Why I am a Pacifican

[Locke]

Along with the above, my constant reminding that if you feel there are vague areas of the terms you negotiate to make them certain and proceed. Maybe a third party can handle the calculations? I don't know, but these are mundane items that can be talked out rather than complete show stoppers.

Also, the whole 90% thing is not to be expected in one day and the Karma officials have already stated they will be implementing a system which will track the warfare of the PM nations as they come out to assure things do not go over 14 days. With this, determinations will be made regarding members that fail to exit PM via other issues (inactivity, ghosting, wanting to defy the terms, etc).

Well, I won't be negotiating anything, I'm not NPO. However, I'd like to know what large and credible "third parties" we have. And no, the neutral menace of TDO doesn't count. Okay, maybe it does, but I wouldn't have a clue myself.

Really? Taking a look at the terms it does seem like a 14 day minimum, not maximum. Could you point me to where Karma officials have said something to the contrary? I'd love to see it.

It is all in the terms Moo quoted for you all. As such I don't quite understand the outrage of some people regarding these terms.

But that's something entirely different.

We never asked NPO to force all (or 90%, w/e) of its nations out of PM in one day. The term you are talking about doesn't even state that.

Maybe it is badly worded, but it has been clear from the beginning what this term was all about. The amount of spin I have seen in that Monster thread is therefore pretty silly.

It doesn't state that, but that's not what I meant. What I meant was that they have to be at 90% war mode before the 14 days start. So, let's say it takes...to pull a random number off the top of my head, 3 days to get them all out. Depending on 1) who's active and 2) who feels like being defiant that will either be short or long, but it's somewhere in the middle, I think. That's more days of war, which will hurt the compliant nations even more than just the 14 days. Again, 14 day minimum seems to be what's happening. Unless of course, bkphysics is right and it's really a maximum, although looking at the terms I don't see it.

[Heracles the Great]

Well, we may have aggresively started this war, but when Karma's intent is to drag people out of peace mode and war with them for weeks before they can be at peace, fully throws the "were being defensive, your the aggressors" line out the window.

That's not even the slightest bit accurate. Punishing you for being aggressive and starting a war that did far greater damage to their nations than the reps will ever come close to paying for is not them becoming aggressive. And forcing your nations out of peace mode to hinder your future growth so that it's a long time before you're capable of ever pulling another curbstomp is not aggressive either. You seem to forget that when you entered into this war, you gambled with the your rights to determine the future of your alliance and put it on the poker table - you have lost the war and those you attacked now hold power over your future - that does not make them aggressors, and in no way can your propoganda ever make it so.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Heracles the Great

[Archon]

Blackstone had a spy in NPO. Blackstone gave screenshots to OV. That is not the same thing as OV having a spy in NPO.

Although, actually, I can answer your question pretty authoritatively. A little over a year ago, MK accepted screenshots of a members-only RIA board. Negotiations stalled for two months. Remember that time I declared war on MK? That's because I didn't. Two months later, the issue was resolved peacefully.

So that's what I'd do in NPO's situation, having already been in it once myself.

And to Delta's credit, relations between RIA and MK at the time were already laughably bad.

[King DrunkWino]

Only serious playing this game for 316 days. Answer this question for me. Aren't Reps to pay for current damages cause during the current war?

Karma is crossing that line and having NPO pay for things that happened three years ago. Is that really the road we want to walk in CN?

The NPO, imo, is recieving a final bill for around three years of people consider misdeeds. In a way, I feel bad for those folks that joined up a few days, weeks or months ago, even those that joined up a year ago, in that the butchers bill is being laid down squarely on your back. It comes back to one little phrase I've heard time and again round here: Members are responsible for the actions of their leadership.

Though, I think it's great that there are those that didn't participate in some of the things in the NPO's past that are going to stay and are going to do their part in rebuilding. I really hope your leadership realizes and appreciates that.

Then again, I've been in Cynic Town for a while.

[Heracles the Great]

Well, in a political simulator, being in a position politically to take advantage of a rivals mis-step is just that, playing a good game.

Only if it was intentional - if they were in that position by pure luck, then it's not

[Fort Pitt]

Like myself, I'm sure the majority of Karma don't have anything against the general membership of NPO, mainly the government.

It's a shame you got dragged into all of this by them.

[Tromp]

Well, I won't be negotiating anything, I'm not NPO. However, I'd like to know what large and credible "third parties" we have. And no, the neutral menace of TDO doesn't count. Okay, maybe it does, but I wouldn't have a clue myself.

Really? Taking a look at the terms it does seem like a 14 day minimum, not maximum. Could you point me to where Karma officials have said something to the contrary? I'd love to see it.

If I may interrupt here.

The terms state 14 days. How can you say it is not 14 days?

After the period of 14 days has elapsed no further attacks are to occur, peace is to be offered in all quarters, and the period of protection specified in part C of this agreement will begin.

It doesn't state that, but that's not what I meant. What I meant was that they have to be at 90% war mode before the 14 days start. So, let's say it takes...to pull a random number off the top of my head, 3 days to get them all out. Depending on 1) who's active and 2) who feels like being defiant that will either be short or long, but it's somewhere in the middle, I think. That's more days of war, which will hurt the compliant nations even more than just the 14 days. Again, 14 day minimum seems to be what's happening. Unless of course, bkphysics is right and it's really a maximum, although looking at the terms I don't see it.

As I have said before, the term may be badly worded but our intentions were quite clear from the beginning. We would only declare war when they would have met the conditions as stated in that term. I'll once again quote the term Moo posted and bold the important part.

B1) The New Pacific Order shall move the bulk of its forces into warmode for 2 weeks prior to the end of combat. When 90% or more of all nations at or above 4,000 infrastructure and additionally 90% or more of the alliance is in warmode, a countdown clock shall begin, starting on the day immediately after the above conditions have been met. A state of open warfare shall exist between the signatories of this document for a period of exactly 14 days. After the period of 14 days has elapsed no further attacks are to occur, peace is to be offered in all quarters, and the period of protection specified in part C of this agreement will begin.

As you can see the term here implies that we would only engage when the conditions were met. But I'll give you the point that this could be interpreted differently. That does not change the fact that NPO was told in private that this would be the case, as I have already said somewhere in this thread, which basically nullifies your argument.

[Oppe]

except that would be a lie

It would not be a lie, it would be, as accurate if not more accurate statement then yours.

See it does not really matter but it would be more accurate to say NPO declared war at the end of negotiations since negotiations ended at that point. There were no further negotiations that I am aware of after the declaration was made? were there?

Edit: spelling

Edited June 16, 2009 by Oppe

[Letum]

There however, is no opinion as to whether or not NPO declared in the middle of negotiations.

Nor is there any opinion as to the clearly traceable route where all conflicts in this war stem back to the NPO's aggressive declaration of war on Ordo Verde.

Just sayin'

I don't suppose either of you would be able to ignore the opportunity to make a political point and simply debate the actual issue expressed, i.e what constitutes aggression in general?

Well, can't really say I'd expect much. Ender Land doesn't seem to have the capacity for this at any time, but I suppose I might try with you in a few months Archon, when there will be less of an in-game conflict on interests to derail the discussion.

[King DrunkWino]

It would not be a lie it would be as accurate of npt more accurate statement then yours.

See it does not really matter but it would be more accurate to say NPO declared war at the end of negotiations since negotiations ended at that point. There were no further negotiations that I am aware of after the declaration was made? were there?

Launching attacks kinda preempt the purpose of peace negotiations ya know.

[Delta1212]

It would not be a lie it would be as accurate of npt more accurate statement then yours.

See it does not really matter but it would be more accurate to say NPO declared war at the end of negotiations since negotiations ended at that point. There were no further negotiations that I am aware of after the declaration was made? were there?

Unless you count the negotiations using the "Oops, my bad" defense.

[Klonopin]

The NPO, imo, is recieving a final bill for around three years of people consider misdeeds. In a way, I feel bad for those folks that joined up a few days, weeks or months ago, even those that joined up a year ago, in that the butchers bill is being laid down squarely on your back. It comes back to one little phrase I've heard time and again round here: Members are responsible for the actions of their leadership.

Though, I think it's great that there are those that didn't participate in some of the things in the NPO's past that are going to stay and are going to do their part in rebuilding. I really hope your leadership realizes and appreciates that.

Then again, I've been in Cynic Town for a while.

I have faith that NPO will rebuild to her former size and glory. It will not happen over night, but take years.

A hypothetical situation -- Two years from now, NPO goes to war with an AA that is current a part of Karma. NPO wins that war. During peace negotations, NPO states, "Remember 4/21/09 and the Karma war? We want all those Reps back plus all the current damages."

Isn't that what is starting to take shape here at the end of the Karma War?

It is a thin line to walk.

[Teriethien]

I have faith that NPO will rebuild to her former size and glory. It will not happen over night, but take years.

A hypothetical situation -- Two years from now, NPO goes to war with an AA that is current a part of Karma. NPO wins that war. During peace negotations, NPO states, "Remember 4/21/09 and the Karma war? We want all those Reps back plus all the current damages."

Isn't that what is starting to take shape here at the end of the Karma War?

It is a thin line to walk.

Are you trying to tell Karma that letting the NPO rebuild in any way will end up being a cause for regret?

It would not be a lie, it would be, as accurate if not more accurate statement then yours.

See it does not really matter but it would be more accurate to say NPO declared war at the end of negotiations since negotiations ended at that point. There were no further negotiations that I am aware of after the declaration was made? were there?

Edit: spelling

You're arguing semantics. But still, negotiations ended because the NPO declared war; causality implies that negotiation ended after the DoW. Therefore it is indeed technically inaccurate to say that the NPO declared after negotiations had ended. Yes I'm that bored.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Teriethien

[Delta1212]

I have faith that NPO will rebuild to her former size and glory. It will not happen over night, but take years.

A hypothetical situation -- Two years from now, NPO goes to war with an AA that is current a part of Karma. NPO wins that war. During peace negotations, NPO states, "Remember 4/21/09 and the Karma war? We want all those Reps back plus all the current damages."

Isn't that what is starting to take shape here at the end of the Karma War?

It is a thin line to walk.

The current rep amounts don't even come close to covering damages, let alone all reps plus damages.

[King Death II]

I have faith that NPO will rebuild to her former size and glory. It will not happen over night, but take years.

A hypothetical situation -- Two years from now, NPO goes to war with an AA that is current a part of Karma. NPO wins that war. During peace negotations, NPO states, "Remember 4/21/09 and the Karma war? We want all those Reps back plus all the current damages."

Isn't that what is starting to take shape here at the end of the Karma War?

It is a thin line to walk.

You guys would do it anyways, even if Karma gave white peace.

Edited June 16, 2009 by King Death II

[Ogaden]

Like myself, I'm sure the majority of Karma don't have anything against the general membership of NPO, mainly the government.

It's a shame you got dragged into all of this by them.

Your vitrol and insults at general membership would disagree.

[Ogaden]

You guys would do it anyways, even if Karma gave white peace.

I'm not a fan of demanding any reps at all, to be honest. Some would say that I'm in the wrong alliance then, but I feel I made the correct choice, and that my views represent the future of NPO.

The one term I'd like to see on any peace agreement is the statement "this makes us even".

Edited June 16, 2009 by James Dahl

[bkphysics]

Really? Taking a look at the terms it does seem like a 14 day minimum, not maximum. Could you point me to where Karma officials have said something to the contrary? I'd love to see it.

Each nation will only be warred on for 14 days. No more, no less. Peace will be offered after the 14 days. We would also maintain a list of who has warred the requisite 14 days and who hasn't. Once there has reached 90 percent compliance, then the other portions of the terms begins.

I would suggest a viable third party would be the GPA (should they wish to do this) or any other alliance that has remained quite neutral in this conflict.

[King Death II]

I'm not a fan of demanding any reps at all, to be honest. Some would say that I'm in the wrong alliance then, but I feel I made the correct choice, and that my views represent the future of NPO.

The one term I'd like to see on any peace agreement is the statement "this makes us even".

There is no future to NPO if you dont change your government

[Oppe]

You're arguing semantics. But still, negotiations ended because the NPO declared war; causality implies that negotiation ended after the DoW. Therefore it is indeed technically inaccurate to say that the NPO declared after negotiations had ended. Yes I'm that bored.

The devil is in the details as always and while I wait for stuff to get done at work I would clarify a couple of things.

It is indeed inaccurate to to say the NPO declared after negotiations ended. If you would be so kind as to look back at my statement.

"See it does not really matter but it would be more accurate to say NPO declared war at the end of negotiations since negotiations ended at that point" notice not after negotiations had ended.

So it is indeed technically more accurate then the previous statement.

{ooc} I hate hurry up and wait experiments so yes I am bored as well {/ooc}

[Ogaden]

There is no future to NPO if you dont change your government

Our government changes all the time, hell I've been in NPO for less than 6 months and the whole military command structure and half the IOs are different then they were when I came here.

[Klonopin]

Are you trying to tell Karma that letting the NPO rebuild in any way will end up being a cause for regret?

In no way was I making threats. Through a "A hypothetical situation", I was trying to show where this was going.

Am I saying that NPO should be given White Peace? No of course not.

But the true spirit of Reps is to pay for damages take during the current conflict. Not perceived damages from three years ago.

It is an ugly trend that will take over CN.

You guys would do it anyways, even if Karma gave white peace.

With that logic, you should not stop until NPO is disbanded.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Klonopin

[King DrunkWino]

I have faith that NPO will rebuild to her former size and glory. It will not happen over night, but take years.

A hypothetical situation -- Two years from now, NPO goes to war with an AA that is current a part of Karma. NPO wins that war. During peace negotations, NPO states, "Remember 4/21/09 and the Karma war? We want all those Reps back plus all the current damages."

Isn't that what is starting to take shape here at the end of the Karma War?

It is a thin line to walk.

Then, eventually, you'll find yourselves again beaten down and faced by familiar and new faces and the circle will continue. All your hypothetical would prove is that the NPO hadn't learned why what's happening right now is happening.

[King Death II]

Our government changes all the time, hell I've been in NPO for less than 6 months and the whole military command structure and half the IOs are different then they were when I came here.

You guys dont have real gov changes, its just switches between the old founding members every so often. Its those old founding members that are the root of the problem and once those are out of power, NPO can start moving forward.

[Mathias]

That's the basic experience that comes with any alliance. Good luck, I'm glad you're enjoying CN.