Citadel Announcement

[Denial]

I really don't know why you always need to spin your stuff to make it rosier then it is, even when it is not necessary. Obviously the plain facts will rise up to the light.

It is like a knee jerk reaction with you people, and I really dislike that. No offense, but thats just not my coup of tee.

This, coming from a Pacifican, is very amusing.

The Initiative will last forever!

[mhawk]

I can't seem to recall PC breaking a NAP with TPF. It looks to me like they followed the cancellation procedures properly.

I suppose when you want to cancel your treaty with NPO you can attack them instead of cancel, "breaking" a treaty is the same thing as following the written cancellation period?

[Electron Sponge]

We wish the Citadel the best of luck in wherever the future leads it and we thank those within the Citadel that were voices that defended us and stood up for us in the midst of the farce of a trial that took place.

This is a rather interesting assertion nestled into an otherwise quite diplomatic post.

I'm no expert on Citadel's internal workings but I do know that when a bloc puts an alliance up for a dismissal vote it's usually a fait accompli. I am curious, is a trial even a mandated part of the process?

[Branimir]

I am sorry, but it is spin. To say their choice in the war was not a reason (exactly the words used) for OG's throwing out is plain silly.

Of course it is one of the reasons, of course it computes largely, you cant say that wasn't the predominant issue with a straight face.

Every block made, in existence and which will be made would throw out an alliance which in a war fought for opposition of the majority in the block. But the thing about Cit, they will not tell it like that because that would not be the most excellent PR, although understandable. They will mention some obscure logs released from OG gov. (nobody mentioned that, interesting), this and that--- but not the real main issue present.

No, you are not somehow different then the rest of us, to be able to respect your friends choice in honoring treaties with people you dislike with no malcontent towards you and move forward from there. As the rest of us, you will hold grudge and then kick them out. No reason to pretend otherwise, mention some logs, say war wasn't a reason, etc.

This is my opinion and I have no intend in to going in some epic debates about semantics with you. We all know what happened here and why basically. The knee jerk need of some from Cit to put it in a more rosier package is not needed.

This, coming from a Pacifican, is very amusing.

The Initiative will last forever!

Yes, that counters my point brilliantly and it does not come off as a petty attack at all. Some of you will never learn.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Branimir

[Dr. Dan]

This is a rather interesting assertion nestled into an otherwise quite diplomatic post.

I'm no expert on Citadel's internal workings but I do know that when a bloc puts an alliance up for a dismissal vote it's usually a fait accompli. I am curious, is a trial even a mandated part of the process?

Any representative on the Council may propose the expulsion of a signatory. The representative proposing expulsion must provide grounds for the expulsion of the signatory, and said member shall be given a period of no less than 24 hours to respond. Following the response of the signatory facing expulsion, the representatives of the other signatories shall conduct an anonymous vote. For the expulsion to be enacted, the following requirements must be met: i) the polls shall remain open for a period no less than 24 hours, and no greater than 48 hours; ii) a minimum of 80% of eligible representatives shall vote, and iii) a minimum of 67% of all votes must be cast in favor of expelling the signatory. Should the motion to expel the signatory pass, the signatory�€™s name shall be stricken from the list of signatories, and the expelled member shall be instantly deprived of all protections and responsibilities within this document.

Not a trial, per se, but there is obviously discussion on the matter.

[Kroknia]

I could have seen OG being kept in the Citadel regardless of the side of the war they were on. I think this was much deeper than that.

[HellAngel]

Nobody would really blame Cit to throw out OG for their side in the war. I really don't know why you always need to spin your stuff to make it rosier then it is, even when it is not necessary. Obviously the plain facts will rise up to the light.

It is like a knee jerk reaction with you people, and I really dislike that. No offense, but thats just not my coup of tee.

Anyway, good luck to OG. Hope you manage through these times.

I think Syz simplified the matter for the sake of the argument. OG joining in on the other side of the war was just the result of the same reasons they got kicked for, not the reason itself.

But you know, i dont really care if you believe me or not.

[Denial]

Yes, that counters my point brilliantly and it does not come off as a petty attack at all. Some of you will never learn.

Teach me, almighty Branimir. Accept me into your warm embrace.

[Dr. Dan]

I am sorry, but it is spin. To say their choice in the war was not a reason (exactly the words used) for OG's throwing out is plain silly.

You are confusing "THE reason" with "A reason". It was a symptom of a larger problem, I believe, may have been what he was going for.

You are right, though, that it's not really worth talking about.

[Branimir]

I think Syz simplified the matter for the sake of the argument. OG joining in on the other side of the war was just the result of the same reasons they got kicked for, not the reason itself.

But you know, i dont really care if you believe me or not.

HellAngel, its all cool. As said, I have no interest into going in a long semantics debate with you about it because as you don't care if I believe you (which is understandable), I don't really care much for your spin attempts.

So, you know, Ill just kind of stick to my opinion about it and respectfully kind of disagree with yours and all is well again in the world. It doesn't concern me anyway so good luck to all of you in this and hopefully things settle down.

Teach me, almighty Branimir. Accept me into your warm embrace.

It would be contra productive for me, because this random poisonous emotional outbursts from you work in my advantage. This attacks like that always do. Yes, I have no problem in admitting my motives even when they are not glorious enough. So please, Rev, do continue.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Branimir

[Electron Sponge]

Teach me, almighty Branimir. Accept me into your warm embrace.

So you want him to snuggle a pit viper, then?

Referential humor is good humor

[The AUT]

If Empress Theodora is telling us not to speculate I don't see the reason why we should. If all parties are happy with the decision then there's no reason to dwell on it, really.

Yes, that counters my point brilliantly and it does not come off as a petty attack at all. Some of you will never learn.

It's Revanche, he's like one of the best and most coherent posts in the OWF ever! You have to listen to him, he's better than you!

[Ejayrazz]

While I don't necessarily disagree with most of the rest of your post, I'd like to take this time to respond to this line of defense that has been used so often and point out that the "I KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING AND YOU DON'T" defense doesn't work when people constantly call your actions in advance. If you're saying it was obvious weeks ago to everyone except you that this would happen, then perhaps it's YOU that needs to pay more attention to the goings-on both within your bloc and on these boards.

It isn't my obligation to know everything whats happening on these boards, but lets use basic FA principles.

1. It is common to keep threads like these respectful within the op.

2. By not doing so, you get shunned for ruthless behavior (Reference: VE-IRON, etc etc)

3. What we have here is a respectful thread advising Bob what is going on

4. There are excerpts you should particularly pay close attention to and talk amongst individuals privately to understand more of the given situation, as bluntly stating them could be perceived as violating term 1 and 2.

5. Taking a thread at face value..? No, investigate.

Combine all of these. Individuals believe OG was gone weeks ago because of Twip, etc. No, their expulsion wasn't being discussed then, it was other mitigating circumstances which are mentioned in the op, problem is no one sincerely analyzed it efficently enough to realize this - and no, its not they joined the other 'side', they followed their treaty...I believe my alliance and TOP once signed Q knowingly acknowledging its supremacy clause.

Nobody would really blame Cit to throw out OG for their side in the war. I really don't know why you always need to spin your stuff to make it rosier then it is, even when it is not necessary. Obviously the plain facts will rise up to the light.

It is like a knee jerk reaction with you people, and I really dislike that. No offense, but thats just not my coup of tee.

Anyway, good luck to OG. Hope you manage through these times.

You stated earlier not to 'paint anything rosier', this really has nothing to do with them following their treaties in my opinion and I will kindly prove it, especially as a representative of my alliance. What alarmed many Citadel alliances is located within the second paragraph of the ops speech. What I see is you being biased due to your personal opinion, therefore you automatically assume the worse and believe we are a bunch of mongering liars.

Mind you, TOP had allies on this 'other side' you speak of. I will give you a hint: Leaders represent their alliance. Use this knowledge, which I am sure you already understand, and reread the second paragraph. Particularly the ending mate.

Or you can contact me privately, as anyone else can.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[Denial]

It would be contra productive for me, because this random poisonous emotional outbursts from you work in my advantage. This attacks like that always do. Yes, I have no problem in admitting my motives even when they are not glorious enough. So please, Rev, do continue.

Sorry, I couldn't hear you through all that faux moral outrage.

So you want him to snuggle a pit viper, then?

Referential humor is good humor

Pit vipers need love too

It's Revanche, he's like one of the best and most coherent posts in the OWF ever! You have to listen to him, he's better than you!

The sooner everyone learns that the better imo.

[Branimir]

Or you can contact me privately, as anyone else can.

It really doesn't concern me, mate, you do as you please. Just voicing my opinion and moving on.

[Ejayrazz]

It concerns you enough to post, it concerns me enough to inform you of another opinion with a prominent fact rather than waving an ego, expecting for understanding to be conveyed. .

[Branimir]

It concerns you enough to post, it concerns me enough to inform you of another opinion with a prominent fact rather than waving an ego, expecting for understanding to be conveyed. .

Semantics. I have noticed the tendency lately that every debate heavily goes into semantics, pointless one at that. To just use to contradict for contradict sake,...also squeeze a small insult and there you go. You have a CN post.

Concern, catching my interest there for a minute on a slow day, whatever mate. As I said, you do as you please, me and my ego will exit now thank you

Edited June 25, 2009 by Branimir

[Bossk]

Good luck, Old Guard.

[Augustus Autumn]

The Initiative will last forever!

I might have to quote you on this after taking it properly out of context

[SoxNation]

Expected. Very, very expected.

But also sad.

Maybe even unfortunate, since as others have suggested, it doesn't seem to actually address the real problem, such as it was. If the guilty party goes free, and the people who are punished for the crime erred more through inaction than action, has justice really been served? If said punishment also deprives the entire bloc of about 2 million NS (give or take, post-rebuilding), and accomplishes little of substance, was it a wise decision? Or was it an act fueled by anger and hurt feelings?

I still have much love for the people of Citadel, but I think this may ultimately have been a mistake.

It may even set a dangerous precedent, since I can think of at least two incidents in the past where the judgment and/or integrity of a Citadel alliance's leadership was called into question, and angry words and hurt feelings absolutely came into play. Where would Citadel be now if either (or both) of those issues had been pushed to the point of punishing an entire alliance with expulsion?

I think there were other options that could have been pursued. I'm not sure they were considered as strongly as they should have been, or WOULD have been, if not for people nursing old grudges and looking for payback rather than resolution.

Well said Nak, always saying what I want to better than me.

[SoxNation]

Its not ironic, it actually explains the situation quite good. 3/5th realized that the Lux Aeterna was flawed in this situation because it was created years ago when this scenario was not foreseen. They then made the decision to do what is right instead of following paper and letting their friends die. 1/3rd decided to follow paper even if that means to support an aggressor and to chose the opposite side of what Citadel thought is the "right side". Thats why they now have to leave us.

And the last 1/3rd were trapped because they didn't know how to decide if you have friends on both sides of the battle - until it was too late, then they were yelled at from all sides, made a decision, were again yelled at from all sides why they come so late, were yelled at when they tried to negotiate good terms for their friends on the other side and are still called "war profiteers!" as if they had all that done intentionally.

I luv Syz, Will miss you old friend.

This is probably one of the best explanations of the war itself, regardless of what happened to OG.

[SoxNation]

Sorry sponge, thats cool if you think its silly but its one thing to accept someone with a checkered past somewhere else but when that checkered past is from an alliance that you are currently kicking out of your bloc and oh....that happened to have led that alliance, that is a bit strange no matter how it is spun.

Are you dense? Citadle can't control Argents membership unless they boot Argent the alliance.

Yes Citadel is not happy with Argent on the whole for accepting Reyne, Argent is taking a stand and hoping it works out.

Deal with it.

[Diomede]

I wouldn't so much say Argent is taking a stand as recognizing how counter-productive reyne and co remaining in OG is to OG. With her and the other two triums out, they now have an opportunity to truly change for the better without baseless accusations of her pulling strings in some psuedo-dictatorial manner.

Argent is a very mature (in OOC age at least ) alliance with the majority of our government being either college students or married adults with children. Reyne fits into the OOC side of our community very well. IC? Well, we're willing to give her that chance.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Diomede

[Dr. Dan]

I wouldn't so much say Argent is taking a stand as recognizing how counter-productive reyne and co remaining in OG is to OG. With her and the other two triums out, they now have an opportunity to truly change for the better without baseless accusations of her pulling strings in some psuedo-dictatorial manner.

Argent is a very mature (in OOC age at least ) alliance with the majority of our government being either college students or married adults with children. Reyne fits into the OOC side of our community very well. IC? Well, we're willing to give her that chance.

Your alliance smells like a retirement home.

[Poobah]

Your alliance smells like a retirement home.

I hate that old person smell