bcndwilson Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Congratulations Leigon, you are much better off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Congratulations Legion Congratulations Leigon, you are much better off Methinks IRON has forgotten their supper rations of late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) Don't worry, this is only a placeholder cancellation before the Legion-ODN-NpO MDoAP Bloc is released. In all seriousness, though, it's sad to see how much damage ending up on the opposites sides of a war can do to one's friendship. I admit this caught me by surprise; you two seemed so close even just a few months ago. Nonetheless, I can understand ODN's desire to pare down their treaties to the point where none of their allies could conceivably end up on opposite sides of a hypothetical war. I personally (and perhaps naively) think they're moving to an extreme end of the spectrum with this one. On the other hand, it's very difficult to blame an alliance that has been mocked relentlessly for almost a year based on a single act of disloyalty when they decide to drastically narrow their Foreign Affairs focus to prevent the same from happening again. Good luck to both. My sincerest congratulations to pie for coming out victorious in the end. Edited July 14, 2009 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 It isn't like the ODN even honored this treaty since GW III. How many times was it since then that you stood back and watched Legion get beaten down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 It isn't like the ODN even honored this treaty since GW III. How many times was it since then that you stood back and watched Legion get beaten down? *WalkerNinja watches to see if anyone takes a too obvious bait. I think Hymenbreach just got done addressing this point, actually. 2008 called. It wants its opinions back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 *WalkerNinja watches to see if anyone takes a too obvious bait. I think Hymenbreach just got done addressing this point, actually. So how do you feel about being used as a convenient scapegoat, along with your "clique?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jipps Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Heh, I give my congradualtions to The Legion who should've done away with this piece of paper months ago. ODN made the decision to cancel this a long time ago, right when Legion needed it the most in the face of Valhalla's onslaught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroicDisaster Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) Heh, I give my congradualtions to The Legion who should've done away with this piece of paper months ago.ODN made the decision to cancel this a long time ago, right when Legion needed it the most in the face of Valhalla's onslaught. If I'm update to date on my history, Legion asked us to not get involved. Edited July 14, 2009 by HeroicDisaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 My sincerest congratulations to pie for coming out victorious in the end. The pie is a lie. As for this being the result of ending up on opposite sides of a war, that is not accurate. The cancellation is driven by the joint assessment of the two alliances that our future foreign affairs directions are misaligned. Perhaps things will change, and a new treaty will emerge between us at some point. Perhaps not. It was a good treaty while it lasted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 The pie is a lie.As for this being the result of ending up on opposite sides of a war, that is not accurate. The cancellation is driven by the joint assessment of the two alliances that our future foreign affairs directions are misaligned. Perhaps things will change, and a new treaty will emerge between us at some point. Perhaps not. It was a good treaty while it lasted. So talk to us about the future of ODN, Comrade Pingu, and how is it different from the future of Legion? You see, when I read statements like what was said in the opening post I sense that things are being slightly misrepresented. "It's not you, it's me." "It was a mutual decision to break up." That sort of thing. I'm just curious, that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 So talk to us about the future of ODN, Comrade Pingu, and how is it different from the future of Legion?You see, when I read statements like what was said in the opening post I sense that things are being slightly misrepresented. "It's not you, it's me." "It was a mutual decision to break up." That sort of thing. As I understand things, it was a mutual decision arrived at after lengthy discussions that made plain that we're headed in different directions. No misrepresentation that I can see. But I'm sure a government member can better satisfy your curiosity if you are genuinely confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 As I understand things, it was a mutual decision *bzzzz* Ohh, sorry. Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you. I'm sure our ambassador would fill us in if he ever came around. (Or if I cared enough to read the ODN Embassy) PS There's no such thing as a mutual decision in these instances. There is always an initiator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 There's no such thing as a mutual decision in these instances. There is always an initiator. Au contraire, mon vieux. That one or other party to a discussion speaks first has no bearing on whether the end result of that discussion can be considered unilateral or mutual. If I ask you to dance, and you agree, have I imposed that upon you? No, it is a mutual decision to spin the light fantastic together - to the strains, perhaps, of the late, sainted Barry White. That I took the initiative does not preclude the outcome being mutually agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Au contraire, mon vieux. That one or other party to a discussion speaks first has no bearing on whether the end result of that discussion can be considered unilateral or mutual. If I ask you to dance, and you agree, have I imposed that upon you? No, it is a mutual decision to spin the light fantastic together - to the strains, perhaps, of the late, sainted Barry White. That I took the initiative does not preclude the outcome being mutually agreed. If we're talking about dancing, you and Legion were already dancing and then stopped. Things like that don't happen in tandem. Someone initiates, someone assents, but by no means is it mutual. Mutuality is actually impossible because it would imply simultaneous cessation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 You seem to be freighting 'mutuality' with meanings such as 'simultaneity,' 'unanimity,' and, possibly, 'spontaneity' - meanings that it does not necessarily or automatically bear. If you and I have been dancing for many hours, it doesn't matter which one of us first notices that we are tiring or that music no longer sounds as sweet - if we agree to sit down, we agree. It is mutual. It is only not mutual if, for example, you say 'bugger this, I'm knackered' but I wish to dance on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) PS There's no such thing as a mutual decision in these instances. There is always an initiator. I'll post just to set the record straight. Legion requested a government conference with ODN to determine the future of ORRPLE. Where to go, how the allies connect, why we were upset at ODN, why ODN was upset at Legion, etc. This happened for month and a half roughly but nothing was truly decided. Two days ago, Legion govt learned of the cancellation through rumors floating on the interwebs, I approached an ODN official who said the members and government were divided. Next day we received word from ODN's government of cancellation. Edited July 14, 2009 by Imperial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 The pie is a lie.As for this being the result of ending up on opposite sides of a war, that is not accurate. The cancellation is driven by the joint assessment of the two alliances that our future foreign affairs directions are misaligned. Perhaps things will change, and a new treaty will emerge between us at some point. Perhaps not. It was a good treaty while it lasted. My apologies. I usually assume that one's perceptions of future foreign affairs directions are grounded in recent history. From my vantage point (soaring high above the clouds as all birds are wont to do) Legion and ODN seemed rather close both politically and emotionally just a few months back. The only event I saw that might explain this surprising (at least to me) cancellation was the way war split. Of course, we in the cheap seats miss a lot of the backstage exchanges that so often lead to declining relations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 You seem to be freighting 'mutuality' with meanings such as 'simultaneity,' 'unanimity,' and, possibly, 'spontaneity' - meanings that it does not necessarily or automatically bear. If you and I have been dancing for many hours, it doesn't matter which one of us first notices that we are tiring or that music no longer sounds as sweet - if we agree to sit down, we agree. It is mutual. It is only not mutual if, for example, you say 'bugger this, I'm knackered' but I wish to dance on. Or possibly it's just that I know it really wasn't mutual and I like making you post more. I'll post just to set the record straight. Legion requested a government conference with ODN to determine the future of ORRPLE. Where to go, how the allies connect, why we were upset at ODN, why ODN was upset at Legion, etc. This happened for month and a half roughly but nothing was truly decided. Two days ago, Legion govt learned of the cancellation through rumors floating on the interwebs, I approached an ODN official who said the members and government were divided. Next day we received word from ODN's government of cancellation. That doesn't sound too mutual, does it Comrade Pingu? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) The pie is a lie.As for this being the result of ending up on opposite sides of a war, that is not accurate. The cancellation is driven by the joint assessment of the two alliances that our future foreign affairs directions are misaligned. Perhaps things will change, and a new treaty will emerge between us at some point. Perhaps not. It was a good treaty while it lasted. They entered the war and the next day you entered on the other side ignoring your treaty with the Legion for the umpteenth time, you chose to go to the other side. If you really think regular betrayal by a treaty partner is not that big a deal and going down different roads is why this treaty failed then your remaining treaty partners should be aware how you operate. Edited July 14, 2009 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Or possibly it's just that I know it really wasn't mutual and I like making you post more. You can't make me post more. I post because I like to have conversations with you. It's mutual. As to Imperial's account, that is not quite to the point of what I was saying. From what I have learned of the discussions that led ultimately to the cancellation (and I was not a party, am not in government, and so may of course be misinterpreting), and from the internal discussion within ODN about the treaty (of which I was part, as a cantankerous member of the General Assembly), it is my assessment that the primary concerns were not about either party's past actions, however much they may have caused angst, but about future directions and alignments, and these appeared to be mutually incompatible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joracy Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Or possibly it's just that I know it really wasn't mutual and I like making you post more.That doesn't sound too mutual, does it Comrade Pingu? The discussion eventually went to legion mentioning downgrading to a PIAT, well continuing the discussions etc. We offered more of a NAP/ToF which was refused. We asked if a PIAT was still on the table, which was also refused. After that, there weren't any other options for treaties. TBH, I'm not sure where this "rumor" came from. We mentioned our discussions days before that we were talking with the general assembly, things were divided, but a downgrade or cut was inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikz Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) One more treaty voided. One which would have never been honored anyways. Edited July 14, 2009 by erikz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorbolt Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 One more treaty voided. One which would have never been honored anyways. It may well have been honored it does no good to assume such things. Best of luck to the ODN I'm sure this was a tough decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikz Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 It may well have been honored it does no good to assume such things.Best of luck to the ODN I'm sure this was a tough decision. Sorry, the ODN (as an alliance) and me have never been friends to say the least. I'll quit it. Does no good to either party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Sorry, the ODN (as an alliance) and me have never been friends to say the least. I'll quit it. Does no good to either party. But we have yet to become acquainted! Swing around sometime, why don't you? 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.