A New Day Approaches

[Hell Scream]

Really? Check this thread, in which Crimson Guard attacks a nation because of OOC attacks.

Actually, sir, Invicta attacked first. They took 2 slots, Francesa took the third. Baseballer has done numerous things, including deleting our forums, hijacking our communications, and lying that a govt member quit and pretending he took his position. He got what he deserved.

Upon checking the Red Dawn forums, can you imagine how shocked I was, to find that an alliance who has not officially sign this treaty are not only members of the treaty but also the only government of said treaty.

I give you the Red Dawn Government.

http://cn-reddawn.com/index.php?app=member...amp;module=list

NPO.Admin

Group:

Red Dawn Government

Mary the Fantabulous

Group:

Red Dawn Government

TrotskysRevenge

Group:

Red Dawn Government

You will also see that it is on NPO server, but not least to say, that 13 out of the 26 people to sign up on Red Dawn Forums are in fact all NPO members and government.

SO i must say it once again, for an alliance who has not been given the ok to sign this treaty, not only seems to be a member of this treaty but are spearheading said treaty.

PLEASE EXPLAIN ?

NPO has a history of having the most mature and intelligent members of Cybernations in their alliance, it was only natural for them to write this treaty. The forum is for reds, NPO is red. NPO created the forum, for us. What is your problem with that?

[Thorgrum]

NPO has a history of having the most mature and intelligent members of Cybernations in their alliance, it was only natural for them to write this treaty. The forum is for reds, NPO is red. NPO created the forum, for us. What is your problem with that?

On the bolded part can you eloborate a bit more for the peanut gallery like myself? Was the treaty written before the implementation of the current terms they are under?

Thanks in advance

[Branimir]

On the bolded part can you eloborate a bit more for the peanut gallery like myself? Was the treaty written before the implementation of the current terms they are under?

I don't know if we really did write it, but if we did then it must have been after terms.

Is this leading anywhere, or was that just it?

Edited August 11, 2009 by Branimir

[Rafael Nadal]

Also, this isn't a part of my though process regarding this, but just for argument's sake, color me skeptical about the retraction of the Moldavi Doctrine. I'm hardly sold on that being a completely genuine move. Are you going to try to sell me on their ending of hostilities with FAN as well?

This treaty fundamentally contradicts the Moldavi Doctrine. I hardly see how refusing to let them sign it would have anything to do with that.

Then I guess it's a good thing that this didn't come into play as the reason why we declined them consent to sign this right away. Also, perhaps you miseed,"Also, this isn't a part of my thought process regarding this, but just for arguement's sake..." which clearly states that what I'm talking about did not factor into the decision.

Oh please get over it. The NPO have lost a very big war, and have been given humiliating terms. Perhaps we are just trying to to move on. This is a brave move by the emperor. The real reason for a refusal is more likely to be becuase Karma wish to see us vilified and isolated, overtures of friendship make us look less 'evil', and the beginnings of unity within the same sphere which we reside brings trades and strength.

Get over what? I'm well aware you've lost and are now under terms, quite aware in fact. I don't wish to spoil your fantasy about how Karma wishes to see you vilified and isolated as being the reason for us not consenting to NPO signing this right away. I assure you it's hard to dress up the real reason to be quite as tasty to consume.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Rafael Nadal

[Thorgrum]

Is this leading anywhere, or was that just it?

Leading anywhere?

Im from the peanut gallery the only place I can lead you is into an abyss of non sense and short back and forth quips.

Of course you could lead me to an answer to my question, since you dont know who wrote it, or you could let Hell Scream answer himself.

[Branimir]

Im from the peanut gallery the only place I can lead you is into an abyss of non sense and short back and forth quips.

Oh my

Actually, what I was basically asking is, did you ask that question because you though we cant draft treaties for people under terms?

Because we can write treaties for anybody which asks our capable leadership structure for help in that regard.

We just cant join freely treaties, because our sovereignty has been stripped that way.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Branimir

[Bilrow]

Oh my

Actually, what I was basically asking is, did you ask that question because you though we cant draft treaties for people under terms?

Because we can write treaties for anybody which asks our capable leadership structure for help in that regard.

We just cant join freely treaties, because our sovereignty has been stripped that way.

That is until the prison guards take away our writing utensils and then we will have to find other means of writing I guess.

[Thorgrum]

Actually, what I was basically asking is, did you ask that question because you though we cant draft treaties for people under terms?

Not at all, Im curious as to the timing of the drafting. I find it mildly interesting that coming out of the war we have a treaty with Schatt and the NPO is lurking within the structure of it. Im not insinuating or proclaiming a violation of terms at all.

Because we can write treaties for anybody which asks our capable leadership structure for help in that regard.

We just cant join freely treaties, because our sovereignty has been stripped that way.

Oh I know the last part all to well anyone with a passing interest would, its interesting to me that here we are, not far removed from the Karma war and the NPO is a future signatory to a treaty which, they drafted, with Schatt.

Thank you for induldging me in my curiousity. Cheers Branimir!

[Branimir]

Thank you for induldging me in my curiousity. Cheers Branimir!

I try to help where I can.

Sometimes I am useful sometime not

[Schattenmann]

On the bolded part can you eloborate a bit more for the peanut gallery like myself? Was the treaty written before the implementation of the current terms they are under?

Thanks in advance

The first treaty was written by Francesca while she was a MoFA for FIRE, that draft was never published because FIRE disbanded. UED then wrote a draft. UED then decided that we should not use that treaty, so NPO used parts of that UED draft, put in edits that had been suggested by others in the talks. We all wrote it.

Not at all, Im curious as to the timing of the drafting. I find it mildly interesting that coming out of the war we have a treaty with Schatt and the NPO is lurking within the structure of it. Im not insinuating or proclaiming a violation of terms at all.

Oh I know the last part all to well anyone with a passing interest would, its interesting to me that here we are, not far removed from the Karma war and the NPO is a future signatory to a treaty which, they drafted, with Schatt.

Thank you for induldging me in my curiousity. Cheers Branimir!

I'm not sure if you're insuating a plot or not. Either way, I find it interesting, too.

[Zeta Defender]

Whoa man, he just said he was gonna see whats gonna happen with the bloc. No need to get all defensive and make wild statements like that. What if Rok wants to watch the bloc to see in the future if they could ally with one of the bloc alliances? sheesh........

Considering you are in Rok Bloc and being a fellow red team alliance I am sure Rok can get all the Intel from UED regarding this bloc if they really wanted to. Maybe they need more protectorates or maybe they want to find another Carter in the rough.

The reason we denied them consent to sign this has very little to do with the treaty itself.

O really so if the treaty is fine, then why did you deny the NPO the right to sign it? Unless you want to milk Pacifica surrender for all its worst. I wonder how a color bloc for trades, tech, Red unaligned protection and the senate is a threat to Karma or more specifically Vanguard?

But of course, because I know such a policy isn't currently possible on my own sphere of Aqua, I live vicariously through Red Dawn and support this policy wholeheartedly.

The day Walford legacy dies will be the day that CN lives again. (Pretty sure we own the policy of tech raiding to old Walford).

Tampering with an alliances means of communication has always been considered an act of war.

Listen to the man, he be wise beyond measure.

Maybe you should take the time to read your surrender terms again Moo ?

This is the Revenge Doctrine Version 2.0 which was never removed or nullified which would make Moo correct and by the way the Doctrine while the war was going on so even those the ToS nullified it, it was already changed to begin with. Version 2.0 stated that Red will be protected by all the alliances and members on Red.

WoW you are right, I edited my post "in any form stands out more"

Also you would restart a war for a Sphere protecting its own members? If you are going to try and DoW us for wanted to protect the red sphere with all the other red alliances, I may know loop holes and e-lawyering but this goes beyond stupidity. If you want to keep tech raiders going, let them feed on Black but we still protect red with the other Red Dawn members. Looks like Chaos is coming back to the world, but I prefer Order.

Upon checking the Red Dawn forums, can you imagine how shocked I was, to find that an alliance who has not officially sign this treaty are not only members of the treaty but also the only government of said treaty.

I give you the Red Dawn Government.

http://cn-reddawn.com/index.php?app=member...amp;module=list

NPO.Admin

Group:

Red Dawn Government

Mary the Fantabulous

Group:

Red Dawn Government

TrotskysRevenge

Group:

Red Dawn Government

You will also see that it is on NPO server, but not least to say, that 13 out of the 26 people to sign up on Red Dawn Forums are in fact all NPO members and government.

SO i must say it once again, for an alliance who has not been given the ok to sign this treaty, not only seems to be a member of this treaty but are spearheading said treaty.

PLEASE EXPLAIN ?

We offered to host the boards as a sign of good faith and good will to the other alliances (OOC: The NPO has a server and it helps to keep costs down, if you want one of the other alliances to host it, go give them the money for it). And the NPO is the biggest of the bunch so we do have a lot of govt so unless Sparta can say they have less than 13 people on the Noir boards. I wouldn't be making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Shimmer]

Let me clarify this for everyone.

Multiple Red Unity treaties were written by different people. Ideas that were in one where placed into another. Once a final copy had been glued together it was re-written so it would flow easier.

@Red Protection Court.

This bloc is not militaristic and cannot force anyone to not raid red. The court will be used to attempt to get peace for the red unaligned and allow our trade partners to grow with some form of stability. I have no issues trying to help fellow Red Nations exist in peace.

@Senate

I'm fairly positive it wasn't written as a joke and the senate will be seeing non-NPO senators in the very near future.

[scythegfx]

NPO will not agree with any of the others within the bloc, unless they all agree to vote for NPO members ?

NPO will only agree to there own senators there for forcing a free vote, where they control the numbers

This will always happen, unless everyone agree to vote for NPO members, also this will not be seen as a failure to NPO, as they will still control the numbers that vote for the senate on red.

This will be the clause that NPO will abuse most, as in the mind set of the NPO Gov anyone out side of the NPO is suspected of desiring to do harm to the NPO. therefore no one but the NPO members would be able to run for senate.

Can you see the future?

Or are you really that set in your beliefs that you really can't see the NPO changing Post War?

Besides personal biases based on your view of past NPO policy, what evidence do you have to back up these claims?

[Nathan Flech]

Dang it. Why does the red team care about this is, and not get booed like FAN did??

I remember when I tech raided a red nation and nothing happened. I didn't know about revenge doctrine then.

[scythegfx]

I'm sorry to inform you, sir, that people are capable of liking us. We are also capable of liking people back.

It's true! It really is! I've seen it

If this is the case, I congratulate the NPO and her allies on such a potentially successful Bloc. However, I would still appreciate knowing how you, yes you personally, perceive this playing out in the Senate, as your alliance holds over 600 members, and the next highest signatory includes a grand total of 11 people.

Obviously It looks like they're going to support other Red Dawn Senate Candidates as a show of good faith.

Now, when that happens, will you still be complaining?

[scythegfx]

You will also see that it is on NPO server, but not least to say, that 13 out of the 26 people to sign up on Red Dawn Forums are in fact all NPO members and government.

SO i must say it once again, for an alliance who has not been given the ok to sign this treaty, not only seems to be a member of this treaty but are spearheading said treaty.

PLEASE EXPLAIN ?

The alliance makes up at least 9/10ths of the total membership of the bloc (if they sign), Obviously they would have a large amount of users registered on the boards. Same way there are more Invicta/UPN/Valhalla members on PUB, then say, OFLC members. Thats just how it works.

Sparta is a big part of NOIR, how ever NPO is not part of this block ?

Also I have to point out, well done on over looking the fact that NPO are the only Red Dawn Gov

When NPO signs this, they will be a big part of this bloc.

[Rafael Nadal]

Considering you are in Rok Bloc and being a fellow red team alliance I am sure Rok can get all the Intel from UED regarding this bloc if they really wanted to. Maybe they need more protectorates or maybe they want to find another Carter in the rough.

O really so if the treaty is fine, then why did you deny the NPO the right to sign it? Unless you want to milk Pacifica surrender for all its worst. I wonder how a color bloc for trades, tech, Red unaligned protection and the senate is a threat to Karma or more specifically Vanguard?

The day Walford legacy dies will be the day that CN lives again. (Pretty sure we own the policy of tech raiding to old Walford).

Listen to the man, he be wise beyond measure.

This is the Revenge Doctrine Version 2.0 which was never removed or nullified which would make Moo correct and by the way the Doctrine while the war was going on so even those the ToS nullified it, it was already changed to begin with. Version 2.0 stated that Red will be protected by all the alliances and members on Red.

Also you would restart a war for a Sphere protecting its own members? If you are going to try and DoW us for wanted to protect the red sphere with all the other red alliances, I may know loop holes and e-lawyering but this goes beyond stupidity. If you want to keep tech raiders going, let them feed on Black but we still protect red with the other Red Dawn members. Looks like Chaos is coming back to the world, but I prefer Order.

We offered to host the boards as a sign of good faith and good will to the other alliances (OOC: The NPO has a server and it helps to keep costs down, if you want one of the other alliances to host it, go give them the money for it). And the NPO is the biggest of the bunch so we do have a lot of govt so unless Sparta can say they have less than 13 people on the Noir boards. I wouldn't be making a mountain out of a molehill.

You assume we said no out of some sort of spite, in an attempt to rub in our new found power, as a way to really stick it to NPO, even after the actual war is over. I'm sorry, but you're wrong; our reasoning was quite objective, and had nothing to do with any potential threat this treaty would/could cause.

Feel free to ask your own leaders, specifically, Cortath, Moo, DM, and Loucifer, who are all in our joint channel, and I believe who all have access to our terms' boards. Any one of them who tells you anything about any maliciousness on our part regarding this decision is being purposely disingenuous.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Rafael Nadal

[Walt Schmidt]

1 - Planet Bob continues to evolve.

2 - Roles change.

3 - What unfortunately appears not to change are those who deny 1 & 2 above.

For the rest of us let's sit back, so to speak, and enjoy...

[Hawkenstein]

Seeing as NPO's signatures are not on this agreement I don't see what all the fuss is about

Edited August 11, 2009 by Hawkenstein

[Yuthura Ban]

That is until the prison guards take away our writing utensils and then we will have to find other means of writing I guess.

Bilrow, you know it's because you shanked that one guy. They put you on suicide watch too.

[muffasamini]

You assume we [KARMA] said no out of some sort of spite, in an attempt to rub in our new found power, as a way to really stick it to NPO, even after the actual war is over. I'm sorry, but you're wrong; our reasoning was quite objective, and had nothing to do with any potential threat this treaty would/could cause.

I believe you. I really do. Honestly.

[heggo]

Oh, I was hoping for a trade war.

[Mary the Fantabulous]

I intended to say this last night but the proud leader of Rothinzil went to sleep before it got posted.

WOLVERINES!

And in regards to the mention that I masked as "Red Dawn government" on the forums, they needed someone used to working with IPB, which I am.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Mary the Fantabulous

[TrotskysRevenge]

"The website was initially hosted on UED's webspace, yet as they left the talks, a new one was created, with consent by Red Dawn signatories, on Pacifica webspace. However, we were able to regain the database from the UED site, and infused it with the database created by the one already hosted on the Pacifica location, thus resulting in some conflicts. That might have been why they are labelled as Red Dawn Government, rather than NPO Government. The Red Dawn Government tag came from the original forum, not the remade one."

[OOC] It is not an NPO server; it is my personal server, for which I pay money. I host several websites for small businesses unrelated to the Cyberverse, forums for other games as well as those of GATO and MCXA. I am a web developer and I host the sites I develop for the most part on my server. Each domain has its own separate ftp access; unless I need to maintain or add files I do not intrude on the sites. Check with MCXA and GATO. [OOC]

[Tsar Vserossijskij]

Karma doesn't have to let you sign it at all actually. But its cool, keep trying to make people look bad for an agreement you guys signed and for a term that is something that NPO has used many times before (or worse, see: Viceroys).

Kind of an old post, and apologies if this has already been hashed out, but I have to ask: If the NPO shouldn't complain about the terms because we signed the treaty of surrender, doesn't that have some major implications about Karma's legitimacy? I mean, it's not like we signed anyone's terms for them... Just saying, you can't have your cake and eat it too.