Vanguard Edict

[sodom gomorrah]

This thread was supposed to be about Vanguard leaving OUT to be able to declare war on orange alliances and giving the remaining signatories the finger* - I think, although that was swiftly derailed about half way down the first page. Good luck Vanguard in the future, no matter where you decide to be.

*This is the only reason to do this. and don't say there's no reason not to, my point is still solid.

[Jack Diorno]

Well, orange sphere sure is full of jerks that's for sure. I really hope Aqua never gets this pitiful.

[shilo]

This is truly a sad announcement, in general, but specifically about a backlash for Orange Unity.

Franklin really hit the nail on the head with most of his comments, there can be no cause for celebration after such an announcement.

OUT is above all a forum for completely different alliances to talk with each other, based on the common ground that is the OT.

OUT had it's very tense moments, some rather pitiful ones (and I was guilty regarding one of those moments), but still it means peaceful interaction and sharing the same sphere, and cooperation that ensures mutual benefit.

I simply cannot see any reason to no longer work for it save for the one thing that OUT prevented (may it be merely by a feeling, rather than by treaties) which is the ability to attack another orange alliance.

OUT surely had its problems, and always could use improvement upon, but generally leaving OUT is the least best way to ensure things improve, rather than working together with all signatories continueously and persistently to achieve said change.

Edited September 19, 2009 by shilo

[Some-Guy]

If OUT wasn't working for Vanguard, then good for them that they manned up and withdrew.

I don't like you much, Vanguard, but at least your politics are reasonably plain and transparent... so screw it, I'll bury my hatchet with you guys, for what ever little it is worth.

I think this was a great decision Vanguard. I support any move that cuts a tie to TOP, even a color treaty.

Another good move would be to swing by our forums or IRC to discuss that axe you're grinding there mate, we've got a good spread of people at Paradoxia so I'm sure there will be plenty of folks who you don't have a specific grudge against who sit down with you for tea, biscuits and a good natter.

Or you could invite us you your place, your choice.

... or you can sit there and seethe in nerd rage if you like, whatever works for you, mate.

[Blue Lightning]

There is no evidence that the Senate would be utilised as a weapon against any alliance, or that sanction powers would be misused in any way, by opening it up to all Orange alliances. If certain Orange alliances are concerned that a free Senate would lead to these consequences, then perhaps Orange is even less united than we all believe, and Vanguard was perfectly justified in leaving OUT and pursuing its own methods of harmonising its home environment. Talks of Sphere apartheid are fully justified. It is no surprise that someone of your ilk - with IRON coursing through your veins, and your mindset still that of a Hegemonist - would deny the obvious castes present within the Orange Sphere. There are two classes within Orange: the haves and have-nots. Vanguard disagrees with such a state in any Sphere, but particularly in our own home.

There is, on the other hand, plenty of evidence to suggest that sanction powers would not be abused by continuing the current senators of the OST. Like, over 2 years of evidence. I personally have never heard complaints on the conduct of Orange senators throughout the long history of the OST. Perhaps there has been before my time or I just missed it, maybe someone more qualified can vouch for this. The fact that motivation exists for another alliance to upset that status quo in order to get themselves a senate seat strikes me as suspicious.

At worst, people want to obtain a senate seat and use it's power to their own ends. More likely though, I think people are letting their own egos and ambitions put the stability of the Orange senate in jeopardy as they demand a "free" and "fair" senate even though they don't actually have any problems with the current reliable and well trusted senators beyond the flag that they fly.

[edit]The beauty of Orange and the OUT is that it has never required it's members to be the best of friends. It allows alliances to join a stable and prosperous sphere regardless of their beliefs and virtues. The OUT doesn't ask much of it's signatories, merely that they remain somewhat amicable with each other and settle inter-alliance disputes peacefully. If Vanguard no longer wish to be amicable and peaceful with other Orange alliances, then this move makes perfect sense.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Blue Lightning

[BamaBuc]

A couple comments.

The view these days seems to be that letting team color affect your FA is stupid. I don't really agree. A sphere's image plays a big role in getting alliances to go (and stay) there. Or more specifically, in getting their resources to go (and stay) there. A bitterly divided sphere isn't going to look very appealing. A united sphere or one where not everyone agrees but can still get along is the kind I want to go to. A central conclave of some sort is a good way to make this happen.

Secondly, I'm not a huge Vanguard fan, and I like some of the alliances that are being condemned for "driving them out" or whatever... But with that said, I don't really understand the outrage here. So Vanguard wants to be on Orange but doesn't want to be in OUT. Okay. Cool. Like I said, I think color treaties are good... But if Vanguard doesn't want to be in one, fine. What's the big deal? They're not trying to pull OUT down or throw Orange into chaos or start a competing treaty to divide the sphere. They decided this treaty wasn't something they wanted to do, so they left. I don't see the big controversy.

-Bama

[Delta1212]

At worst, people want to obtain a senate seat and use it's power to their own ends. More likely though, I think people are letting their own egos and ambitions put the stability of the Orange senate in jeopardy as they demand a "free" and "fair" senate even though they don't actually have any problems with the current reliable and well trusted senators beyond the flag that they fly.

There are 5 candidates including the 3 senators who are even remotely close to being in the senate on Maroon. I'm directly allied to all 5 and the top 4 are in SF. I still trust me the most out of all of them and wouldn't like a system that restricted whether I could run for senate or how. You can use whatever system works for you, though I'm honestly surprised Orange has maintained a restricted senate for so long given how well it worked out for everyone else that has tried it.

Edit: I also love how it seems that not only do you require a treaty to declare war, but now you require a treaty to have amicable relations. There are plenty of alliances I would rather get along with than not. There are significantly fewer that I'd want to be legally bound to have peaceable relations with no matter what. My allies come first, and anything which has the real potential get in the way of my supporting them gets a pretty major mark against. Luckily, for the most part, my team and my allies are the same so I don't have such a conflict of interest, but I can definitely see where Vanguard would be averse to a document that legally binds them from defending their allies in certain scenarios in order to maintain relations with alliances it obviously doesn't get along with.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Delta1212

[Blue Lightning]

Edit: I also love how it seems that not only do you require a treaty to declare war, but now you require a treaty to have amicable relations. There are plenty of alliances I would rather get along with than not. There are significantly fewer that I'd want to be legally bound to have peaceable relations with no matter what. My allies come first, and anything which has the real potential get in the way of my supporting them gets a pretty major mark against. Luckily, for the most part, my team and my allies are the same so I don't have such a conflict of interest, but I can definitely see where Vanguard would be averse to a document that legally binds them from defending their allies in certain scenarios in order to maintain relations with alliances it obviously doesn't get along with.

I don't require either of those things. I just said if Vanguard no longer want to be amicable and peaceful to other Orange alliances then they shouldn't be a member of this treaty which requires them to be so.

[edit]I wasn't trying to criticise them.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Blue Lightning

[willirica]

There are 5 candidates including the 3 senators who are even remotely close to being in the senate on Maroon. I'm directly allied to all 5 and the top 4 are in SF. I still trust me the most out of all of them and wouldn't like a system that restricted whether I could run for senate or how. You can use whatever system works for you, though I'm honestly surprised Orange has maintained a restricted senate for so long given how well it worked out for everyone else that has tried it.

Edit: I also love how it seems that not only do you require a treaty to declare war, but now you require a treaty to have amicable relations. There are plenty of alliances I would rather get along with than not. There are significantly fewer that I'd want to be legally bound to have peaceable relations with no matter what. My allies come first, and anything which has the real potential get in the way of my supporting them gets a pretty major mark against. Luckily, for the most part, my team and my allies are the same so I don't have such a conflict of interest, but I can definitely see where Vanguard would be averse to a document that legally binds them from defending their allies in certain scenarios in order to maintain relations with alliances it obviously doesn't get along with.

A great post; quoted for emphasis.

After reading this thread i think it should be perfectly obvious to everyone that Vanguard has made a great choice in dropping the OUT treaty.

[shahenshah]

I can definitely see where Vanguard would be averse to a document that legally binds them from defending their allies in certain scenarios in order to maintain relations with alliances it obviously doesn't get along with.

That certain scenario didnt play out in the biggest war ever, if there was anytime it was a hurdle, it was half a year ago, that also based on assumptions that turned out to be just that, just assumptions.

I cannot see any such scenario forming up anytime now or maybe my head is just buried in sand.

Edited September 19, 2009 by shahenshah

[Gork]

I don't require either of those things. I just said if Vanguard no longer want to be amicable and peaceful to other Orange alliances then they shouldn't be a member of this treaty which requires them to be so.

[edit]I wasn't trying to criticise them.

Other Vanguard members have previously stated our motives for leaving OUT clearly. Our intent is not to distance ourselves from Orange alliances with which we currently maintain open relations, but we consider this treaty both unnecessary for collaborating effectively with the rest of the Team and a restraint of our future actions. The NAP/ODP clauses of OUT have political implications which transcend sphere unity, that Delta described earlier.

[Trace]

I can't help but laugh at the people who keep going on about senators like they are something important. Move on folks, its not 2006/7 anymore. Try to take an example from aqua, no senate treaty, and frankly nobody gives a crap about the senate or whose in it. And hey, things work just fine here.

[Mixoux]

I can't help but laugh at the people who keep going on about senators like they are something important. Move on folks, its not 2006/7 anymore. Try to take an example from aqua, no senate treaty, and frankly nobody gives a crap about the senate or whose in it. And hey, things work just fine here.

It's been a heated debate discussed for years now. I think a lot of drama would be solved by simply opening the senate up, but hey, to each their own.

[AirMe]

I can't help but laugh at the people who keep going on about senators like they are something important. Move on folks, its not 2006/7 anymore. Try to take an example from aqua, no senate treaty, and frankly nobody gives a crap about the senate or whose in it. And hey, things work just fine here.

This man is wise and Orange would be wise to heed his words instead of looking like fools over that issue.

[Lincongrad]

Many color sphere treaties are used as shields. Vanguard was probably right in leaving OUT if they felt that their policy didn't align at all. Might I suggest a purely economic treaty be added to Orange as well as the one with ODP/NAP?

EDIT: GRAMMARZ!!! Also mistaken example.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Lincongrad

[MCRABT]

Yes I am sure, this is surely why the ODN embassy remains closed at IRON forums correct? Truly. Yes I can see how we are all working at making orange united. There are still those that are willing to talk with IRON still in the ODN. At least I am.

Your embassy remains closed and will do for the significant future as we have no interest in developing any kind of individual ties or friendship with you. We are perfectly willing to work with you in the OUT but we have no desire to have a social relationship with your alliance. Yes we are still willing to talk to you and work for the mutual benefit of OUT but you are not welcome in our home.

I would describe our relationship with you as the guy at work you speak with and work with to get things done for the greater good but we wouldn't invite you round to our barbecues. In other words live and let live or at least that's what we are trying to do. ODN paranoia that we are on the verge of hostilities isn't helping much though.

Also this thread isn't about ODN and OUT it seems to have been derailed a little if any ODN members have any questions about IRON's stance on the OUT feel free to query me on irc or send me a PM

Edited September 19, 2009 by MCRABT

[sodom gomorrah]

Other Vanguard members have previously stated our motives for leaving OUT clearly. Our intent is not to distance ourselves from Orange alliances with which we currently maintain open relations, but we consider this treaty both unnecessary for collaborating effectively with the rest of the Team and a restraint of our future actions. The NAP/ODP clauses of OUT have political implications which transcend sphere unity, that Delta described earlier.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that you are doing the right thing if OUT is incompatible with your main politic line. (If your problems are with the OST, then that is completely unrelated and should have been brought up on .gov level with the signatories.) But OUT only promote growth, and tries to prevent inter-orange war. It's sad if those two things goes against your plans for the future.

[Rafael Nadal]

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that you are doing the right thing if OUT is incompatible with your main politic line. (If your problems are with the OST, then that is completely unrelated and should have been brought up on .gov level with the signatories.) But OUT only promote growth, and tries to prevent inter-orange war. It's sad if those two things goes against your plans for the future.

OUT doesn't promote anything except a ridiculous feeling of security, since it protects you from attack from other Orange alliances, no matter if you deserve to be attacked or not. To even begin to classify OUT as economic would be a gross mistake.

As we've said, OUT is not the sole vehicle for relations with other Orange alliances; I'm very confident we still have the ability to build and maintain relations with Orange alliances, in the same manner we have relations with Aqua, Blue, Purple, etc alliances.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

You're welcome to join the black team Vanguard.

[John Ron]

Another good move would be to swing by our forums or IRC to discuss that axe you're grinding there mate, we've got a good spread of people at Paradoxia so I'm sure there will be plenty of folks who you don't have a specific grudge against who sit down with you for tea, biscuits and a good natter.

Or you could invite us you your place, your choice.

... or you can sit there and seethe in nerd rage if you like, whatever works for you, mate.

Don't play dumb. I had a great deal of respect for you guys until a month ago when I found out [OOC]you were trying to get my entire alliance banned[/OOC]. Do your forums contain a topic on my alliance where you talk about [OOC]seeing if you can get Aircastle banned or even mention this low tactic.[/OOC] Or is that not true?

Honestly, we had good relations with most of Citadel, heck we are modeled after Umbrella, and I [edit]had[edit] a great deal of respect for your military power. You kind of made us an enemy you know. Well done. Did you do this because we didn't want to join Citadel?

Sorry Vanguard for this off-topic post.

Edited September 19, 2009 by John Ron

[Khyber]

Here is where I inserted my foot in my mouth. To my defense I never read that topic. Further explained below.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Khyber

[WalkerNinja]

I've gotta back Khyber up here. I just ended my term as Grand Chancellor (MoFA) and neither myself nor my staff had any clue that you existed before a topic popped up in the Citadel entitled, "Air Castle; should we know them?" From there someone mentioned that you guys liked to keep a low profile and that getting buddy-buddy with the biggest bloc in the game didn't exactly thrill you. Upon hearing that I wiped my hands of it, said "meh", and never thought about it (you) again.

You also haven't shown up in any TOP FA discussions at all, period, since I left office. I know because I still rank highly within the chancellery (I expect that the current Grand Chancellor will be along shortly to verify this). So this idea that we're somehow secretly out to get you [ooc]banned[/ooc] because you scorned us is truly laughable. I daresay that if you were a tad less insular, you might have come to this conclusion yourself by now rather than succumbing to narcissistic paranoid delusions.

Cheers.

Edited September 19, 2009 by WalkerNinja

[Kaiser]

Don't play dumb. I had a great deal of respect for you guys until a month ago when I found out [OOC]you were trying to get my entire alliance banned[/OOC]. Do your forums contain a topic on my alliance where you talk about [OOC]seeing if you can get Aircastle banned or even mention this low tactic.[/OOC] Or is that not true?

Honestly, we had good relations with most of Citadel, heck we are modeled after Umbrella, and I [edit]had[edit] a great deal of respect for your military power. You kind of made us an enemy you know. Well done. Did you do this because we didn't want to join Citadel?

Sorry Vanguard for this off-topic post.

I'm sorry to disagree with Walker, and Khyber, but they were wrong.

There was a topic about you in early August that went like this.

"Aircastle, these guys are quiet, but have really good stats, thoughts?"

"Yeah, they're quiet, and apperently FCC likes them"

"They kind of remind me of FnF, think they're [ooc]multis?[/ooc]"

"Maybe, not really our business if they are. If they are, they will be caught, if not then they will live. We're not the world police"

Then the conversation died. A couple of our members thought you guys seemed like FnF, but no one really cared. I think the far more interesting question is how you got information from our private forums, and why you think that [ooc]Some members thinking you look suspecious OOC, should make you change your mind about us IC.[/ooc]

Oh, and sorry everyone for the off topic post.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Kaiser

[Hasin]

Yeah, Kaiser's right. Due to your incredibly competent programs, and spread of nations you reminded us of FnF. A couple people raised concerns, everyone else said don't bother.

[sodom gomorrah]

OUT doesn't promote anything except a ridiculous feeling of security, since it protects you from attack from other Orange alliances, no matter if you deserve to be attacked or not.

Either you're saying that you think that Vanguard deserves to be rolled, and therefore left the OUT, so we signatories would be able to do it, or that you're want to be able to roll oranges, and leave because of that.

Would it be vary far-fetched to assume that you wouldn't shed many tears if TOP (and possibly IRON?) was rolled?