Zangmonkey Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 You'd have to read oink's post mo'betta. The implication is that standing with IRON caused this. During that war, IRON/TOP would have been hurt badly along with FOK. After the war, FOK cancels on TOP. Oink says what he says. Implication is that FOK didn't like looking at more NS and ditched TOP for the "safer" side. Why do I imply it's safer? Well, the last basis for determining any future sides was the TPF issue. I wouldn't really read much into it, I was just pointing out some stuff oink said that made me wonder why he said it. I certainly don't believe how he phrased things are indicative of how FOK feels. If I had to venture a guess I would say that the way FOK.gov was treated after they expressed some concerns might be a motivator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 If I had to venture a guess I would say that the way FOK.gov was treated after they expressed some concerns might be a motivator. I second this. And the fact that it hasn't stopped still says it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khyber Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Where did you get this crap from? We would be going to help TOP when it was going to get its 'beatdown', as stated in the post you linked there. After the last conflict we needed to choose sides, so our resources wouldn't be stretched to thin in the future. As you know, FOK would and will honour any treaty it has signed. Because we were going to be in a tight spot for any next conflict, our membership voted and we chose to drop TOP. Not because we dislike or hate them, but because our paths are too different to still make it feasible to be treaty'd with them and not overstretch our resources may a conflict arise. We chose to be with our LEO allies and to put our FA in line with their FA. I personally hold no ill will towards TOP and I hope we can come back together in the future. The best of luck to you TOP, you certainly deserve it! Erikz, I love you guys in FOK, but your contradicting yourself. Let me get this straight 1) You would stand by TOP if it was in a beatdown. 2) You chose the other side that is going to give TOP a beat down. No sir, you will not be standing with TOP in the coming beatdown. They will be fighting increadle odds. Your reasoning is because they are holding to a treaty with IRON, which RnR has (I expect it to be canceled soon, since it really means nothing). Also, LEO political path is hardly it's own. How could it be? You have a member of LEO that is part of another bloc that will have to enter a war decided by that bloc according to its treaty. So if SF says they got to war, LEO goes to war. Every bloc is influenced by other blocs due to treaties that exist between member alliances, however only LEO and SF has a bloc member that is part of another bloc. And we have seen in the past with Q and Citadel how that works. The bloc either suffers internal issues, or for the most part the more aggressive bloc, Q in the old case, gets to pull the other bloc around. As for the hold "no ill will", sure, I believe that, but you should try to be more honest with yourselves in what your doing, and stop with this, "we will defend TOP in a beat down, but are canceling the treaty anyways because of diverging paths." We all know how the war will start, the side that is strong will start a war over some CB they've cooked up, proper propaganda will make it morally swallowable, they will avoid diplomacy, or will go in there for a show and act offended by the great evil crime done to them, and negotiations will fail, as the lossing side will not swallow it's pride and fold. That alliance will be on the outskirts, or not a popular one so that alliances that are in the middle will be torn to support and war begins. We've all learned all too well from the NPO how to play this game, and then you're left with two basic choices, friends and moral compulsion. And moral compulsion is often bent to where your friends are and the spin you place on the CB. FOK already places friends over moral compulsion, something that is still very acceptable in my eyes, and so in the end your've made it clear with this cancelation that you will be going in to bat for the other side, and indeed partake in the stomping coming TOP's way. At least TOP's way if TOP as FOK so clearly told TOP, if they don't dump IRON. Tell me would you really respect TOP if they did dump IRON? Seriously? You think if NPO came to them about dumping you pre Karma, TOP would have capitulated? I supported your move when you left Q, cause you made the game more exciting. This move though will just lead to a curb stomp, and we all know how fun that is when your on the winning side. 2 weeks of war tops, where your 3 on 1, and talking about how much the enemy sucks because he collected in anarchy or some BS. Enjoy. I guess there is a reason my favorite alliance in game these days is Umbrella. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I enjoy how the main thrust of the argument for cancellation is that TOP cannot ever be allied with anyone who is ex-hegemony, or the entire ex-Karma coalition will unite against them. Thats pretty much what this is. It is an attempt to bully and isolate them because they dare be friends with IRON. I salute TOP for standing by their friends in the face of obvious coercion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suryanto tan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 The idea that an alliance should choose older allies over newer ones are beyond me. When two alliances no longer agree with each other on major issues that divide the Planet Bob, they should depart. TOP and FOK have very different culture. That FOK was allied to TOP in the first place is mainly due to the fact that they started in orange, and naturally be friend with them. Most of FOK members are tough fighters, active raiders who places FUN above preserving infra and upholding fake morality code. TOP is the opposite of that. When a tech raiding cases brought up to the forum, you see a strike contrast about both alliances. That said, I am sure that the decision was not taken lightly. Good luck. We glad that you choose a side, even that it is differ from ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khyber Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) If I had to venture a guess I would say that the way FOK.gov was treated after they expressed some concerns might be a motivator. "Dump IRON or we will dump you" is a low concern to bring up. I would have laughed it off if TOP ever came to me and told me to stop being friends with IAA. Tell me what would be your reaction if TOP told you to dump MK or they would dump you? Seriously your double standards are poor propaganda tools. And Tromp man, I love you, but stop playing the agrieved party? You've been saying for a while how your not a fan of TOP, and have time and time again pledged your support to SF, your simply looking for an excuse and you have it, you trying to fiegn offended simply makes you look petty, especially to someone that you've told you wish was more honest. Let me start with honesty, I was happy when TOP sided with Karma because I didn't like NPO. The CB was meh. Would have been happy if Echelon sided with NpO as well because I didn't like NPO. I thought NPO was ruining the game in stagnency and beat down. Now that the NPO is not a form of stagency, I couldn't care less about them. So why the need of our paper support if you dont mind if we honor the treaty anyway? Why not cancel all your treaties? It's better on this side of the treaty web anyways. Edited January 20, 2010 by Khyber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) "Dump IRON or we will dump you" is a low concern to bring up. I would have laughed it off if TOP ever came to me and told me to stop being friends with IAA.Tell me what would be your reaction if TOP told you to dump MK or they would dump you? Seriously your double standards are poor propaganda tools. I see no problem with what you've said except that wasn't the beginning of this tussle, it's only the most loudly repeated part. Edited January 20, 2010 by Matthew PK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golan 1st Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 This is a surprising and disappointing announcement Good luck to FOK and TOP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khyber Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) I see no problem with what you've said except that wasn't the beginning of this tussle, it's only the most loudly repeated part. Then you know something I don't about this. Your free to share it with me in private or public Edited January 20, 2010 by Khyber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojiras ajeridas Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I don't get all this discussion. FOK didn't want to be tied to ex-Heg, TOP didn't want to cancel with IRON, so FOK cancelled a treaty, we are still good friends, FOK won't attack TOP, TOP won't attack FOK over this, one treaty less, clearer treaty web and actually no bad blood at both sides (exepted exceptions of course ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayzell Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 This cancellation makes me sad. I always thought of FOK as one of TOP's closest allies and greatest friends. Personally I do not agree at all with the reasoning put forth, but FOK is sovereign and may do what it thinks it should. I still like FOK as an alliance, and hope this path they have chosen is a prosperous one. Thanks for the good times, friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Good luck FOK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidMercury Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 So why the need of our paper support if you dont mind if we honor the treaty anyway? Personally I feel as though FOK has our back either way. I know I have FOK's back either way and I'd say a lot of TOP feels the exact same way. I've always been a proponent of the paperless route (pushed for it while in Gremlins, pushing for it in TOP since I got here). The only way to test this is if push comes to shove, and I'd say most people are going to choose the paper tie they have versus the non-paper tie (I hope I'm wrong for our sake and for Gremlins sake). We all know how that goes. Matters such as these types of global trends have a "your with us or your not" air to them when it comes to long time allies. I think taking a step back, looking at the totality of what has been going on, considering what kind of things your "friends" are saying, and the way these things have caused you all to react to others in private may be a good idea. I'd agree with you on the first point. The non-chaining factors are rarely called into play. As per the second point, I whole-heartedly disagree. Yes a lot of TOP feels hurt but truly wish nothing but the best for FOK and truly still do call them friends. Some members are going to react negatively, of course and there is plenty of baiting going on which some will step up to and most (hopefully) will ignore. I believe FOK has handled this admirably though I wish they hadn't felt the need to cancel, though as I've said, I don't need a piece of paper to tell me who I like or who I'd be willing to go to ZI for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave5436 Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) What does Crymson in office have anything to do with TOP honoring a treaty with a MDoAP partner? Snakes in the grass cannot be trusted. Personally I feel as though FOK has our back either way. I know I have FOK's back either way and I'd say a lot of TOP feels the exact same way. I've always been a proponent of the paperless route (pushed for it while in Gremlins, pushing for it in TOP since I got here). The only way to test this is if push comes to shove, and I'd say most people are going to choose the paper tie they have versus the non-paper tie (I hope I'm wrong for our sake and for Gremlins sake).I'd agree with you on the first point. The non-chaining factors are rarely called into play. As per the second point, I whole-heartedly disagree. Yes a lot of TOP feels hurt but truly wish nothing but the best for FOK and truly still do call them friends. Some members are going to react negatively, of course and there is plenty of baiting going on which some will step up to and most (hopefully) will ignore. I believe FOK has handled this admirably though I wish they hadn't felt the need to cancel, though as I've said, I don't need a piece of paper to tell me who I like or who I'd be willing to go to ZI for. I am of the belief that for most of the world, at least, canceling treaties is a sign of serious decay in the relationship. While TOP members (and individual FOK members) may feel differently, I am inclined to suspect that the treaty cancellation was the last in a line of events occurring in FOK to sever their ties with us. In other words, when A cancels on B, it is a sign that A simply, truly, doesn't like B. Edited January 20, 2010 by Gustave5436 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 In other words, when A cancels on B, it is a sign that A simply, truly, doesn't like B. I don't think it's that simple. Rather, when A cancels on B, it is a sign that A no longer wishes to be held to the terms of the treaty it had with B. There are plenty of alliances I like or respect that I wouldn't want to have a treaty with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I don't know if someone already asked that, but will FOK cancel their treaty with RnR too or ask them to cancel on IRON? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) Personally I feel as though FOK has our back either way. I know I have FOK's back either way and I'd say a lot of TOP feels the exact same way. I've always been a proponent of the paperless route (pushed for it while in Gremlins, pushing for it in TOP since I got here). The only way to test this is if push comes to shove, and I'd say most people are going to choose the paper tie they have versus the non-paper tie (I hope I'm wrong for our sake and for Gremlins sake).I'd agree with you on the first point. The non-chaining factors are rarely called into play. As per the second point, I whole-heartedly disagree. Yes a lot of TOP feels hurt but truly wish nothing but the best for FOK and truly still do call them friends. Some members are going to react negatively, of course and there is plenty of baiting going on which some will step up to and most (hopefully) will ignore. I believe FOK has handled this admirably though I wish they hadn't felt the need to cancel, though as I've said, I don't need a piece of paper to tell me who I like or who I'd be willing to go to ZI for. I believe you misinterpreted. I truly don't doubt you wish them the best, and still call many of them friends, and visa versa. If anything that fact adds more credence to my actual point. Instillation of doubt, paranoia, and distrust is a very effective way to get someone to treat others in such a manner that would cause them to rethink a commitment, and at the same time draw the manipulated party in. Personally I believe its quite possible you all are victims of being played in such a manner by a 3rd party over the last few months, and the current state of affairs is a direct result. I see no one crying TOP is evil, TOP is controlling, TOP is meddling in the affairs of others for their own gain. If anything at all, I hear claims of excessive paranoia often resulting in the undue mistreatment of others, and I believe that's not a product of your own fault, but rather the flame fanning by a certain group of "friends". Edited January 20, 2010 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Calling Umar a fairweather member is more than a little absurd. I agree completely. Umar was a loyal and contributing member of TOP for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobdole Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Good luck to both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
necAnt Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I´m sad that our ways had to part, i wish all those lovely fokkers the best on there way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Craig Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) I don't know if someone already asked that, but will FOK cancel their treaty with RnR too or ask them to cancel on IRON? I love how random ideas get mentioned, then become "fact," and are then used to draw ridiculous conclusions and/or propositions. -Craig Edited January 20, 2010 by Comrade Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabioviejo Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 You can't unfriend or unlove me FOK! But nice try . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutchman Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Line or no line, FOK still is a friend of you TOP! That our paths may cross again in the future Hail TOP Hail FOK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEd Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I don't know if someone already asked that, but will FOK cancel their treaty with RnR too or ask them to cancel on IRON? I guess it's possible, or then there's the ladder, RnR has already or will cancel on IRON because their FA paths aren't even close to being close. I believe you misinterpreted. I truly don't doubt you wish them the best, and still call many of them friends, and visa versa. If anything that fact adds more credence to my actual point. Instillation of doubt, paranoia, and distrust is a very effective way to get someone to treat others in such a manner that would cause them to rethink a commitment, and at the same time draw the manipulated party in. Personally I believe its quite possible you all are victims of being played in such a manner by a 3rd party over the last few months, and the current state of affairs is a direct result. I see no one crying TOP is evil, TOP is controlling, TOP is meddling in the affairs of others for their own gain. If anything at all, I hear claims of excessive paranoia often resulting in the undue mistreatment of others, and I believe that's not a product of your own fault, but rather the flame fanning by a certain group of "friends". Why not just say who these friends are ? I mean, doesn't take a genius to figure out but then again, who knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogeWilliam Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Why not just say who these friends are ? I mean, doesn't take a genius to figure out but then again, who knows Yea I have no clue about all this ambiguous friend talk. I didn't even know we had friends. 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.