Mogar Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) If RageQuitassman holds their balls that tight, so be it. it has less to do with him forcing anyone to do anything, and far more to do with you guys blowing what limited PR you had. Reminder: your alliance has literally one treaty, in 6 months when round 2 happens people will remember your behavior from now. Edited February 6, 2014 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I dunno about your own preferences, but admitting defeat/surrendering, would be agreeable to me, it isnt like bassman is demanding the entire alliance change their flag to Ariana Grande or anything. Goldie would be an official party line, mine is that of an outside observer(albeit one with far far more resources and information than the average though.) *shrugs* My preferences and your preferences have nothing to do with NoR's preferences. They're not connected to NSO except through NG, so it's of no real concern to me. I just pointed out the terminology used in the agreement with NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 An admission of defeat IS a surrender ffs.... Diff words same thing It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Hmm, because he is not a part of whatever happens here then. So mock away Tywin, because ze war for you iz not over. NoR is not in a position to enforce PZI or EZI on anyone. Be careful what you say in case you enter an impossible situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) I love how the oA coalition wanted front-by-front peace and now is backpedaling. NpO/TOP/Umb have wanted nothing more this whole war but to punitively punish NPO and everything that's been done up to this point is to create more bad blood, not solve the problem and move on. Is their really any question that it's the oA Coalition that is stalling peace once again. You can't really say anything about NoR when the oA coalition is stalling peace on completely separate fronts. They wanted front-by-front peace, not us. This is the reason we pushed for coalition peace. It's just a better way to do peace - no games. Just common sense which I guess was lost on people more intent on squeezing every last ounce of blood out of an alliance. The reason we wanted coalition peace is to avoid all of this and have a nice clean cut off, not this ridiculous dog and pony show of disorganized governments doing who knows what, lol. But if you are content to see IRON build up and grow even larger, then I guess more power to you. Edited February 6, 2014 by Steve Buscemi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I love how the oA coalition wanted front-by-front peace and then made a coalition peace deal with NPO dependent on fronts peacing. NpO/TOP/Umb have wanted nothing more this whole war but to punitively punish NPO and everything that's been done up to this point is to create more bad blood, not solve the problem and move on. Is their really any question that it's the oA Coalition that is stalling peace once again. You can't really say anything about NoR when you won't peace out other fronts and takes days for what takes non-democratic governments, literally hours or less to decide. All the while you can keep adding more equivalent-to reparations to NPO's tally. How many billions are you going to try to suck from NPO before enough is enough? The reason we wanted coalition peace is to avoid all of this and have a nice clean cut off, not this ridiculous dog and pony show of disorganized governments doing who knows what, lol. But if you are content to see IRON build up and grow even larger, then I guess more power to you. NPO's neo-imperialism continues to remain a grave threat to global stability. I have recently journeyed to Francograd to cure the sickness, but the war fever is high. In the face of such a relentless counter-revolutionary enemy I believe the Coalition is correct in approaching peace talks very cautiously, seeking concessions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 NPO's neo-imperialism continues to remain a grave threat to global stability. I have recently journeyed to Francograd to cure the sickness, but the war fever is high. In the face of such a relentless counter-revolutionary enemy I believe the Coalition is correct in approaching peace talks very cautiously, seeking concessions. I by no means speak for the order but I did see the responses you received and it was basically pure sarcasm. We have no fever or ailment however our willingness and war FERVOR is obviously high, we love that stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I by no means speak for the order but I did see the responses you received and it was basically pure sarcasm. We have no fever or ailment however our willingness and war FERVOR is obviously high, we love that stuff. A patient is not qualified to self-diagnose their condition. That is why the Party is here, comrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) A patient is not qualified to self-diagnose their condition. That is why the Party is here, comrade. IRL this is a decent argument. Within the realm of Bob you are not a doctor and you lack the necessary information to make that judgement. Pacifica knows her weaknesses and strengths and if you choose to underestimate Pacificas capacity to do so it's your own mistake. My point stands, your taking the responses you received as an insider's look at Pacifica, in actuality it was purely ridicule. Unless ur just going for smear, then keep at it. Edited February 6, 2014 by Boston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 IRL this is a decent argument. Within the realm of Bob you are not a doctor and you lack the necessary information to make that judgement. Pacifica knows her weaknesses and strengths and if you choose to underestimate Pacificas capacity to do so it's your own mistake. My point stands, your taking the responses you received as an insider's look at Pacifica, in actuality it was purely ridicule. Unless ur just going for smear, then keep at it. If you disagree with The Party's diagnosis, join it to present an alternate thesis in the Party Congress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I love how the oA coalition wanted front-by-front peace and now is backpedaling. NpO/TOP/Umb have wanted nothing more this whole war but to punitively punish NPO and everything that's been done up to this point is to create more bad blood, not solve the problem and move on. Is their really any question that it's the oA Coalition that is stalling peace once again. You can't really say anything about NoR when the oA coalition is stalling peace on completely separate fronts. They wanted front-by-front peace, not us. This is the reason we pushed for coalition peace. It's just a better way to do peace - no games. Just common sense which I guess was lost on people more intent on squeezing every last ounce of blood out of an alliance. The reason we wanted coalition peace is to avoid all of this and have a nice clean cut off, not this ridiculous dog and pony show of disorganized governments doing who knows what, lol. But if you are content to see IRON build up and grow even larger, then I guess more power to you. What fronts are being stalled? I can think of 2 that are being slowed by the NPO coalition, and none by the NpO coalition. Unless NoR refusing to surrender is lumped on NpO side, then its even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 If you disagree with The Party's diagnosis, join it to present an alternate thesis in the Party Congress. Rather than address the fact that your basing opinions off an alliance's public forum lulz section you extend an invitation. I see no benefit or value in a "party" that then tries to benefit off whatever reaction it can provoke. You were even chill in the Damn thread and recognized the ridicule, played along and then come here with your serious face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 What fronts are being stalled? I can think of 2 that are being slowed by the NPO coalition, and none by the NpO coalition. Unless NoR refusing to surrender is lumped on NpO side, then its even. I've been waiting four days for "paperwork" from Dajobo, we've got two of our three fronts agreed upon already pending Polar signatures. So there's one at least that Polar is currently holding up (for whatever reasons are their own, I don't know them - I'm just saying it's not [i]all[/i] on this side). Are you guys communicating over there? Between Goldie not knowing the terms that are being agreed to and Sengoku not knowing that your coalition has one or two pieces of responsibility still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 it will only be NoR and possibly NG/NSO leftI'm still wondering why (according to context clues) we're being held as a bargaining chip to pressure NoR via NG. You would think that since your coalition is the one who wanted to do this "front by front," we could leave whenever we wanted like you guys said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Lots of things that were said earlier have gone by the wayside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) I've been waiting four days for "paperwork" from Dajobo, we've got two of our three fronts agreed upon already pending Polar signatures. So there's one at least that Polar is currently holding up (for whatever reasons are their own, I don't know them - I'm just saying it's not all on this side). Are you guys communicating over there? Between Goldie not knowing the terms that are being agreed to and Sengoku not knowing that your coalition has one or two pieces of responsibility still. When your coalition cannot have fronts close because they need to talk to NPO and confirm that NPO agreed to terms, I wouldn't be going around calling out sides for not communicating. But obviously we disagree on that. In terms of your peace hold up, are you saying that NSO is comfortable peacing our with the NoR situation undecided? I haven't followed your talks enough to know if this is news to just me, but if so, then it would seem that that is the NpO holding it up. If on the otherhand you are waiting on the NoR talks because you are waiting on NG who is waiting on them, then I'm not sure that really qualifies at all. Edit: quoting is a pain. Edited February 6, 2014 by hartfw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurthwaite Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 So, once again, congrats to ODN on a well fought war. /me coughs *OP* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) When your coalition cannot have fronts close because they need to talk to NPO and confirm that NPO agreed to terms, I wouldn't be going around calling out sides for not communicating. But obviously we disagree on that. In terms of your peace hold up, are you saying that NSO is comfortable peacing our with the NoR situation undecided? I haven't followed your talks enough to know if this is news to just me, but if so, then it would seem that that is the NpO holding it up. If on the otherhand you are waiting on the NoR talks because you are waiting on NG who is waiting on them, then I'm not sure that really qualifies at all. Edit: quoting is a pain. Our coalition can not have a coalition close, we must have a 'fronts close' situation per Polar Coalition. Neither we nor Polar Coalition need to confirm anything with Pacifica, Pacifica is in limbo per their agreement with Polar Coalition awaiting Polar and co to close out all the other fronts. Where you feel or understand that Pacifica must sign off on all the rest our treatises, I don't know. I have no issues closing out without NoR, correct. We're on a font-by-front basis as per the rules of engagement laid out by Polar Coalition. Our loyalty in that part of the circle is to NG, not to NoR. As long as my decisions in that regard are contented by NG, then all is well. What happens there, is for the NG-NoR relationship. I'm not calling any animosity towards Polar Coalition on this waiting (yet - as I said, I don't know their reasons yet, they've not been communicated and I'm not a mind-reader), I'm just pointing out it's not all on our side of the fence. Edited February 6, 2014 by Rayvon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Our coalition can not have a coalition close, we must have a 'fronts close' situation per Polar Coalition. Neither we nor Polar Coalition need to confirm anything with Pacifica, Pacifica is in limbo per their agreement with Polar Coalition awaiting Polar and co to close out all the other fronts. Where you feel or understand that Pacifica must sign off on all the rest our treatises, I don't know. I have no issues closing out without NoR, correct. We're on a font-by-front basis as per the rules of engagement laid out by Polar Coalition. Our loyalty in that part of the circle is to NG, not to NoR. As long as my decisions in that regard are contented by NG, then all is well. What happens there, is for the NG-NoR relationship. I'm not calling any animosity towards Polar Coalition on this waiting (yet - as I said, I don't know their reasons yet, they've not been communicated and I'm not a mind-reader), I'm just pointing out it's not all on our side of the fence. Thanks for the reply, really appreciated. Based upon what you said, then it does sound like the NpO coalition is be slow with peace for you. In terms of the checking with NPO, there was a front that refused to close based upon this need the other night, so, it is a real thing or was then. Which would make it 1 slow front per side, or 2 if you assign NoR to either side. Sincere good luck to all in getting peace in reasonable time frames. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dajobo Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I've been waiting four days for "paperwork" from Dajobo, we've got two of our three fronts agreed upon already pending Polar signatures. So there's one at least that Polar is currently holding up (for whatever reasons are their own, I don't know them - I'm just saying it's not all on this side). Indeed there was a misunderstanding on this front Rayvon but it's fixed now. Check your inbox ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 So, once again, congrats to ODN on a well fought war. /me coughs *OP* Stop it you. This thread is long-gone and you know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 Personally, I think peace by front is brilliant and demonstrates the undisputable victory of the Coalition. Whoever thought of that and got the ball rolling deserves a medal in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 Personally, I think peace by front is brilliant and demonstrates the undisputable victory of the Coalition. Whoever thought of that and got the ball rolling deserves a medal in my book.Yeah, whoever first invented peacing out by fronts sure must be a genius. Wish we could've thought of it before this war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurdanak Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 That made absolutely no sense to me, Jerdge. :mellow:Welcome to the GPA's world. D: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malkavian Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 Welcome to the GPA's world. D: A world bursting with legalistic type and a knack for confusing an outsider. 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.