Jump to content

An Agreement has been reached...


Recommended Posts

It's funny to see the people who chose to leave the previous Orange unity treaty (capitalise as you will) complaining about this one.

Good luck to all, I hope you get Orange sorted out after the war. Now Vanguard is gone, one of the two main bones of contention (TOP-Vanguard) is gone with them, so it's down to IRON and ODN to play nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' date='05 April 2010 - 03:09 AM' timestamp='1270433368' post='2248209']
Good to see FOK and ODN on this list.


oh wait, okay that's fine it'll take time right?
[/quote]

I guess it would have also taken time for you to read the posts of Tromp and EgoFreaky to realise that their exclusion was of their own choice. :rolleyes:

ODN and FOK would have to[b]WANT[/b] to be involved before they were added to the Initiative.


I hope that the absence of any political element to this treaty will produce fruitful economic results. :)

Edited by MCRABT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how exactly is this any different then OUT?

No offense, I (despite my alliance tag) was a big supporter of of OUT but after some deep looking into I see the flaws. Those boards were extremely inactive, and even when they were started up again, after the hacking and all, they remained that way. I'm all for "inter-alliance corporation" but only when I know all alliances cooperating haven't tried the same thing over and over again.

But hopefully 3 times the charm. :)
Best of luck to all alliances involved, especially my former alliance RnR.
(I use the n' because I'm a rebel yo.)

Edited by YoshiRevoultion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='YoshiRevoultion' date='07 April 2010 - 10:18 AM' timestamp='1270631913' post='2251479']
So how exactly is this any different then OUT?

No offense, I (despite my alliance tag) was a big supporter of of OUT but after some deep looking into I see the flaws. Those boards were extremely inactive, and even when they were started up again, after the hacking and all, they remained that way. I'm all for "inter-alliance corporation" but only when I know all alliances cooperating haven't tried the same thing over and over again.

But hopefully 3 times the charm. :)
Best of luck to all alliances involved, especially my former alliance RnR.
(I use the n' because I'm a rebel yo.)
[/quote]

/me slaps Yoshi for using the n :)

The difference is that CTI lost all the deadweight OUT had, OUT tried to arrange everything, and by that succeeded at nothing for the most part. It wanted to maintain peace on orange and political cooperation and in the end it failed. Trades where just a side dish for OUT.

CTI however is purely trade based, it works on the fact that all of orange no matter what side of the treatyweb you are connected to has one thing in common, trades. It set's some guidelines about trades (Standards for trade circle set-ups, 48 hour notice before canceling a trade, no mass trade cancellations etc.) and every signatory has to dedicate at least one member to set up trades and work for the good of all trade on orange.

Any political agenda that has been mentioned has been dragged in by non signatories who probably don't even really understand the concept. CTI is not made to replace out, just to do the one thing OUT failed so hard at, arranging trades.

As a side effect it also keeps signatory alliances talking which is never a bad thing. But don't expect it to turn out into another OUT like structure with defensive clauses and senate arrangements or anything like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I "love" the input from ALL the uninvolved alliances.

I'd kindly request that those that aren't involved limit their responses to how much they don't like IRON as it appears that's their main point as it is.

This is a "technical treaty" limited to it's main task ensuring better trades for those involved and those involved only by the fact that they hold resources required by a CTI trade set.

The initial three member team that agreed the fundamentals on how CTI works tried to include every alliance possible given the political situation before this last Campaign. And they tried doing that even though there is ample proof of shenanigans from some.

I'd love to see every alliance on Orange participate in CTI as it benefits us all, but as with everything else it will take time ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Theophilos' date='07 April 2010 - 05:03 PM' timestamp='1270648963' post='2251596']
I know that these two words: "technical treaty" are hard to read together, let alone understand. But I know you can do it if you really, really try to. I'll be glad to help if you can't manage though ...
[/quote]

from the behaviour of some MASSIVE fine gentlemen in this thread from RON and TOP its quite clear that this is not regarded as a technical treaty.

one ODNer posted about the paradox of wishing for a peacefull orange when a big part of it is not included in the treaty and suddently all of ODN was crying because it wasnt included in the treaty dominated by the 4 most full of fail alliances in the sphere.


ITT RON and TOP have learned nothing.

Edited by Venizelos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Venizelos' date='07 April 2010 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1270648651' post='2251593']
so TOP, IRON, sattelites and RnR signed a colour treaty without even an ODP clause.

great success you guys.
[/quote]
What I find the most interesting about this is that the main reason those who no longer approved of OUT, ie politics mixed up with economics, and not clearly enough focused on economic, now that we have a politics-free solely economics based treaty, still disapprove of this treaty.
As as of now no OT alliance is at war with another, besides generally disapproving of any proposal that comes partially from IRON, there really isn't much left why not every alliance isn't joining the treaty as we speak.

So while you maybe miss the ODP clause, if you were better informed regarding the issues some had with OUT, you would infact approve of such a treaty and invite your friends to join it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awwwww you say the sweetest things Venizelos >_<

And you being the MASSIVELY fine gentleman (the first amongst your peers for sure), don't even have the common courtesy to call our Republic by her proper name, IRON. Do stop by after you've learned how to do that :ehm:

Ps: Almost forgot, and ty Venizelos for proving my point :)

Edit: correction

Edited by Theophilos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='shilo' date='07 April 2010 - 05:12 PM' timestamp='1270649522' post='2251603']
What I find the most interesting about this is that the main reason those who no longer approved of OUT, ie politics mixed up with economics, and not clearly enough focused on economic, now that we have a politics-free solely economics based treaty, still disapprove of this treaty.
As as of now no OT alliance is at war with another, besides generally disapproving of any proposal that comes partially from IRON, there really isn't much left why not every alliance isn't joining the treaty as we speak.

So while you maybe miss the ODP clause, if you were better informed regarding the issues some had with OUT, you would infact approve of such a treaty and invite your friends to join it.
[/quote]

hey you guys, we attacked you unprovoked, and just finished a 70 day war where we lost miserably and surrendered to you. lets make an orange treaty where we dominate over you.

brah, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY THAT [s]GOD[/s] ODN DOESNT LIKE YOU.



theofilos, you're right, i didnt use the right name. i should have called you ON.

Edited by Venizelos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Venizelos' date='07 April 2010 - 04:21 PM' timestamp='1270650073' post='2251609']
hey you guys, we attacked you unprovoked, and just finished a 70 day war where we lost miserably and surrendered to you. lets make an orange treaty where we dominate over you.

brah, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY THAT [s]GOD[/s] ODN DOESNT LIKE YOU.



theofilos, you're right, i didnt use the right name. i should have called you ON.
[/quote]

You truly are clueless, aren't you? more's the pitty.

Enjoy your rant Venizelos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Venizelos' date='07 April 2010 - 04:21 PM' timestamp='1270650073' post='2251609']
hey you guys, we attacked you unprovoked, and just finished a 70 day war where we lost miserably and surrendered to you. lets make an orange treaty where we dominate over you.

brah, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY THAT [s]GOD[/s] ODN DOESNT LIKE YOU.



theofilos, you're right, i didnt use the right name. i should have called you ON.
[/quote]
Dominate? Ehmm, out of curiosity, have you actually seen a summary of the treaty at least, or actually read the document? If you had done any of the two, you would realize that there is no possibility to [i]dominate[/i] anyone. The whole idea of the treaty is to ensure that [u]everyone[/u] in the OT can find stable TCs more quickly and with less hassle, no matter the politics. Now naturally, if an alliance has so much dislike for any of the other alliances that even signing a merely economic treaty is too much, I understand that 100%. Then however, the problem lays not with the treaty, but with the alliance having the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Theophilos' date='07 April 2010 - 05:29 PM' timestamp='1270650547' post='2251619']
You truly are clueless, aren't you? more's the pitty.

Enjoy your rant Venizelos.
[/quote]


as a former ON member, i think i know what i'm talking about.


shilo, if i read correctly there is a restriction on sanctions that includes voting on whether the member alliances agree with it. in a treaty where almost all other members are under the TOP sphere of influence that means effectively giving up your senator's sovereignity.

Edited by Venizelos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...