Jump to content

TORN Q&A


Catface

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The first one is not a question.

As far as the latter goes, knowing what I know now, I would have pressed to have the CB not acted on. The why and what that would have probably lead too is a bit long winded for a Q&A answer, but perhaps sometime I'll get it down on paper (a la Delta1212).

Really? That's the only thing you regret? Acting on the CB?. Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is plenty of room to expand on the hows and whys, but its beyond the scope of posts in a Q&A thread.

Well, I have another question. Besides your post-apocalyptic war realization that the CB was a bad idea, is there any conduct say in the month of April, having to do with your allies, you would do different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have another question. Besides your post-apocalyptic war realization that the CB was a bad idea, is there any conduct say in the month of April, having to do with your allies, you would do different?

Oh quite. Watching certain allies of ours face a mountain of opposition without being able to fight by their side was absolutely torture, despite their desires that we not, then, join them in their burden.

I'm quite intent on seeing it does not happen again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is plenty of room to expand on the hows and whys, but its beyond the scope of posts in a Q&A thread.

I don't mean to pry into topics that are too delicate to discuss in public, but I will offer you friendly advice and say that I think this is the perfect place to present your side of the story on the events that transpired during the OV incident. You have a rare opportunity to address a wide audience, that let's face it is already gossiping about TORN's role in the war whether they hear your side or not. You'd be wise to take this opportunity before your position becomes locked down by the rumors and conjecture that are bound to spread.

I could certainly believe that the information is too sensitive and the events are too recent to be shared with the public. If that is not the case, though, I have to wonder what the purpose of a Q&A is if the "elephant in the room" question is passed over because it requires too much detail.

Edited by Penguin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean to pry into topics that are too delicate to discuss in public, but I will offer you friendly advice and say that I think this is the perfect place to present your side of the story on the events that transpired during the OV incident. You have a rare opportunity to address a wide audience, that let's face it is already gossiping about TORN's role in the war whether they hear your side or not. You'd be wise to take this opportunity before your position becomes locked down by the rumors and conjecture that are bound to spread.

People will believe what they want to believe, regardless of our side of things. Your advice is gracious, but I disagree. Of course we've noticed the commentary and conjecture throughout AP, which we were fully expecting. Few have actually come to us in private ask if so-so is false or true or to clarify something or whatever.

That said, our allies fully know our side of things that transpired, and that is enough for us. Rumors will be rumors. It won't be delved into detail here, as has been stated before, but perhaps will in the future in a feature-length film it deserves. As to your second paragraph, I believe the first sentence of it is indeed the case.

Do you smell like beef jerky?

No. We smell like beer and sex.

Edited by mythicknight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh quite. Watching certain allies of ours face a mountain of opposition without being able to fight by their side was absolutely torture, despite their desires that we not, then, join them in their burden.

I'm quite intent on seeing it does not happen again.

Honest question here. Why would you ever sign away the ability to stand up for those allies of yours? I dont see why you had to sign that away in a peace accord with an alliance that you never actually attacked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest question here. Why would you ever sign away the ability to stand up for those allies of yours? I dont see why you had to sign that away in a peace accord with an alliance that you never actually attacked.

The terms specified that we would not re enter against anyone in what would become the Karma front. We only signed away this ability after consulting with our allies as we were under the impression that they would not be participating as well. I can assure you that this was not an easy, or fun thing to do. Speaking from the perspective of someone who was a member of TORN's general assembly at the time, I can assure you that many of us wanted to re enter as we saw our allies and friends being attacked. Unfortunately we were already bound by terms and could not come back in with out violating our peace agreement. This was not a fun time for us internally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The terms specified that we would not re enter against anyone in what would become the Karma front. We only signed away this ability after consulting with our allies as we were under the impression that they would not be participating as well. I can assure you that this was not an easy, or fun thing to do. Speaking from the perspective of someone who was a member of TORN's general assembly at the time, I can assure you that many of us wanted to re enter as we saw our allies and friends being attacked. Unfortunately we were already bound by terms and could not come back in with out violating our peace agreement. This was not a fun time for us internally.

No, I imagine it wouldn't be fun at all. A lesson learned to everyone to be more careful with what they agree with. As the NPO shows, one does not have to agree to the first terms given. Discussion can be had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I imagine it wouldn't be fun at all. A lesson learned to everyone to be more careful with what they agree with. As the NPO shows, one does not have to agree to the first terms given. Discussion can be had.

When we agreed to peace, the general membership did feel that NPO had stabbed us in the back. The merits and authenticity of that point are certainly drawn in to question now, but at the time the general membership viewed the events as a black and white picture. Prior to that, I can tell you that the vast, vast majority of the membership wanted to go 'Viet TORN'. The average member had no qualms with fighting. It is unfortunate events transpired the way they did, but the past can not be changed.

Things will not occur the same way in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to emphasize the point that we were told that our allies would not be joining the fight. It was this belief that convinced many members, myself included, that Viet TORN wasn't the right thing to do and that we should accept the terms. Thus, you can imagine our horror when we saw ally after ally join the war, with us unable to help them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to emphasize the point that we were told that our allies would not be joining the fight. It was this belief that convinced many members, myself included, that Viet TORN wasn't the right thing to do and that we should accept the terms. Thus, you can imagine our horror when we saw ally after ally join the war, with us unable to help them out.

Well, one should never hand over their ability to stand up for their allies unless perhaps that ability has been completely pounded into oblivion due to defending said allies. That is what I speak of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, one should never hand over their ability to stand up for their allies unless perhaps that ability has been completely pounded into oblivion due to defending said allies. That is what I speak of.

We never had any intention of not sticking by our remaining allies that had not already atempted to obtain peace on their own. Our peace agreement specifically said we would stay out of what would be known as the Karma War. When you are told by your allies to agree to the agreement because they won't be participating in the Karma War, there isn't much you can do. We never gave up our right to defend them in the case of an outside attack. However, they all changed their minds and decided the right thing to do was enter the war AFTER the peace agreement was signed. Had we known this was going to happen, the general membership never would have supported agreeing to peace. I think you need to look a little more at the actual circumstances instead of zeroing in on the fact that we seemingly abandoned our allies, because that is quite simply not the case. That being said, things will certainly not happen the same way next time. We will go to even greater lengths to ensure that we are able to stick by our allies side for the duration of any potential conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What made you so sure that you should trust your allies at MK, who you were allied for five months at the time, over TPF and NPO, who you were allied to for a year and a half and a year respectively?

In general, there were a number of circumstances that led to the decisions that were made; I think that if you read back in the thread, you'll find your answer.

Why do you think it was so easy for you guys to goad the NPO into a war they didn't want to fight?

Hello, sarcasm. Nice to meet you. How are you? I am fine. :mellow:

Edited by Rach86
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, there were a number of circumstances that led to the decisions that were made; I think that if you read back in the thread, you'll find your answer.

Not that it is any of my business, nor should I even care :ph34r:, but I sort of was reading with an eye on that question too, and missed it. Maybe it's just so obvious and Sith Musso and I are the silly ones? Eh, don't answer that, especially given the Sith origins of the curiosity... ;)

Hello, sarcasm. Nice to meet you. How are you? I am fine. :mellow:

When did Rach start talking to herself/answering her own questions? (Also, no answer expected, just good to see you doing well :P )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just thought I'd just skip the formalities and formulate, in the form of a question, the opinion most of the planet seems to have about your alliance.

Well, I can honestly say that I've never really heard that opinion from, well, anyone. What planet are you speaking of?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...