IRON's terms end

[Totila]

Why don't you tell us how you really feel.

Well I already did in short. Besides that I am excited of course and when I think about a certain alliances we fought with, my blood boils- but I am trying to not think about them much. Its party time!

[shahenshah]

Why don't you tell us how you really feel.

We feel awesome, Score jumps, Passes, Merger, Party and most amazingly the support we're getting from our allies and non-allies, from unexpected corners, its all there, that has to be the best thing. Wanna join? --> #iron.

[PrideAssassin]

Fark is very mid tier heavy when it comes to nation strength and most of the attacks were on sub-1k nations

We just don't have anyone who can fight them, our military is voluntary and we cannot just go and find some guy who's on our AA and in range and yell at them to attack. It's against our laws

Then why agree to task which you cannot carry out? How can you call out IRON in the utterly disrespectful manner you have (three times now; the ToS, the review debacle, and now this piece of diplomacy) about how we wouldn't adhere to a review when you can't (or won't) adhere to the protection clause you agreed to?

Just sayin'.

I personally was thrilled to be able to continue to operate without jumping through your (often) 72 hour hoops only to be told "Yeah, we can't do it". If it can't be done, don't agree to do it, aye?

Kick your recruiters in the rear. Sell off infra. The vast majority of "protection" was internal. We respected you enough to keep this bit of information private, but it's obviously not appreciated or reciprocated. The fact remains (to use your argument against you) YOU agreed to take this task on, and you utterly failed to abide by Article 7.

Per article 7, you wrote a law. If you wrote and agreed to a law which was against your laws, that's not really our problem now, is it?

Several times during the first few weeks, we were cleared only to be attacked for violating terms when we were told we could build up and defend because you couldn't be bothered.

I'm not trying to be obtuse here, I'm just pointing out fallacies in your reasoning. As I've said before, I appreciate having been freed from the bureaucratic boondoggle that was requesting permission to basically defend ourselves.

Edit: No acrimony intended, and I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm just being the pot to your kettle. I rather enjoyed my contacts with Fark, but the posturing here is ... uncharacteristic of the people I encountered in private. Best of luck to Fark in the future.

Now can we put this behind us and get back to what is important? Namely, parties.

Edited August 24, 2009 by PrideAssassin

[Puppet Master]

I would like to extend my personal wishes of well being and growth to my friends in IRON. I fought for IRON during those days and saw in each of you a warrior and a friend and to this day, I still call you my brothers. I am happy to see now that you have been release from your terms and as again able to make waves of your own. I know you will continue down your path with your heads held high and with the greatest sense of pride and honor and I only await to see IRON in a few months time.

Oh and just for good old times…

HAIL IRON! FERRO CREDIMUS!

--------------------------------------

This surprised you?

Its good to see that you have not grown at all and still hold pointless grudges...

When you consider how few MP's they had during the war i wouldnt be too awful worried about that. their top 5% nations were reduced to tech sellers

Yes they were, and they did so with pride and dignity!

This is an extremely honest and no !@#$%^&* announcement. Hails.

In my opinion, IRON is one of these alliances who have never stood for anything and never will stand for anything. You cancelled on the New Pacific Order, and prior to that you were just another pillar in the Hegemony who made no effort to do anything out of the ordinary.

However, you *did* fight hard in the war, when you eventually came to the conclusion that shame > infra. Therefore, congratulations on your release from terms.

IRON stands for more than someone like you will ever be able to comprehend. Also just a little advice, its not a good idea to disrespect a well known and loved alliance days after you come here pleading for other alliances support because you cant defend your own alliance. I would say its sorry to see any PR you gained has faded away, but its not.

I disagree. I am glad that FARK used this as an OP, actually. It is good to know "how things went down."

Considering the fact that these kind of things are handled in private conversations, which we will never see, I find it hard for you to seriously make this sort of comment.

Indeed, your counter-blitz against IRON was the stuff of legends. It just confused the hell out of me when you said that. In my time here I've never been a member of a democracy so I guess I can't imagine anything other than an all-powerful government.

My favorite part of the blitz were the Fark nations that attacked hours before update and before Fark ever posted a DoW.....

Oh and one last thing:

o/ IRON

o/ Council

o/ every single IRON nation

o/ Respect

o/ Diginity

o/ Honor

This is my type of hail fest! Good luck and best wishes IRON!

[WorldConqueror]

Congratulations on your freedom, IRON. Glad to see you made it through terms ok. I'll be watching to see when you break your prewar nuke record

And:

We just don't have anyone who can fight them, our military is voluntary and we cannot just go and find some guy who's on our AA and in range and yell at them to attack. It's against our laws

Are you serious? I mean, really? If someone orders you to attack you can just say "nah dun wanna"?

Edited August 24, 2009 by WorldConqueror

[Alter Leader Nabla]

Cool topic bros.

[Samus]

To the future.

[President S O]

Congrats to IRON, Best of luck

[Consul of Monkeys]

I'm very pleased to see this. Congratulations to our great allies in IRON.

[terveis]

Congratulations on this IRON. It was fun fighting against you. many weeks of green hell, and i am still suffering the consequences. I like both FARK and IRON, so it saddens me to see that this didnt bring them closer, but hey, we cant all be friends.

Good luck in the future IRON

o/ IRON

o/ FARK

(i just read some old logs about those peace talks, those were fun times. I hope that FireGuy15207 still has the diplomatic medal that i made for him )

Edited August 24, 2009 by terveis

[ChairmanHal]

Alliance hails.... check

Random hails of nouns such as honor and dignity... check

Best of luck on [insert alliance]'s path... check

Chairman Hal... check

Article 10 is too lulzy for my taste... check

Article 10 is too lenient for my taste... check

I've lost respect for [insert alliance]... check

I've gained respect for [insert alliance]... check

Looks like we have all the bases covered in a typical CN thread. Until next time, Romo out.

Congrats IRON

ChairmaHal...

Looks at total post count...

Notes it is lower than a lot of other people...

Remembers that he doesn't post in even a quarter the threads in AA, let alone the OWF...

Figures that someone from Fark was trying to be humorous again...

Shrugs...

Moves on to another thread....

[Kiss Goodbye]

IRON, I can't wait to see what you've grown to by the end of September.

[Gurney Halleck]

Congrats on the completion of the terms, IRON.

[WalkerNinja]

Fark, I really appreciate your honesty. Simultaneously, I am completely unsurprised that this is the reception that you received given the terms that you extended.

First, if you want to be taken seriously, conduct your business seriously.

Second, if you don't want people to rebel, don't humiliate them (even if they've already been defeated).

Third, if you don't want to have to waste your time monitoring ridiculous surrender terms, don't write them. Decommisioning all tanks, keeping soldiers under 30%, banning external aid... are a huge waste of time. A couple of hundred extra soldiers won't enable them to rebel, and as long as they pay you your reps on time, who cares if they get aid?

Finally, to believe that a prisoner would police itself is just plain foolish. It doesn't happen in real life, and there's no reason for it to happen here. The only reason to comply with surrender terms is the cessation of hostilities. If the violation of terms will not result in a resumption of hostilities, there is no reason to follow it. In fact, if the term was humiliating and hateful in the first place, there is every reason NOT to follow it. Raise your hand if you think that NPO following a war-guilt clause was either heartfelt or sincere. Anyone?

If you seriously thought (and I think that you did, since you're such honest guys) that these terms would help you get closer to IRON, then you just don't know them at all. These terms are one big slap in the face to anyone that treats this game with a serious mind.

I still appreciate and like you, Fark, but your anger in this matter inspires incredulity in my mind.

[Cataduanes]

Sincere congratz on completing your terms IRON, i look forward to that tango with Blacknight at some point...and much for BnT

IRON stands for more than someone like you will ever be able to comprehend.

And what would that be then? i am sincerely curious.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Cataduanes

[Lenny N Karl]

Congrats IRON,

Wishing you continued growth and fun in the future

o/ IRON

[WalkerNinja]

Are you serious? I mean, really? If someone orders you to attack you can just say "nah dun wanna"?

If the society of your alliance is sufficiently unified and harmonious, the choice of whether to fight or not is merely a facade. By the time the request is made, the decision has been resolved, and there was never a doubt how it would turn out anyways.

I would think that this would make perfect sense to a Francoist. The metaphysical force of a united people willingly funneled through a single individual who reveals their communal mind to the world at large. Compulsory service (or compliance) in a Francoist society is the ultimate paradox.

EDIT: )): Grammar )):

Edited August 24, 2009 by WalkerNinja

[Dom Zak]

Thanks WalkerNinja, that made me feel good with you several comments throughout this thread. YES, I read all the comments.

again, I post

o/ IRON

o/ Freedom

o/ Council

o/ CON

Ferro Credimus

[Neo Anglia]

Warmest congratulations to our friends in IRON, though I do confess I shall sorely miss your epic beer reviews

o/ IRON

o/ Fark's beer reviews

[Cable77]

BOO Fark

BOO RoK

That is all.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I like IRON a lot more now than I did before the war. I suppose you can chalk that up in part to being on the winning side, but to me is more of a result of my interactions with some of your members post-war.

Nonetheless, I understand the ill feelings members of IRON may feel towards Ragnarok and Farkistan and I hope that we will have the opportunity to work towards improving relations as all three alliances have, at their heart, good members who truly want only what is best for themselves and their allies.

[HellAngel]

Among all the things that the Council had to do after the war, you guys were b%^%^ing about Article 10 and ZI'ng bay(just try)...oh well this is pointless. In short,

o/ IRON!

o/ TOP, Gre, MHA and allies of IRON

BOO Fark

BOO RoK

That is all.

You dont know how much Fark helped us for your cause, so please dont judge without knowing the big picture.

[potato]

Fark, I really appreciate your honesty. Simultaneously, I am completely unsurprised that this is the reception that you received given the terms that you extended.

First, if you want to be taken seriously, conduct your business seriously.

Second, if you don't want people to rebel, don't humiliate them (even if they've already been defeated).

Third, if you don't want to have to waste your time monitoring ridiculous surrender terms, don't write them. Decommisioning all tanks, keeping soldiers under 30%, banning external aid... are a huge waste of time. A couple of hundred extra soldiers won't enable them to rebel, and as long as they pay you your reps on time, who cares if they get aid?

Finally, to believe that a prisoner would police itself is just plain foolish. It doesn't happen in real life, and there's no reason for it to happen here. The only reason to comply with surrender terms is the cessation of hostilities. If the violation of terms will not result in a resumption of hostilities, there is no reason to follow it. In fact, if the term was humiliating and hateful in the first place, there is every reason NOT to follow it. Raise your hand if you think that NPO following a war-guilt clause was either heartfelt or sincere. Anyone?

If you seriously thought (and I think that you did, since you're such honest guys) that these terms would help you get closer to IRON, then you just don't know them at all. These terms are one big slap in the face to anyone that treats this game with a serious mind.

I still appreciate and like you, Fark, but your anger in this matter inspires incredulity in my mind.

While you do have a point here and there, I take offense to the dichotomy you and some other seem to make between "lulz" and "srs bsnss". What is this? UjW again? Some people's idea of fun is collecting stats, some others like RPing or making jokes. Or drinking beer. Or playing sports. When we both were in ODN, you can vouch that I was far from being serious all the time. Did that make me a bad leader? Did that make you a better leader than me?

Clearly, Fark didn't know IRON well enough. If they had - maybe - they would have known that asking someone to drink a beer and write a few lines on how it felt was so horrendous. Or, you know, IRON, when they signed the terms, could have said "Look, I don't drink and even if I did, I don't intend to write the review". What better ground is there to get to know someone than something 99% of CN brags about? Again, just because it's written in a "lulzy" way doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously. Otherwise, why didn't IRON "forget" to send reps? Clearly, the amount IRON had to pay was written in the same way.

IRON agreed to follow the terms then and they (or who ever else) have no ground to moan about it now.

[Heft]

While you do have a point here and there, I take offense to the dichotomy you and some other seem to make between "lulz" and "srs bsnss". What is this? UjW again? Some people's idea of fun is collecting stats, some others like RPing or making jokes. Or drinking beer. Or playing sports. When we both were in ODN, you can vouch that I was far from being serious all the time. Did that make me a bad leader? Did that make you a better leader than me?

Clearly, Fark didn't know IRON well enough. If they had - maybe - they would have known that asking someone to drink a beer and write a few lines on how it felt was so horrendous. Or, you know, IRON, when they signed the terms, could have said "Look, I don't drink and even if I did, I don't intend to write the review". What better ground is there to get to know someone than something 99% of CN brags about? Again, just because it's written in a "lulzy" way doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously. Otherwise, why didn't IRON "forget" to send reps? Clearly, the amount IRON had to pay was written in the same way.

IRON agreed to follow the terms then and they (or who ever else) have no ground to moan about it now.

It's already been explained that they didn't like the term, but that the terms they were accepted were those with much less reps than initially demanded, and they didn't have much choice at that point. They were also under the impression (as was just about everyone other than FARK) that it was a joke and not a big deal. The term was irrelevant to anything and never worth making a fuss over for anyone, until apparently FARK decided to do so. Finally, IRON never actually complained, and hasn't really been doing so now.

And judging from here it wasn't just IRON that had trouble following some of the terms.

[potato]

It's already been explained that they didn't like the term, but that the terms they were accepted were those with much less reps than initially demanded, and they didn't have much choice at that point. They were also under the impression (as was just about everyone other than FARK) that it was a joke and not a big deal. The term was irrelevant to anything and never worth making a fuss over for anyone, until apparently FARK decided to do so. Finally, IRON never actually complained, and hasn't really been doing so now.

And judging from here it wasn't just IRON that had trouble following some of the terms.

Just as Fark didn't know IRON, IRON obviously didn't know Fark. Anyone who has talked to a Farker once knows they're all about beer and that term was no joke.

Also, you'll note that I did say "or who ever else". If it wasn't clear enough, I didn't mean to criticize IRON, just those complaining about it now.

[shilo]

While you do have a point here and there, I take offense to the dichotomy you and some other seem to make between "lulz" and "srs bsnss". What is this? UjW again? Some people's idea of fun is collecting stats, some others like RPing or making jokes. Or drinking beer. Or playing sports. When we both were in ODN, you can vouch that I was far from being serious all the time. Did that make me a bad leader? Did that make you a better leader than me?

Clearly, Fark didn't know IRON well enough. If they had - maybe - they would have known that asking someone to drink a beer and write a few lines on how it felt was so horrendous. Or, you know, IRON, when they signed the terms, could have said "Look, I don't drink and even if I did, I don't intend to write the review". What better ground is there to get to know someone than something 99% of CN brags about? Again, just because it's written in a "lulzy" way doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously. Otherwise, why didn't IRON "forget" to send reps? Clearly, the amount IRON had to pay was written in the same way.

IRON agreed to follow the terms then and they (or who ever else) have no ground to moan about it now.

Well, let's turn around the problem and consider that IRON would have asked a defeated FARK to write a (completely) serious statement [OOC]political essay regarding the aftermath of WWI and how Germany dealt with the defeat[/OOC] about some political stuff.

FARK, being oh so lulzy, likely would have thought that this would have been rather insulting and demeaning, and rightly so, and that doing some serious OOC stuff has no place in such a document, especially writing a couple pages.

IRON leadership might have honestly felt that this was a most interesting topic, it has a curious connection to those IC events etc.

So while one side might see terms like this interesting, funny, and maybe a way to interact [OOC] and find out whether or not FARK leadership could be an interesting group to debate history in the future[/OOC] with FARK, the other side may not. Simply because as you simply cannot seem to accept in your various posts here - FARK does things less serious, while IRON does take things seriouls.

The fact that they now make a huge fuss about in this thread tells me however that the term was more serious than they make it look like, and that if they truly had intentions to make friends with IRON, not demanding reparations and OOC action of their leadership would have been the right way. What they did by all means wasn't a way to start off a friendly relationship, simply by not even understanding and appreciating the opposite partie's different culture.

Edited August 24, 2009 by shilo