Delta1212 Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 GOONs was 5x and you had to post a plea for it to get accepted And they got disbanded. What was your point exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre27 Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 Most people seem to be stuck in the past though, judging by the some of the rubbish getting posted around the OWF. That seems to be true. Anyway i do not believe in reps/terms. An apology would be optional, but it should not be a part of the terms. Who would believe a forced apology. Why not simply let the Pacifica leadership write some Vogon Poetry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix von Agnu Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 The only two terms that aren't insanely harsh, are the nuke and apology terms. Otherwise a lot of them are ridiculous. Seeing as there are way too many threads devoted to NPO terms, I won't discuss this anymore here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SithPie Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 I hope you don't think that it makes NPO look like saints. We clearly know what the NPO did to GOONS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 I hope you don't think that it makes NPO look like saints. There are no saints in this conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 Anyway i do not believe in reps/terms Interesting choice of alliance then ;p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jipps Posted June 20, 2009 Report Share Posted June 20, 2009 There are no saints in this conflict. Oh so true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamlin Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Current terms are right, though i dont recall the exact details of them off hand. i'd like to see military treaties cancelled and all secret terms rescinded (dont tell me they dont exist, those at NpO would beg to differ) To play devils advocate. If there were secret terms how would you know they had been dropped? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viluin Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) They have a "policy" that any damage you do to them unintentionally (or intentionally, I guess) has to be repaid at 3 times the cost.If you destroy 5 tech, you have to reimburse them 15. If you accidentally send their enemy 3 million, you have to send them 9. etc. If we had that policy in wars, MK would still be paying reps. Edited June 23, 2009 by Viluin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WcaesarD Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 If we had that policy in wars, MK would still be paying reps. Yeah, because MK would have agreed to those kid of terms for defending allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamlin Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Yeah, because MK would have agreed to those kid of terms for defending allies. pot, meet kettle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WcaesarD Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) pot, meet kettle. You missed the key part of that sentence "for defending allies". Also, I'm not part of Karma. Edited June 23, 2009 by WCaesarD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamlin Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 You missed the key part of that sentence "for defending allies". Also, I'm not part of Karma. I confused threads. I thought we were still on the Echelon reps thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperium of Poliz Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 (edited) nulled. i still cant believe that a simple stern talking to isn't an option! Edited June 25, 2009 by Imperium of Poliz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 There are no saints in this conflict. That's because you have to die to get sainthood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strykewolf Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 I voted.... Too harsh. ((shrugs)) And yeah, I should be one jumping up and down and demanding blood. But, I'm not...and it's not me. ((shrugs)) It's not needed. I think the point has been shoved home, and uncomfortably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustakrakish II Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 I voted ALL because im too much of a "cat" to choose. Thus: VFABIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 First 10 options, barring the first one. People should be free to leave the alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyisraelie Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Voted all because I could. Ya dawg, ya should stop posting NPO polls, thanks dawg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Metternich Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Yeah, voted for all except the last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackoftheLegion Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 I couldn't choose, so I clicked all of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 That's because you have to die to get sainthood. There are no holy men in this conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 There are no holy men in this conflict. Iunno. I wouldn't be surprised if someone from CCC was part of a clergy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinite Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 There are no holy men in this conflict. I do wonder what Walford would say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Being a member of clergy does not make one a holy man. Quite the opposite, it seems, at least in most cases. I wonder what Walford is doing now though. 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.