Peace at Kashyyyk

[AirMe]

[quote name='mhawk' date='27 February 2010 - 10:24 AM' timestamp='1267284509' post='2206515']
Can I ask why my aidslot was required to be wasted for this?

The war TPF and NSO fought was cordial and ended on far better terms than anyone else we fought in Karma.
[/quote]

What are you talking about? There is nothing about your aid slot in those terms.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='AirMe' date='27 February 2010 - 10:34 AM' timestamp='1267285096' post='2206528']
What are you talking about? There is nothing about your aid slot in those terms.
[/quote]
Fark required my $1 be sent to mhawk.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 10:39 AM' timestamp='1267285407' post='2206535']
Fark required my $1 be sent to mhawk.
[/quote]

I need more coffee.

[Kortal]

[quote name='Corinan' date='27 February 2010 - 10:11 AM' timestamp='1267283727' post='2206500']
This war has shown that the New Sith Order is incapable of dying. I won't stop you from fantasizing though.
[/quote]
Who said anything about NSO

[Corinan]

[quote name='Kortal' date='27 February 2010 - 10:55 AM' timestamp='1267286333' post='2206553']
Who said anything about NSO
[/quote]

Considering that you quoted an NSO member, I'd say you, genius.

[Spanky22]

Congrats on your peace, NSO. You guys got stuck in about the worst imaginable position in this war and I'm happy to see you made your way out of it. Good luck with your rebuilding.

Also, some personal thanks for a few good fights to Corinan, Kevin32891, and CodyHaner. You all fought valiantly and it was a pleasure to meet you on the battlefield. Well done, gents.

[Corinan]

[quote name='Spanky22' date='27 February 2010 - 11:06 AM' timestamp='1267287019' post='2206565']
Congrats on your peace, NSO. You guys got stuck in about the worst imaginable position in this war and I'm happy to see you made your way out of it. Good luck with your rebuilding.

Also, some personal thanks for a few good fights to Corinan, Kevin32891, and CodyHaner. You all fought valiantly and it was a pleasure to meet you on the battlefield. Well done, gents.
[/quote]

Oh yeah I think we exchanged several nukes. Good times.

[Jens of the desert]

I would have rather a group of people like NSO had to pay reps, but I guess I should just be content with your partial destruction for now.

[neneko]

I don't think sith deserved any harsh terms in this war. It was clear that they entered because of their treaty obligations and didn't really support the initial aggression by TIFDTT.

Saying that ivan was forced away as emperor with these terms is silly though. "Do things my way or I'm gonna take my ball and go home" isn't the only way to handle negotiations.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='neneko' date='27 February 2010 - 11:19 AM' timestamp='1267287769' post='2206584']
I don't think sith deserved any harsh terms in this war. It was clear that they entered because of their treaty obligations and didn't really support the initial aggression by TIFDTT.

Saying that ivan was forced away as emperor with these terms is silly though. "Do things my way or I'm gonna take my ball and go home" isn't the only way to handle negotiations.
[/quote]
Actually, you are wrong.

If you will take a look at the logs you will see that I did make several separate requests that the wording be changed to an admission of defeat instead of a surrender because a surrender would mandate my resignation. Our opponents knew that and acknowledged it. That was wholly their choice to make when they stated that the [i]only[/i] option was surrender but they knew what it meant from the NSO point of view. Regardless, we accepted their terms and I did what they knew I would do.

[Penkala]

WaitwaitwaitwaitWAIT.

Weren't you just the ones complaining of leaving the battlefield before those who cae in to defend you left? IRON (and TOP and others) came in to back you guys up and they're still fighting.

How is this any different?

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='Penkala' date='27 February 2010 - 11:29 AM' timestamp='1267288372' post='2206591']
WaitwaitwaitwaitWAIT.

Weren't you just the ones complaining of leaving the battlefield before those who cae in to defend you left? IRON (and TOP and others) came in to back you guys up and they're still fighting.

How is this any different?
[/quote]
For several reasons.

1. IRON didn't enter to directly defend the NSO.
2. The NSO was never initially intended to be a logistic or strategic support for IRON's front.
3. The NSO lost over 70% of its total NS in the process of defending two allies on two different fronts so there is no realistic expectation from anyone that we would be able to contribute further.
4. IRON has stated that they can not leave until their allies exit, so we are assisting in that endeavor by exiting to provide them with one less worry in pursuing their own peace.

Also, where were we complaining about any such thing?

[ojiras ajeridas]

A great white peace granted by great alliances over great fighters = great announcement

[neneko]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 05:27 PM' timestamp='1267288250' post='2206590']
Actually, you are wrong.

If you will take a look at the logs you will see that I did make several separate requests that the wording be changed to an admission of defeat instead of a surrender because a surrender would mandate my resignation. Our opponents knew that and acknowledged it. That was wholly their choice to make when they stated that the [i]only[/i] option was surrender but they knew what it meant from the NSO point of view. Regardless, we accepted their terms and I did what they knew I would do.
[/quote]
That doesn't change anything though. You could just have sucked it up. Even if the wording was changed it'd still be just as much a surrender so resigning as emperor because of semantics still seems silly to me.

Just swallowing your pride was an option for you all along. Nobody forced you to resign.

[Penkala]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 11:33 AM' timestamp='1267288616' post='2206596']
For several reasons.

1. IRON didn't enter to directly defend the NSO.
2. The NSO was never initially intended to be a logistic or strategic support for IRON's front.
3. The NSO lost over 70% of its total NS in the process of defending two allies on two different fronts so there is no realistic expectation from anyone that we would be able to contribute further.
4. IRON has stated that they can not leave until their allies exit, so we are assisting in that endeavor by exiting to provide them with one less worry in pursuing their own peace.

Also, where were we complaining about any such thing?
[/quote]

Fair enough. I do believe the two situations are sufficiently different... although they are quite similar. And please don't deny it, Ivan. Because if I go pull quotes you'll dismiss them in some way or another. I've learned not to waste my time. Putting up the "that never happened" hurdle is just stupid. It happened. It was in that 45-pager that just got locked. You may go find it yourself if you do not believe me.

Also, sorry if this was addressed later, but was this a coup or a resignation?

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='neneko' date='27 February 2010 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1267289004' post='2206604']
That doesn't change anything though. You could just have sucked it up. Even if the wording was changed it'd still be just as much a surrender so resigning as emperor because of semantics still seems silly to me.

Just swallowing your pride was an option for you all along. Nobody forced you to resign.
[/quote]
That doesn't even make sense. If it is the same thing then our opponents, after they were told several times that forcing us to use the word surrender required my signature, could have relented on that one point. They knew it meant my resignation and they did it anyway because they wanted that result. There is no other way to look at it.

I know that for you and most people here standing by your word means little, but those that know me or have ever dealt with me know otherwise when it comes to what I state to my own alliance. It was known that the use of the word would require me to resign. I requested, because I did not want to resign, that it be altered. They refused. Instead of continuing to wage war over it I decided to agree and resign. So, in that respect, you are correct. They did not force me to resign. I could have continued to have my alliance fight over it instead.

[Duncan King]

[quote name='Comrade Korey' date='27 February 2010 - 12:17 AM' timestamp='1267251670' post='2206073']
I think he was joking.... Probably
Anyway, I just wish this could have happened before our treaty was cut. Glad you got peace, I'm sure the rebuilding will be quick
[/quote]
You expected them to keep your treaty after your alliance switched sides midstream and threw them under the bus?

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 09:39 AM' timestamp='1267285407' post='2206535']
Fark required my $1 be sent to mhawk.
[/quote]
Brilliant. Not only are Fark spiting NSO but they're sparing room to give the finger to TPF.

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 10:43 AM' timestamp='1267289216' post='2206610']
That doesn't even make sense. If it is the same thing then our opponents, after they were told several times that forcing us to use the word surrender required my signature, could have relented on that one point. They knew it meant my resignation and they did it anyway because they wanted that result. There is no other way to look at it.

I know that for you and most people here standing by your word means little, but those that know me or have ever dealt with me know otherwise when it comes to what I state to my own alliance. It was known that the use of the word would require me to resign. I requested, because I did not want to resign, that it be altered. They refused. Instead of continuing to wage war over it I decided to agree and resign. So, in that respect, you are correct. They did not force me to resign. I could have continued to have my alliance fight over it instead.
[/quote]
I agree with you and if I were in the same situation, I would have done the same. I also believe that if you state that you will do something that you need to do it. All we have to go on on this planet is our words and I've always believed that my word needs to mean something.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Duncan King

[Penkala]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='27 February 2010 - 12:38 AM' timestamp='1267249342' post='2205974']
glad the terms were much better than expected. congrats on peace NSO, you deserve it, rebuild well.
[/quote]

Pssst, they were actually [i]worse[/i] and literally [i]considerably harsher[/i] than what you were whining about before.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Duncan King' date='27 February 2010 - 11:44 AM' timestamp='1267289309' post='2206613']
You expected them to keep your treaty after your alliance switched sides midstream and threw them under the bus?


Brilliant. Not only are Fark spiting NSO but they're sparing room to give the finger to TPF.
[/quote]

Because 1 aid slot is giving the finger to someone. Overreact much? Next thing you will be telling me is that you would rather pay reps than do a beer/milk/wine/cheese review.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='Penkala' date='27 February 2010 - 11:40 AM' timestamp='1267289019' post='2206605']
Fair enough. I do believe the two situations are sufficiently different... although they are quite similar. And please don't deny it, Ivan. Because if I go pull quotes you'll dismiss them in some way or another. I've learned not to waste my time. Putting up the "that never happened" hurdle is just stupid. It happened. It was in that 45-pager that just got locked. You may go find it yourself if you do not believe me.

Also, sorry if this was addressed later, but was this a coup or a resignation?
[/quote]
It was a resignation. I held a vote within the Darth Council on whether or not we should accept the terms, being the terms listed inclusive of my resignation because of them, and it was a tie. I broke the tie through my own action.

And that topic was 49 pages I believe and not once within it did it come up that we would not leave the field before those that came to defend us left because those that had come to defend us had already left, so there would have been no point in making such an assertion.

[Delta1212]

You spent weeks publically lambasting Fark in an attempt to force them to change your terms instead of going to them and trying to find a mutually agreeable peace. Those weeks included a standing peace that did not require you to use the word surrender. After all your attempts to diplomatically strong arm them in the court of public opinion, that got taken off te table and an outright surrender was put on it. It's not Fark's fault that you pulled a "Never give up! Never surrender!" stunt to your membership. It is your fault that you chose to a "my way or the highway" style of negotiation when they were feeling generous. If you don't like terms, you don't have to accept them. The proper response is either to go on fighting or make a counter-offer. Instead, you ran to the boards to decry Fark for holding you at war. Every single time. Surprisingly, that doesn't always convince people to give in.


You then spent the entire negotiation trying out various wordings to questions and statements in an attempt to get them to say that your resignation was part of the terms instead of a tacit threat you were holding over them in order to once again force them to give you want you wanted. You never tried any diplomacy except to strong arm your opposition and unsurprisingly, it didn't work. You've since spent the entire thread of your resignation trying to "subtley" guide the conversation toward a discussion of how you were forced from power in order to make good on the equally "subtle" threat, but in a manner that allows you to claim that someone else made the claim and you are merely responding in agreement.

Ivan, you need to learn how to negotiate in a style of give and take instead of always attempting to find leverage that will make the other person give. Sometimes there just isn't a lever long enough and all the poking does you no favors.

[bkphysics]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='27 February 2010 - 08:47 AM' timestamp='1267289447' post='2206618']
snip
[/quote]
It really isn't that complex. He gave his word as Emperor the NSO would never surrender. The word surrender was included in the final proposed peace terms so he stayed true to his word. As crappy as that is, that's what happened.

Shame on you Ivan for being true to your word! You absolute scoundrel! /endsarcasm

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='27 February 2010 - 11:47 AM' timestamp='1267289447' post='2206618']
You spent weeks publically lambasting Fark in an attempt to force them to change your terms instead of going to them and trying to find a mutually agreeable peace. Those weeks included a standing peace that did not require you to use the word surrender. After all your attempts to diplomatically strong arm them in the court of public opinion, that got taken off te table and an outright surrender was put on it. It's not Fark's fault that you pulled a "Never give up! Never surrender!" stunt to your membership. It is your fault that you chose to a "my way or the highway" style of negotiation when they were feeling generous. If you don't like terms, you don't have to accept them. The proper response is either to go on fighting or make a counter-offer. Instead, you ran to the boards to decry Fark for holding you at war. Every single time. Surprisingly, that doesn't always convince people to give in.


You then spent the entire negotiation trying out various wordings to questions and statements in an attempt to get them to say that your resignation was part of the terms instead of a tacit threat you were holding over them in order to once again force them to give you want you wanted. You never tried any diplomacy except to strong arm your opposition and unsurprisingly, it didn't work. You've since spent the entire thread of your resignation trying to "subtley" guide the conversation toward a discussion of how you were forced from power in order to make good on the equally "subtle" threat, but in a manner that allows you to claim that someone else made the claim and you are merely responding in agreement.

Ivan, you need to learn how to negotiate in a style of give and take instead of always attempting to find leverage that will make the other person give. Sometimes there just isn't a lever long enough and all the poking does you no favors.
[/quote]
If what you state was remotely true then I would still be Emperor, correct?

Aside from that, I can't really figure out what you are talking about throughout a lot of it because you keep saying things like "a standing peace" or whatever was available when it quite frankly was not. After I was given an ultimatum by Randomly Jim I was told that all offers were off the table and that they would give us alternatives when they decided to. Since that time I know that several of my people tried to talk to them because of my infrequent IRC activity and that several other alliances, Polar and STA in particular, tried to talk to them but all that resulted was "they refused our terms so now they will be harsher".

So what is your point, exactly? I made counter offers. I agreed to their terms without question and would probably have agreed to harsher terms in reality. All I asked was that it be changed from surrender to an admission of defeat, which was the sticking point since day one. Nothing that happened between then and now effected that. It wasn't a matter of my actions causing them to stick to it. It was stated from the very beginning that a surrender would be mandated. How is that negotiating in good faith or being willing to compromise?

No, it was very clear to me that they wanted my resignation, so they got it. I hope everyone is very happy about it. Continuing to harp on it at this point makes no sense. You got want you wanted. Fark couldn't help you from making yourself look like a complete jackass last time we tangled but I am certain this end result more than satisfies.

[neneko]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 05:43 PM' timestamp='1267289216' post='2206610']
That doesn't even make sense. If it is the same thing then our opponents, after they were told several times that forcing us to use the word surrender required my signature, could have relented on that one point. They knew it meant my resignation and they did it anyway because they wanted that result. There is no other way to look at it.

I know that for you and most people here standing by your word means little, but those that know me or have ever dealt with me know otherwise when it comes to what I state to my own alliance. It was known that the use of the word would require me to resign. I requested, because I did not want to resign, that it be altered. They refused. Instead of continuing to wage war over it I decided to agree and resign. So, in that respect, you are correct. They did not force me to resign. I could have continued to have my alliance fight over it instead.
[/quote]
I still fail to see how you would stand by your word if the wording was changed. It would still be a surrender even if they used another word. A duck is still a duck even if you call it an elephant.

If you want to resign because you couldn't technically stay true to your word that's your decision but you're not getting any martyr points from me.

[Penkala]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='27 February 2010 - 11:43 AM' timestamp='1267289216' post='2206610']
That doesn't even make sense. If it is the same thing then our opponents, after they were told several times that forcing us to use the word surrender required my signature, could have relented on that one point. They knew it meant my resignation and they did it anyway because they wanted that result. There is no other way to look at it.

I know that for you and most people here standing by your word means little, but those that know me or have ever dealt with me know otherwise when it comes to what I state to my own alliance. It was known that the use of the word would require me to resign. I requested, because I did not want to resign, that it be altered. They refused. Instead of continuing to wage war over it I decided to agree and resign. So, in that respect, you are correct. They did not force me to resign. I could have continued to have my alliance fight over it instead.
[/quote]

Or maybe you should have thought of it before making that your law. It's a nice way to try to ensure white peace, though. Demand it and if you don't get it try to play it off as the ebil opponents forcing your gov out. Nice bit of propaganda to use (or threaten to use) against your victors. That's YOUR decision to setup the resignation to work that way, though. Not ours. Tough luck.

[quote]And that topic was 49 pages I believe and not once within it did it come up that we would not leave the field before those that came to defend us left because those that had come to defend us had already left, so there would have been no point in making such an assertion.[/quote]

No, but you complained about NpO leaving before you could. You canceled a treaty over it. I was asking why IRON should not do the same, but I'll agree you had no damage left to inflict when you surrendered and NpO could have inflicted damage yet they still surrendered so there is a difference.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Penkala