Voodoo Nova Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 So the hearsay argument fails, so naturally let's resort to 'appeal to authority'. Just because you claim it as hearsay, does not make it such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infidel Israeli Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Could someone please summarize the last 99 pages for me? Karma said "these are your reps" (reps are VERY strict) NPO said "what about this instead?" (still strict but less devastating) Karma said "no" NPO said "no, we refuse to pay these" It's been the same argument for every page: side 1: "these reps are unreasonable" side 2: "NPO deserves it" Edited June 13, 2009 by Infidel Israeli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 If that's your definition of proof for your first sentence's claim, I am afraid I will have to quibble at your second sentence's claim. There's no reason it would be wrong unless the TDSM8 guys just made the whole thing up, which if you believe that, there's nothing that will convince you. Since I went through a somewhat similar experience dealing with NPO on targets myself, I have no reason to not believe TDSM8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scythegfx Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 re-read, this is coming from NPO.IF Karma was to adhere to the NPOer's post, then the number of days the peace mode nations would see is much higher than 14 days. Re read it again, I am not, have never, and will never be in the NPO. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Just because you claim it as hearsay, does not make it such. Indeed it doesn't, the complete lack of supporting evidence makes it hearsay. I am merely the messenger of this revelation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Indeed it doesn't, the complete lack of supporting evidence makes it hearsay.I am merely the messenger of this revelation. There is evidence, you're just refusing to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 To put it frankly...Terms suck, make new ones.These terms serve more to perpetuate the cycle of greed, fascism and triviality. Your movement of the people, by and for the people got you... nothing! So just hide behind some lost sense of righteousness, freedom and revenge. These terms are the future! The future of this great world which you, Karma, so arrogantly saved this world for. I don't mind these terms being the future. I welcome any alliance who commits the same types of acts as the NPO for the same large amount of time as the NPO receiving terms such as these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Could someone please summarize the last 99 pages for me? Karma: reps are $7billion and 300k tech. We also want all your nations out of peace of bash them for 2 weeks starting from the last man out. NPO: How about $8 billion and 300k tech if you remove the bash you up good clause Karma: No NPO: No dice Everyone: Rarwwwww Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Re read it again, I am not, have never, and will never be in the NPO. Thank you. I think he means I was trying to find the correct application for NPOer I quoted's logic, not that you were a NPO member. It didn't work so well. Edited June 13, 2009 by Aurion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scythegfx Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 So....try again buddy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankees Empire Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Thanks to the people who gave me the tl;dr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 If a man rapes and murders multiple children and is put to death by the government of the country in which he resides, that government is not "just as bad" as that man. I'm sorry that you don't comprehend this, but to those still complaining about these terms, perhaps you should reevaluate your method as publicly moaning and complaining will solve nothing and the general public does not pity or feel badly for you, hence why you are in the position you now find yourself. If you are unable to reach something that you find reasonable, then you know your choices... suck it up and accept them, or continue to fight and spend the next few months in war. And please, do not compare yourselves to FAN - they actually fought and surrendered and didn't go "VietFAN" until the NPO pulled the terms out from other them and reengaged on crap reasons. For you to compare yourselves to them, you'd first have to surrender and accept terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of the Port Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 You want something logistically impossible? Heh, I guess that was a typo on his part, logistically possible makes sense There are just too many nations that are absent for OOC-reasons: exams, vacations, moving, marriage, baby being born, etc. We will not kick out members who have a very good reason of being away, and we will not force them to pay attention to things that are completely irrelevant to their present situation. I would not want to be part of such an alliance, and fortunately, Moo thinks the same. We will not accept those 90%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Neither would 3 weeks. It shouldn't be that unreasonable to get to 90% in a few days when you're talking about large nations (not noobs) and they don't have to count ghosts and those who refuse to obey. I'm not sure. They've already stated that they have several nation that have not complied with the multiple order they've recieved already to cycle out of PM. The amount of nations that haven't cycled out on orders already issued is why they can't hit 90%. And that's even if Karma allows for every ghost NPO says is a ghost. There's a deal to be made here and Karma can have the deal wrapped up today, but not with that 90% stipulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Could someone please summarize the last 99 pages for me? Moo: Karma made us an offer; we don't think we can pay it; we made a counteroffer which actually benefits them more but has fewer side-terms designed to damage us; they rejected it Karma: Sure you can pay it! Cortath: Here are the numbers I used to calculate that we couldn't pay it Karma: What you did to MK/Athens/TDSM8/NpO/\m/ was worse Cortath: Uh, look at my numbers, please And so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twizzler Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Could someone please summarize the last 99 pages for me? Certainly. NPO: "we will not accept these outrageous terms. Everyone else: "Lets debate extraneous things that may or may not apply to the actual situation at hand." Pro-NPO folks: "These terms are outrageous" Karma folks: "No you" Pro-NPO folks: "My good sir, I will take your claim of 'No you' to heart and raise you a 'NO YOU' " Karma folks: "No you" Pro-NPO folks: "No.... YOU" And repeat. EDIT: I like my summary better than Haf's. Just thought I'd let that be known. Edited June 13, 2009 by Twizzler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gn0xious Jr Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) To put it frankly...Terms are deserved, and they dosuck, but they also sucked when NPO made them the standard make new ones.These terms serve more to cease perpetuate the cycle of greed, fascism and triviality from the NPO. Your movement of the people, by and for the people got you... nothing! an opportunity to call NPO out on all the crap they've been doing for the past couple of years. So just stand hide behind some lost sense of righteousness, freedom and justice revenge. These terms are the future for NPO! The future of this great world which you, Karma, so gallantly arrogantly saved this world for. There, fixed that for you. edit... needed... Edited June 13, 2009 by Gn0xious Jr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Where's kingzogs damn letter!!! This fellow makes an excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob5 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) They have been offered peace, albeit with stringent terms. They balked, offering more money if their big nations could escape. Why do you think that is? So they could do all they could to be nice losers and simply pay the reps? NO. They did it because anyone who takes the time to even look at the numbers knows that they can pay that back and be a threatening powerhouse with grudges to settle in months. Even with the reps to be paid, that is possible due to the number of nations they have. And if they were given their counteroffer they would have several extremely large nations capable of fueling their turbo-comeback. You don't understand. The current terms are unfulfillable. Reparations cannot be paid; conditions cannot be met. Refer to the links in my signature for why this is so. Our counter proposal should not be misconstrued as an effort to somehow maintain ourselves for a brutally efficient comeback. Rather, our proposal is a generous alternative to demands which are logistically and economically unreasonable. We understand very well that we have lost this war, and we are trying our best to come to a solution agreeable to all parties. Remember, we offered to pay substantially *more* than originally requested. There's been a lot of hot rhetoric from both sides as to how this or that is fair or not fair, but the truth of the matter is that the terms as they are are impossible to carry through with. Unless you advocate a complete dissolution of the New Pacific Order, you should be able to see why the terms cannot be accepted as they are. To reiterate this again: if we were to accept the terms as they are now, there would undoubtedly be righteous outrage as people find that we cannot carry out our side of the bargain. Edited June 13, 2009 by noob5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I'm not sure. They've already stated that they have several nation that have not complied with the multiple order they've recieved already to cycle out of PM. The amount of nations that haven't cycled out on orders already issued is why they can't hit 90%. And that's even if Karma allows for every ghost NPO says is a ghost.There's a deal to be made here and Karma can have the deal wrapped up today, but not with that 90% stipulation. If NPO nations are not following orders any longer then perhaps the NPO has bigger problems than this war. Dare I say they might be having leadership problems? Yes, I dare. If the NPO leadership can't get its nations to fight a war how can any of us expect them to get their nations to respect the peace, or pay the reps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scythegfx Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 If a man rapes and murders multiple children and is put to death by the government of the country in which he resides, that government is not "just as bad" as that man. I'm sorry that you don't comprehend this, but to those still complaining about these terms, perhaps you should reevaluate your method as publicly moaning and complaining will solve nothing and the general public does not pity or feel badly for you, hence why you are in the position you now find yourself. If you are unable to reach something that you find reasonable, then you know your choices... suck it up and accept them, or continue to fight and spend the next few months in war. And please, do not compare yourselves to FAN - they actually fought and surrendered and didn't go "VietFAN" until the NPO pulled the terms out from other them and reengaged on crap reasons. For you to compare yourselves to them, you'd first have to surrender and accept terms. Depends, some people see the death penalty as murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 To put it frankly...Terms suck, make new ones.These terms serve more to perpetuate the cycle of greed, fascism and triviality. Your movement of the people, by and for the people got you... nothing! So just hide behind some lost sense of righteousness, freedom and revenge. These terms are the future! The future of this great world which you, Karma, so arrogantly saved this world for. I'm afraid you're going to have to be clearer. I personally think the terms are very near to the line of what's justice, and what's hypocrisy. Which side they really fall on must be a collective decision, taken - objectively if possible - by those affected most by the NPO's past actions. The problem is that in the past, lighter terms have been given, and months later, the spirit in which they were issued was spat back in our faces. There's so much distrust that not issuing strong terms would be unacceptable to many. How strong is the issue that needs to be resolved here. The idea is to stop the cycle. Unfortunately, there is a strong feeling that if lighter terms were given, effectively an act of unconditional forgiveness, it would once again be useless, and the cycle would repeat. That may not be the case, but previous experience is an indicator here. For those who missed it: I will admit that I have some limited sympathy with the announcement. However, I feel that it is very important that everyone understands clearly that the precedent that the most contraversial term follows was set by Pacifica; if you recall, it is they who in the past have specified that any nation in peace mode prior to the conclusion of war would be attacked for a set period, equivalent to the number of days of war which they avoided, starting from the moment at which the rest of the alliance was given peace. The NPO have had the majority of their high strength nations in peace mode for more than fourteen days, so this is not going beyond anything which has been done before. Let us be clear; the fact that 'they did it first' is not a moral justification. However, there is no room here for Pacifica to claim that these terms are harsher than anything previously issued. The reparations are larger than any previous single sum, but this war has been considerably bigger than any that has gone before - increased reparations go hand-in-hand with that. Let us also not forget that many in Karma see these reparations as a repayment for all the damage that Pacfica has done over the course of the last few years, not just for this war. Indeed, some of the terms that Pacifica has issued in the past upon conclusion of its wars have arguably been worse; namely, those leading directly to the disbandment of an enemy alliance. Make no mistake, Karma as a coalition has the power to enforce a ZI order - but the line is drawn; that is beyond the pale. The reason for that is that within the ranks of Karma, there is a strong feeling that we must not be hypocrites in victory. The line between justice and excess is one that must be pinned down firmly. There are good reasons to be optimistic. The removal of the Moldavi Doctrine is an excellent first step on the path to reconcilliation. That is a path that I want us to follow. Yes, I believe that the cycle of revenge can be broken; it can end right now! The difficulty is that there is a strong distrust of Pacifica. There will not be a repeat of GW I. That is why Karma wants these terms - effectively, we want Pacifica to accept them, and when the terms expire, we'll call it quits. But the feeling is that before forgiveness, there must be penance. I've gone on for far too long already: to conclude let us drop the partisan behaviour, and talk frankly about the terms. Both sides. Cripple (Senator, Greenland Republic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 EDIT: I like my summary better than Haf's. Just thought I'd let that be known. Yours is funnier, but mine has more Cortath. Maybe we should collaborate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 If a man rapes and murders multiple children Seriously? That's the comparison you're making? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stumpy Jung Il Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Seriously? That's the comparison you're making? I think this is the shortest Vladimir post ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts