Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Ivan completely stripped Corinan of any power or decision making ability that he had. Alliance or not, it's just as pathetic considering he was the second command and in charge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) Ivan actually has the right to countermand Corinan if he wants to. And Fark has the ability to stop RIA from going into a foolish war because it violates the spirit of their treaty. I'm sorry you don't have any ability to make a comparative analysis Edited December 27, 2009 by Aeternalis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwood1 Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 The best part of this is the naturalness of the arrogance contained within this statement. Seriously no dig, it's quite entertaining. I was thinking the same thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Corinan is not leader of the NSO. Not yet anyway. Hail Emperor Moldavi! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senekis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Ivan completely stripped Corinan of any power or decision making ability that he had. Alliance or not, it's just as pathetic considering he was the second command and in charge You should do some read before talking. RIA is a sovereign alliance which has a treaty with another alliance (Fark). Moldavi is the leader of the NSO and Corinan's boss. You don't need to be a genius to notice that those are completely different scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 You should do some read before talking. RIA is a sovereign alliance which has a treaty with another alliance (Fark). Moldavi is the leader of the NSO and Corinan's boss. You don't need to be a genius to notice that those are completely different scenarios. speaking of reading: And Fark has the ability to stop RIA from going into a foolish war because it violates the spirit of their treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senekis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) And Fark has the ability to stop RIA from going into a foolish war because it violates the spirit of their treaty.I'm sorry you don't have any ability to make a comparative analysis If you read the SF Pact, you'll notice that there's a paragraph regarding the sovereignty of the involved alliances. As I said earlier; it doesn't hurt to read the information before talking. Edit: typo Edited December 27, 2009 by Senekis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 If you read the SF Pact, you'll notice that there's a paragraph regarding the sovereignty of the involved alliances. As I said earlier; it doesn't hurt to read the information before talking. Edit: typo If you'd read thread from which this exact argument originated, you'd find everything i'm about to say also, i don't feel like copypasta right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted December 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 I would ask that NSO members simply ignore Aeternalis. It is obvious that there is a disconnect with reality involved on some level in regards to the positions he attempts to make so there is little point in showing his arguments to be incorrect, which they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 o/ NSO \o...Ivan is just like Hank, Jr. and tells it like it is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) A duel is a duel. If RIA wishes to enter a duel, Fark, as a sovereign alliance, has no right to get involved in RIA's FA matters without RIA's consent. FARK, I understand you are trying to be a good ally, I understand you really wished the best intentions by wishing to protect your brother, but that is a decision for them to make, not you. To act as though your word meant more than their own alliance may come off as something other than what you intend. Just some friendly advice from an outside perspective. To Ivan: You're not as innocent as you make it sound. Making stupid topics and fake apologies is what set some people off, not you being a victim and evil -- though I wont speak for everyone. Though, you are right about SCM's initial topic -- it was wrong. The reaction wasn't any better and in some instances, on the same level of stupidity (not directly to you) On that note, all I can say to NSO is: Well played. Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 If you'd read thread from which this exact argument originated, you'd find everything i'm about to sayalso, i don't feel like copypasta right now You mean you don't feel like backing up your trash-talking with anything except vague ramblings. I'm sorry that we're able to note that there is a slight difference between a boss reprimanding a subordinate, and an ally restricting the rights of it's erstwhile equal. Oh, I'm sorry, were you using that comparison before it got the crap beaten out of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senekis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 If you'd read thread from which this exact argument originated, you'd find everything i'm about to sayalso, i don't feel like copypasta right now Well.. if you actually read it, you'd already know that I was one of the first to point out the sovereignty clause of the SF Pact and that nobody was able to give a valid counter against that. Anyway, I don't want to start another endless cycle of nonsense. Come back when they modify the SF Pact and your point starts making some sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Not yet anyway. I very much look forward to that day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brentbee Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 On that note, all I can say to NSO is: Well played. we were not playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 we were not playing. I don't think you understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 I very much look forward to that day. It's the same day I'll be made into Corinan's right-hand Sith. Oh yes, if you think Corinan started incidents indiscriminately, just wait until you see the rise of Dark Lord Chron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 You mean you don't feel like backing up your trash-talking with anything except vague ramblings.I'm sorry that we're able to note that there is a slight difference between a boss reprimanding a subordinate, and an ally restricting the rights of it's erstwhile equal. Oh, I'm sorry, were you using that comparison before it got the crap beaten out of it? You're right, i guess a signatory of an MADP going to war does not only endanger the particular signatory, but also the other signatories based on the warring party's ability to defend themselves and their allies when a real situation (like this one) arises; furthermore violating the spirit of the MADP treaty, particularly the war clause. But something i will take away from this is that i never have to take Corinan's word, or word of any NSO gov, with any weight, as their actions will be reversed at whim by object of your admiration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brentbee Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 I don't think you understand. the comment was to simply state that I would have gladly gone to ZI in this fight. There was no bluffing by the NSO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) But something i will take away from this is that i never have to take Corinan's word, or word of any NSO gov, with any weight, as their actions will be reversed at whim by object of your admiration. Congratulations on discovering how absolute rule works. May I suggest learning the ropes of a democracy next? Edited December 27, 2009 by Chron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) the comment was to simply state that I would have gladly gone to ZI in this fight. There was no bluffing by the NSO. Well played, as in, they played their cards right. As in, accepting the engagement duel. I am glad they followed their word, whether you like em' or not, it was well played and has shut everyone up -- therefore, well played. I'm not biased, I give credit when it's due. Sorry if you felt otherwise, it was a compliment. Edited December 27, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) Well played, as in, they played their cards right. As in, accepting the engagement duel. I am glad they followed their word, whether you like em' or not, it was well played and has shut everyone up -- therefore, well played. I'm not biased, I give credit when it's due. Sorry if you felt otherwise, it was a compliment. Thanks very much for it. But I assure you, we can't take all the credit. Edited December 27, 2009 by Chron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Congratulations on discovering how absolute rule works. May I suggest learning the ropes of a democracy next? Maybe we could learn about binding agreements Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerdonia Redux Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 not important now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anhur Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Ivan and the NSO... there's just something about you guys I like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.