Announcment from ADI

[mco119]

[quote name='Axolotlia' date='28 March 2010 - 12:58 AM' timestamp='1269752316' post='2238946']
Keep in mind the difference in the type of government. We are not the United States. You say


The United States doesnt work where they have the emeritus members of government stay in the current government, where as in Cybernations, usually old gov still does have a say in matters and does retain some power.

My 2 cents
[/quote]

Respectfully, you are either missing my point, or arguing semantics to distract from my point.

[Axolotlia]

[quote name='mco119' date='28 March 2010 - 12:10 AM' timestamp='1269753007' post='2238960']
Respectfully, you are either missing my point, or arguing semantics to distract from my point.
[/quote]

I may be missing your point.

Im just pointing out what i saw in it that made it sound to me defunct from the current situation

[USMC123]

[quote name='Lord Tri' date='27 March 2010 - 08:48 AM' timestamp='1269704893' post='2238326']
[b]I request that ADI membership (including gov) cease posting in this thread. This is merely a request, not an order.[/b]

The world has heard our side of the story, we have great friends, and we have our fun-filled enemies. Now, I will once again let all of you know, that the offer of civil discussion is always a standing offer with me. If you have the ability to slander us here, I'm sure you can muster up the ability to speak with me personally on IRC or via private message.

[i]Lord Tri of Tribathia[/i]
Lord High Sentinel of ADI
[/quote]


Serious question here: Why post asking members not to post but not make it mandatory? I mean, if you're the boss, you could just gag 'em. This is as pointless as (OOC)the UN issuing a non-binding resolution.(/OOC)

Now, tell your members to shut up

LIKE A BOSS

[Axolotlia]

[OOC]I feel like such a rebel now... [/OOC]

Im going to stop now thanks for showing me that

[Lord Tri]

[quote name='mco119' date='28 March 2010 - 05:33 AM' timestamp='1269750775' post='2238917']
This thread has been full of comments essentially implying that ADI is "a different alliance now," and that it "regrets its former actions, and is going in a new direction." With respect, the fact that the current ADI administration has retained you at all shows that none of this is sincere. If an alliance has truly learned from its mistakes, why would it have as an advisor the individual that is largely responsible for its past troubles (to say nothing of its current reputation)?

The message this sends is that although ADI wishes to project an image of change, they aren't really all that serious about it. If it were a serious attempt to go in a new direction, to right past wrongs, you would not have ANY position in the government, and, further, you would likely be flat out removed from the alliance. Look at the real world..did the Obama administration, which claims to wish for a new direction for this country, retain President Bush as an advisor? Of course not. One of the first rules of governmental change is to show the people that efforts to this effect are genuine, which is best accomplished by disassociating from those the public holds responsible for whatever the problem is. ADI has failed to do this, and I believe this is because you, John, are still a major influence on the actions of this alliance. However, even if this were not the case, even if you had left the alliance, ADI would not be excused from its past mistakes. They must be held accountable, and that is exactly what is happening now. Whether we like it or not, we must all, in one form or another, be brought to account for our errors.

Can ADI run its government as it wishes? Of course. However, it should accept the consequences of this decision, and not spend time trying to convince people here that it really "means well." This will not be believed by most. Now, is John Warbuck the sole problem in ADI? No, he is not. That being said, his continuing presence serves as a constant reminder of past grievances, as well as almost certain future indiscretions.
[/quote]

[b]"This thread has been full of comments essentially implying that ADI is "a different alliance now," and that it "regrets its former actions, and is going in a new direction." With respect, the fact that the current ADI administration has retained you at all shows that none of this is sincere. If an alliance has truly learned from its mistakes, why would it have as an advisor the individual that is largely responsible for its past troubles (to say nothing of its current reputation)? "[/b]

That individual is also largely responsible for the successes that ADI has had. Warbuck is an active and contributing member of this alliance, like many others we have. I consider every one of my members to be advisors to me as a leader, because without their support, I am not a leader. Does that mean I will try and please everyone? No. In the end I will do what I feel is best for the alliance, but not without careful deliberation with the membership, gov, and ex-gov of ADI. If I find a provisional member with a better idea than Warbucks, by all means, I will have no qualms with supporting it. The position of "Lord High Sentinel Emeritus" carries with it: no power and no more influence than that of anyone else in this alliance.

[b]"The message this sends is that although ADI wishes to project an image of change, they aren't really all that serious about it."[/b]

Aren't really all that serious about it? Are you serious? Since I became Lord High Sentinel I have made friends with former enemies, offered to speak one-on-one with members of alliances (friends and enemies) that had concerns about ADI, I have made almost every effort possible to extend a hand of friendship and cordiality with my enemies. I have spoken with Hoo several times, and would even go so far as to consider him a friend. So tell me, if I wasn't all that serious about it, why would I waste my time trying to correct an image that may never be corrected? I never was one to do something I believe is a waste of my precious time.

[b]"If it were a serious attempt to go in a new direction, to right past wrongs, you would not have ANY position in the government, and, further, you would likely be flat out removed from the alliance."[/b]

John Warbuck does not have any position in government, and I refuse to remove him from the alliance. You could compare it to how I simply could not find it in me to hate and despise RoK. Like Warbuck, RoK was there for us in the beginning and was a major contributor to the alliance we are today. I will never forget what RoK did for us as a fledgling alliance, I also will never forget what Warbuck has done for this alliance.

[b]"[OOC]Look at the real world..did the Obama administration, which claims to wish for a new direction for this country, retain President Bush as an advisor? Of course not.[/OOC]"[/b]

[OOC]You're attempt at comparing this to the real world was very poorly done. Was George Bush kicked out of the country and is no longer a citizen? No. Will he also always be able to say that he holds the rather prestigious title of being the United States' 43rd president? Yes. And, whether you want to believe it or not, as a former president, he will always retain some form of significant influence.[/OOC]

[b]"ADI has failed to do this, and I believe this is because you, John, are still a major influence on the actions of this alliance."[/b]

I still retain a great deal of respect for Warbuck, as I do with all my former superiors, regardless of what I think of their decision-making, I shall always respect them. I also do request his opinions on the internal workings of the alliance (something Warbuck will always be stronger than me in). Does Warbuck have much influence on what I do when it comes to Foreign Affairs? No, because that's where my strength is. However, when it comes to me not entirely understanding certain interior programs and proposals, his opinion does mean a lot to me. As I said earlier however, his influence on me is no stronger than that of any other member, if I notice a member who has a stronger plan, I will always steal it from them and claim it as my own...damn...I just admitted that didn't I?

[b]"They must be held accountable, and that is exactly what is happening now. Whether we like it or not, we must all, in one form or another, be brought to account for our errors."[/b]

Has ADI been brought to account for their errors? Well...seeing as we lost some friends, and made many enemies, and basically had our entire reputation annihilated overnight, I'd say yeah, we've accounted for our errors. Not to mention the sheer amount of time I have been putting in in an effort to make-up for past mistakes is definitely taking a toll on me.

Now I'm sure you'll probably come up with some witty way to turn everything I just said around, but if you do not think I am sincere, then I will also invite you to come speak with me personally.

[i]Lord Tri of Tribathia[/i]
Lord High Sentinel of ADI

[the masheen]

What about this entire thread is NOT hilarious? I don't know what's more pathetic; the fact that these self righteous nations are attempting to rationalize attacking an entire alliance for reasons they refuse to reveal, or the fact that people are trolling this topic and have somehow drifted so far off topic that were nearly on the verge of "your momma" jokes.
To all the Rogue nations: Don't you think this whole thing is a little over the top? I crack up everytime i read your serious messages. The whole thing is really dramatic, dont you think? The only way you can possibly justify these attacks is to convince everyone that it is right to attack completely innocent nations that have no idea what's going on. The majority of nations in ADI that have no control over how our government operates, as there are plenty of nations who are completely oblivious to the whole situation. There are new nations that don't even know about the past actions taken by the government. This is like if the present day U.S. decided to bomb Germany for occupying Poland in WWII. You're just attacking a bunch of people who have no idea what's going on and who haven't necessarily done anything wrong. If you have gripes with individuals, then why don't you attack them? Keep the people who are just trying to have fun with this game out of it. Even as I'm writing this I'm just thinking how stupid it is that I'm even trying to attempt to explain to your type how self-righteous and dumb this whole thing is. There is no justice in what you're doing. You're just ruining this game for a bunch of people who are just trying to have fun. What ADI needs to focus on doing is getting one of you banned. I don't comprehend why you would risk getting the nations you've worked so hard on banned. There is nothing you can say that will ever make me understand regardless of what reason you can possibly give. I don't know who brainwashed all of you that this was the right thing to do, but one of you should just step forward and give us your reasons and end this. And Lord Tri, let's just stop trying to defend the alliance in this thread. The more we keep posting the more these trolls continue to harass us. Let them say what they have to say. None of them can discredit the alliance, regardless of how important they think they might be. Let them have their false glory. I guarentee there is nothing they can say to make me repost in this thread to defend myself.

[Bob Janova]

Hey look, it's an ADI thread, and the usual haters come out of the woodwork to air out an ancient (and never really justified) grudge.

No alliance deserves to be hit by simultaneous roguery, so good luck fighting them off, and I'm glad several alliances have jumped on to help you with them.

[Jack Diorno]

Hey look, Bob Janova is disgruntled about something.

ADI deserves to be hit with rogues, good day to you sir!

[Roy the Mighty]

I would just like to thank the ADI rogues for nukeing me

[philp110]

[quote name='Roy the Mighty' date='28 March 2010 - 08:17 AM' timestamp='1269778618' post='2239102']
I would just like to thank the ADI rogues for nukeing me
[/quote]

I had to hit you with [i]something[/i] during this whole war, right? It's like one of those touristy T-shirt. "I went to war with phillip110 and all I got was this one nuke"

[Wabooz]

nevermind...I shouldn't get involved. Again, gl with this ADI

Edited March 28, 2010 by Wabooz

[tow2b]

ADI you need to do one of two things

Nut up, or shut up

And so far you have not been able to do either one of these. So the war continues.

[James Wilson]

I must say, this thread made me laugh quite a bit, especially when the PC guy started talking about Honor.

[HalfEmpty]

[quote name='James Wilson' date='28 March 2010 - 10:28 AM' timestamp='1269786510' post='2239148']
I must say, this thread made me laugh quite a bit, especially when the PC guy started talking about Honor.
[/quote]


No big deal. Just don't sign any treaties with them.

[My Name Is Romance]

[quote name='the masheen' date='28 March 2010 - 06:02 AM' timestamp='1269770558' post='2239079']
- You're just ruining this game for a bunch of people who are just trying to have fun. -
[/quote]

It's ok for someone else to have fun but not for someone else?

[James Wilson]

[quote name='My Name Is Romance' date='28 March 2010 - 10:49 AM' timestamp='1269787779' post='2239158']
It's ok for someone else to have fun but not for someone else?
[/quote]
Why must their fun come at the expense of someone else's fun?

[My Name Is Romance]

[quote name='James Wilson' date='28 March 2010 - 11:18 AM' timestamp='1269789482' post='2239179']
Why must their fun come at the expense of someone else's fun?
[/quote]

The same reason you laughed when someone from PC talked about honor. You got your giggles from someone else's expense.

Is it right, is it wrong, who knows? But if they have fun warring someone just for fun. Why say there wrong or doing this game a disservice or an alliance a disservice?

[kpcurley]

[quote name='Newhotness' date='26 March 2010 - 12:04 AM' timestamp='1269579835' post='2237068']
i think you have it backwards. it takes more of a man to go attack a whole alliance on their own or with 1 or 2 friends than it does to try and hide behind their alliance after attacking...
[/quote]


You are both wrong. This is internet text based game, no manliness is required in any circumstances.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='HalfEmpty' date='28 March 2010 - 10:39 AM' timestamp='1269787181' post='2239154']
No big deal. Just don't sign any treaties with them.
[/quote]

I lol'd at this. PC put their @#$% on the line for us when the going was rough. I wouldn't want a treaty with anybody if I couldn't have that treaty with PC now. PC has the most "honor" out of all you losers.

[Tulafaras]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' date='28 March 2010 - 04:58 PM' timestamp='1269791865' post='2239203']
I lol'd at this. PC put their @#$% on the line for us when the going was rough. I wouldn't want a treaty with anybody if I couldn't have that treaty with PC now. PC has the most "honor" out of all you losers.
[/quote]
As much as i like PC we can talk until we are blue in the face and TPF still won't change their mind because PC did in fact break a treaty with them. (and no, i ain't interested in rehashing that entire debate, it has been done to death) so don't waste your breath trying to defend them. TPF has their opinion and PC is fine with it.

On topic of the thread, honestly this thread is hilarious. I wish ADI luck in dealing with the attack, but honestly posting this thread is just asking for a few flames and chuckles from the sidelines....

[crawlerbot]

Darn, I just ran out of popcorn. And also "yo momma" jokes. Good luck with the rouges.

[Roy the Mighty]

[quote name='phillip110' date='28 March 2010 - 09:00 AM' timestamp='1269781239' post='2239110']
I had to hit you with [i]something[/i] during this whole war, right? It's like one of those touristy T-shirt. "I went to war with phillip110 and all I got was this one nuke"
[/quote]
I thought the same thing; I figured that now at least when I say I fought some rouge for ADI, I have something to show to prove it lol

[Esquire]

This thread hasn't been going anywhere for quite some time (let alone anywhere having a whole to do with the OP at times), and has been a haven for rule-breaking. Closed.