King Srqt Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 You are correct. Carter did exist when the coup occured.EDIT: clarity OOC: a moderator made the announcement that he had a 100% warning level before the thread was posted it is my understanding that there can be a delay from when a person reaches a ban level to when they are banned. He was out of the game before Nintenderek made his thread about taking over fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Murometz Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 (edited) VE signed a treaty with FIRE, thinking that FIRE was like the Syndicate, because most of FIRE, when treaty was signed, came from the Syndicate. Turns out FIRE is something completely different. Therefore the treaty was cancelled. Also, FIRE - you had a one person government, so when you changed that one person, you changed the entire government. This is just a cancellation. We have no ill will towards FIRE. No matter how much VE gets verbally attacked here, we aren't using verbal attacks against FIRE, but merely explaining the cancellation. Edited July 7, 2009 by Ilya Murometz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 VE signed a treaty with FIRE, thinking that FIRE was like the Syndicate, because most of FIRE, when treaty was signed, came from the Syndicate. Turns out FIRE is something completely different. Therefore the treaty was cancelled. Also, FIRE - you had a one person government, so when you changed that one person, you changed the entire government. This is just a cancellation. We have no ill will towards FIRE. No matter how much VE gets verbally attacked here, we aren't using verbal attacks against FIRE, but merely explaining the cancellation. We did not have a one person government. Although only one government position was written into the charter, it gave him the power to create others, of which he did. All those other positions are staying the same. All the government is staying the same. The only difference are the regents being promoted to Fire Lords to make a tri and Carter not being a part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 OOC: a moderator made the announcement that he had a 100% warning level before the thread was posted it is my understanding that there can be a delay from when a person reaches a ban level to when they are banned. He was out of the game before Nintenderek made his thread about taking over fire. I stand corrected as far as the order of posts go. I still contend the petition was a step in the coup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Murometz Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 (edited) We did not have a one person government. Although only one government position was written into the charter, it gave him the power to create others, of which he did. All those other positions are staying the same. All the government is staying the same. The only difference are the regents being promoted to Fire Lords to make a tri and Carter not being a part of it. I think our views differ, because, the bolded part, I view that as a one person government. The charter establishes the government. The charter had only one government position. When that person is gone, the government is changed. Edited July 7, 2009 by Ilya Murometz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Wallace Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Semantics at this point. Anyways, I believe FIRE could be one of the more interesting alliances in the next 18 months if they can hang on and make it work. I would like to see VE and FIRE get to know each other a little bit better and let's see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mydogti Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 FIRE coups Carter best move you guys have made carter stay gone bud, CN is a better place without you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 you guys are assuming that carter got couped and thats right when this discussion started, and that we dropped them right there. that is not correct, there were other reasons for the cancellation, notably the realm merge got a lot of questions flying about whether we wanted this treaty or not, as the forming of the realm involved deserters from ve. if fire was going to merge with the realm without gauging our opinion on it first, and that they were going to appoint a mofa who was a deserter from our alliance as well, then the opinion of myself and others is how can we trust them with a high level defense treaty, if some of their members have a history of deserting us in wartime. i like some people in fire, and i respect them very much and hope we can be friends. maybe down the road a defense treaty will be an option, but it is of my opinion that their basically entirely revamped alliance needs to prove themselves before we can talk of a defense treaty again. some people in this thread question our ability as allies. well to that ill say look at the karma war, and how we've treated our allies there. the syndicate is not the same alliance as fire, and therefore it was hard to keep maintaining this high level treaty with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Nukem Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 FIRE coups Carter best move you guys have madecarter stay gone bud, CN is a better place without you. Hey that is not cool. Carter is already gone and for most of the time I knew him I liked him. Please learn not to troll. In regards to the cancellation it was very expected. O/ VE O/ FIRE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 you guys are assuming that carter got couped and thats right when this discussion started, and that we dropped them right there. that is not correct, there were other reasons for the cancellation, notably the realm merge got a lot of questions flying about whether we wanted this treaty or not, as the forming of the realm involved deserters from ve. if fire was going to merge with the realm without gauging our opinion on it first, and that they were going to appoint a mofa who was a deserter from our alliance as well, then the opinion of myself and others is how can we trust them with a high level defense treaty, if some of their members have a history of deserting us in wartime. This was one of my major concerns as well, And I have made it known several times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornelius Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Honestly Random, I don't know if you're still bitter over us dropping NpO (which if anything I would've done faster considering the circumstances, but that's another discussion) but canceling treaties is rare for us. Such things are not done lightly, and never have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 VE has been a great asset and a good protectorate of ours. I support their decision here and being member of one of the alliances caught up in the FIRE issue I praise VE for their stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 you guys are assuming that carter got couped and thats right when this discussion started, and that we dropped them right there. that is not correct, there were other reasons for the cancellation, notably the realm merge got a lot of questions flying about whether we wanted this treaty or not, as the forming of the realm involved deserters from ve. if fire was going to merge with the realm without gauging our opinion on it first, and that they were going to appoint a mofa who was a deserter from our alliance as well, then the opinion of myself and others is how can we trust them with a high level defense treaty, if some of their members have a history of deserting us in wartime. Are you seriously still holding a grudge over that? I would understand if VE was about to lose that war, but I think everyone knew from the second that war began who was going to win and who is currently winning. The word deserters is way overused in today's CN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Are you seriously still holding a grudge over that? I would understand if VE was about to lose that war, but I think everyone knew from the second that war began who was going to win and who is currently winning. The word deserters is way overused in today's CN. Desertion: the abandonment without consent or legal justification of a person, post, or relationship and the associated duties and obligations Seems legit to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Are you seriously still holding a grudge over that? I would understand if VE was about to lose that war, but I think everyone knew from the second that war began who was going to win and who is currently winning. The word deserters is way overused in today's CN. it didn't help any that most of the deserters in this situation didn't even bother to post a resignation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 it didn't help any that most of the deserters in this situation didn't even bother to post a resignation. While I can understand being angry about that (Someone in FIRE recently did that so I do completely understand), I don't understand why you would hold it against an entire alliance, for the actions of a few. For example, an ex member of FIRE joined NSO the other day. He didn't post his resignation until today. Am I mad at the individual member? A little bit. Am I mad at NSO? Not really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 While I can understand being angry about that (Someone in FIRE recently did that so I do completely understand), I don't understand why you would hold it against an entire alliance, for the actions of a few.For example, an ex member of FIRE joined NSO the other day. He didn't post his resignation until today. Am I mad at the individual member? A little bit. Am I mad at NSO? Not really. it doesn't help when 1 of the people who didn't post a resignation is now in government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 it doesn't help when 1 of the people who didn't post a resignation is now in government. I am not aware of who that person is, however I'm sure they've proved their worth and why they are in government. There's no need to hold a grudge for one little mistake, especially involving a completely different alliance at the time, especially one that's almost two months old, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 I am not aware of who that person is, however I'm sure they've proved their worth and why they are in government. There's no need to hold a grudge for one little mistake, especially involving a completely different alliance at the time, especially one that's almost two months old, isn't it? when that person makes up 1/3rd of the new government of FIRE it kind of does matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 when that person makes up 1/3rd of the new government of FIRE it kind of does matter. First off, I explained the government thing earlier. There's more then three members of government, no matter what the charter says. Your ignorance is overwhelming. Secondly, I'm still not quite sure which member your talking about (I think I might know though) and to be honest, every Fire Lord deserves the position they have. So, if that's the reason you canceled, I'm quite glad we aren't allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Wallace Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Nintenderek, you're taking this personally and you shouldn't. Let's establish a good base and see if a true friendship develops. I personally think a treaty between FIRE and VE would be a good thing if the treaty was more than just words on paper. Let's work towards this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Nintenderek, you're taking this personally and you shouldn't. Let's establish a good base and see if a true friendship develops. I personally think a treaty between FIRE and VE would be a good thing if the treaty was more than just words on paper. Let's work towards this. I'm not taking the cancellation for the treaty personally. I'm taking the reasons for it personally. I'm all for what you stated, however I'm against some of your other reasons and statements stated in this thread, including these Any kindof questionable leadership, regardless of who it is makes a fairly bad imprint on ones Alliance.And considering the gravity of who it was and everything thereof, we had to make the right call and I support our Parliament fully on this decision and have been for awhile now. Also, FIRE - you had a one person government, so when you changed that one person, you changed the entire government. you guys are assuming that carter got couped and thats right when this discussion started, and that we dropped them right there. that is not correct, there were other reasons for the cancellation, notably the realm merge got a lot of questions flying about whether we wanted this treaty or not, as the forming of the realm involved deserters from ve. if fire was going to merge with the realm without gauging our opinion on it first, and that they were going to appoint a mofa who was a deserter from our alliance as well, then the opinion of myself and others is how can we trust them with a high level defense treaty, if some of their members have a history of deserting us in wartime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 I'm not taking the cancellation for the treaty personally. I'm taking the reasons for it personally. I'm all for what you stated, however I'm against some of your other reasons and statements stated in this thread, including these Do you blame us for being hesitant, I mean lets get serious here. If you had those that deserted your Alliance during War Time operations and jumped into another one...wouldn't you be a little aggravated that this was going on and that they deliberately left your Alliance on bad terms? I won't name names here or anything but there were several who left and that in itself does not go right with me at all. You know what they did with Deserters during the Civil War. They were Shot. Again let me just clarify that this is my own beliefs here nor do they reflect on our Alliance as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 You know what they did with Deserters during the Civil War. They were Shot. OOC: They still are Let's keep in mind that for many alliances (idk how VE does things), desertion is a ZI-able offense. It also seems reasonable to me that an alliance would have misgivings about a deserter leading another alliance, especially if allied to deserted alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 Fun; best of luck to both sides. 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.