An announcement from ADI

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' date='17 February 2010 - 07:28 PM' timestamp='1266434883' post='2187790']
Posts like these only remind us that we will be doing the right thing. You of all people have no right to even type the term "aqua peace". 1. Aqua peace will be damaged due to you own actions. 2. You were more than willing to break "aqua peace" for your own benefit previously.

This entire post is typical John Warbuck garbage and lies.
[/quote]

Is this for real?

[b]"Aqua peace will be damaged due to your own actions"[/b] - As I recall, I brought up the idea of negotiation with you, Hoo. Rather than even think on that idea, how did you react? You banned me from #rok, someone who wasn't trolling, who came in peace in an effort to bring the peace. I attempted to broker peace, I fought to negotiate and bring our alliances to the table, along with others, but you could care less about peace, so long as you get your little "revenge".

[b]"You were more willing to break "aqua peace" for your own benefit previously."[/b] - Being the man who negotiated on behalf of TDO during the little ADI-TDO issue, I'd say I have every right to comment on this. You see, this is where the difference between you and Warbuck is evident. Warbuck, while being extraordinarily upset over multiple transgressions by TDO, was capable of being level-headed and speaking with me on the matter. Warbuck heard me out, and we developed a way to keep the peace between our alliances. So don't come at the world acting like you are just in your reasoning because, as per the reason's stated in the first quote, you are way off.

EDIT: While I doubt this post has done anything to change your mind, if you do decide that you desire peace, you know me Hoo, and you know I'm always willing to discuss the idea. You see? Now it's your choice.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Lord Tri

[John Warbuck]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 01:51 PM' timestamp='1266436281' post='2187831']
Is this for real?

[b]"Aqua peace will be damaged due to your own actions"[/b] - As I recall, I brought up the idea of negotiation with you, Hoo. Rather than even think on that idea, how did you react? You banned me from #rok, someone who wasn't trolling, who came in peace in an effort to bring the peace. I attempted to broker peace, I fought to negotiate and bring our alliances to the table, along with others, but you could care less about peace, so long as you get your little "revenge".

[b]"You were more willing to break "aqua peace" for your own benefit previously."[/b] - Being the man who negotiated on behalf of TDO during the little ADI-TDO issue, I'd say I have every right to comment on this. You see, this is where the difference between you and Warbuck is evident. Warbuck, while being extraordinarily upset over multiple transgressions by TDO, was capable of being level-headed and speaking with me on the matter. Warbuck heard me out, and we developed a way to keep the peace between our alliances. So don't come at the world acting like you are just in your reasoning, cause you are way off.
[/quote]
The only reason I'm going to reply to this is to recognize Lord Tri's talents. He saw my anger at the situation and was able to overcome it. However, that did require my listening to him and taking in what he had to say. We developed a mutual respect for one another through that situation that we still have. He does make a very good point though. He knew that I didn't want to disturb aqua peace by declaring on TDO, but I felt there was no other choice.

Lord Tri showed me that there WAS another choice, and when I saw that there was, I chose that option. Why? Because under the surface I didn't want to bring war to my own sphere, and I believe that war should be a last resort. It is only an option when I can no longer negotiate, or when negotiation is impossible (fulfilling a treaty or having people like Hoo declare on us). There IS another option to this, but Hoo won't be satisfied with any option that allows ADI to [OOC]play the game[/OOC] in peace.

Edited February 17, 2010 by John Warbuck

[Da DreadLord]

[quote name='John Warbuck' date='17 February 2010 - 08:58 PM' timestamp='1266436702' post='2187841']
any option that allows ADI to [OOC]play the game[/OOC] in peace.
[/quote]

well there are 2..

- declare neutrality
- looking at the TDO situation..make the member causing problems to step down from his position

Edited February 17, 2010 by Da DreadLord

[John Warbuck]

[quote name='Da DreadLord' date='17 February 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1266437522' post='2187861']
well there are 2..

- declare neutrality
- looking at the TDO situation..make the member causing problems to step down from his position
[/quote]
If Hoo stepped down, that would be fine by me.

Seriously though, you can only force someone to step down when that person has committed a crime against your alliance. And it has to be a rather serious one, and one that you can back up with indisputable evidence.

[El Hefe]

[quote name='John Warbuck' date='17 February 2010 - 01:58 PM' timestamp='1266436702' post='2187841']
Hoo won't be satisfied with any option that allows ADI to [OOC]play the game[/OOC] in peace.[/quote]

In case you haven't noticed, you are playing the game - it's called politics. You've made your maneuvers, and they've lead you to the point where you will be attacked.

You talk about Hoo having choices - you had your choices to make Warbuck, now you have to live (or die) with them.

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='Da DreadLord' date='17 February 2010 - 08:12 PM' timestamp='1266437522' post='2187861']
well there are 2..

- declare neutrality
- looking at the TDO situation..make the member causing problems to step down from his position
[/quote]

I'm failing to see the problem here. ADI declares support for RoK (after all they are our friends), ADI opts to hear out the other side of the story and notices that RoK left some stuff out (friends don't do that!), ADI withdraws support for RoK (not so good friends any more), RoK cancels the treaty (really not good friends any more). I dunno, sounds like a typical day on Planet Bob to me. To those who I know will quote this and bring up Warbuck posting fake logs, give it a rest. While I disagree with log-dropping, the fact of the matter is that it can't be proved either way, I'll prove it to you:

[quote]VanHooIII[RoK] [13:21:02] Tri...I need to tell you something...
LordTri[ADI] [13:21:43] Hey Hoo, whats up?
VanHooIII[RoK] [13:22:14] I secretly have a poster of Edward Cullen in my room...[/quote]

Is it real? Is it fake? Who knows.

[Da DreadLord]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 09:36 PM' timestamp='1266438988' post='2187904']
I'm failing to see the problem here. ADI declares support for RoK (after all they are our friends), ADI opts to hear out the other side of the story and notices that RoK left some stuff out (friends don't do that!), ADI withdraws support for RoK (not so good friends any more), RoK cancels the treaty (really not good friends any more). I dunno, sounds like a typical day on Planet Bob to me. To those who I know will quote this and bring up Warbuck posting fake logs, give it a rest. While I disagree with log-dropping, the fact of the matter is that it can't be proved either way, I'll prove it to you:
[/quote]

well if you have any brains, youd hear out all sides BEFORE declaring support..but hey, thats just me

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='Da DreadLord' date='17 February 2010 - 08:39 PM' timestamp='1266439151' post='2187911']
well if you have any brains, youd hear out all sides BEFORE declaring support..but hey, thats just me
[/quote]

Well that was before I came along. But you are right, that would have made sense. Honest mistake though.

[Da DreadLord]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 09:41 PM' timestamp='1266439297' post='2187913']
Well that was before I came along. But you are right, that would have made sense. Honest mistake though.
[/quote]
and mistakes have consequences

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='Da DreadLord' date='17 February 2010 - 08:42 PM' timestamp='1266439367' post='2187917']
and mistakes have consequences
[/quote]

Right, because every time I forget to do the laundry, my room mates whip a DoW out.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

Hoo, and fellow Rokkers why even bother responding to Warbuck and ADI? Its not worth it, it doesn't accomplish anything,(besides some semi-entertaining reading) and ADI and Rok will never agree with what happened. The only response to ADI we should have in these forums for the next few months is either a Declaration of War or silence.

My 2 cents

-SRD

[El Hefe]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 02:36 PM' timestamp='1266438988' post='2187904']
Is it real? Is it fake? Who knows.[/quote]
I guarantee that is a fake. Hoo is definitely a Jacob Black kinda guy

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='Sweeeeet Ronny D' date='17 February 2010 - 08:45 PM' timestamp='1266439500' post='2187922']
Hoo, and fellow Rokkers why even bother responding to Warbuck and ADI? Its not worth it, it doesn't accomplish anything,(besides some semi-entertaining reading) and ADI and Rok will never agree with what happened. The only response to ADI we should have in these forums for the next few months is either a Declaration of War or silence.

My 2 cents

-SRD
[/quote]
Um...we are responding to RoK...

Just my two cents.

[quote]I guarantee that is a fake. Hoo is definitely a Jacob Black kinda guy[/quote]
No really, its real, im not lying.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Lord Tri

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 03:41 PM' timestamp='1266439297' post='2187913']
Well that was before I came along. But you are right, that would have made sense. Honest mistake though.
[/quote]

Wait, am I missing something here? I thought Warbuck lead and made the decisions of ADI and all the guilt fell onto him for the decisions he made... but since you're here all that changes?

Rok used to be my allies, and they were great allies and protectors that were willing to put their entire alliance on the line to defend their own (at the time I was ACF) over a little matter with another aqua alliance. Quite ironically, no action was taken then either. But what didn't happen was ACF never supported Rok's enemies in a matter they didn't want to get involved in.

Quick history lesson, which I swear is hysterically similar to ADI in some regards.

ACF had Echelon and Rok as protectors due to weird history, when the time came to grow up we didn't treaty either to preserve the peace but instead remained close to both as friends willing to help each other out to the best of our abilities. The future would have decided, after some time of stretching our legs on our own, which way we went. But we never smeared our allies name and we never betrayed the friendship they showed to us at our birth or during our life.

I feel Warbuck made a cardinal sin with the protectorate agreement, he turned his back on his protector (MDoAP partner but former protector, not even a long time had passed so Rok didn't change during that time much if at all) after being boastful about standing with them.

It's one thing to disagree, it's another thing to declare neutrality in a tough situation (which no one was stopping ADI) it's another thing to turn your back on your ally. If ADI had done this to anyone else it'd be the same situation if the alliance was of some significance.

I'm not sure how better I can put this from a bystander's point of view, but simply Warbuck/ADI made a huge mistake, which all of ADI has to live with. And trying to act like a mistake was not made and going around trying to act high and mighty in the situation will only make it worse for a long time. Betrayal is something people don't take well.

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='17 February 2010 - 11:25 PM' timestamp='1266449159' post='2188252']
Wait, am I missing something here? I thought Warbuck lead and made the decisions of ADI and all the guilt fell onto him for the decisions he made... but since you're here all that changes?[/quote]

No, you misread my post, I wasn't a member at the time. And I'm sorry, but your whole "They were so nice to you so you gotta do what they say" argument is boring. Did they protect us? Yes. Do we appreciate it? To this very day. But could we allow ourselves, being a fully sovereign alliance under no protectorate, to sit and have our "allies" give us false information and omit details of a coming conflict that we would deem kind of important? And then support said allies? I'm sorry but the answer is most definitely no. Perhaps the manner in which it was done was a little tactless, but whats done is done. If RoK wants to come at us, by all means go ahead. But just understand, that whole "consequences" thing, applies to you guys as well.

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='17 February 2010 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1266451150' post='2188319']
No, you misread my post, I wasn't a member at the time. And I'm sorry, but your whole "They were so nice to you so you gotta do what they say" argument is boring. Did they protect us? Yes. Do we appreciate it? To this very day. But could we allow ourselves, being a fully sovereign alliance under no protectorate, to sit and have our "allies" give us false information and omit details of a coming conflict that we would deem kind of important? And then support said allies? I'm sorry but the answer is most definitely no. [b]Perhaps the manner in which it was done was a little tactless, but whats done is done.[/b] If RoK wants to come at us, by all means go ahead. But just understand, that whole "consequences" thing, applies to you guys as well.
[/quote]

This is what matters. You bailed in a time you shouldn't have, if you had issues you handle them after conflicts. Any alliance that leaves an ally in the dust before a potentially blockbuster war receives just as much discontent feelings about them. But this time you left an ally in the dust for... what? I never even saw enough evidence to fully hate Rok.

[John Warbuck]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='17 February 2010 - 06:34 PM' timestamp='1266453272' post='2188384']
This is what matters. You bailed in a time you shouldn't have, if you had issues you handle them after conflicts. Any alliance that leaves an ally in the dust before a potentially blockbuster war receives just as much discontent feelings about them. But this time you left an ally in the dust for... what? [b]I never even saw enough evidence to fully hate Rok.[/b]
[/quote]
We didn't hate RoK. We just had two allies that were about to go to war [b]against each other[/b]. We couldn't be unfair to either side, so we stayed neutral. Then RoK made the moves after then, harassing us, baiting us, threatening us, and making all attempts possible to wreck our image. All we wanted was to move on. If staying neutral when two allies are going to fight each other is betrayal in your eyes, then what is attacking an ally in defense of another ally?

[Lord Tri]

EDIT: Warbuck basically said the same thing.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Lord Tri

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='John Warbuck' date='17 February 2010 - 07:38 PM' timestamp='1266453528' post='2188391']
We didn't hate RoK. We just had two allies that were about to go to war [b]against each other[/b]. We couldn't be unfair to either side, so we stayed neutral. Then RoK made the moves after then, harassing us, baiting us, threatening us, and making all attempts possible to wreck our image. All we wanted was to move on. If staying neutral when two allies are going to fight each other is betrayal in your eyes, then what is attacking an ally in defense of another ally?
[/quote]

What are you talking about? They said you could have remained neutral.

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='18 February 2010 - 12:48 AM' timestamp='1266454100' post='2188407']
What are you talking about? They said you could have remained neutral.
[/quote]
Thats what we did?....It's not like we pulled support from RoK and immediately were like "Howdy FEAR! Need help?"

[John Warbuck]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='17 February 2010 - 06:48 PM' timestamp='1266454100' post='2188407']
What are you talking about? They said you could have remained neutral.
[/quote]
They canceled on us because we went neutral.

Here was ADI's statement, which is why RoK canceled the treaty. Anyone claiming ADI was not going to defend RoK should read the bolded lines. Anyone who claims RoK was mad about us supporting the other side should read the bolded lines.

[quote]In the beginning stages of ADI's development, RoK was there for us. Like a big brother, they gave us guidance and they protected us. We at ADI feel deeply indebted to our brothers at Ragnarok. When this whole situation developed, we saw the CB and we voiced our support for Ragnarok. [b]We have brothers on the other side of this however.[/b] Our brothers on the other side are also likely to suffer [b]immense damage[/b], which may [b]crush them[/b] for a great and long time.

ADI is a typical democracy, but in times of war, the Lord High Sentinel assumes all authority, and this decision that I am about to make is my decision, and it is being made with ADI's [b]membership and allies in mind[/b]. It is truly the [b]most difficult decision that I've ever needed to make.[/b] For anyone that thinks running an alliance is easy- it is not. This is one of the worst parts of running an alliance and making decisions.

As things have developed, ADI has noticed that what was once an airtight CB is becoming shaky. [b]We were also told in the beginning that our friends at FEAR would not be involved with this.[/b] Due to a [b]blunder by me personally,[/b] I did not investigate. [b]I took RoK for their word[/b], and TPF had a MADP with FEAR that I soon found out about. [b]This puts ADI in a huge conflict of interest in which we have needed to choose.[/b]

[b]RoK claims that ADI must defend them,[/b] however, since [b]RoK made the first move, this falls under Optional Aggression.[/b] In order for me to make a Declaration of War in favor of RoK, I need to see more reason to do so. [b]FEAR attempted to have ADI mediate between the two sides, and RoK did not want to come to the table. ADI will continue to offer themselves as an unbiased mediator.[/b]

Should RoK make a true and real attempt to negotiate terms with TPF and company, and those talks fail, it will be at that point that ADI [b]will defend RoK to the death.[/b] However, without such an attempt at diplomacy over the matter, ADI will [b]not get involved on either side of the conflict[/b]. [b]We cannot support wiping out an entire group of alliances over a personal vendetta. It goes against what we stand for. It is why we gave peace to TDO and did not go to war.[/b] It is the same reason that we will sit this one out unless diplomacy fails.

I would like no hard feelings with RoK- we still owe you a LOT, and you are still our brethren. I just cannot, in good conscience support this. I've been going back and forth over this for the past two days, and I really didn't want to be a disappointment to RoK. However, I also do not want to be a disappointment to my own members. They've been asking questions lately that I cannot give solid answers to. I cannot ignore their concerns. Their concerns are my concerns as well.

Should RoK wish to mediate with TPF, ADI will be there to help. [b]We wish to be there first hand to see if TPF is as stubborn as the claims people make indicate. If that is the case, ADI will have a just and true reason to go to war.[/b] But at the moment, we do not. I know this decision will be met with skepticism and many will begin to flame on this thread. That's fine. I don't care what people think of me- I only care what I know to be true and just.

Signed for the Aqua Defense Initiative,

Lord High Sentinel John Warbuck [/quote]

Edited February 18, 2010 by John Warbuck

[Mayzie]

[quote name='Lusitan' date='17 February 2010 - 07:41 PM' timestamp='1266435688' post='2187814']
Well, judging from the ammount of support ADI gets and considering no one sane should keep any sort of treaty with WAPA - in case they think you're on the wrong side and give you previous notice they are not going to fulfil that treaty, regardless of optional being part of it or not - then I'd say this announcement is a win-win situation.
[/quote]

It's even more win seeing you whine. You obviously don't understand the WAPA -1TF relationship, nor the position NEW happily put them in last war but are pissed off they didn't throw themselves under a bus full of the majority of their friends.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='John Warbuck' date='17 February 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1266454291' post='2188420']
They canceled on us because we went neutral.[/quote]


That was not the reason for the cancellation and you know it. Do you [b]ever[/b] stop lying or are you just programmed to lie every time you speak or type?

[mgregory]

[quote name='John Warbuck' date='17 February 2010 - 06:38 PM' timestamp='1266453528' post='2188391']
We didn't hate RoK. We just had two allies that were about to go to war against each other. We couldn't be unfair to either side, so we stayed neutral. Then RoK made the moves after then, harassing us, baiting us, threatening us, and [b]making all attempts possible to wreck our image.[/b] All we wanted was to move on. If staying neutral when two allies are going to fight each other is betrayal in your eyes, then what is attacking an ally in defense of another ally?
[/quote]


Sorry to tell you this, but your image is wrecked. Until ADI does something dramatic to improve their image you will always be looked down upon and no one in their right mind will give you the time of day. Expect every post you make to come under scrutiny and I'm pretty sure you will never live down what you did to RoK, whether it is what really happened or not. The OWF has made its judgement on you and you will have to live with it, so it is futile to try and convince us any other way. The sooner you realize this the sooner you will learn to not reply to your threads anymore after your OP.


Good luck RoK and have fun!

edit: formatting

Edited February 18, 2010 by mgregory

[John Warbuck]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' date='17 February 2010 - 07:03 PM' timestamp='1266455028' post='2188440']
That was not the reason for the cancellation and you know it. Do you [b]ever[/b] stop lying or are you just programmed to lie every time you speak or type?
[/quote]
Want the link to that thread I just quoted? You canceled on us IN THE THREAD. The cancellation came before any logs, and conspiracies about logs. The cancellation came based off of what I just quoted above, and the DoW is about the same exact thing. You want to try and play like you are making a moral stand, but you are just pissed off that ADI wouldn't go to war against FEAR. That is what you are trying to cover up by degrading me. THAT is the secret.

Edited February 18, 2010 by John Warbuck