Jump to content

NPO Annoucement: 2nd Triannual Report of the 6th Year of Order


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 400
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Detlev' date='03 May 2010 - 01:40 AM' timestamp='1272811213' post='2283751']
I'm guessing you all don't much like Athens, Sparta, or Mushroom Kingdom. Thanks for all that tech BTW. It is pretty slick.
[/quote]
I don't know, I think we have been rather complimentary towards the Mushroom Kingdom. After all, we previously recognized your great efforts in setting up the vast Co-Prosperity Sphere centered on yourselves, and now we are recognizing all the hard work Archon must put in as not only King of the Mushroom Kingdom and leader of the Co-Prosperity Sphere, but also the brains of Athens and Sparta. It must be quite a strain, taking on the responsibility of thinking for the governments of an additional two alliances. You should learn how to take a compliment. [img]http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1152/emotcolbertu.gif[/img]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why Londo is getting so much flak for having (possibly) changed his mind about something - I seem to remember a rather high profile statement from the NPO saying they'd never cancel a certain treaty, only to see it bite the dust but months later. Perhaps he's simply trying to flatter you via imitation? Maybe he just wants a little bit of love? (And please god don't try to be clever and make some insinuating connection between love and crushing war)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ComradeHitochi' date='01 May 2010 - 06:17 PM' timestamp='1272752257' post='2283072']
This is the first I have heard of reparations being forwarded to Mushroom Kingdom from Athens and Sparta. That is the only thing that could remotely be interpreted as a whine. How can something new be stale?
[/quote]
Probably because it's been mentioned several times here and we started getting them shortly after NPO surrendered. This isn't exactly a new thing here. We were getting tech from as early as August of last year.

Also, I don't think we were getting any from Sparta. I think it all came from Athens, Rok and the leftover debt to Vanguard from before the merger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to our friends in Pacifica I cannot wait to see you guys jump to the top after you come out of terms. Also a great read as usual o/ Sir Paul! I do love luling over all the bickering :lol1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Haflinger' date='02 May 2010 - 11:44 PM' timestamp='1272804264' post='2283715']
It leaves the decision of what is an approved reparations target out of the terms. Interestingly this could allow Karma to force NPO to violate the terms by just not approving any reparation targets.
[/quote]
You're right, it does. And aren't we all the more benevolent for not doing that? Hail the innocent. Well done for accomplishing your tasks given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ryuzaki' date='02 May 2010 - 08:23 AM' timestamp='1272803002' post='2283710']
Tell us all mighty Hal, how it is a treaty violation.
[/quote]

By the terms negotiated for the actual reparation process (the 'how" of the treaty terms). If they did not make it into the wording of the original treaty document itself, it matters little, since the agreement reached on the details of the reparations has the same weight (and penalties) as the treaty.

NPO is of course in no position to actually do anything about the changes except comply and let its irritation be known. It has done so now publicly.

However, something else you should have gotten from my post:

[quote]Is it worth mentioning? Perhaps. The next 25 pages? Nope.[/quote]

Apparently something lost on a number of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]the agreement reached on the details of the reparations has the same weight (and penalties) as the treaty.[/quote]
Well, no, actually, it doesn't. The treaty is the public record of what was agreed, it has the official alliance signatures on it and that's what counts. Verbal agreements really don't mean anything when you get down to legal notions of 'breaking terms'. It does not break the terms to give approved reps targets outside the signatory alliances, unless they're within NPO itself since that would break the 'no accepting tech aid' clause.

Regarding the OP, you're laying it on a bit thick in places, but generally a good issue. Regarding defending NPO from rogues, as mentioned in previous Reports most of the rogues are so tiny none of us can actually hit them, so the figures are not as bad as they first appear. I hope the response of VE and FOK since we last discussed this with you has been better ;).

Good luck when you finally reach the end of terms. Hopefully we will not see another alliance put under terms for so long again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations on finally being so close to the end of terms.

As a side note, a verbal contract has the same weight as a written contract unless contradicted by a written contract. So as long as they could prove the verbal terms it's binding. As has already been stated, though, NPO obviously isn't allowed to be in a position to enforce the terms. I hope that NPO was allowed to deduct the cost of the undefended attacks on their nations, no matter how small, from their owed reparations.

Edit: If you guys need some help with small rogue attacks, let someone know, we might be able to find a few guys to help you out.

Edited by LokiLockpicker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to petition the removal of Sir Donald R Daemon from the position of Retired Imperial Officer. Given he never really acted his part AS an Imperial Officer I do not see how he could have possibly retired. Aside from that discrepancy it was a decent read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LokiLockpicker' date='02 May 2010 - 09:32 PM' timestamp='1272850359' post='2284460']
Congratulations on finally being so close to the end of terms.

As a side note, a verbal contract has the same weight as a written contract unless contradicted by a written contract. So as long as they could prove the verbal terms it's binding. As has already been stated, though, NPO obviously isn't allowed to be in a position to enforce the terms. I hope that NPO was allowed to deduct the cost of the undefended attacks on their nations, no matter how small, from their owed reparations.

Edit: If you guys need some help with small rogue attacks, let someone know, we might be able to find a few guys to help you out.
[/quote]

We were not.

[quote name='Cager' date='02 May 2010 - 10:00 PM' timestamp='1272852030' post='2284506']
I would like to petition the removal of Sir Donald R Daemon from the position of Retired Imperial Officer. Given he never really acted his part AS an Imperial Officer I do not see how he could have possibly retired. Aside from that discrepancy it was a decent read.
[/quote]

Petition denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Cager' date='02 May 2010 - 10:00 PM' timestamp='1272852030' post='2284506']
I would like to petition the removal of Sir Donald R Daemon from the position of Retired Imperial Officer. Given he never really acted his part AS an Imperial Officer I do not see how he could have possibly retired. Aside from that discrepancy it was a decent read.
[/quote]


SDRD paid a lot of good money to Pacifica to get his position. Cortath taking away the meaningless status of "retired imperial officer" and removing him from even an advisory position would be borderline criminal.

I'm just glad to see a number of those people removed from having any sort of actual power. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting that a bit of colour commentary gets the lion's share of the attention. I never said that the G15 violated the surrender terms. If they did, I would have used those words as [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=64998&st=0&p=1736903&fromsearch=1&#entry1736903]I have done in the past[/url]. This was, in my always humble opinion, a “reinterpretation” of previous rulings regarding the transfer of K.A.R.M.A. investments between the Order and the G15. Since the G15 and her allies are currently the lead party, the Order, of course, complies with all investment agreement interpretations they decide upon.

And Londo, I think being cute is a favorite surrender term that’s thrown around by your side of the web.

[quote name='Detlev' date='02 May 2010 - 07:40 AM' timestamp='1272811213' post='2283751']
I'm guessing you all don't much like Athens, Sparta, or Mushroom Kingdom. Thanks for all that tech BTW. It is pretty slick.
[/quote]

I like them just fine. As I’ve said before, great heroes need great villains, and those three make some of the best villains around. If you don’t believe me, just wait until [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=75017&st=80&p=2003122&#entry2003122]our terms are done.[/url] Besides, the Order maintains cordial relations with most G15 alliances and friendly relations with some.

[quote name='TheNeverender' date='02 May 2010 - 10:43 AM' timestamp='1272822176' post='2283914']
I'm not sure why Londo is getting so much flak for having (possibly) changed his mind about something - I seem to remember a rather high profile statement from the NPO saying they'd never cancel a certain treaty, only to see it bite the dust but months later. Perhaps he's simply trying to flatter you via imitation? Maybe he just wants a little bit of love? (And please god don't try to be clever and make some insinuating connection between love and crushing war)
[/quote]
It didn’t turn out to be the best strategy. Perhaps you’ll have more luck with it.

With respect to the document itself and all my “whining,” I believe that I have done a great service to the Cyberverse by illustrating how G15 was “doin’ it wrong.” It was a flawed document and I took every opportunity to point that out. There are several aspects of it that are no longer included even when the MKCPS are trying to “punish” alliances.

[list]Limitations on nations who may pay tech reps
Demilitarization and protectorates
Restrictions of treaties [/list]
By exercising every available option to us, we proved that the above terms were not good for the G15 or the Cyberverse. You may have noticed that they were not included in the Easter Sunday Accords. (Gramlins is a little behind the learning curve, but we’ll do our best to bring them up to speed). I hope the Order will be the last alliance to have those terms applied, and if that is the case, it is because we took to the streets in force. I will not apologize for my actions during this last year, and will continue to drive home my message until it is imprinted in the subconscious of every member of the MKCPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='02 May 2010 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1272849510' post='2284447']
Well, no, actually, it doesn't. The treaty is the public record of what was agreed, it has the official alliance signatures on it and that's what counts. Verbal agreements really don't mean anything when you get down to legal notions of 'breaking terms'. It does not break the terms to give approved reps targets outside the signatory alliances, unless they're within NPO itself since that would break the 'no accepting tech aid' clause.
[/quote]

We will respectfully agree to disagree on this one, I think. The implication from the OP and elsewhere is that there was some sort of formal side agreement that specified that there would be no reparations sent outside the signatory alliances and that NPO was subsequently handed a list of nations to send tech to that fell outside that agreement. Again, noteworthy, but not the stuff of 25 pages of the OWF. Indeed I've gone on longer on this topic than I ever intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A terrific read SP... :)

I look forward to the New (and improved) Pacific Order returning to world politics again. It's been far too long a period of silence from Pacifica...

oo/ NPO
oo/ SirPaul
oo/ Improving surrender terms ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='01 May 2010 - 05:58 PM' timestamp='1272751102' post='2283049']
Another excellent read, although the whining is getting a bit stale.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Overall a pretty good comment, but the whining whenever Pacifica says anything is getting a bit stale.

I for one look forward to the rising of Pacifica. It is about time you reclaim your place on top of the world. The current stewards have shown themselves to be less than deserving of such prestige.[/color]

Edited by Rebel Virginia
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...