Protected Nation

[SoxNation]

Which is why their entire government approached us a month back offering GR an MDP, or at the very least a lower-level PIAT, right?

I understand your point (and I think it's a good one) but the truth is, their entire government had been expressing interest in GR for quite some time now. That discussion was not out of the ordinary in the least.

So we get back to, degen was in the IRC channel and knew what was going on, the entire .gov was down with allying to GR or talking about it...

So someone outside of .gov must have said no.... someone who hosts the forums and chills in .gov IRC rooms...

and the wheels on the bus go round and round.

[Virillus]

Yet another alliance destroyed because of Vir.

He wasn't even a member this time

It's true, I've learned to harness the power of my curse;)

[RudeBoy]

Yes I do question it.

GGA reluctantly rescinded the Dilrow Doctrine and along came the Jungle Accords? (or whatever its called), since then GGA has been playing pretty nice on Green compared to what they had done to control the Green senate in the past, in so much as GGA dropped a long standing doctrine which was put in place to protect GGA's sovereignty - ironically enough the cause of the Dilrow doctrine was a rogue VE senator called Free Quebec.

Given the colourful history between GGA and VE and with both sides seeking to "build relations" its hard to see this thread as anything other than a bait to GGA. A simple IRC conversation with GGA leadership regarding shaneprice would have done the trick without the need for this circus; either VE government are as inept as the former GGA member they have taken into their ranks or this was a deliberate act to stir up some GGA hate.

Lets be fair, we all know any thread regarding GGA descends into a flamewar, who here honestly thinks VE didnt know that this would stoke a flame thread for GGA? I know I dont.

Um you know VE and GGA have an MDoAP and have been allied for quite a while, right? Yeah we have a long bumpy history with GGA but we worked rather long with GGA to mend that relationship. Also, I'd say the Dilrow Doctrine was more put in place to secure gga's grasp on green, not the FQ thing, but that's a matter of perspective. I doubt I'll be able to change your view on that, and you won't be able to change mine. Incidentally, if GGA hadn't abused their treaties to become green's sole super power, FQ never would've gone rogue (by the way, fq resigned and then went rogue, that wasn't ve-sanctioned or planned or anything).

If you think we would go out of our way to make our allies look like !@#$ well, I don't really know what to say. You obviously don't think much of the VE and that's fine, but it doesn't change that you're wrong. As has been pointed out a few times, it's pretty standard for alliances to allow when they give a single nation protectorate status. VE certainly isn't the first to do it, and I guarantee there was no malicious intent- you're reading too much in to things. Shaneprice was kicked, the reasons weren't public (until a few pages in to this thread). It was a simple announcement to discourage people from attacking a prominent ex gga gov member, not trying to look like a hero or anything ridiculous like that. Seriously who the hell is so full of themselves they need to make threads designed to make them look heroic or whatever? certainly not us. VE has always kept quiet unless we feel the need to speak up, we don't even make regular "MONTH OF WHATEVER" government update posts.

And seriously the dilrow doctrine and fq don't have anything to do with this. This is a current gga issue, not a 2 year old green sphere issue.

edit- didn't see slayer questioning us, too. Like I said, it's pretty standard for alliances to announce that kind of thing. Apparently TPF doesn't. Good for you guys. But that doesn't make us evil or anything, we simply wanted to make this known to everybody. High profile members tend to attract more attention when they suddenly leave an alliance, we wanted to make sure he was protected. It's just that simple. Like I said, we have no interest in making our allies in GGA look bad. Our post isn't responsible for that, you can thank people like Delphis or whatever for that.

Edited March 18, 2009 by RudeBoy

[Fallen Fool]

I have to wonder why VE felt the need to make this a public announcement. People that leave gov positions are often allowed to ghost in a friendly alliance until they get settled in a new home.

To me, it looks like an attempt to embarrass GGA in what was (and should be) an internal matter.

Didn't TPF, and a !@#$ load of other alliances, offer DarkMistress a single person protectorate while she was unaligned last year?

Or am I misremembering?

[Earogema]

It's true, I've learned to harness the power of my curse;)

Do it to the NPO now. You guys do want them dead after all

[Cobalt]

When the new ideas are stupid it is incompetence.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

- - -

New ideas are new ideas... whether they are "stupid" or not has no bearing on someone's competence as a leader... and correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't GGA have 3 triumvirs who can't act autonomously? If the other triumvirs don't like his idea, they say no and move on - simple. I've read the GGA charter a couple times, my take being that its casually written and relatively unclear on the powers of the triumvirate and their procedures (aside from expulsion), maybe that's one of the confounding variables here.

[Drai]

Yet another alliance destroyed because of Vir.

He wasn't even a member this time

Funny thing is, if people would stop holding that sentiment against him I'm sure none of the problems would arise. If you make something out to be dangerous then the precautions you take in dealing with it will create a scenario that almost inevitably leads to dangerous results. Going through the whole logs, Virillus never said a single thing that would give anybody reason to be skeptical of the whole conversation. However, the fact that he was involved in the logs made some people freak out and try to create a big deal of the whole thing.

[King Srqt]

It's a legitimate question. We've allowed people to ghost us when an alliance we were allied to was having internal issues.

Shurukian is an example. We allowed her to ghost us to save TGE the embarrassment of baring the internal issue. When Shuru founded TSI, we gave her a protectorate (with TGE's blessing).

This doesn't seem a stretch to me...and I certainly don't think what VE did is classy or honorable. Their motives in how they handled this are questionable at best.

I know I mean we would have to go back a whole 3 weeks to find the last alliance that did something similar and had no outrage levied toward them at all

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=49688

[KingSuck]

So then the part of my quote that asks if the point was that you stand behind them was right then, and I wasn't stretching.

But the other points in that quote (which you places greater emphasis on) were not right, thus the 'reading too far' comment. It's kinda a moot point though

[Drai]

So we get back to, degen was in the IRC channel and knew what was going on, the entire .gov was down with allying to GR or talking about it...

So someone outside of .gov must have said no.... someone who hosts the forums and chills in .gov IRC rooms...

and the wheels on the bus go round and round.

That, and some of GR's allies weren't convinced GGA had truly changed.

[Rayvon]

Didn't TPF, and a !@#$ load of other alliances, offer DarkMistress a single person protectorate while she was unaligned last year?

Or am I misremembering?

No - they were trying to embarrass IRON

[Epiphanus]

It's a legitimate question. We've allowed people to ghost us when an alliance we were allied to was having internal issues.

Shurukian is an example. We allowed her to ghost us to save TGE the embarrassment of baring the internal issue. When Shuru founded TSI, we gave her a protectorate (with TGE's blessing).

This doesn't seem a stretch to me...and I certainly don't think what VE did is classy or honorable. Their motives in how they handled this are questionable at best.

See Ejay's post. I say that, knowing you read it but chose to ignore it. This thread would have been another boring thread making its way to the second page was it not for the post of an ex-GGA Chancellor that has been quoted so many times, it may go down in history as more famous than, "did you Polar really too stupid to read?"

[Slayer99]

No offense meant Slayer, but I think you're looking into this way too deeply. I quite honestly doubt VE had any idea that this announcement would turn into what it did. Single nation protectorates have been announced many times before, regardless of the reason the nation left whatever alliance they left. This was meant to inform, and not to embarrass.

Unless you're suggesting that VE would have an ulterior motive for wanting damage the PR of some of it's closest allies, which would suggest that there is possibly trouble in paradise. But of course that is ridiculous, because unless I am mistaken, you yourself have stated on several occassions that relations between the allies are as close as ever.

I may be looking into things too deeply, but I've encountered this type of situation before and I never considered making someone a single-nation protectorate or making a post about it on the OWF. I don't think VE gov is that naive to think that there wouldn't be fallout from this thread. On the contrary, I think VE gov is very saavy...which is why I asked the question.

As I'm not in VE or GGA, I can't speak to their relationship. I asked what I felt was a legitimate question based on how this situation was handled as opposed to how it could or should have been handled.

[Slayer99]

Didn't TPF, and a !@#$ load of other alliances, offer DarkMistress a single person protectorate while she was unaligned last year?

Or am I misremembering?

Uh..no.

[Earogema]

Funny thing is, if people would stop holding that sentiment against him I'm sure none of the problems would arise. If you make something out to be dangerous then the precautions you take in dealing with it will create a scenario that almost inevitably leads to dangerous results. Going through the whole logs, Virillus never said a single thing that would give anybody reason to be skeptical of the whole conversation. However, the fact that he was involved in the logs made some people freak out and try to create a big deal of the whole thing.

I personally always use it as a joke. I forgave him a long time ago.

I think the issue is more with the GGA wanting to treaty GR rather than just Virillus, although, I'm sure he wouldn't mind if it were that one.

[Slayer99]

A better question is why do you care this time, but never before? Suddenly since it was VE who makes this announcement, it must be all about shaming the GGA? Come on, dude - come up with something better or leave it alone.

What makes you think I never cared before?

[Earogema]

What makes you think I never cared before?

40 pages, etc.

[Drai]

I personally always use it as a joke. I forgave him a long time ago.

I think the issue is more with the GGA wanting to treaty GR rather than just Virillus, although, I'm sure he wouldn't mind if it were that one.

Yeah, I remember you two joking about it a while ago. I was more responding to the people who actually believe it.

I don't even think it was the fact that they wanted to treaty GR, but that they were considering drawing themselves away from some of their other allies.

Edited March 18, 2009 by Drai

[Virillus]

I personally always use it as a joke. I forgave him a long time ago.

I think the issue is more with the GGA wanting to treaty GR rather than just Virillus, although, I'm sure he wouldn't mind if it were that one.

There aint' nary a green maiden' that canna' resist me charm!

(thanks, man)

[Fallen Fool]

Uh..no.

I misremembered kind of.

TBB placed DM under his personal protection which, to me at the time, seemed to imply that TPF stood behind it since he was Evil Underlord/second-in-command at that point.

Edited March 18, 2009 by Fallen_Fool

[Slayer99]

40 pages, etc.

That wasn't the reference and the question wasn't geared towards you...but thanks for joining the conversation with your witty response.

[King Srqt]

I may be looking into things too deeply, but I've encountered this type of situation before and I never considered making someone a single-nation protectorate.

Are you sure about that?

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...mp;#entry122602

[Earogema]

Yeah, I remember you two joking about it a while ago. I was more responding to the people who actually believe it.

I don't even think it was the fact that they wanted to treaty GR, but that they were considering drawing themselves away from some of their other allies.

Yeah, that's probably more true.

[Ejayrazz]

I have to wonder why VE felt the need to make this a public announcement. People that leave gov positions are often allowed to ghost in a friendly alliance until they get settled in a new home.

To me, it looks like an attempt to embarrass GGA in what was (and should be) an internal matter.

An assumption based on nothing my dear friend. Each alliance conducts their affairs differently, if they attempted to 'embarrass the GGA' they would have done so willingly in the op. And in all seriousness, it is the proper thing to do when serving a protectorate for a member who is NOT in your respective alliance. I believe NPO has done this before, a very good ally of yours and I saw no rejections then.

The point was why? He could have just as easily ghosted VE (with their permission of course).

We've done that for people...as have others. The only single-nation protectorate I ever considered was franzjosef.

There, you have considered a protectorate before. Each situation has its own mitigating circumstances, and as stated previously, each alliance has their own political agenda and fomalities. THe reasoning for this announcement:

People view protection status differently throughout CN. If he was bearing VE's AA and was not a member, well, people could fabricate numerous reasons for attacking Shane. Needless to say, they wished to avoid any possible military conflict - this eliminated any confusion which people may have. Simple as that, nothing more nothing less. The conspiracy theories have only spiraled dozens of threads down the drain.

It's a legitimate question. We've allowed people to ghost us when an alliance we were allied to was having internal issues.

Shurukian is an example. We allowed her to ghost us to save TGE the embarrassment of baring the internal issue. When Shuru founded TSI, we gave her a protectorate (with TGE's blessing).

This doesn't seem a stretch to me...and I certainly don't think what VE did is classy or honorable. Their motives in how they handled this are questionable at best.

GGAs' motives are questionable internally and externally, not VE. Please, VE aren't a dishonorable bunch, this path wont be walked along easily mate.

[Bob Sanders]

You mean the same way that GGA switched sides when Bilrow and Kevin the Great coup'd PC....oh wai............

This is March 2009, not mid-2006. We both know that things have changed a bit since then.

I am interested to know who Bob Sanders thinks would attack the GGA had they left 1V. I'm pretty certain none of their non-allies would have. He seems to think the opposite, however.

You have a poor handle on the politics of Planet Bob.

He must have mixed up his words. What he wanted to say was Valhalla was going to roll the GGA if they dared leave their side.

Why? We would laughing too hard at the insanity of the decision.

BnT: Degenerate was also in that chat (as shown by Ironchef's logs way back near the start of the thread). So anything that applies to Shane should also apply to him. But to give you a counterexample to your idea that someone in this position would always end up kicked: during the final signing of the UJA, I gave a strong indication that Grämlins would sign as soon as we could; if you remember the announcement, there's even a nice quote from me in there. As it turned out that wasn't a sentiment that the alliance shared. But they didn't kick me from the alliance, or from government.

I do give Valhalla considerable credit for trying to defend GGA here, though. It really is a hiding to nothing and to put yourself in the line of (verbal) fire is the act of a good ally ... even if you have a poor choice in who to be an ally to .

Considering Degen is the entire reason that this got out and the Shane Price is no longer in power that is crazy talk. He obviously was not part of Shane Price's plans. Arguing that Degen is just as responsible as Shane is easily the weakest argument I have ever seen you make and I disagree with nearly ever post you have ever made.

Bob Sanders said, directly, that GGA should fear us. Go back to one of his earlier posts where he claims that GGA trying to leave NPO's nest would be alliance suicide because he assumed we would all jump at the opportunity to blow GGA out of the water. This is false. We don't care.

You, indirectly, supported Bob Sanders and his statements through your comment to Shaneprince. Just as Bob Sanders tried to conjure up fear in the GGA general membership by having them believe a fairy tale story that we're all here waiting for them to fall away from the herd, you tried to undermine Shaneprince's views of who he considers as friends. Like I said, you and Bob Sanders are, through 2 different paths, pushing GGA in the same direction; fear.

That wasn't a threat, that was a straight forward political analysis. It sure as hell makes more sense than what you are saying. You want unicorns and candy don't ask me for my opinion on Planet Bob politics. I will call it like a I see it. Frankly the political analysis of a certain alliance's future/current leanings in this thread has been been several steps less than stellar so I have more than a few doubts when the people make that analysis suggesting that GGA would not be in danger.

P.S. He is not a prince. Don't talk about him for 5 pages if you don't even know his name. :lol:

Edited March 18, 2009 by Bob Sanders