An Echelon Announcement

[AirMe]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 01:21 PM' timestamp='1264962105' post='2147929']
Caffine certainly does walk a new line; however, outright violation of terms when convenient is not acceptable. The manner in which this was done is indicative of Echelon's continued pre-Karma mentality even if Caffine has moved on.
[/quote]

I agree with you that it is a wrong move to unilaterally remove a term that was placed on you.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Neo Anglia' date='31 January 2010 - 01:20 PM' timestamp='1264962031' post='2147926']
To expand upon mem's point, he has not been acting [i]as gov[/i], but on behalf of and request of an Active minister or Director. There was always someone there to pull him back if he started getting ahead of himself.
[/quote]
My point stands in that we really did not care and simply going around and asking would very likely have yielded the result you were looking for without the overtones of opportunism and attempted insults.

[Schattenmann]

Corrected

Edited January 31, 2010 by Schattenmann

[JackSkellington]

My only complaint about this is Echelon not going to the alliances they surrendered to and have the term removed. I really don't think it would have been that hard to do. A term that you agreed to is no different then any economic term you agreed to. If you were to say no to paying the reps that YOU agreed to pay, then you'd be hit for not abiding by the terms. Same goes for just deciding to say no to this specific term. Frankly, what the term is is almost entirely irrelevant. It's the fact that you agreed to it and are now going back on your word without even talking to the alliances you surrendered to.

[shahenshah]

Good to see all signatories agreeing it was an awful term and had to go anyway.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='hizzy' date='31 January 2010 - 07:52 AM' timestamp='1264942364' post='2147424']
TBH I'm ashamed of whichever jackasses enforced such a term, even if Caffine1 was being a public spectacle. People should know better than that.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]GOD, MA, and RoK were the brains behind that term I believe. I am entirely unsurprised that those class acts would pull something like that.[/color]

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='31 January 2010 - 01:45 PM' timestamp='1264963516' post='2147980']
[color="#0000FF"]GOD, MA, and RoK were the brains behind that term I believe. I am entirely unsurprised that those class acts would pull something like that.[/color]
[/quote]
Everyone assumes Xiphosis was behind that term despite the fact that he had nothing to do with it. So no.

[Neo Anglia]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 01:21 PM' timestamp='1264962105' post='2147929']
Caffine certainly does walk a new line; however, outright violation of terms when convenient is not acceptable. The manner in which this was done is indicative of Echelon's continued pre-Karma mentality even if Caffine has moved on.
[/quote]So wait, [i]we're[/i] being aggressive and generally "not nice" because we choose to invoke our own full sovereignty? If we said and oh by the way so and so is an a**hat for putting it in there, I'd agree. We [i]never[/i] said that. All we are doing is reclaiming our full sovereignty as an alliance. Only the usual suspects are crying foul over it.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Neo Anglia

[AirMe]

[quote name='Neo Anglia' date='31 January 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1264963927' post='2147997']
So wait, [i]we're[/i] being aggressive and generally "not nice" because we choose to invoke our own full sovereignty? If we said and oh by the way so and so is an a**hat for putting it in there, I'd agree. We [i]never[/i] said that. All we are doing is reclaiming our full sovereignty as an alliance. Only the usual trollers are crying foul over it.
[/quote]

Let me help you understand what he said.

He agrees the term was BS but thinks you should have talked to the alliances that handed down the term in the first place to have it removed instead of removing it yourselves. By removing it yourselves are showing an example to some of how you haven't changed the arrogant ways of your past.

[Caffine]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 01:30 PM' timestamp='1264962610' post='2147942']
And the irony of all your tears over the term is hysterically ironic. Echelon attacked GATO for violating terms dictating that a certain member could not be in GATO gov that were issued by a war coalition that hadn't even existed for over a year, but at the same time Echelon knows they can violate the exact same sort of term because they know they can count on Karma to not be the type of filthy little monster Echelon was.
[/quote]

Just as a heads up, Echelon was not involved in the war against GATO. It started before we joined One Vision, and we abstained from voting on any issues about it.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Neo Anglia' date='31 January 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1264963927' post='2147997']
So wait, [i]we're[/i] being aggressive and generally "not nice" because we choose to invoke our own full sovereignty? If we said and oh by the way so and so is an a**hat for putting it in there, I'd agree. We [i]never[/i] said that. All we are doing is reclaiming our full sovereignty as an alliance. Only the usual trollers are crying foul over it.
[/quote]
No, they'd be the only ones crying foul if you had asked first. Even if we'd said no, you could have then done this and we'd be the bad guys. Instead, you come off looking less impressive than you could have. The only time I respect breaking surrender terms is if you're doing it to attack the people you surrendered to. I won't like it if someone who surrenders to me does it, but I'll have more respect for them than someone who randomly throws off terms, especially terms they could have gotten removed and chose not to.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Delta1212

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='31 January 2010 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1264963516' post='2147980']
[color="#0000FF"]GOD, MA, and RoK were the brains behind that term I believe. I am entirely unsurprised that those class acts would pull something like that.[/color]
[/quote]


How dare you insult those shimmering beacons of morality.

THEY ARE OUR SAVIORS. You [b]monster[/b].

In all seriousness good luck Echelon this was the right course of action. Now let's see if the Superfiends will do anything about it.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 10:48 AM' timestamp='1264963717' post='2147992']
Everyone assumes Xiphosis was behind that term despite the fact that he had nothing to do with it. So no.
[/quote]


This man speaks the truth. At the time Xiphosis was to busy trying to disband Echelon's protectorate.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='31 January 2010 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1264963516' post='2147980']
[color="#0000FF"]GOD, MA, and RoK were the brains behind that term I believe. I am entirely unsurprised that those class acts would pull something like that.[/color]
[/quote]


RoK wasn't fighting Echelon and had nothing to do with that term.

Also, I don't think anyone has an issue with that term being removed ... the point is that Echelon decided to make an announcement to show just how "rebellious" they are. All you had to do was approach the alliances who intially enforced this and requested to have it removed. I don't dislike Echelon like I used to, but I'm not exactly shocked that Echelon would go about something like this wrong.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='31 January 2010 - 02:00 PM' timestamp='1264964456' post='2148009']
How dare you insult those shimmering beacons of morality.

THEY ARE OUR SAVIORS. You [b]monster[/b].

In all seriousness good luck Echelon this was the right course of action. Now let's see if the Superfiends will do anything about it.
[/quote]
And now we have a call to "do something about it"

This thread is amusing.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 01:48 PM' timestamp='1264963717' post='2147992']
Everyone assumes Xiphosis was behind that term despite the fact that he had nothing to do with it. So no.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]You think I'm going to fall for that nonsense? I am not your regular Tom who can't see through your lies. I know the truth and I know your true character. So let's be honest here. We both know what Superfriends was up to in that war, so why hide it? I am sure everyone is dying to here the truth come out of you.[/color]

[Nobody Expects]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 06:17 PM' timestamp='1264961851' post='2147921']Charles, rushing to cheer on Echelon. Check. Alterego, international face of BAPS
[/quote]

Alterego is not the international face of BAPS, we afford all members freedom of speech on the OWF, the vast majority think its a pointless cesspool and don't bother.

[Mixoux]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='31 January 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1264965199' post='2148031']
[color="#0000FF"]You think I'm going to fall for that nonsense? I am not your regular Tom who can't see through your lies. I know the truth and I know your true character. So let's be honest here. We both know what Superfriends was up to in that war, so why hide it? I am sure everyone is dying to here the truth come out of you.[/color]
[/quote]

You mean that GOD wanted tough terms for Echelon, got a lot of flak for this, but yet ironically didn't even propose the caffine term?

Not sure what there is to hide, really.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Mixoux' date='31 January 2010 - 02:15 PM' timestamp='1264965330' post='2148037']
You mean that GOD wanted tough terms for Echelon, got a lot of flak for this, but yet ironically didn't even propose the caffine term?

Not sure what there is to hide, really.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]It doesn't matter. You did not object to the term. You made this infringement of sovereignty possible. You also tried to disband an alliance. That is something I fought against long ago. If I must fight you now, so be it. You will regret this.[/color]

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='31 January 2010 - 02:17 PM' timestamp='1264965455' post='2148043']
[color="#0000FF"]It doesn't matter. You did not object to the term. You made this infringement of sovereignty possible. You also tried to disband an alliance. That is something I fought against long ago. If I must fight you now, so be it. You will regret this.[/color]
[/quote]
Just so we're clear and make sure to regret the correct thing... what exactly is it that we (or he depending on whom you were addressing) will regret?

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1264965532' post='2148048']
Just so we're clear and make sure to regret the correct thing... what exactly is it that we (or he depending on whom you were addressing) will regret?
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Crossing me. Justice will be had.[/color]

[Heft]

I do like seeing more people recognize that the only thing obligating to follow terms is force of arms. It's a contract signed under duress and only enforceable by the continued presence and application of punitive force.

There is nothing dishonorable or wrong with breaking surrender terms, and if the enforcers are no longer able or willing to enforce it, then shirking the undesired term is the only reasonable course of action.

[Neo Anglia]

Oh to your defense Mixoux, I know it wasn't GOD that originally proposed it. I realize you guys took a round-robin approach to writing them. But that said, the few times I spoke with Xiph and NoFish, they were in fact quite to the point in saying "this is it, take it or leave it" regarding any negotiation or removal of said terms, a fact that frustrated their negotiator to no end.

[KaitlinK]

[quote name='Solidus117' date='31 January 2010 - 04:18 AM' timestamp='1264940325' post='2147385']


Let it be known that our sovereignty will never again be so egregiously impinged upon, for we are the ones who determine who will serve and who will not.

[/quote]

How does that work when the sovereignty in question was as you put it "egregiously impinged upon" by yourselves?
The terms of the Karma war were agreed to by yourselves and before everyone rushes to the "what else were they suppose to do they were getting rolled" the Caffine term was not one of the sticking points in the negotiations. The biggest one being the term identifying who pays reparations.

At the time of the Karma War Caffine was more of a liability to Echelon than an asset. Now with time, people can change and perhaps thats whats happened here. If that is the case then I wish Echelon well in the path they have chosen, I sincerely hope it ends better for you than the last time. However, I dont think this was the best way to start by blaming others. Accept responsibility for your own actions, they are yours alone and should be owned by you not just for the past but for also failing to go to those who you entered into this agreement with before posting.
Your word, in an agreement is something you want people to trust once thats gone you become nothing more than a punchline.

Edited January 31, 2010 by KaitlinK

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' date='31 January 2010 - 11:15 AM' timestamp='1264965303' post='2148036']
Alterego is not the international face of BAPS, we afford all members freedom of speech on the OWF, the vast majority think its a pointless cesspool and don't bother.
[/quote]

Understandable stance. However, with as often as Alterego posts he is (sadly) the international face of BAPS to most of us.

[Minarchist]

Never was a fan of terms like this. Hopefully this war does not bear witness to such abhorrent terms.