that the only opinions who matters are the gov since they won't tell the membership anything and they are constantly lagging behind in terms of communcation of information. If that is the case, why bother having the membership vote? Why not just admit you are a republic and stop trying to pretend then? Or can we just admit that in two separate votes, one at the beginning and one post-war, the membership of INT decided to leave LSF to rot to NoR.

And another thing, why is it that GATO/TLR get to hit R&R without informing you, and it's apparently completely okay, but when LSF does something you knew it would be doing in advance, sans specifics, from what you yourself just said, they are in the wrong and don't deserve to be defended from being turned into gravel by their arch enemies over the course of four months? But your blocmates get to directly attack INT's allies without even telling you or asking permission beforehand and you lay down and take it like dogs? That's even !@#$@#$ worse than what I was saying about you. You have TLR and ODN going on the OWF to !@#$ all over your allies from day one, TLR and GATO attacking your allies without asking you or even informing you, and ODN straight up conspiring against you with multiple non-bloc members to prevent you from defending your oldest allies. Who your gov, who apparently controls everything in your direct democracy without government, promised they would defend.

Meanwhile, the bloc sits there and tells you it will defend your decision and go in with INT if it chooses, but you and I both know that INT would've probably been kicked out of CNG if they honored their treaty against the will of all three of it's fellow bloc members. But at this point, I cannot for the life of me understand why INT isn't seriously considering leaving. FFS, you have been reduced in this thread to citing NPL as the reason you couldn't help out LSF during the Dave War, a war sparked specifically to keep you from defending your allies and destroy your PR to save MK. That not a single person I heard of complained about having to do. I don't really know how to wrap up this rant, so... /rant

Edited September 20, 2012 by Hereno

[Biff Webster]

I guess horse!@#$ taste sweeter with a spoonful of NS.

[Icewolf]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348153225' post='3032279']
@Rigas specifically: INT is an alliance of leftists, not a leftist alliance. That's what I keep being told when I bring up ideological solidarity in the CN left, so I'm going to bring it up here and watch the flip flopping.[/quote]Well, thats definitely not true according to the first line of their wiki. Although that wiki also lists LSF as an MDoAP partner so I don't know what we can trust.

[Grigoris Lambrakis]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348153225' post='3032279']
@Rigas specifically: INT is an alliance of leftists, not a leftist alliance. That's what I keep being told when I bring up ideological solidarity in the CN left, so I'm going to bring it up here and watch the flip flopping. [/quote]

Allow me to flip-flop then. What's a leftist alliance in CN if not an alliance of leftists? If you give me a definition and then point this alliance to me, I'll quit Int and join it.

[quote]democracy and all that...why bother having the membership vote?[/quote]

Cause you can have both democracy and a government I guess.


[quote] a war sparked specifically to keep you from defending your allies and destroy your PR to save MK[/quote]
Wait, you mean that LSF didn't see the direct tie between MK and NoR or did they miss the tie between MK and CnG? Since when do micros dictate the politics of sanctioned alliances and blocs?

I understand your frustration, but perhaps you should chill a bit and use your brains too.

[Sabcat]

[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1348149858' post='3032259']
Where in that post did I scapegoat Trotsky? He did what he thought was right every step of the way. Whether they were the best actions or not... well, hindsight is 20/20. I talked to him often during this period and I know that he never had anything but INT and our allies' best interests at heart. As for us getting blindsided, yes, we did know that LSF was going to provoke NoR. BUT, we (as in Congress) didn't know about the Dave War until we read about it on the OWF. Same goes for the GATO/TLR - R&R hit. So did we know about what was generally going to happen? Sure. But the specifics blindsided 99% of the alliance, as they often do. A lot of things unrolled in a way that we didn't expect. Which we should have expected but... well, at that point you just get paralyzed with indecision trying to think of every way a situation should go, and that just makes things worse. Heck, it's the reason LSF was at war for a month longer than they needed to be.
[/quote]

You make Int sound like a group with no clear idea who you are or what you stand for. Just a leaf blowing in the wind

[Hereno]

[quote name='Rigas' timestamp='1348155216' post='3032283']
Allow me to flip-flop then. What's a leftist alliance in CN if not an alliance of leftists? If you give me a definition and then point this alliance to me, I'll quit Int and join it.

Cause you can have both democracy and a government I guess.

Wait, you mean that LSF didn't see the direct tie between MK and NoR or did they miss the tie between MK and CnG? Since when do micros dictate the politics of sanctioned alliances and blocs?

I understand your frustration, but perhaps you should chill a bit and use your brains too.
[/quote]

You left the largest leftist alliance to join INT.

LSF wasn't a micro until INT sat around and watched it burn.

[Grigoris Lambrakis]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1348155605' post='3032285']
You left the largest leftist alliance to join INT.

LSF wasn't a micro until INT sat around and watched it burn.
[/quote]

1m ns and 25 members is still a micro in my book.

And no, lsf is not leftist, it's post-modern anarchist . But I won't start ranting about LSF again now, I'm quickly growing bored myself of listening to myself ranting about lsf .

[Sabcat]

[quote name='Rigas' timestamp='1348155874' post='3032287']
1m ns and 25 members is still a micro in my book.

And no, lsf is not leftist, it's post-modern anarchist . But I won't start ranting about LSF again now, I'm quickly growing bored myself of listening to myself ranting about lsf .
[/quote]

It's all so funny isn't it?

I would leave the talk of ideology out of this if I were you, you're ignorance of that subject is already being amply demonstrated elsewhere.

[Grigoris Lambrakis]

Well, how would you call a group that refers to

1. Anarchism.
2. Pirates or Machno, never certain which of the two.
3. Dune.

All in one, really?

[Gibsonator21]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1348133459' post='3032190']
Or maybe they would rather support their bloc than some hairbrained half-OOC war on an alliance that was pretty much bothering nobody.
[/quote]
No you're right, that's what they did. They supported their bloc who was supporting another aggressive attack that was going to lead to one of their other long-time allies being rolled. They had no right choice, really. You guys sure are great pals to them.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1348134399' post='3032197']
The bolded part is simply wrong. You know it, I know it, you cannot admit it because your entire rant implodes on itself. Anyone who has ever dealt with a democracy that has to vote such things, knows that you cannot count on a 100% outcome based on ANYONE'S word. The vote has to take place, and in the time of the vote taking place, people become more and more knowledgable, and may not make the "promised" decision. LSF could have chosen prudence, and waited four or 5 days for INT war council to officially vote, then there would have been no confusion. They instead accepted a promise that at the end of the day, they knew the person making it, really didnt have the power to make it. Did he have sway? Yes. Did he have absolute authority to promise the military in an alliance where such things are voted on (plain as day in the charter), no he did not. LSF ran forward like wide-eyed children on Christmas morning. They have since paid the price.
[/quote]

Not really. When an alliance leader says something, elected or not, that's the highest position in the alliance telling you something. So regardless of whether what he says is fact or not, since he's the leader of the alliance, it will be taken at face value. No one goes and talks to the Congress of an alliance. Hell, from what I remember of being in Democracies, Congress members are usually fairly ignorant of what's going on, and thus are easy to manipulate.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Gibsonator21