Jump to content

An Agora Announcement


Firebolt

Recommended Posts

Does this announcement represent a departure from Agora's old stance on the blue team? I ask because upon speaking to a number of leaders in Agora, I was informed that you valued the tight-knit grouping of your bloc very highly and would not want to accept alliances into the bloc that might jeopardize it. I wholeheartedly respect that position. I was told that alliances who did not get along well with current members of Agora would summarily be denied entry. I wholeheartedly respect that position as well.

I felt this was a reasonable and logical direction to take your bloc; after all who would want to be optionally bound to defend alliances that they did not get along with? However, I felt it was a direction that also could not be described as "unity". If you desire to unite a team, you cannot pick and choose who gets to come in and who gets left out in the cold; unity means everyone.

Does this announcement supersede the statements previously delivered to me regarding the direction of Agora? Are you now willing to accommodate the entire Blue team into your bloc at the cost of its small town feel? The first step towards true unity would best be accomplished with an open invitation to the rest of your team and certainly not by pursuing applicants in private one by one by one.

Not all blocs need to be about unity though, maybe that is simply not the direction Agora wishes to take. I'm sure whatever direction you ultimately choose, the Blue Team will find a way to stay on top. Best of luck to you all.

Edited by Penguin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 228
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So, what are you saying? Would you like to come play Tetris?

We've explained in multiple threads, NPO's involvement. You say "bah!" Then, when I admit that we are slaves to the Pacifican Viceroys, you say "sarcasm!"

I'm at a lost for what to tell you. So, I will explain it to you in simpler terms.

NPO thinks we're cool.

We think NPO is cool.

Agora - "Hey, NPO, wanna join our cool bloc?"

NPO- "Sure. Can I have Tech?"

Agora - "No."

NPO- "Can I play in your arcade?"

Agora - "Sure, I guess. But don't hog it."

NPO - "OK, I'll join."

So if the NPO is in it because they are "cool" even though they aren't on the blue team, yet the NpO isn't in it because they are "not cool" but on the blue team HOW is it a blue unity bloc again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the NPO is in it because they are "cool" even though they aren't on the blue team, yet the NpO isn't in it because they are "not cool" but on the blue team HOW is it a blue unity bloc again?

Do NPO and NpO not hold a treaty?

If NPO are the 'enforcers', as I paraphrase, and they're happy enough to hold a treaty with NpO, why would they get in the way of NpO becoming an Agora signatory? Assuming your point still is that they want control over who's involved...

I don't think they hinder the goals of Agora, certainly not in my view as the leader of a Blue alliance, but even if you do have a point, it's not being helped by a seemingly illogical and desperate argument.

Congratulations to Agora at any rate... Although I don't think my arcade scores should have been discounted just because I'm not a signatory <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why are they there? No one has adequately explained it with anything but diplomatic doublespeak, which is essentially what you're saying in your OP about openness. You never flat out say you have an open door policy, "restrictions on applicants" is not the same thing.

As I said, all people that applied to Agora have been accepted but one. If you don't apply you'll never know whether you get accepted or not, we offer a platform for communication and more cooperation throughout blue and the chance that you get accepted is fairly large. Only because there is only one red participant, doesn't mean it can't enhance blue unity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agora - "Hey, NPO, wanna join our cool bloc?"

NPO- "Sure. Can I have Tech?"

Agora - "No."

NPO- "Can I play in your arcade?"

Agora - "Sure, I guess. But don't hog it."

NPO - "OK, I'll join."

Wow, that's witty. Too bad the forming of Agora wasn't even close to that. Props on the deflection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, sorry. I didn't mean to sound antagonistic, but one of our trade directors um...received an interesting message from an um...member of NADC government regarding a trade circle. I had interpreted it as NADC policy, and as it isn't, I'll take the business from the announcement. I'll send the response to you privately.

Best of luck with your announcement.

Well, on the contrary, as a periodic trade guild organizer for TFD (not even for Agora), I've found that when I send messages to other people, there are a number of them from non-Agora Blue alliances that respond with a rather nasty reply of how I am Agora and I'm sh!t and such, when I was merely offering them a spot in the trade guild. Of course, I don't blame the alliance they are from, and I'm not trying to throw stones here, but I think this behaviour (apparently found on both sides) is something that has been somewhat promoted just by the general tone of what the specific alliance feels. If (picking random alliances here) say Echelon enjoyed joking around about how the Blue opposition were nuts and how they always are giving them crap over merely an economic bloc, I think it would probably rub off on some of the members, and those members would form the opinion displayed by the other members. The same goes for the other side. If (again - random alliance) NpO enjoyed joking around about how Agora was "the enemy" and how their ultimate goal is to block Blue unity, and that it was a joke because NPO was in it, then I think it would (again) rub off on some of the members, and those members would form the opinion displayed by the other members.

This isn't necessarily any big issue right now, as I know that any rational trade guild organizer will know to just ignore the messages and move on, but I'd just like to put it out there that it does happen on both sides, and that it's really just caused by some of the bitterness that has arose between the "division" in the Blue sphere.

Regarding some of the other opinions displayed about the validity of Agora's hope for unity: I really honestly believe, that as a member of an alliance in the Agora bloc, Agora is not at all against Blue unity. I would actually personally be disappointed if Agora turned down another Blue alliance simply because they don't think they would "fit in." I would like to personally challenge any Blue team alliance that has any doubts to apply to Agora, and be surprised.

For those of you that suggest that NPO's involvement completely invalidates this claim, let me tell you right now: It's not meant to promote Blue unity. It would be foolish to claim that. NPO is there because we enjoy their involvement economically (another of our main goals).

Just a quick shot at Choader: Don't be so sure. :P NPO can be cool sometimes. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agora facilitates economic transactions between alliances. It provides an easy meeting point for negotiation of larger tech deal operations. Pacifica being there allows it to enjoy the advantage of acquiring tech contracts more easily, however, it's always up to the alliance who's selling the technology the choice on who and how much to sell. If Pacifica wasn't there would it stop Agora signatories from selling them tech? Not at all. Each alliance keeps its sovereign right to decide with whom it does business. Agora provides a friendly and easier enviromment. That's all.

As for your last sentence, Blue unity being one of Agora's goals does not make it exclusively a Blue Unity bloc. Agora is a blue and red economic bloc where each signatory looks to obtain economic advantages. There are alliances with excess technology to sell. Pacifica is interested in buying. I believe this constitutes enough economic reason for Pacifica to be there.

Ok, for clarification, Agora is a tech trade bloc, with a senate clause and ODP? I'm unsure how that is supposed to unite the blue sphere, but I now see where NPO fit into it. Some alliances do have excess sellers and obviously it's in their best interests to match their sellers with buyers.

I personally, wouldn't consider that to be worth giving away my alliance's right to vote for whichever senator they choose to or even signing an ODP with alliances I know relatively little of but fully understand why others have done so.

If this is just a tech/odp/senate bloc, then why is it that not so long back someone (xxSnipexx?) started a topic about trying to help the blue team establish trades and setting up a forum, did they come under mockery and joke threat's from Agora signatories?

Edited by Mayzie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the NPO is in it because they are "cool" even though they aren't on the blue team, yet the NpO isn't in it because they are "not cool" but on the blue team HOW is it a blue unity bloc again?

NpO has never applied. We would be absolutely thrilled to have them as members.

Again - our friends at Polaris have an open invitation to apply, and NADC for one commits itself to a "yes" vote. Come on over, Polar.

For the record, Polar has never applied. I hope they do so.

If this is just a tech/odp/senate bloc, then why is it that not so long back someone (xxSnipexx?) started a topic about trying to help the blue team establish trades and setting up a forum, did they come under mockery and joke threat's from Agora signatories?

It was a joke because ODP blocs usually don't roll people. Also, Nod was a micro alliance that is not known as an economic super power. Do they have any buyer nations? Finally, Nod was invited to apply to Agora. They came by our IRC, and we have not heard back since. I believe it was due to Dr. Fresh's body odor.

EDIT: Forgot these -

Ah, sorry. I didn't mean to sound antagonistic, but one of our trade directors um...received an interesting message from an um...member of NADC government regarding a trade circle. I had interpreted it as NADC policy, and as it isn't, I'll take the business from the announcement. I'll send the response to you privately.

Best of luck with your announcement.

Agora hopes to give blue and red nations a superior opportunity to find a trade circle. We think our product is superior to any other opportunity in our spheres. However, it was only meant to act as a supplement to individual signatories' efforts and there was never a restriction put on, that I know of. If there was, I have been in violation.

I'll try to clarify this internally. Thanks for the heads-up and the PM.

Does this announcement represent a departure from Agora's old stance on the blue team? I ask because upon speaking to a number of leaders in Agora, I was informed that you valued the tight-knit grouping of your bloc very highly and would not want to accept alliances into the bloc that might jeopardize it.

Please do not mistake our closeness for exclusivity. The whole point of an ODP bloc over a MDP bloc was the fact that we could be more expansive. Some people would rather not get into a huge war (smaller alliances). And some alliances are squeamish to sign a MDP with a warmonger (Echelon :P).

Therefore, we decided to give everyone a non-binding opportunity for prosperity and interaction. Thus, Agora. I fail to see how an alliance is risking anything by joining Agora.

Edited by watchman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, you're saying you can't find tech BUYERS? Damn, send that crap my way, oh wait, that'd be counter-productive to your goal of blue unity, right? Look, there's no possible way you're getting too many sellers and not enough buyers. With the demographics of the game as a whole and especially the blue team, it's just not a feasible claim.

If the point of this is to make a "friendly environment" for the blue team, it could easily be accomplished within the blue team.

Blue unity isn't something you just "do" as a side note to a treaty. Blue unity is something that the team has to do for themselves, having to use a red team alliance as a crutch is counter-productive to team unity, as is having them in this economic bloc. The entire thing is a sad joke, there is no compelling reason you'd be willing to admit that the red team needs to be involved with this bloc.

The fact that your comrades have to resort to sarcastic posts without any content whatsoever does nothing but reinforce this point.

No offense, but I start feeling like my time would be better spent arguing with a wall rather than arguing with you.

I didn't say we cannot find tech buyers. I said that Agora facilitates doing business among it's member alliances. Pretty simple, please stop trying to distort it.

Second, one of the Treaty's goals is indeed promote Blue Unity. However, the primary objective is to provide economic benefits to its signatories, as I already said. We use Pacifica for nothing but doing business and vice-versa. Finally, you're clearly an important and wise person who ought to be consulted on what is better for Agora but, seeing as the symbiosis between Agora and Pacifica is working for the reasons I already presented and you refused to read, thanks but no thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this announcement represent a departure from Agora's old stance on the blue team? I ask because upon speaking to a number of leaders in Agora, I was informed that you valued the tight-knit grouping of your bloc very highly and would not want to accept alliances into the bloc that might jeopardize it. I wholeheartedly respect that position. I was told that alliances who did not get along well with current members of Agora would summarily be denied entry. I wholeheartedly respect that position as well.

I felt this was a reasonable and logical direction to take your bloc; after all who would want to be optionally bound to defend alliances that they did not get along with? However, I felt it was a direction that also could not be described as "unity". If you desire to unite a team, you cannot pick and choose who gets to come in and who gets left out in the cold; unity means everyone.

Does this announcement supersede the statements previously delivered to me regarding the direction of Agora? Are you now willing to accommodate the entire Blue team into your bloc at the cost of its small town feel? The first step towards true unity would best be accomplished with an open invitation to the rest of your team and certainly not by pursuing applicants in private one by one by one.

Not all blocs need to be about unity though, maybe that is simply not the direction Agora wishes to take. I'm sure whatever direction you ultimately choose, the Blue Team will find a way to stay on top. Best of luck to you all.

I must say that Penguin sums up nicely what I wanted to say. Exclusivity does not imply unity and it has been stated in this thread that one alliance on Blue team has already been denied entrance into the 'Blue unity bloc'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding some of the other opinions displayed about the validity of Agora's hope for unity: I really honestly believe, that as a member of an alliance in the Agora bloc, Agora is not at all against Blue unity. I would actually personally be disappointed if Agora turned down another Blue alliance simply because they don't think they would "fit in." I would like to personally challenge any Blue team alliance that has any doubts to apply to Agora, and be surprised.

For those of you that suggest that NPO's involvement completely invalidates this claim, let me tell you right now: It's not meant to promote Blue unity. It would be foolish to claim that. NPO is there because we enjoy their involvement economically (another of our main goals).

Just a quick shot at Choader: Don't be so sure. :P NPO can be cool sometimes. ;)

So, what are you saying? Would you like to come play Tetris?

We've explained in multiple threads, NPO's involvement. You say "bah!" Then, when I admit that we are slaves to the Pacifican Viceroys, you say "sarcasm!"

I'm at a lost for what to tell you. So, I will explain it to you in simpler terms.

NPO thinks we're cool.

We think NPO is cool.

Agora - "Hey, NPO, wanna join our cool bloc?"

NPO- "Sure. Can I have Tech?"

Agora - "No."

NPO- "Can I play in your arcade?"

Agora - "Sure, I guess. But don't hog it."

NPO - "OK, I'll join."

Oh Blue Team I love you but you don't make any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say that Penguin sums up nicely what I wanted to say. Exclusivity does not imply unity and it has been stated in this thread that one alliance on Blue team has already been denied entrance into the 'Blue unity bloc'.

You have no idea why they were denied entrance. In fact, I don't, either. This is because unanimous consent is required for approval. The alliance in question had an objector. Sovereign alliances vote however they choose and are not required explain anything. We're actually still hoping to get them involved in Agora some day. It just did not work out this go around.

OWF Rule - those who know the least, say the most.

Oh Blue Team I love you but you don't make any sense.

A peanut gallery member, who has never been inside Agora's economic forums claimed earlier that NPO had no reason to join Agora, because Agora had no tech to give them. This was news to me, so I had to make up some other reason for joining. Sorry for the confusion.

Edited by watchman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have no idea why they were denied entrance. In fact, I don't, either. This is because unanimous consent is required for approval. The alliance in question had an objector. Sovereign alliances vote however they choose and are not required explain anything. We're actually still hoping to get them involved in Agora some day. It just did not work out this go around.

OWF Rule - those who know the least, say the most.

A peanut gallery member, who has never been inside Agora's economic forums claimed earlier that NPO had no reason to join Agora, because Agora had no tech to give them. This was news to me, so I had to make up some other reason for joining. Sorry for the confusion.

Godwin's Law:

As an OWF discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving people not knowing anything or NPO approaches one.

You can claim what you want, but the exclusion of the alliance from a 'unity' bloc with economic, tech, and ODP clause values implies that you are not interested in unity. I'm not the one trying to say that Agora is a unity bloc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this announcement represent a departure from Agora's old stance on the blue team? I ask because upon speaking to a number of leaders in Agora, I was informed that you valued the tight-knit grouping of your bloc very highly and would not want to accept alliances into the bloc that might jeopardize it. I wholeheartedly respect that position. I was told that alliances who did not get along well with current members of Agora would summarily be denied entry. I wholeheartedly respect that position as well.

I felt this was a reasonable and logical direction to take your bloc; after all who would want to be optionally bound to defend alliances that they did not get along with? However, I felt it was a direction that also could not be described as "unity". If you desire to unite a team, you cannot pick and choose who gets to come in and who gets left out in the cold; unity means everyone.

Does this announcement supersede the statements previously delivered to me regarding the direction of Agora? Are you now willing to accommodate the entire Blue team into your bloc at the cost of its small town feel? The first step towards true unity would best be accomplished with an open invitation to the rest of your team and certainly not by pursuing applicants in private one by one by one.

Not all blocs need to be about unity though, maybe that is simply not the direction Agora wishes to take. I'm sure whatever direction you ultimately choose, the Blue Team will find a way to stay on top. Best of luck to you all.

Personally, I believe Blue unity has more to do with each alliance's respect for the other's integrity and common work towards goals that bring advantage to the sphere itself. I honestly don't think that amalgamating a number of blue alliances into a bloc without previous background work will prove either useful or productive, regarding both Agora and Blue Team, hence I disagree with naming it Blue unity.

Agora wants to work towards unity though, this announcement is a statement of that intention and that we do not hold any prejudices towards anyone wishing to join; that we're willing to establish relationships of mutual respect for eachother's that allow us to build a better future for Blue Team.

I must say that Penguin sums up nicely what I wanted to say. Exclusivity does not imply unity and it has been stated in this thread that one alliance on Blue team has already been denied entrance into the 'Blue unity bloc'.

You can claim what you want, but the exclusion of the alliance from a 'unity' bloc with economic, tech, and ODP clause values implies that you are not interested in unity. I'm not the one trying to say that Agora is a unity bloc.

Refer to my reply above to Penguin on why Agora membership does not equal Blue unity. Furthermore, Agora is a Red and Blue Economic Bloc. Blue unity plays an important role and we seriously want it to progress, but we recognize it's not only in our hands to make it go forward, it's a two-way street.

There was one alliance refused indeed, for very specific reasons by one of Agora's members. It was not set in stone though, and the development of that application was let in the hands of those two alliances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread was a mistake, you have just re-ignited all the arguments about Agora. And you know what, the detractors are right, it doesn't make sense. If you wanted tech buyers, why didn't you invite the Citadel alliances? We could help you with Blue Unity too <_<. The fact is, you don't need a treaty to facilitate business (it's profitable for both sides so people want to engage in it anyway); in fact, all you can do with such a treaty is restrict your business opportunities, if there is a clause about not selling outside the group. (I don't think there is such a clause in Agora, which means it has zero value for tech trading as opposed to negative value.)

In addition, tech trading mostly benefits the buyer, and thus for the sake of Blue economics you should not be encouraging the mass export of tech to another colour. Are you seriously saying that Blue has such a net surplus of tech sellers that you simply had to sign a treaty to give it away?

A colour unity and trade cooperation treaty does make sense but in both cases the inclusion of an off-colour alliance (which is larger than any other signatory, and probably about as big as everyone else put together), and the exclusion of several politically and economically important on-colour alliances, weakens its ability in that area.

So, any Blue alliance is welcome, but at least one has already been rejected? (And Polaris clearly given strong signals that it should not try applying, too.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the sake of Blue economics you should not be encouraging the mass export of tech to another colour. Are you seriously saying that Blue has such a net surplus of tech sellers that you simply had to sign a treaty to give it away?

With all due respect, this bloc is a Red and Blue Economic sphere. If a seller chooses to sell tech in a long term one on one deal, Agora can facilitate it. If that person finds a red or blue buyer does not matter, as long as he gets his $3M. NpO, GR and the rest of the blue sphere does not get that tech because they have refused to join. That is up to them. We certainly won't shove tech down their throats.

NPO and all other signatories get the tech because they are members. The notion that we are sending massive amounts of tech to Red sphere is crazy. Agora only facilitates tech and trade opportunities. If alliances do not desire such opportunities, that is up to them. It seems to me, Pacifica is wise in this regard.

So, any Blue alliance is welcome, but at least one has already been rejected? (And Polaris clearly given strong signals that it should not try applying, too.)

Don't believe the propaganda. Several members of Polar and GR have claimed that they were told they could not join. This is news to me. If they were told that it was not a statement approved by Agora. In fact, it is nonsense. The more inclusive we are, the better for our membership and our spheres.

Smear propaganda may be good for incendiary conversation. Have fun with that. However, the facts are Agora is wide open for more signatories. In fact, I have invited NpO and GR in this very thread. What else can I do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread was a mistake, you have just re-ignited all the arguments about Agora. And you know what, the detractors are right, it doesn't make sense. If you wanted tech buyers, why didn't you invite the Citadel alliances? We could help you with Blue Unity too <_<. The fact is, you don't need a treaty to facilitate business (it's profitable for both sides so people want to engage in it anyway); in fact, all you can do with such a treaty is restrict your business opportunities, if there is a clause about not selling outside the group. (I don't think there is such a clause in Agora, which means it has zero value for tech trading as opposed to negative value.)

In addition, tech trading mostly benefits the buyer, and thus for the sake of Blue economics you should not be encouraging the mass export of tech to another colour. Are you seriously saying that Blue has such a net surplus of tech sellers that you simply had to sign a treaty to give it away?

A colour unity and trade cooperation treaty does make sense but in both cases the inclusion of an off-colour alliance (which is larger than any other signatory, and probably about as big as everyone else put together), and the exclusion of several politically and economically important on-colour alliances, weakens its ability in that area.

So, any Blue alliance is welcome, but at least one has already been rejected? (And Polaris clearly given strong signals that it should not try applying, too.)

Nobody is saying that Polar or its allies cannot join. I think that if they applied to join a bloc they would be surprised on how they are treated. Furthermore, as far as tech selling goes, no one was forced to sign this treaty, they all did so voluntarily fully aware of the economic implications of just such a treaty. At no point did the NPO say "sell us tech or die", nor did we indicate any such thing. We simply said that we would be interested in participating in a economic treaty with the signatories. We have a lot of close friends on blue, and gained a few close ones such as NADC and TFD as a result of this treaty. I do not see this treaty having a negative effect on either side, we don't interfere in areas say pertaining to the Senate on Blue as the leaders of the other signatories can confirm.

As sovereign alliances they are perfectly in their right to join whatever bloc they wish to enter into, and sign whatever agreement they wish to go into. I do not see the reason why others must troll a bloc which has committed absolutely no hostile acts against anyone. The dislike of Agora in my mind seems to be coming from people who believe that they should have greater say over the signatories of Agora's foreign affairs than those actual signatories.

Nowhere can anyone point to any Agora leadership using Agora as a treaty of coercion against another power, at least as far as I have been informed, and I tend to be the most active on the NPO side for Agora relations. I think someone needs to do so, otherwise I am curious to why so much effort is expended on trashing Agora everytime they have a topic (this isn't directed at you specifically Janova, but in general).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(this isn't directed at you specifically Janova, but in general)

I'm glad you added that because you are addressing accusations which I did not make B)

Certainly, alliances are allowed to sign whatever they want. It is the claim that Agora is about Blue Unity which has incited the argument again.

Nobody is saying that Polar or its allies cannot join.

Penguin indicated that Polar had been given a strong hint that that was the case earlier in the thread.

Don't believe the propaganda. Several members of Polar and GR have claimed that they were told they could not join. This is news to me. If they were told that it was not a statement approved by Agora. In fact, it is nonsense. The more inclusive we are, the better for our membership and our spheres.

Smear propaganda may be good for incendiary conversation. Have fun with that. However, the facts are Agora is wide open for more signatories. In fact, I have invited NpO and GR in this very thread. What else can I do?

Except you have already confirmed that at least one alliance has already been refused membership.

Nowhere can anyone point to any Agora leadership using Agora as a treaty of coercion against another power, at least as far as I have been informed, and I tend to be the most active on the NPO side for Agora relations. I think someone needs to do so, otherwise I am curious to why so much effort is expended on trashing Agora everytime they have a topic

Taken at face value, Agora has no meaning. It is about tech trading (which doesn't require a treaty), trading (which make no sense with the NPO involved) and Senate control through non-violent means (which doesn't require a treaty). None of those things adequately explain why a partial 'Blue unity treaty' was signed at the time that it was, excluding the ex-BLEU alliances. Thus, people see things that perhaps are not there as the 'real' motivation for the treaty. Also, it has the NPO in it which makes it a tin-foil magnet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

latter points were terrible jokes..

No joke! :awesome:

Does this announcement represent a departure from Agora's old stance on the blue team?

It represents an intentional clarification of our desire to truly increase Blue Unity and that no alliances are automatically denied entry. I can only speak for myself, but I would not vote against the entry of any blue team alliance that peacefully sought to become an Agora member alliance and was committed to true cooperation across the Blue Team.

If you desire to unite a team, you cannot pick and choose who gets to come in and who gets left out in the cold; unity means everyone.

Hear, hear.

In addition, Unity also means a cooperative spirit.

Congrats, Firebolt!!!

Thanks, sweetheart ;)

@Bob Janova: You raise many valid concerns. This thread is formal step towards addressing some of those concerns. Our work is nowhere near complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Penguin indicated that Polar had been given a strong hint that that was the case earlier in the thread.

Except you have already confirmed that at least one alliance has already been refused membership.

I think I cleared up one issue with ZBaldwin privately. However, I would really like to know who Penguin talked to that told them they would be refused. I can say with full confidence they are not on the leadership forums of Agora.

NpO certainly was not the alliance that was refused. I don't want to embarrass the one alliance that was refused because I think with a little bit of work, they could be a big help to Agora. Also, it would require a bit of OOC maneuvering. However, I am willing to explain in via PM.

I'd challenge Polaris and GR to apply along with other Blue alliances. Let's see how exclusive Agora really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It represents an intentional clarification of our desire to truly increase Blue Unity and that no alliances are automatically denied entry.

After reading this repetative thread this sentence sums up Agora's message.

UBD will reign supreme over the arcade for time to come me thinks..

o/ UBD

o/ Firebolt

o/ Agora

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...