Jump to content

An Announcement from the Mostly Harmless Alliance


jadoo1989
 Share

Recommended Posts

67.jpg

Ladies and Gentlemen of Bob,

I'm afraid that my first public address to you all as Triumvir of the Mostly Harmless Alliance must be on a somewhat somber note. Recently, the Mostly Harmless Alliance engaged in a protectorate agreement with the alliance known as Order of Justice. During the negotiations stage, government members of the OoJ were made fully aware of the guidelines and requirements set forth by the EPIC protectorate agreement and agreed to abide by them with full knowledge that failure to do so would lead to the voiding of the agreement.

We intended to give OoJ the benefit of the doubt, as they were simply starting out. However, the agreement set forth in EPIC has been ignored for far too long. As such, under article 5 section 3 of the EPIC protectorate agreement, the protectorate between OoJ and MHA is considered immediately void.

Although not an expressed right of the treaty under the condition of void, the MHA hereby grants temporary protection to the OoJ AA in an effort to give them 48 hours to find alternate arrangements. The temporary protection shall end 48 hrs from the time of this post or whenever OoJ finds a new protector, whichever happens first.

Though the agreement between our two alliances has ended, we would like to wish OoJ luck with their future here in the cyberverse.

- Jadoo1989,

Triumvir, MHA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, all those annoying protectorates lately.

Either alliance should be more selective and careful when getting a protectorate, or small alliances should shop around when looking for a protector instead of taking the first one that offers support, because obviously they won't have your back unless you follow all their rules. This is just getting too common.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, all those annoying protectorates lately.

Either alliance should be more selective and careful when getting a protectorate, or small alliances should shop around when looking for a protector instead of taking the first one that offers support, because obviously they won't have your back unless you follow all their rules. This is just getting too common.

Bolded the part that made me laugh. When they signed this protectorate they agreed to everything contained within the document. You expect us to keep them around when they knowingly and willingly break the agreement they signed with us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bolded the part that made me laugh. When they signed this protectorate they agreed to everything contained within the document. You expect us to keep them around when they knowingly and willingly break the agreement they signed with us?

Why sign something with someone you can't trust? Especially a protectorate, you know a new alliance will have a million problems going through its growing pains. I just don't understand the extremely rigid protectorate treaties out there, they're written in a way that many of them are bound to fail the day they are signed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bolded the part that made me laugh. When they signed this protectorate they agreed to everything contained within the document. You expect us to keep them around when they knowingly and willingly break the agreement they signed with us?

The man speaks truth. We harbor no ill will nor animosity toward them. We simply ask for cooperation and the following of the requirements that you agree to. If you hold up your end, we hold up ours. With that said, I feel that OoJ probably learned a valuable lesson. I hope that they flourish nicely with their next protector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why sign something with someone you can't trust? Especially a protectorate, you know a new alliance will have a million problems going through its growing pains. I just don't understand the extremely rigid protectorate treaties out there, they're written in a way that many of them are bound to fail the day they are signed.

Which part of this particular treaty did you feel was too rigid or written in a way that meant it was bound to fail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...