Camp Obedience- For Puppies!

[Korlath]

I read your message, Canik. You were concerned about your guys taking damage. If damage was a concern to you the you should have accepted the diplomatic solution and accepted the peace offers. Acting as a protectorate doesn't just mean you have your sword at your disposal for solutions, but also your pen. It seems to me your side was more concerned about escalating the issue.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Korlath

[James Spanier]

16 minutes ago, Korlath said:

What strikes me the most is that Can I'm pretty much asked that I sit there and take my punishment without fighting back. Limit my nukes against your counters to 1 per day? If you were worried about your guys taking damage you should have accepted the diplomatic solution and accepted my peace offers. Obvious FTW was more interested in taking escalating the situation.

 

The aggrieved party is well within their rights to try and extract concessions to maximize punishment, the ability to or not to enforce notwithstanding.

 

2 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

You can just admit you wanted a fight and we can get this over with.

 

 

I apologize for hitting you with doubled up responses, but if the matter was confirmed to be considered settled by FTW after two rounds, how does that constitute wanting to turn it into a war? FTW had zero control over their application and acceptance to Kashmir, the punishment was going to be the same no matter what AA they were on. The fact they chose another of your allies to join doesn't abscond them of the response.

[General Kanabis]

7 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

I agree FTW should have better articulated what they were actually doing,  however it's been asserted to me that they did specify that two rounds was acceptable between your offer of exactly that and their notification they were adhering to that.

 

It was very unofficial and as I stated before- the terminology ranges from -two counters to -two rounds

 

7 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

What about their announcement wasn't specific? Protection period lasts 90 days. There was an attack on the 90th day, protection is invoked, protection is enforced, protection is extended to prevent a potentially immediate "legal" raid to spite FTW.

 

Protection expired before it was enforced or extended. I mean that has to matter.

Edited March 17, 2019 by General Kanabis

[Korlath]

6 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

 

The aggrieved party is well within their rights to try and extract concessions to maximize punishment, the ability to or not to enforce notwithstanding.

 

 

I apologize for hitting you with doubled up responses, but if the matter was confirmed to be considered settled by FTW after two rounds, how does that constitute wanting to turn it into a war? FTW had zero control over their application and acceptance to Kashmir, the punishment was going to be the same no matter what AA they were on. The fact they chose another of your allies to join doesn't abscond them of the response.

If the aggrieved party chooses the military option as their preferred solution despite a diplomatic option being available, then they better be prepared for the consequences of such military response. Sorry, I don't believe in handicapping myself for the sake of someone's ego. You want war you better be prepared to receive damage. If you are concerned about receiving damage then pursue a diplomatic solution. Simple.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Korlath

[General Kanabis]

13 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

 

 if they were going to escalate do you think they'd stop at two wars on one nation when they could have just hit all of Sellswords, or trying to utilize it as a CB on Kashmir as a whole?

 

Hence the DoW.

That is precisely what we figured.

 

 

[James Spanier]

9 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

It was very unofficial and as I stated before- the terminology ranges from -two counters to -two rounds

 

 

Protection expired before it was enforced or extended. I mean that has to matter.

 

So you walked back two rounds to two counters. That sounds like your confusion, not theirs.

 

Protection period expiring does not absolve prior protection period activation. Just because you want that to matter doesn't make it true, I implore you to to talk to any major entity who has been at the game for awhile and ask them if it's 'legal' to defend against a raid that happened within the statuary time scale in the immediate (less than 24 hours) post statuary period.

 

1 minute ago, General Kanabis said:

 

Hence the DoW.

That is precisely what we figured.

 

 

 

I mean in addition to being able to personally confirm that wasn't the case (which admittedly means nothing to you to be fair), there's the fact that Kashmir could have easily done any form of diplomacy first. Unless Polar talking to FTW was that diplomacy, and what do you know, FTW committed to exactly what they said to you they would. Normally you'd wait for them to actually contradict themselves before going to war.

 

FTW was offered two rounds by you, FTW has asserted they acknowledged two rounds was acceptable, FTW told you they were doing two rounds, FTW told Polar they were doing two rounds. Then you declared war, actually escalating things.

[General Kanabis]

4 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

FTW told you they were doing two rounds

 

No. He said maybe two rounds, if he felt like it.

And tbh the last thing he said before yesterday's Too Little Too Late message was that he was inclined to escalate things.

 

When have we not defended our allies?

 

[James Spanier]

15 minutes ago, Korlath said:

If the aggrieved party chooses the military option as their preferred solution despite a diplomatic option being available, then they better be prepared for the consequences of such military response. Sorry, I don't believe in handicapping myself for the sake of someone's ego. You want war you better be prepared to receive damage. If you are concerned about receiving damage then pursue a diplomatic solution. Simple.

 

They were prepared the moment they chose that option by fact of doing so. They can demand whatever, and you don't have to agree, but that doesn't contradict that the counter happened regardless. They cannot however mechanically enforce you to adhere to their demands, which is why I explicitly stated that they're free to make concession demands but that doesn't mean they can actually enforce them which they understand, nor does it imply you are bound to allow them to be enforced as you have demonstrated.

[Canik]

3 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

No. He said maybe two rounds, if he felt like it.

And tbh the last thing he said before yesterday's Too Little Too Late message was that he was inclined to escalate things.

 

When have we not defended our allies?

 

 

No this was the last thing I said until yesterday when I nicely confirmed we would be stopping when the 2nd round ended:

 

[General Kanabis]

4 minutes ago, Canik said:

 

No this was the last thing I said until yesterday when I nicely confirmed we would be stopping when the 2nd round ended:

 

 

Yeah I paraphrased "probably be good at 2 rounds" to "Maybe if you felt like it"

How is that, btw, in any way supposed to assure me he'll stick to his word?

and I was referring to both that message and this one sent 20 minutes prior

 

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by General Kanabis

[Canik]

5 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

Yeah I paraphrased "probably be good at 2 rounds" to "Maybe if you felt like it"

How is that, btw, in any way supposed to assure me he'll stick to his word?

and I was referring to both that message and this one sent 20 minutes prior

 

 

 

To which you replied:

 

Lol

Edited March 17, 2019 by Canik

[Korlath]

8 minutes ago, Canik said:

 

No this was the last thing I said until yesterday when I nicely confirmed we would be stopping when the 2nd round ended:

 

 

This sounds like the "maybe two rounds, if I felt like it" message that GK mentioned

Edited March 17, 2019 by Korlath

[James Spanier]

2 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

No. He said maybe two rounds, if he felt like it.

And tbh the last thing he said before yesterday's Too Little Too Late message was that he was inclined to escalate things.

 

When have we not defended our allies?

 

 

 

That is them them telling you two rounds, which is what they told everyone else who asked at that point.

 

Being inclined to escalate, while indeed threatening, starts to crumble after confirming in three separate instances it wasn't happening (once to RFI, once to you, and once to Polar) before your DoW. If they told everyone involved that two rounds was what they were going with (which you had suggested to them and which they had suggested could be acceptable), that doesn't really leave the door open to escalation without massively egging themselves in the face. They have done exactly what they'd suggested they'd do and have not at all deviated from that. Even Kashmir seemed satisfied the affair had a confirmed end date. Unless you were also in charge of Kashmir's FA?

[Canik]

4 minutes ago, Canik said:

 

To which you replied:

 

Lol

So you agreed to it. Checkmate?

[General Kanabis]

Can you blame me for thinking they'd use this as an excuse to come back for more?

 

[General Kanabis]

2 minutes ago, Canik said:

So you agreed to it. Checkmate?

 

It says HIS TWO CURRENT ROUNDS.

I was referring to the actual rounds of war he was waging at the time. When he got hit a third time, this was also seen as acceptable.

The 4th time, and while he resided within Kashmir, is what we contest.

Edited March 17, 2019 by General Kanabis

[Canik]

1 minute ago, General Kanabis said:

Can you blame me for thinking they'd use this as an excuse to come back for more?

 

Maybe wait until the potential 3rd round begins or doesn't. Altho, you agreed to a potential 3rd round too. We'd really have go 4 round to have clearly broken the agreement.

 

[Canik]

Just now, General Kanabis said:

 

It says HIS TWO CURRENT ROUNDS.

I was referring to the actual rounds of war he was waging at the time. When he got hit a third time, this was also seen acceptable.

The 4th time, and while within Kashmir, we contest.

Oh you count rounds by wars? I count rounds by weeks.

[General Kanabis]

1 minute ago, Canik said:

Maybe wait until the potential 3rd round begins or doesn't. Altho, you agreed to a potential 3rd round too. We'd really have go 4 round to have clearly broken the agreement.

 

 

Yeah my mistake for using the term round and counter alternately to mean the same thing.

Still does not change the fact you hinted at war in previous messages.

[James Spanier]

6 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

Can you blame me for thinking they'd use this as an excuse to come back for more?

 

 

Yes actually I can, because the matter was settled within the bounds of what was laid out.

 

And this just confirms that.

 

If the issue was the AA change, that's on Kashmir for failing to do their due diligence and on COBRA for failing to tell them what they'd negotiated. If this was some big plot to roll COBRA/Kashmir, Korlath certainly did everything in their power to make it happen with their direct actions, not FTW.

Edited March 17, 2019 by James Spanier

[Canik]

2 minutes ago, General Kanabis said:

 

Yeah my mistake for using the term round and counter alternately to mean the same thing.

Still does not change the fact you hinted at war in previous messages.

I was just letting you know why I wasn't bending way over backwards like we're friends or allies.

It's okay tho. We'll help you learn to count rounds.

[General Kanabis]

2 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

due diligence

 Speaking of due diligence, why didn't FTW contact Kashmir and give them a chance at diplomacy before infringing upon their sovereignty?

Everyone on our side considered the matter settled because Korlath was technically going to go through with his two rounds regardless.

The fact he joined Kash only limited the number of actual counters, a matter which by your own testimony, is moot compared to the issue with round adherence.

[General Kanabis]

2 minutes ago, Canik said:

We'll help you learn to count rounds.

 

Not by yourselves you're not, I'm assuming. 

[James Spanier]

1 minute ago, General Kanabis said:

 Speaking of due diligence, why didn't FTW contact Kashmir and give them a chance at diplomacy before infringing upon their sovereignty?

Everyone on our side considered the matter settled because Korlath was technically going to go through with his two rounds regardless.

The fact he joined Kash only limited the number of actual counters, a matter which by your own testimony, is moot compared to the issue with round adherence.

 

Oh boy a new line of defense to pick apart.

 

Why would Kashmir infringe on FTW's sovereignty to enforce a protectorate without first approaching them diplomatically? Why didn't Kashmir defend themselves if they actually disagreed with the terms? Did you or Korlath not tell Kashmir about matters and SirWilliam had no clue? Did you tell them but Kashmir didn't care? Kashmir seems to have spoken to Polar, who approached FTW and got the same answer as you and I, everyone was satisfied.

 

If you want to strengthen the case for a CB on Kashmir go ahead, it'd be a great image for them I'm sure, but don't sit there and pretend FTW were some puppet masters playing 64D chess knowing what Korlath would do or how Kashmir would act beforehand.

 

Korlath was due for at least two rounds no matter the AA regardless if you actually confused counters for rounds or not, and if Kashmir wanted to dispute it they could have. Instead you disputed it for them and tried to justify your mistake by inadvertently or intentionally misrepresenting the actual process and the timeline within.

 

[General Kanabis]

2 minutes ago, James Spanier said:

Korlath was due for at least two rounds

 

Based on what, that last message I sent Canik?

What about that super ambiguous message he sent before that saying he didn't want to make anything official. Or the fact it dragged on over a week before I heard a response.

In the dead silence, you tend to assume they're getting ready on the other side.