A Brief Announcement from the Orange Defense Network

[Style #386]

you need to look up the definition of lie then my friend.

A change of opinion, for better or worse, of an alliance does not constitute a lie.

I honestly don't know if I can make this any simpler for you.

You made an action, and then gave a reason for it. Several months later, you claim that said justification was in fact not the real justification, but that there was in fact another reason for it. You cannot change the reasoning for something you've already done. Therefore, your "new" reason must have always been the real reason, in which case you lied the first time. Or, you have made up the second reason since. Given the nature of the reason used, one can conclude that the goal of the newer justification is to be deliberately hurtful to a former PIAT partner.

Either is an embarrassing reflection of an alliance's government member.

[scythegfx]

Do you want me to quote you? By saying the last page was talking about the MDP? Let's look at the first post on that page. Oh wait! That's me wondering who pushed the PIAT!!

Also, even if it was just a change of opinion, if you're current opinion is 'lol Optional Defense Network' why are you so butt hurt over this cancellation? Wouldn't this be a positive thing for you? If I were in your place, I would probably say 'K' and drop it rather than acting like a childish fool.

Exactly, who pushed the PIAT...after the cancellation of the MDP....

I'm not butthurt over the cancellation. I'm butthurt over what the ODN I used to be so fond of has turned into.

[Style #386]

Please tell me that ODN Leadership is smarter than this.

THose statements were made months apart, in two totally different political climates.

And the statements were both given as justification for an event that happened months apart. The current political climate is utterly irrelevant.

Please tell that that Invicta's leadership is smarter than this.

[Poobah]

I know BnT loathes ODN from my time in Valhalla and he implied pretty clearly that we're holding on to OUT for the sole purpose of preventing you from attacking us, so you can bother him if the inference bothers you. As for whether you want us out of OUT or not, I don't know. You say you don't, but then your membership keeps asking why we're still in it as though you're either hoping or expecting us to leave. I never said OUT was useless, though I won't deny some in ODN think that it is. They're a loud minority at this point. It took forever to get the treaty to the point that it's at. It seems far more reasonable to me to hang on to it for a while and see if there are better days ahead, while we busy ourselves with other things.. It doesn't really prevent us from doing anything we'd want to do, so why move to axe it and force ourselves to start over down the road should things normalize?

If you're saying that it is a loud minority that wants ODN out of OUT and feel that it is useless, then I have the same right to say that it is a loud minority in IRON that hope ODN is leaving (we're not hoping for that, regardless of what our members feel, with the exception of a small few, we do not want to see ODN out of OUT).

I also don't think you, as in IRON, are the major problem in working on it. I feel that the relationship between IRON and ODN is the major problem and that comes from both sides. I like you guys for the most part and fought on your side in the Karma war. Hell, I've probably been aligned with IRON in major wars as often as I've been aligned with ODN. I can't say as though that feeling is felt throughout the ODN, but we certainly all don't hate you. There's going to be some trolling from both sides, and the trolls will use that to justify themselves, and reinstating our embassy would probably result in a whole bunch more trolling, so it's not like I don't understand the move, even if I don't agree with it. That said, if those of us that actually like and respect one another leave all the communication to the trolls, it's pretty obvious where this is going.

I personally was at the ODN forums attempting to restore things to at least neutrality in regards to the dislike ODN has towards IRON, and to your alliance's credit you did remain respectful in that embassy. Then the most recent OUT topic happeed, and some of your government members who said to me they wanted to really try and restore relations between our alliances began to post things like "cutting the strings" was the best move ODN has made. So yes, it would be great if the only interaction wasn't the people insulting our alliances, but when the people who are supposedly working to "restore relations" are the these same people, you see where someone like me experienced problems.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Poobah

[scythegfx]

I honestly don't know if I can make this any simpler for you.

You made an action, and then gave a reason for it. Several months later, you claim that said justification was in fact not the real justification, but that there was in fact another reason for it. You cannot change the reasoning for something you've already done. Therefore, your "new" reason must have always been the real reason, in which case you lied the first time. Or, you have made up the second reason since. Given the nature of the reason used, one can conclude that the goal of the newer justification is to be deliberately hurtful to a former PIAT partner.

Either is an embarrassing reflection of an alliance's government member.

Hey, remember that time when I Stated that I wasnt involved in government discussions with ODN at the time of the MDP cancellation? Because I do.

[Haflinger]

Changing one's mind =/= saying one thing and then saying another.

A for effort, though.

If the two statements happened near each other in time, you'd have a point. However, there were several months between when Jorost approached you guys and this cancellation.

For example, I once posted this:

Don't be surprised to see the ODN honour treaties.

you guys.

I wasn't lying then either.

[scythegfx]

Also, Please note, that Invicta is Dictatorsshipp and that jorost has the final say. If he gave you that reason, then that was his opinion and official stance of Invicta.

[Twizzler]

Exactly, who pushed the PIAT...after the cancellation of the MDP....

I'm not butthurt over the cancellation. I'm butthurt over what the ODN I used to be so fond of has turned into.

Yes, after the MDP cancellation... meaning.. we already passed that part. I'm sorry, I assumed we were going in chronological order. Its cool to go backwards though if you want.

I think the ODN here is saying things like 'look, our relationship on paper really isn't going anywhere, so we cancelled it' However, a PIAT does not a relationship make. We are not heading in the same direction, and so it just doesn't make sense for us to be tied together through some e-paper. That does not mean that we cannot be respectful and friendly still. I liked Invicta. I liked them a lot. However, your first post in here was childish and completely uncalled for, especially coming from a government member that claims (as from the post I am quoting) to be fond of us. I'm still the same god damn person, and if you think that our relationship cannot continue because of a piece of e-paper, then I think I am glad to be parting ways with Invicta.

[Delta1212]

I aim to please. =)

but at least I know an MDP is there for mutual defence. If one gets attacked, the other defends, the wording of the treaty doesnt matter to me, the spirit does. E-lawyering for the lose.

Maybe you should only sign treaties that say exactly what you think they should mean then?

Edited September 26, 2009 by Delta1212

[scythegfx]

Maybe you should only say treaties that say exactly what you think they should mean then?

Hell, I'll make sure to do that.

But the fact of the matter is that I can't change how A treaty I was not involved in writing was written (I was the MoW back then).

[Delta1212]

Hell, I'll make sure to do that.

But the fact of the matter is that I can't change how A treaty I was not involved in writing was written (I was the MoW back then).

Doesn't mean you get to blame people for following through on a treaty exactly as written just because you think a slightly different treaty should have been signed.

[scythegfx]

Doesn't mean you get to blame people for following through on a treaty exactly as written just because you think a slightly different treaty should have been signed.

they didnt follow through on the treaty, they suspended it.

[Twizzler]

they didnt follow through on the treaty, they suspended it.

Yes. Although, that situation has already been laid out by Joracy. We could have not suspended it, still have done the same, and have followed the treaty to the letter. However, if that situation played out, instead of being mad we suspended it, you would have been mad that we followed it in such a manner. So basically, there is no pleasing you.

[scythegfx]

Yes. Although, that situation has already been laid out by Joracy. We could have not suspended it, still have done the same, and have followed the treaty to the letter. However, if that situation played out, instead of being mad we suspended it, you would have been mad that we followed it in such a manner. So basically, there is no pleasing you.

Truth, I am an increadibly angry homeless man. And I apologize for any feelings that have been hurt or mistakes that have been made.

[Locke]

You said "We are focusing on CDT", now you're saying "lol Optional Defense Network". That's a lie in my book. If that's "how you roll" (which implies pride in the action), then that's a rather pathetic reflection of the way you do business. Congrats, I suppose.

It can't be both? Among government at the time there were those that were wary of military committment to you because of the suspension and those who were just looking to prune dead treaties, as you've done here. Some, such as myself, hold both views. They're not contradictory. However, Jorost's reasoning, in the end, is what matters, so if he gives the reason "streamlining," the reason is streamlining, no matter what the rest of us think.

That said, and since I can't get on IRC right now, scythe, cool it.

And he apologizes as I post. <.<

Edited September 26, 2009 by Locke

[bill n ted]

I know BnT loathes ODN from my time in Valhalla and he implied pretty clearly that we're holding on to OUT for the sole purpose of preventing you from attacking us, so you can bother him if the inference bothers you. As for whether you want us out of OUT or not, I don't know. You say you don't, but then your membership keeps asking why we're still in it as though you're either hoping or expecting us to leave. I never said OUT was useless, though I won't deny some in ODN think that it is. They're a loud minority at this point. It took forever to get the treaty to the point that it's at. It seems far more reasonable to me to hang on to it for a while and see if there are better days ahead, while we busy ourselves with other things.. It doesn't really prevent us from doing anything we'd want to do, so why move to axe it and force ourselves to start over down the road should things normalize?

I also don't think you, as in IRON, are the major problem in working on it. I feel that the relationship between IRON and ODN is the major problem and that comes from both sides. I like you guys for the most part and fought on your side in the Karma war. Hell, I've probably been aligned with IRON in major wars as often as I've been aligned with ODN. I can't say as though that feeling is felt throughout the ODN, but we certainly all don't hate you. There's going to be some trolling from both sides, and the trolls will use that to justify themselves, and reinstating our embassy would probably result in a whole bunch more trolling, so it's not like I don't understand the move, even if I don't agree with it. That said, if those of us that actually like and respect one another leave all the communication to the trolls, it's pretty obvious where this is going.

It was a simple question whether or not ODN is considering leaving OUT, and if not why given their public responses in regards to OUT. I merely pitched the idea that ODN is staying within OUT as a means to keep a NAP with Orange alliances; what you conclude from that statement however paranoid is your prerogative but have still not answered my original question.

I sympathize with your situation Tiggah; with the loud minority in ODN that think OUT is worthless there is a loud minority within my alliance that vocally bashes you guys, come to think of it we could both agree its not just a minority of alliances that bash you guys. I cant say as though that feeling is felt throughout the IRON, but we certainly all don't hate you. Those pesky loud minorities again

If you wish to avoid those things that live under the bridge best try IRC queries. As those things that live under the bridge tend to pop up in most public channels and even forums. As has already been stated by my government; the only ties IRON has to ODN is OUT/OST, whilst we will endeavour to work with ODN on mutually beneficial matters we have no interest with ODN other than on a purely business footing. Your friendship or even cordiality is not welcome due to past transgressions, however we will work ODN in OUT/OST matters as we deem those matters to be mutually beneficial for which the OUT forums more than accommodate IRON/ODN communications I'd have thought; hence there is no reason for ODN to have a embassy on IRON's board and vice versa.

As has been stated numerous times by my government; if ODN needs to contact IRON query them in IRC or OUT forums, everything else including an embassy on our forums is nonessential niceties that is a slower form of communication for inter alliance information other than social pleasantry which we are unwilling to give you

[wickedj]

Congrats on cleaning up your treaties; itll still be interesting as always to see what MDP's youll honour as and when the inevitable crunch comes and what government/former government member(s) will be the scapegoats.

As ODN has stated it has little interest in OUT these days does that mean ODN will be withdrawing? Seens as your getting rid of treaties you dont need/want I see little reason for ODN to remain in OUT, or is there an ulterior motive for ODN keeping its signature on OUT? Is it for the NAP that forms a part of OUT that you dont want to get rid of?

Just curious

Hows destroying ODN going for ya? still babbling on about them i see...

Edited September 26, 2009 by wickedj

[Khyber]

Good stuff. I´m with someguy on this one. If these treaties were going no where and they were the reason they were signed, then it was a good idea to dump them.

[worrgames08]

I sympathize with your situation Tiggah; with the loud minority in ODN that think OUT is worthless there is a loud minority within my alliance that vocally bashes you guys, come to think of it we could both agree its not just a minority of alliances that bash you guys.

Congrats on getting rid of those useless treaties, etc etc.

[shahenshah]

--

Also Tiggah, you or anyone is free to come and talk, there is infact a personal invitation pending. Besides, now HS is in ODN govt, I know him for ~ 3+? years since well before CN, we talk about CN and the good ol times.

Edited September 26, 2009 by shahenshah

[lazyox]

first we get trolled because we sign so many treaties we can not follow them all now when we are parring down to the we will die for treaties we are still getting trolled . i swear more ignorant trolls have never existed than the weak sisters who ODN bash .at least be consistant .pick something you do not like than wait till we do it . there is nobody who is 100 percent wrong at all times . sheeesh

[merlin]

Besides, now HS is in ODN govt, I know him for ~ 3+? years since well before CN

Clearly this is an indication that current lines of communication between our alliances are insufficient (HellScream is not a member of our government).

[lazyox]

It was a simple question whether or not ODN is considering leaving OUT, and if not why given their public responses in regards to OUT. I merely pitched the idea that ODN is staying within OUT as a means to keep a NAP with Orange alliances; what you conclude from that statement however paranoid is your prerogative but have still not answered my original question.

I sympathize with your situation Tiggah; with the loud minority in ODN that think OUT is worthless there is a loud minority within my alliance that vocally bashes you guys, come to think of it we could both agree its not just a minority of alliances that bash you guys. I cant say as though that feeling is felt throughout the IRON, but we certainly all don't hate you. Those pesky loud minorities again

If you wish to avoid those things that live under the bridge best try IRC queries. As those things that live under the bridge tend to pop up in most public channels and even forums. As has already been stated by my government; the only ties IRON has to ODN is OUT/OST, whilst we will endeavour to work with ODN on mutually beneficial matters we have no interest with ODN other than on a purely business footing. Your friendship or even cordiality is not welcome due to past transgressions, however we will work ODN in OUT/OST matters as we deem those matters to be mutually beneficial for which the OUT forums more than accommodate IRON/ODN communications I'd have thought; hence there is no reason for ODN to have a embassy on IRON's board and vice versa.

As has been stated numerous times by my government; if ODN needs to contact IRON query them in IRC or OUT forums, everything else including an embassy on our forums is nonessential niceties that is a slower form of communication for inter alliance information other than social pleasantry which we are unwilling to give you

You know till iron is willing to take responsbilty admit there misstakes such as goons . There will be no nice nice because it all comes down to the way you treated us. We are willing to forget you were overbearing non conserderate and tried to use us . And you will have to forgive that when you called us like dogs we didn't come. We sided with those who treated us like equals . boo hooo your feelings were hurt well you deserved it . Get over it .

[Locke]

Clearly this is an indication that current lines of communication between our alliances are insufficient (HellScream is not a member of our government).

Do you not consider a Deputy Secretary of State gov?

Edited September 26, 2009 by Locke

[Style #386]

Do you not consider a Deputy Secretary of State gov?

No.