Ok, admit it, you spent the last few weeks watching Olympic Curling

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Caffine1' date='11 March 2010 - 07:26 PM' timestamp='1268357496' post='2222719']
So the fact that we're being reasonable in willing to negotiate means we're not being honest? Well here's the truth, we're planning on paying the rest to SBA out of our own pocket.
[/quote]
Being reasonable in negotiations is having a firm stance with a little room to compromise. If you truly believe SBA deserves payment, you shouldn't budge to 1/4th of your original offer.

While paying out of your own pocket is a nice gesture, it would be entirely unnecessary if your negotiations didn't fall through almost instantly [i]every time you speak to someone[/i].

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Earogema' date='11 March 2010 - 03:35 PM' timestamp='1268343633' post='2222453']
People seem to forget this, but we actually you know DID SOMETHING for 10 months. It was suicidal, but we didn't only post on the forums you know, we were also at war. Yes, we fought against might makes right- Which is what I say Echelon should do. That is declare a symbolic war, since they seem to have the PR to do so.

That is really the only possible course. PC will just raid them again if they don't. (According to the PC is doing this on purpose theory).

If they don't believe PC is doing it on purpose, then no war is required. However if they're going to wear tin foil hats, and honestly think this was all on purpose, then war is the only option.[/quote]

i did not forget. though you have to realize yourself that your physical war did nothing at all. it was the war of words that did anything at all. if Vox had not gone on the forums but stuck with the physical war for 10 months, you would have been forgotten by now or relegated to the likes of Rebbilon or Jarheads. so yes, good for you. you fought a useless war that did nothing but crush your nations. it was still a useless war except on the forums.


[quote]I agree with this. However, Echelon's FA is terrible. No really. This is the reason WHY their enemies are posting for them. They still don't support them, just in this instance (which is what Polar does when it sees an injustice, go figure). Echelon in my opinion, does not have the ability to win a war of words. PC may screw up again, but I highly doubt Echelon will still have mustered enough support to take them down. I figure if anybody is going to defeat PC it's going to have to be them losing their allies.

Tbh, I would support PC a lot of the times even in the wrong, because I knew they would do the same for me. They would have to abuse my friendship one too many times for me to ever consider canceling on them for what they did for us when Polar declared. I realize that perhaps this reeks of the old Hegemony defense- They are really our friends, that's why we fight 12 to 1! However, they fought for us when it when we were outnumbered. They are true friends.
[/quote]

Echelon is winning the war of words. When people who dislike Echelon support them it says something. PC has only their allies and mostly from \m/ and Athens, both alliances known for similar actions, defending them. FOK and other allies have their back, no one is doubting that either. but to state PC is winning the war of words is ridiculous. all that PC, Athens, \m/ and anyone else who defends PC verbally is doing, is making themselves look stupid, ignorant, ridiculous, and deceptive. in other words, the more you defend PC, the worse you look.

[quote name='Sakura' date='11 March 2010 - 04:35 PM' timestamp='1268347270' post='2222502']
In absence of anything stating otherwise, there is no post-merger protection. Even if one were to argue there were, I doubt many would argue that it extends to, or even past four months.



[OOC]Actually, bulls in China shops tend to cause little relative damage -- as they avoid the shelves[/OOC]

It *is* extortion when a member of Echelon is the one that made the merger edit in the first place.
[/quote]

so by this mentality, Tick1 is now the official speaker of PC? great. i am sure he will do wonders for your alliance's image since his words and actions can now be taken as official PC business.

[quote name='AirMe' date='11 March 2010 - 06:47 PM' timestamp='1268355172' post='2222674']
I get what she was saying, and I agree with the intended message but the analogy was flawed.
[/quote]

what i find amusing is the people who are stating that PC should not have to pay reps at all despite launching an aggressive attack on another alliance. i mean given the AA of some of those people, i find that quite amusing...

[Otherworld]

[quote]Being reasonable in negotiations is having a firm stance with a little room to compromise. If you truly believe SBA deserves payment, you shouldn't budge to 1/4th of your original offer.

While paying out of your own pocket is a nice gesture, it would be entirely unnecessary if your negotiations didn't fall through almost instantly every time you speak to someone. [/quote]

The fact that PC won't pay the 50 mil pretty much sums up the prospects of them paying 200mil. It just wasnt going to happen. It was better for us to attempt to get some reps for SBA rather than insist on the full amount and definitely get nothing.

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='11 March 2010 - 07:46 PM' timestamp='1268358700' post='2222749']
so by this mentality, Tick1 is now the official speaker of PC? great. i am sure he will do wonders for your alliance's image since his words and actions can now be taken as official PC business.
[/quote]
I guess if nobody redacts his policies within months.

[quote name='Otherworld' date='11 March 2010 - 07:48 PM' timestamp='1268358834' post='2222752']
The fact that PC won't pay the 50 mil pretty much sums up the prospects of them paying 200mil. It just wasnt going to happen. It was better for us to attempt to get some reps for SBA rather than insist on the full amount and definitely get nothing.
[/quote]
It should tell you something when your alliance hasn't had a very successful negotiation/foreign affairs (from some people's perspective) history. Not everyone who opposes you can be wrong, you know.

Get new, decent negotiators with more tact.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Rey the Great

[Caffine]

[quote name='Rey the Great' date='11 March 2010 - 08:50 PM' timestamp='1268358938' post='2222754']
I guess if nobody redacts his policies within months.


It should tell you something when your alliance hasn't had a very successful negotiation/foreign affairs (from some people's perspective) history. Not everyone who opposes you can be wrong, you know.

Get new, decent negotiators with more tact.
[/quote]

That's a very interesting approach, however had you actually read the logs you would see that you are mistaken.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Rey the Great' date='11 March 2010 - 08:50 PM' timestamp='1268358938' post='2222754']
I guess if nobody redacts his policies within months.


It should tell you something when your alliance hasn't had a very successful negotiation/foreign affairs (from some people's perspective) history. Not everyone who opposes you can be wrong, you know.

Get new, decent negotiators with more tact.
[/quote]

So because they were meanies at the negotation table they get nothing? Alright

[Otherworld]

[quote]It should tell you something when your alliance hasn't had a very successful negotiation/foreign affairs (from some people's perspective) history. Not everyone who opposes you can be wrong, you know.

Get new, decent negotiators with more tact. [/quote]

Thanks for the advice but next time when replying to me... try to actually reply to what I said instead of making a pretty much new/irrlevant point.

[Kevin McDonald]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 08:59 PM' timestamp='1268359516' post='2222764']
So because they were meanies at the negotation table they get nothing? Alright
[/quote]

Whether or not they were... isn't that how it should be? When people approach discussions from a hardened, hostile position they generally get far less then if they approach from a flexible, calmer position.

[Earogema]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='11 March 2010 - 07:46 PM' timestamp='1268358700' post='2222749']
i did not forget. though you have to realize yourself that your physical war did nothing at all. it was the war of words that did anything at all. if Vox had not gone on the forums but stuck with the physical war for 10 months, you would have been forgotten by now or relegated to the likes of Rebbilon or Jarheads. so yes, good for you. you fought a useless war that did nothing but crush your nations. it was still a useless war except on the forums.




Echelon is winning the war of words. When people who dislike Echelon support them it says something. PC has only their allies and mostly from \m/ and Athens, both alliances known for similar actions, defending them. FOK and other allies have their back, no one is doubting that either. but to state PC is winning the war of words is ridiculous. all that PC, Athens, \m/ and anyone else who defends PC verbally is doing, is making themselves look stupid, ignorant, ridiculous, and deceptive. in other words, the more you defend PC, the worse you look.
[/quote]
The physical war was directly connected with our forum ideals. One of the very founding principles of Vox was quite literary- "Do something about it." If you honestly think that Vox didn't argue that force was a method to destroying the old hegemony, then what was the point of us siding with Karma? Certainly our words matter, but as I said: If Echelon wants to be taken seriously, they will act seriously. Until then, they are free to post on these forums, rehashing arguments made very frequently over 2 older threads, and other arguments made on the first 2 pages of this thread.

Vox fought both the war, and the war of words. It was [i]required[/i] really of us to do so. I have said it time and time again: If you want something to happen in CN, then go. I don't think might makes right, but if you believe you are right, then show the world via action. Words are part of that. Nations are the only objective way of measuring how much your infra matters to you. If the ideals mean more, if Echelon really believes they are right, then I will have no problem with them declaring war and bringing in their allies. I welcome it. And not because I realize that we will win easily, but because they would actually be doing something. They would show they are not afraid. I'd gain a tremendous amount of respect for them if they did as much. Polaris declared just because they disagreed with the FoA raid. Echelon actually has a feasible CB and there is no war. They know they will lose, but if they had any backbone they'd declare anyway.

In fact, if Vox didn't actually physically fight, then some of the issues we addressed as Vox would have never come to light. On of our biggest early arguments was against PZI/EZI, and we could have only gotten on those lists as physical rogues. Physical action is needed to bring to light this situation in the fullest light.

Even if I concede that Echelon is winning the war of words, I highly doubt that they will continue these victories for long. If in the instance that they do, then I suppose I will either have canceled on PC for their unjust actions, or be defending them in an outnumbered war. As it is, I doubt either of those will happen, and this will probably just ferment until the next war.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Earogema

[Lord Curzon]

I mean if your not gonna pay them, just tell it like it is. You're not gonna pay them because you're more powerful than them. They can't make you pay so you're not going to. You're calling them out, demonstrating that the protectorate is nothing more than a piece of paper because they can't fulfill their obligations right now. Whatever, that is the game. Just own up to instead of hiding behind "bawww get a better negotiation team."

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Kevin McDonald' date='11 March 2010 - 09:03 PM' timestamp='1268359719' post='2222766']
Whether or not they were... isn't that how it should be? When people approach discussions from a hardened, hostile position they generally get far less then if they approach from a flexible, calmer position.
[/quote]

Are you kidding me? Echelon has offered to go down to 50 mil, I'd hardly call that a "hardened position". If thats not flexibility then I suppose your definition of flexible is "appeasement".

Edit: sorry thought someone would post before me.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Lord Curzon

[Earogema]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1268359919' post='2222769']
I mean if your not gonna pay them, just tell it like it is. You're not gonna pay them because you're more powerful than them. They can't make you pay so you're not going to. You're calling them out, demonstrating that the protectorate is nothing more than a piece of paper because they can't fulfill their obligations right now. Whatever, that is the game. Just own up to instead of hiding behind "bawww get a better negotiation team."
[/quote]
Even if that happened, what would it accomplish?

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='12 March 2010 - 02:09 AM' timestamp='1268360084' post='2222771']
Are you kidding me? Echelon has offered to go down to 50 mil, I'd hardly call that a "hardened position". If thats not flexibility then I suppose your definition of flexible is "appeasement".

Edit: sorry thought someone would post before me.
[/quote]
Its akin to walking up, punching someone in the nose and then saying, "we don't want a fight, lets be reasonable and negotiate something"

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Earogema' date='11 March 2010 - 09:12 PM' timestamp='1268360289' post='2222777']
Even if that happened, what would it accomplish?
[/quote]

It would put this thread to rest imo. That is the reality of the situation. You mentioned in your early thread that if an alliance believes something strongly enough, they should take action. Clearly Echelon does not feel it is in a position to take action. If it did, this would have been an ultimatum, not a plea.

PC is calling them out on their treaty's worth. It is what it is. We can argue this moralistic crusade for another 50 pages, or we can call a spade a spade and move on.

[Kevin McDonald]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 09:09 PM' timestamp='1268360084' post='2222771']
Are you kidding me? Echelon has offered to go down to 50 mil, I'd hardly call that a "hardened position". If thats not flexibility then I suppose your definition of flexible is "appeasement".

Edit: sorry thought someone would post before me.
[/quote]


I'm not debating Echelon's negotiating tactics. I'm simply responding to the post in which you expressed surprise that a "mean" negotiating position would affect the outcome.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Kevin McDonald

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='11 March 2010 - 09:14 PM' timestamp='1268360396' post='2222780']
Its akin to walking up, punching someone in the nose and then saying, "we don't want a fight, lets be reasonable and negotiate something"
[/quote]

I mean fine, if you are going to argue that words are punches. I think we have established that is not true however, otherwise TOP's CB would carry a lot more water.

Sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me. My mom taught me that when I was 5. Hopefully, diplomats have thicker skins. If you sincerely think though that the "harsh words" used is the reason no reps are being paid then fine, continue to argue it. Additionally if you think "harsh words" should affect in game actions, perhaps Grub's declaration of war on you guys for "potty mouths" should be accepted as legit.

[Earogema]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 08:17 PM' timestamp='1268360586' post='2222783']
It would put this thread to rest imo. That is the reality of the situation. You mentioned in your early thread that if an alliance believes something strongly enough, they should take action. Clearly Echelon does not feel it is in a position to take action. If it did, this would have been an ultimatum, not a plea.

PC is calling them out on their treaty's worth. It is what it is. We can argue this moralistic crusade for another 50 pages, or we can call a spade a spade and move on.
[/quote]
Good point.

I like that approach.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Kevin McDonald' date='11 March 2010 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1268360800' post='2222786']
I'm not debating Echelon's negotiating tactics. I'm simply responding to the post in which you expressed surprise that a "mean" negotiating position would affect the outcome.
[/quote]

No, you are confusing negotiating position with the negotiator's lexicon. Their "negotiation position" is that they are asking for 50 mil. Their use of diction is a separate matter, and yeah I think big boys and girls can take some verbal sparring and not let it bleed into their [OOC]game play[/OOC].

Edited March 12, 2010 by Lord Curzon

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Earogema' date='11 March 2010 - 08:05 PM' timestamp='1268359844' post='2222768']
The physical war was directly connected with our forum ideals. One of the very founding principles of Vox was quite literary- "Do something about it." If you honestly think that Vox didn't argue that force was a method to destroying the old hegemony, then what was the point of us siding with Karma? Certainly our words matter, but as I said: If Echelon wants to be taken seriously, they will act seriously. Until then, they are free to post on these forums, rehashing arguments made very frequently over 2 older threads, and other arguments made on the first 2 pages of this thread.

Vox fought both the war, and the war of words. It was [i]required[/i] really of us to do so. I have said it time and time again: If you want something to happen in CN, then go. I don't think might makes right, but if you believe you are right, then show the world via action. Words are part of that. Nations are the only objective way of measuring how much your infra matters to you. If the ideals mean more, if Echelon really believes they are right, then I will have no problem with them declaring war and bringing in their allies. I welcome it. And not because I realize that we will win easily, but because they would actually be doing something. They would show they are not afraid. I'd gain a tremendous amount of respect for them if they did as much. Polaris declared just because they disagreed with the FoA raid. Echelon actually has a feasible CB and there is no war. They know they will lose, but if they had any backbone they'd declare anyway.

In fact, if Vox didn't actually physically fight, then some of the issues we addressed as Vox would have never come to light. On of our biggest early arguments was against PZI/EZI, and we could have only gotten on those lists as physical rogues. Physical action is needed to bring to light this situation in the fullest light.

Even if I concede that Echelon is winning the war of words, I highly doubt that they will continue these victories for long. If in the instance that they do, then I suppose I will either have canceled on PC for their unjust actions, or be defending them in an outnumbered war. As it is, I doubt either of those will happen, and this will probably just ferment until the next war.
[/quote]

so now we come to the crux of the argument. Vox needed to fight in order to back up their war of words as well as the ideals they were espousing. if Echelon fights, it does what exactly? gets them destroyed even more as they would not only face PC, but FOK and others who would back up PC despite PC being the aggressors which is quite interesting given this current war. not only that, but Echelon's allies may end up helping Echelon out and that will do what? get them destroyed. thus, a physical fight accomplishes nothing but gets a bunch of alliances destroyed and most likely paying more reps given the fact that Echelon and their allies are most likely under surrender terms of some sort.

so in the end, Echelon is in even less of a position to protect their protectorates and Echelon's allies get destroyed and overall they end up in a worse position than they are now. so not every war of words requires a physical fight and sometimes, it is better to avoid the physical fight due to the known outcome of it. because if Echelon defends SBA physically, i doubt PC would not demand reps.

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='11 March 2010 - 08:14 PM' timestamp='1268360396' post='2222780']
Its akin to walking up, punching someone in the nose and then saying, "we don't want a fight, lets be reasonable and negotiate something"
[/quote]

except for the tiny fact that it was PC who did the punching, not Echelon.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='12 March 2010 - 02:22 AM' timestamp='1268360880' post='2222789']
I mean fine, if you are going to argue that words are punches. I think we have established that is not true however, otherwise TOP's CB would carry a lot more water.

Sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me. My mom taught me that when I was 5. Hopefully, diplomats have thicker skins. If you sincerely think though that the "harsh words" used is the reason no reps are being paid then fine, continue to argue it. Additionally if you think "harsh words" should affect in game actions, perhaps Grub's declaration of war on you guys for "potty mouths" should be accepted as legit.
[/quote]

I could have sworn that Grub's CB was accepted as legit?

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1268359919' post='2222769']
I mean if your not gonna pay them, just tell it like it is.
[/quote]
I've been told by PC gov they would have probably paid had there been less hostility on Echelon's part.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='11 March 2010 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1268361550' post='2222799']
I could have sworn that Grub's CB was accepted as legit?
[/quote]

Well I suppose that is who you ask
The point is if words matter than every CnG poster who hated on TOP on the OWF would have been guilty of an act of war. Which, forgive me if I'm wrong, is not considered valid.

@Rey, read the logs. I didn't see anything wrong with the tone of Echelon and obviously the mediator didn't either because nothing was said. If PC gov is serious about that, maybe they should grow some thicker skins.

[Otherworld]

[quote]
I've been told by PC gov they would have probably paid had there been less hostility on Echelon's part. [/quote]

Can you please point to any hostility on Echelons part? But its fine for PC to have banned anybody with the Echelon tag from their public chan...right? (although in fairness to them, it was quickly corrected)

[Kevin McDonald]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='11 March 2010 - 09:27 PM' timestamp='1268361178' post='2222794']
No, you are confusing negotiating position with the negotiator's lexicon.[/quote]

I apologize.

[Lord Curzon]

Again, I don't really care how this goes down. I just think it is ridiculous to argue this is anything other than a case of Echelon not being able to back up their protectorate treaty. Mince words however you like, but that seems patently obvious to me.