FreddieMercury Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Does anybody want to explain to me why reps are required? Is it because TFO and Internet Superheroes took some damage? You two knew exactly what you were getting into when you joined this war. If your infrastructure is simply that precious to you then you would have been better off sitting out. TSI honored a treaty. These reparations are not necessary. All they are a sign of is that both of you two, both you alliances, are filled with and run by petty and opportunistic cowards. I recommend that any self-respecting alliance refrain from conducting business with these hooligans. Never thought I'd agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 You really should look up the meaning of karma. Tech deals are beneficial to both sides of the deal. lol please.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Never thought I'd agree with you. It is not too late to change your opinion on this matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Does anybody want to explain to me why reps are required? Is it because TFO and Internet Superheroes took some damage? You two knew exactly what you were getting into when you joined this war. If your infrastructure is simply that precious to you then you would have been better off sitting out. TSI honored a treaty. These reparations are not necessary. All they are a sign of is that both of you two, both you alliances, are filled with and run by petty and opportunistic cowards. I recommend that any self-respecting alliance refrain from conducting business with these hooligans. Nobel sentiments but I fear this is merely the beginning and each alliance will want more than the last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) Does anybody want to explain to me why reps are required? Is it because TFO and Internet Superheroes took some damage? You two knew exactly what you were getting into when you joined this war. If your infrastructure is simply that precious to you then you would have been better off sitting out. TSI honored a treaty. These reparations are not necessary. All they are a sign of is that both of you two, both you alliances, are filled with and run by petty and opportunistic cowards. I recommend that any self-respecting alliance refrain from conducting business with these hooligans. Well said. I figured it was a case of two small alliances wanting to feel like the big man for once... they were in a position of power for the first time in their lives and couldn't help themselves. Sad really. Edited May 5, 2009 by Aimee Mann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringMeTheHorizon Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Should TSI require help in paying reps, shuru toku, you know where to find me. I'll be more then glad to help out in anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akama Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'm sad that an alliance like TSI gets terms, while some others get white peace. Well, the terms are reasonable atleast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Does anybody want to explain to me why reps are required? Is it because TFO and Internet Superheroes took some damage? You two knew exactly what you were getting into when you joined this war. If your infrastructure is simply that precious to you then you would have been better off sitting out. TSI honored a treaty. These reparations are not necessary. All they are a sign of is that both of you two, both you alliances, are filled with and run by petty and opportunistic cowards. I recommend that any self-respecting alliance refrain from conducting business with these hooligans. Baaaaahahahahah! So much for the talking points about non-continuum alliances fighting via treaty being given white peace.And everybody scoffed at me when I said the SSSW18 terms where the just first step toward replacing tyranny with tyranny. o/ Trannys! Both QFT.. and Roadie, not everyone scoffed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revelation Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I see no wronge in giving them terms like these. Both sides agreed? If you dont like them dont sign them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulmar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Congrats on peace TSI, you have put up an admirable fight and I salute you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Well said. I figured it was a case of two small alliances wanting to feel like the big man for once... they were in a position of power for the first time in their lives and couldn't help themselves. Sad really. They have demonstrated by demanding these reparations only why they entered the war. Profiteering. They can say it was to honor treaties, support their allies, or to take on a cause, but it is only a lie. If they truly believe in any sort of principle they would not have done what they have done. They wanted loot. It is as simple and petty as that. Cowards. They are nothing but cowards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owned-You Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I've seen much worse terms, so I won't cry out moral outrage...because frankly this isn't one. However, I do believe that TSI should have got out of this war with White Peace. That being said, what's done is done. Good Luck to all the parties involved in rebuilding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavii Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Well said. I figured it was a case of two small alliances wanting to feel like the big man for once... they were in a position of power for the first time in their lives and couldn't help themselves. Sad really. If they were on such a power trip they could have easily asked for the tech without paying for it all. While I agree the fact that having such tech dealing reps, they should at least follow current market value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I see no wronge in giving them terms like these. Both sides agreed?If you dont like them dont sign them. Lol! I have no response to the content of your post, but that sig is AWESOME! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Bad terms. Making alliances who honored their treaties pay sucks. This is the worst part: - 2,300 technology at 3 million per 150 to TFO - 1,400 technology at 3 million per 150 to IS IS declared on TSI and TSI has to pay reps? That's just insane. The other things are still bad, but not crippling for TSI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Why do people think this fits into a greater Karma policy? The people who do the fighting make the decisions on terms. They are sovereign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) If they were on such a power trip they could have easily asked for the tech without paying for it all.While I agree the fact that having such tech dealing reps, they should at least follow current market value. There's only so much the cowards could get away with and they know it. They fact they demanded anything at all says enough. Give me TSI's crime. What have they done to warrant this? How is this justice? Who did they force to disband? Who have they EZIed? Give me one gross abuse of power undertaken by this alliance while it was connected to the NPO's hegemony. Why do people think this fits into a greater Karma policy? The people who do the fighting make the decisions on terms. They are sovereign. I am well aware of this fact, but I am still convinced that both TFO and IS have proven themselves to be nothing more but petty and opportunistic cowards through the way they have conducted themselves in this war. Edited May 5, 2009 by Rebel Virginia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vijaya Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 It can be tough to surrender but I know TSI has done the best they can. You'll come out stronger in the end and I congratulate on peace and wish you luck. You're a good group.. good luck. Shuru and Toku That ^ Good luck guys, you'll come through this just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revelation Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) Why do people think this fits into a greater Karma policy? The people who do the fighting make the decisions on terms. They are sovereign. Good point. Karma is a "lose" affiliation of alliances. Edited May 5, 2009 by Revelation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I think it was kinda dumb to give terms like these. It's not alot of tech and 150/3m is still a little above break even for the seller but it makes karma as a whole look bad even if most of karma wasn't involved in making these terms (contrary to popular belief we do not have secret meetings in archons basement). As for the argument that they're fair because both sides signed them. All (almost all?) surrender terms through history have been signed by both sides so that would make them all fair. It doesn't really hold up. All in all not a very good move imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Why do people think this fits into a greater Karma policy? The people who do the fighting make the decisions on terms. They are sovereign. Quite frankly, most of us don't. The different approaches taken by different alliances is being observed and will be remembered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 What justification was there to ask for reps? Sad that you lost a bit of infrastructure? Shouldn't have joined the war if that was the case. Glad to see TSI a great alliance out of the war though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king601 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Upon Second look at these terms, I find that they are poor terms for TSI. Poor Show IS. Poor Show TFO. TSI, it is with my greatest hopes that you pull through this. I know you can do this. TFO and IS want to cripple you. But don't worry. You've got great leaders and you'll pull through. I hope that Karma finally gets IS and TFO down the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavii Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 There's only so much the cowards could get away with and they know it. They fact they demanded anything at all says enough. Give me TSI's crime. What have they done to warrant this? How is this justice? Who did they force to disband? Who have they EZIed? Give me one gross abuse of power undertaken by this alliance while it was connected to the NPO's hegemony. There is none, but either way you spin it, (if it had been at market value 3m/100t) it's mutually beneficial for both alliances. The bad thing basically is forcing them to do the tech deals. I personally would not ask this of TSI, I would have gone with white peace. But like Roquentin said, these are sovereign alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Why do people think this fits into a greater Karma policy? The people who do the fighting make the decisions on terms. They are sovereign. I suspect there's 3 reasons for that. 1: It's called the Karma war. 2: Karmas leader, Archon, seems to get called in to peace negotiations that don't involve his alliance 3: Because of the above, nobody knows where Karma ends and the other alliances begin. 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.