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

[AAAAAAAAAAGGGG]

Did you guys (being Echelon) honestly expect PC to pay these reps? And you went through all that work to make an OP anyways?

Echelon, you're not going to get anything, so I'd honestly stop trying and move on.

[hizzy]

I like threads like this. It makes it easy to decide on what alliance to waste my warchest on when I resign. Thanks guys!

[bonecrusher]

why is PC be obligated to pay reps for attacking an alliance? the way i see it is if PC doesnt wanna pay reps(and they definitely shouldnt have to in this case) echelon has an obligation to PROTECT their PROTECTorate and attack PC.

[Biff Webster]

[img]http://rlv.zcache.com/wiki_says_youre_dead_the_poster-p228655163864301761t5ta_400.jpg[/img]

This makes me wonder why there are charters anyway. They only seemed to be interpreted by foreigners looking for a "gotcha!"

[Thomas Jackson]

[quote name='Ruggerdawg' date='09 March 2010 - 07:17 PM' timestamp='1268180546' post='2219952']
If their don't re-raid policy means don't re-raid within a month, then it should say that. In the absense of a time limiting declaration, it reads as an indefinite "do not re-raid." Until such time that the scope of this statement is narrowed, we must take it for face value.[/quote]

That's the beauty of vagueness. You can interpret it one way and be right, but they can interpret it another way and be right as well. So who's more right according to their charter?

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='bonecrusher' date='09 March 2010 - 07:29 PM' timestamp='1268181317' post='2219985']
why is PC be obligated to pay reps for attacking an alliance? the way i see it is if PC doesnt wanna pay reps(and they definitely shouldnt have to in this case) echelon has an obligation to PROTECT their PROTECTorate and attack PC.
[/quote]

It's debatable whether their surrenders terms allow them to declare war on Poison Clan. Even if they are technically allowed, they're obviously in no position to do so.

Public call outs like this can be useful sometimes. I do not believe this one of those times.

[Thomas Jackson]

[quote name='bonecrusher' date='09 March 2010 - 07:29 PM' timestamp='1268181317' post='2219985']
why is PC be obligated to pay reps for attacking an alliance? the way i see it is if PC doesnt wanna pay reps(and they definitely shouldnt have to in this case) echelon has an obligation to PROTECT their PROTECTorate and attack PC.
[/quote]
Echelon already gave PC an ultimatum of war or reps. PC responded by telling them to bugger off, and this thread is Echelon's response. They might as well of just said, "We do not have the backbone to attack PC on our own, but we will if the OWF can rally some support for us."

[lonewolfe2015]

Alright... let's just make one thing clear. You did know they were a former protectorate of Echelon, and that their members still existed in game to some standard. You could have contacted Echelon directly about this matter first rather than have this happen.

On the flip side of things the wiki was wrong somehow which is an issue unto itself that could change the way raiding is conducted or require more extensive upkeep of the wiki.

E: Wanted to ask a question.

[quote name='Thomas Jackson' date='09 March 2010 - 07:32 PM' timestamp='1268181490' post='2219994']
Echelon already gave PC an ultimatum of war or reps. PC responded by telling them to bugger off, and this thread is Echelon's response. They might as well of just said, "We do not have the backbone to attack PC on our own, but we will if the OWF can rally some support for us."
[/quote]


Thomas, by this judgment would you then say that it is fair for a sanctioned alliance to raid a protectorate of someone much smaller than them and simply say tough luck? Because they are so much bigger that the Protector couldn't very well handle them militarily.

Just seems like that is what you meant to say.

Edited March 10, 2010 by lonewolfe2015

[Chief Savage Man]

If running around trying to gather support from the four corners of the Earth didn't work, why would you think posting a novel on the OWF would work instead?

edit: im terrible at english

Edited March 10, 2010 by Chief Savage Man

[Jyrinx]

[quote name='bonecrusher' date='09 March 2010 - 07:29 PM' timestamp='1268181317' post='2219985']
why is PC be obligated to pay reps for attacking an alliance? the way i see it is if PC doesnt wanna pay reps(and they definitely shouldnt have to in this case) echelon has an obligation to PROTECT their PROTECTorate and attack PC.
[/quote]

I know PC won't pay reps, but I'll bite anyway: why exactly do you think PC should not have to pay reparations?

[LegendoftheSkies]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' date='09 March 2010 - 07:34 PM' timestamp='1268181609' post='2220001']
If running around trying to gather support from the four corners of the Earth didn't work, why would you think posting a novel on the OWF would help either?
[/quote]


But they made a chart and everything!

[Earogema]

Upon further inspection of the SBA forums-

The treaty is signed by only one person from SBA (as noted by the post on the forums by William Bonney) and that person is no longer a member of SBA. I think it is very important to note- Was Peregrine, the only signatory to the Echelon treaty, AND the only person who has posted anything regarding SBA treaties to date, the person that PC asked about the protectorate?

[890765]

[quote]On February 25 of 2010, Poison Clan announced its protection of The Gentlemen's Club. However, they failed to note it in their wiki until March 1st. (Image)

Poison Clan is guilty of the same thing we are, not being up to date on their wikis. Had somebody attacked The Gentlement's Club in between those dates, we can say without doubt that Poison Clan would have demanded reps from the attackers.[/quote]


Well, first off, its The Gentlemen's Club, not "The Gentlement's Club"

Secondly, your analogy here is sort of off.

The fact is, Gents formed, and in our DoE, Poison Clan offered us a temporary protectorate, while they discussed giving us a permanent protectorate. They decided to give us a permanent protectorate on March 1st, and the wiki was updated that day.

We weren't an alliance that had been officially/unofficially disbanded for 6 months. If someone raided us, there would be issues.

Edited March 10, 2010 by 890765

[Balder]

This is amazing. Rugger, I'm actually shocked you signed your name to this. I guess after enough time in an alliance like that and you start to lose yourself. Also, stop with these lame charades. Poison Clan isn't going to pay you reparations. I wouldn't either. You won't attack Poison Clan, and thus this matter will be over with the rest of the world shaking their head.

Like I'm doing right now.

[Groucho Marx]

It appears I'm just a little late to the party. Well, I'll go ahead and make myself comfortable and get to the festivities. This won't take long, and should be pretty short and to the point;

You claim Poison Clan is "guilty of the same thing [you have] done" by not updating their wiki. Except there's a minor flaw with that statement. A copy of their treaty is posted on their forums. Has been since they announced it originally. Between Echelon and SBA, this was not the case. You can't claim to be in the right and PC in the wrong just because their wiki wasn't 100% accurate because they had still posted the information in 2 very public places. For one, the Open World Forum and two, the treaty archive they have open to all Foreigners on their Forums. Echelon didn't post the protectorate they had with SBA until March, after the raids had already taken place. And on top of that, you didn't revise the wiki of SBA to reflect that they were under your protection until around that same time too. You admitted to your mistake, provided anyone ever believed you were still legitimately protecting SBA, but instead of dealing with the humiliation of giving off the appearance of a severely inept alliance that you are you decided you were going to try to extort reparations from Poison Clan for it.

Poison Clan doesn't have to pay for your own incompetence. Their members followed their rules and did as instructed by their government. You made the mistake of neglecting your responsibilities as Government officials of your alliances by not keeping pertinent information in a location that was easily and publicly accessible for those who were curious. You also failed to properly communicate to the world publicly that SBA was still under your protection and a sovereign alliance after the supposed merger. The blame for this entire situation lies on Echelon so why should Poison Clan have to pay for your mistakes? Well, I don't think they owe you the crust out of their cracks. SBA had been considered disbanded even by their own leader. Whatever you told him to "rescind" his confirmation of that disbandment must have been financially rewarding, or perhaps backed with the threat of force you've exhibited towards Poison Clan in this situation.

If you think you can intimidate Poison Clan to bowing to your petty demands of compensation for your own incompetence I can guarantee you that Poison Clan won't be the only entity you'll have the pleasure of getting eradicated by. Either put up or shut up, Echelon. I'll be waiting.

[Caffine]

Actually Emperor Marx, it was posted on both alliance's forums. It appears that you didn't actually read what happened and are just looking to condemn Echelon.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Caffine1

[890765]

[quote name='Emperor Marx' date='09 March 2010 - 07:48 PM' timestamp='1268182398' post='2220029']
It appears I'm just a little late to the party. Well, I'll go ahead and make myself comfortable and get to the festivities. [b]This won't take long, and should be pretty short and to the point;[/b]

-Wall of text here-

[/quote]


I lold


Also, it was not clearly stated anywhere that their alliance was still protected or even existed, caffine1.

Edited March 10, 2010 by 890765

[Virillus]

It's both disconcerting and painful to watch people get off on blaming the victim for being their own aggression.

I'm going to agree with Hizzy on this one.



[quote name='x Tela x' date='09 March 2010 - 04:19 PM' timestamp='1268180692' post='2219958']
That's like saying for us to contact Hal if we need to talk to \m/ government.
[/quote]

Let's take this one more step towards hilarious and say you should contact me;)

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='Earogema' date='09 March 2010 - 06:37 PM' timestamp='1268181765' post='2220009']
Upon further inspection of the SBA forums-

The treaty is signed by only one person from SBA (as noted by the post on the forums by William Bonney) and that person is no longer a member of SBA. I think it is very important to note- Was Peregrine, the only signatory to the Echelon treaty, AND the only person who has posted anything regarding SBA treaties to date, the person that PC asked about the protectorate?
[/quote]


riiiight, at MCXA many of our treaties are signed by now members of TSO, does that mean TSO is treatied to IRON now? Doubt it.

That being said, PC should be a little more apologetic about this thing happening, and I can't blame echelon for taking this to the OWF. There's not much else they could do tbh.

[Caffine]

[quote name='890765' date='09 March 2010 - 07:51 PM' timestamp='1268182633' post='2220044']
I lold


Also, it was not clearly stated anywhere that their alliance was still protected or even existed, caffine1.
[/quote]

http://sba.egzodus.com/forum/index.php?topic=7.0
http://www.cn-echelon.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12526
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/5592/snapper1268021143393.jpg

Want to try that again?

[Ruggerdawg]

[quote name='Emperor Marx' date='09 March 2010 - 04:48 PM' timestamp='1268182398' post='2220029']You also failed to properly communicate to the world publicly that SBA was still under your protection and a sovereign alliance after the supposed merger. [/quote]
How frequently ought an alliance re-announce their protectorate agreements? Monthly, weekly, daily?

Because Echelon was once a protector and is currently a protector, and there is no change in status of SBA, there is nothing to announce. The SBA of today is still the SBA before the discussed merger. Albeit a little lighter of members. But still a sovereign alliance nonetheless. Echelon and/or SBA would have made an OWF post announcing a disbandment and/or merger, but since neither occurred, no announcement of any kind was warranted.

FYI, United Domainers is a protectorate of Echelon. They always have been and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

Would you like me to re-post this declaration tomorrow?

Edit: spelling

Edited March 10, 2010 by Ruggerdawg

[supercoolyellow]

Also I'm betting half the people posting in here don't read the op

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Caffine1' date='09 March 2010 - 07:54 PM' timestamp='1268182759' post='2220054']
http://sba.egzodus.com/forum/index.php?topic=7.0
http://www.cn-echelon.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12526
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/5592/snapper1268021143393.jpg

Want to try that again?
[/quote]

:siren: We're headed for a cyclical counterproductive argument.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Ruggerdawg' date='10 March 2010 - 12:55 AM' timestamp='1268182819' post='2220058']

Would you like me to re-post this declaration tomorrow?

Edit: spelling
[/quote]

Yes actually, fix the argument and repost.

[Earogema]

[quote name='supercoolyellow' date='09 March 2010 - 06:53 PM' timestamp='1268182732' post='2220052']
riiiight, at MCXA many of our treaties are signed by now members of TSO, does that mean TSO is treatied to IRON now? Doubt it.

That being said, PC should be a little more apologetic about this thing happening, and I can't blame echelon for taking this to the OWF. There's not much else they could do tbh.
[/quote]
That's not the point. Peregrine was the ONLY signatory to this treaty for SBA. SBA is also a very small alliance, and has always been. He would know if they treaty was intact. In fact, if I asked a former TSO member if they had a treaty with IRON, they would know to say "No, they don't."

Edited March 10, 2010 by Earogema