A New Day Approaches

[Timeline]

You do not know what you are talking about.

I can only repeat my self, I will not draw diagrams for the slow ones.

The ORIGINAL Revenge doctrine was a UNILATERAL NPO policy proclamation BASED ON CLAIMING A SPHERE for NPO.

This is a MULTILATERAL agreement of policy based on common desire of red team alliances for their sphere be free of tech raiding.

You CAN NOT stop red sphere alliances from making this kind of a policy and including all red sphere alliances in it. Surrender treaty can not stop that. It is worded to stop any future claiming of the red sphere by the NPO by unilateral proclamations based upon force.

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.

[Branimir]

There are two problems here. The first, is that the rest of us don't feel as though such actions are necessary - or at least feel strongly enough as to formalise them into a treaty.

No YOU don't feel that it is necessary, not "the rest". You are the only one here with this issue. And we were called pompous,...

The second, is that your alliance has proven in the past of not being able to act with due thought in these very situations

As I already said, what you think of my alliance and what you fear from NPO, I can not change or care enough to change.

I already explained it to you that this treaty includes multiple parties and that acting on behalf of the treaty enacting its stated policies CAN ONLY COME OUT OF COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT of signatories. Its not only about the NPO, jeeez,...there is like !@#$ here and some plenty of other folks,...it is their statement of policy as much as it is ours.

[kriekfreak]

You CAN NOT stop red sphere alliances from making this kind of a policy and including all red sphere alliances in it. Surrender treaty can not stop that. It is worded to stop any future claiming of the red sphere by the NPO by unilateral proclamations based upon force.

Sure, 'we' can't stop all red sphere alliances from making this kind of policy. But 'we' (read Karma) can stop you (read NPO) from signing it.

[jerdge]

In fact I'm sure that «not reinstating [the Moldavi Doctrine or] the original version of the Revenge Doctrine [in any form]» actually means «not reinstating the original Revenge Doctrine and ("but"?) not reinstating it in any form».

And the "Moldavi Doctrine", or the dropped part of the Revenge Doctrine, had nothing to do with the "any form" part. Really.

Like: "if you want to talk please rephrase your statement and don't talk".

[Branimir]

Sure, 'we' can't stop all red sphere alliances from making this kind of policy. But 'we' (read Karma) can stop you (read NPO) from signing it.

And I claimed otherwise?

Isn't our signature pending or what?

That was not what you have claimed before, what you argued is that this is the same as original Revenge doctrine. It isn't.

edit: After further re read of my post, and because everything here is getting nick picked, my previous post may be interpreted as I claim that victorious alliances in the last war against NPO can not stop NPO from entering this treaty for a period of time when surrender terms are in force.

That obviously is not true or my intent to say.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Branimir

[WorkingClassRuler]

Sure, 'we' can't stop all red sphere alliances from making this kind of policy. But 'we' (read Karma) can stop you (read NPO) from signing it.

Only the signatories of NPO's surrender can make such a decision and as you (read iFOK) are not one of them, perhaps you (read, you) shouldn't attempt to speak for them (read Karma). Come on mate, a good show of "not caring" would be to not get so involved.

[hawk11]

Declaration of PZI then? The point is that a harsh action was carried out by the NPO for the very same reason as the article in your new treaty states, without any evidence. This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about, and it seems to contradict your claims that collateral damage would be minimised in such situations.

Alright, I'm done arguing this point. I'm going to point you to AirMe, who, in regards to your attitude towards my alliance, has nailed it directly on the head.

First of, if someone can prove that someone in the game hacked their boards, no one is going to complain when Red Dawn goes after them. Are you trying to suggest that NPO is violating surrender terms? Are you kidding me? Remember all that complaining we did when they pulled this petty crap on other alliances? There is nothing wrong with them signing this and I am sure they checked with the people who are administering their terms before signing this.

The witch hunt is over for now. Put away the pitch fork and torch and go back to the village.

[Branimir]

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.

It is only a matter of time when one signatory alliance gets its senator. It is bound to happen at one point.

This is my opinion.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Branimir

[kriekfreak]

Only the signatories of NPO's surrender can make such a decision and as you (read iFOK) are not one of them, perhaps you (read, you) shouldn't attempt to speak for them (read Karma). Come on mate, a good show of "not caring" would be to not get so involved.

Didn't I just say that I could not but the signatories of NPO's surrender can? I think I did. Also, didn't I say that Karma should share some light on this to prevent any problems in the future? I think I did.

And since when can't I be involved? I'm happy to speak my mind whenever and wherever I feel necessary to do so. NPO are big boys, I'm pretty confident they don't need you to argue for them.

[Haflinger]

Someone didn't get the memo about the fact that things have changed since that time.

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

[Timeline]

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 ?

[WorkingClassRuler]

NPO are big boys, I'm pretty confident they don't need you to argue for them.

Well then by all means start arguing.

[Geoffron X]

Once upon a time there was a handsome fellow who ran for the Red Senate.

When he had secured a place there, he offered to work with the NPO on the Senate's continued smooth operation. The NPO responded by telling this idealistic young man that they were going to kill him and all of his friends, including someone who occasionally went by the name Shantanaman or something like that.

The story gets a bit convoluted after that, but apparently it has a happy ending. Something about Shantanaman riding a cow into the sunset.

I'm very glad to see this and congratulate all parties including, yes, the New Pacific Order.

EDIT: Now I have a song stuck in my head. )): Thanks, Schatt.

Once upon a time a walrus ran for Red Senate.

When he had barely secured a place there, he offered to work with the NPO on the Senate's continued smooth operation. But, the NPO knew that the walrus was in an alliance utterly committed to their destruction, so they saw through the walrus's lies.

[Yuthura Ban]

Well then by all means start arguing.

This actually made me chuckle. To be fair, I don't see the issue with is treaty. All I see is certain people getting riled up when KARMA hasn't even said anything on the issue.

[Franz Ferdinand]

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 ?

"They are hosting the webspace for the bloc, kind of like Sparta does for NOIR. Now, please tell me why that is so wrong?"

Edited August 11, 2009 by Franz Ferdinand

[Timeline]

"They are hosting the webspace for the bloc, kind of like Sparta does for NOIR. Now, please tell me why that is so wrong?"

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

[Schattenmann]

Once upon a time there was a handsome fellow who ran for the Red Senate.

When he had secured a place there, he offered to work with the NPO on the Senate's continued smooth operation. The NPO responded by telling this idealistic young man that they were going to kill him and all of his friends, including someone who occasionally went by the name Shantanaman or something like that.

The story gets a bit convoluted after that, but apparently it has a happy ending. Something about Shantanaman riding a cow into the sunset.

I'm very glad to see this and congratulate all parties including, yes, the New Pacific Order.

EDIT: Now I have a song stuck in my head. )): Thanks, Schatt.

I must tell you in all honesty that it is a very odd thing indeed to be standing where I am right now. The Cult ended up Red because that's where all the original members were due to our last Senate raid. I began trying ot protect unaligned Red nations even when it was just two members, and before there were more Red bodies than just NPO and CoJ I made a trading forum. But Red is bigger than that now, and NPO can't be wished away. The fact of the matter is that I am still happy that NPO got its visit to the prayer room. But, to ignore NPO in the context of a senate and trade treaty (as some alliances that have refused to sign do) is, well, retarded.

In the past, alliances and individuals like New Reverie and Vox Populi had to storm the senate with populist movements because that was the only way. I may be naive, but my stance in the post-Karma War period is simple: If NPO will deal frankly, then I'll deal frankly. NPO has been frank so far, and very helpful. When I first approached Mary about the treaty, I mentioned that we'd like NPO to concede at least one seat on purpose, and she didn't say no, but she didn't say yes. As the treaty picked up steam, it was NPO that worked out exactly how to pursue elections in order to have a non-NPO senator.

As I said earlier, most rulers on Digiterra like to ride around on horses in general hats. I am the Shadowman; I like to whisper in darkened halls and move the world with an invisible hand.

Wat

Wat Wat?

Wat Wat Wat???

In conclusion, the signatories of Red Dawn have just given themselves an OOC reason to declare war on anyone they want for any sketchy reason.

I dare say you are oversimplifying this issue to such extent as to make a mockery of it.

OOC follows: You do not go to war for stupid OOC reasons, and furthermore The Red Dawn is not the means of alliance communication for any alliance - rather it is a means of communication between several alliances - one which is not necessarily critical during war. This is an important subtlety.

But even so, one does not go to war for OOC reasons, no matter how subjectively "serious" they are. If someone were to hack your forums, the correct approach would be to contact the proper legal authorities - not to declare war on them in some online game.

If someone was to punch you in the face and steal your wallet, would you then challenge them to a game of scrabble?

Someone didn't get the memo about the fact that things have changed since that time.

That someone is me.

The previous debate on the issue has answered your concerns well enough, but since I'm the one that wrote "Wilful destruction or tampering with of Red Dawn forums or IRC channels by any party is considered an aggressive act of war against its signatories." I'll address your confusion (I'm certain that I didn't misspell willfull, though )

I added the provision because my experience with team unity when it involves such a diversity of alliances is that it's harder than it looks. If, hypothetically, NPO gets all high and mighty once terms are over and decides that they're going to act like GATO and say "pfffft, we have all the nations, we get all the senators" and as such we vote and kick them out of the treaty, then I just want NPO to know that if they decide it would be funny to wreck the forums before they go, then I might equally decide it'd be funny to declare war on them for doing that.

Except when I wrote it, it was because the most contentious alliance in talks was hosting the boards and I wanted them to be de-incentivized to do something like that. And any other alliance that might find it has diverged from the rest of the team.

A lot of work has gone into this treaty, it's been in progress since before FIRE disbanded, and no one on Red is required to be involved to try for the senate or for their members to trdade at the forum so if they find they don't like Red Dawn they're free to leave. But I don't want some butthurt admin to think that he can wreck all that work without getting into trouble. He can't.

In that case, may I query how you intend to prove such allegations, will you give defendants the opportunity to refute those allegations, and do you plan to present all relevant information to the community unlike NPO has done in the past when attacking alliances for similar OOC as well as IC reasons?

This has nothing to do with the terms. I am more concerned about NPO justifying attacking alliances because some member of some alliance spammed their communication channel or some similarly silly business. Either that, or making stronger allegations without presenting any tangible evidence as has been done in the past.

OOC/Edit: In addition, it's not a simple matter of, "oh look, alliance X hacked our forums, they must die". To attack an entire alliance, one would have to justify that all or most (certainly gov, active members, etc) of that alliance was willingly involved in such attack, otherwise any attack on the entire alliance is entirely unjustified.

This is a highly complex issue, despite whether you perceive it to be one or not. It is very difficult to say the least, to establish whether an alliance had something to do with an attack on an aforementioned communications channel, or if it was a single member, or if it was a rogue government member, or if it was an espionage agent, or if it was the whole government, or if it was a splinter cell group within the alliance, etc.

It is very easy to simply attack the entire alliance regardless of it's involvement in such an affair - as NPO has done many times in the past, but this is certainly not the right approach. A much better way to go is to determine which exact individuals and/or groups were responsible, and punish them exactly - and not their whole alliance. This goes hand in hand with investigative work and being able to judge matters and characters very well.

Because all of this is difficult to accomplish in a fair and unbiased manner, in a manner which punishes the perpetrators and not the innocents, is why I believe it is far more superior to leave OOC issues as OOC issues, because when you try to mix them into IC, you will inevitably make mistakes.

If any alliance were to go to war because someone willfully destroys or tampers with the Red Dawn forums or IRC channels, then it is up to that alliance to determine to what extent it makes its reasons available to the public. Just as in any other war. The fact of the matter is that the actions defined in the statement that has you so worked up are aggressive acts of war, and they always have been, and any military response is not aggressive, its defensive. Frankly, any responding Red Dawn alliance wouldn't need to post a declaration of war, de facto war would have already been declared against Red Dawn signatories.

As for the singularity of actions, you're simply wrong. There's no such thing as a "rogue government member." A member of an alliance's government may act stupidly or without the knowledge or consent of the rest of the individuals of a government of which he is part, but as a government member his actions are the actions of the alliance he leads. If Sunstar hits the Red Dawn forums tomorrow because his innate ADN blood is mad that the NPO is involved, then it's an ODN act of war. A responding Red Dawn alliance might talk to ODN before responding militarily and resolve the situation without blodshed, but ODN has elected Sunstar, he's their man and his actions are their's.

Holding up individuals as little christs doesn't dissuade wild hares. The knowledge that an action has real consequences to everyone you represent does.

One of the alliance names I see up there I doubly .

o/ CoJ

Thank you. CoJ indeed owes a debt of gratitude to tF for their assistance and friendship over the weekend.

We 'in the trenches grunts' understand two points:

- We must follow what is required by the TOS we entered into some three-plus weeks ago

- Notwithstanding that, we still can provide a service when called upon

Shai Dorsai!

o/ Red Dawn

NPO will advance most quickly if the many adopt this optimistic stance.

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.

I see it playing out due to cooperation.

[Kevanovia]

Congrats to our red brethren.

Also regarding pending signatures, the peace terms dont allow NPO to sign treaties so thats why they are pending.

I don't think they'd ever want to be considered your "brethren".

Here's to a new dawn!

[BamaBuc]

Someone didn't get the memo about the fact that things have changed since that time.

(OOC: The memo about how OOC attacks against RL property are okay now? Yeah... I do believe I missed that one. )

Good luck to the signatories. Here's to a bright future for Red.

-Bama

[Poyplemonkeys]

No sweet sir, my alliance abides by them. That is an important difference.

Makes no difference to the fact that it's a choice you made.

[Franz Ferdinand]

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

"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."

[Schattenmann]

Once upon a time a walrus ran for Red Senate.

When he had barely secured a place there, he offered to work with the NPO on the Senate's continued smooth operation. But, the NPO knew that the walrus was in an alliance utterly committed to their destruction, so they saw through the walrus's lies.

Aw Geoffron, let's not. He was commenting on the irony and all. Besides, kingzog was the only person that decided what kingzog would do with his seat, we did not give him orders and he wouldn't have taken them. He said he wouldn't sanction if he wasn't sanctioned, and he wouldn't have. That part of history is already debated into the ground, though. I am happy that we've got to this point in time.

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 ?

YOU'RE WELCOME EXPLANATION ?

"Red Dawn Gov" is a masking group. It means that the people in that group are members of government in an alliance that is cooperating with Red Dawn. NPO is hosting the forum because UED pulled out last week and the only guy around with a server was Moo. If you [OOC]want a PayPal donation link[/OOC], I'm sure we could move the forum to another server.

As for the number of people that are signed up on the board, you will find that this evil trend will continue. NPO has 600 members. In an ideal situation, there will be 600 NPO members and gov and 100 CoJ, CG, Monolith, TDP, and TMF nations. It's a trade forum. NPO has more nations looking for trades than CoJ because NPO has 600 nations and CoJ has 3. For the foreseeable future, NPO will have the largest number and percentage of registered users. Maths! Sparta has more members than other NOIR alliances, having that many users on the Black Conclave doesn't mean Sparta has more control than MFO. It means that NPO has more trading nations. As for government members registered, again, NPO has more IOs and Councillors than most signatories have regular members.

NPO cannot sign the treaty, but if Red Dawn is to work, then NPO cooperation is required. We could play telephone and all come up with a senate candidate then relay it over to NPO and wait to hear back from them, or we can just mask NPO even though they're not signatories and get things done quickly and without hangups.

[kriegsdrachen]

You know, I was kinda skeptical about being (hopefully in the near future) part of a bloc including Schattenmann, but I think I will like it just fine.

o/ Red unity!

[Schattenmann]

You know, I was kinda skeptical about being (hopefully in the near future) part of a bloc including Schattenmann, but I think I will like it just fine.

o/ Red unity!

I wouldn't blame you. Dude was a total tool all last year.

[Branimir]

I wouldn't blame you. Dude was a total tool all last year.

Now you are our tool,...face it Shatt, you are a sold out and a NPO puppet.

PLEASE EXPLAIN ?

Edited August 11, 2009 by Branimir