Jump to content

Nemesis Announcement


Recommended Posts

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 05:57 AM' timestamp='1274245023' post='2302999']
So you're saying daggarz influence on this decision is minimal? Nah.



It means that the alliance's memberships opinion is very casual. Either that or you need to invoke the Amendment clause.
[/quote]


I'm saying as a former member of Nemesis that whenever a treaty is placed forward for discussion, the members discuss it in detail. The government then take that advice and act as the voice of the alliance. Example would be the browncoat alliance that wanted a treaty, it was placed in discussion some people liked the idea, the majority did not, and whooooooo what happened, they took there members views on board and decided agaisnt it. But ofcoarse if thats to hard for you to grasp then well.... what can I say! But seeing as you have such an indepth understanding of Nemesis and it's process, I'm sure you know better being a former Nemesis member and in there government structure.

Edited by Hiro Nakara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='19 May 2010 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1274243825' post='2302971']
words
[/quote]

Yes, we get it. Perfect order is great. Everyone should strive for that, and we should all act as one alliance. Or two, that would make the game far more exciting. Treaties should be made entirely on logic and focus on pleasing all of the current treaty partners. I love autonomy, don't you? Oh, and let's not forget strategy in treatying.

Also, TOOL has never requested any signer of a PIAT with them to help in a war. And they never will. TOOL has fought on opposite sides of its PIATs at times.

Nemesis is free to cancel on whoever they want. I still find it sad that they hate TOOL so much, and without cause.

Edited by Gamemaster1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:01 AM' timestamp='1274245255' post='2303009']
The issue is Nemesis throwing a hissy fit over LoSS signing a treaty with TOOL. They think they treatied the other side and betrayed them, oddly enough. That's the reason why this is given so much attention.


Then I owe you an apology.

Quoted from under:



[b]So you expect me to spy on you to know how you operate outside your charter?[/b] What's the point of your charter than? Mind editing it so we all know and don't have you spell it out? Thanks.
[/quote]

no need to spy, just don't comment on things that you have zero clue about :D kk ? thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:01 AM' timestamp='1274245255' post='2303009']
The issue is Nemesis throwing a hissy fit over LoSS signing a treaty with TOOL. They think they treatied the other side and betrayed them, oddly enough. That's the reason why this is given so much attention.
[/quote]

Slow week I guess.

You do realize its their right to cancel any treaty for any reason they deem worthy, right? Just because you and some other people would much rather hold a treaty that has long since expired in its usefulness doesn't mean they have too. My opinion is that if your alliance and an ally are going different directions then just end it because it will cause more problems then its worth in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' date='19 May 2010 - 06:07 AM' timestamp='1274245641' post='2303019']
no need to spy, just don't comment on things that you have zero clue about :D kk ? thanks
[/quote]

I've as much of a clue as Nemesis' poor charter. :rolleyes:

[quote]You do realize its their right to cancel any treaty for any reason they deem worthy, right? Just because you and some other people would much rather hold a treaty that has long since expired in its usefulness doesn't mean they have too. My opinion is that if your alliance and an ally are going different directions then just end it because it will cause more problems then its worth in the long run.[/quote]

That's fine but now Nemesis is being called out for its unwarranted hate towards TOOL.

Edited by The AUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 12:01 AM' timestamp='1274245255' post='2303009']
The issue is Nemesis throwing a hissy fit over LoSS signing a treaty with TOOL. They think they treatied the other side and betrayed them, oddly enough. That's the reason why this is given so much attention.


Then I owe you an apology.

Quoted from under:



So you expect me to spy on you to know how you operate outside your charter? What's the point of your charter than? Mind editing it so we all know and don't have you spell it out? Thanks.
[/quote]

I said if you were a member, if you were a member, it wouldn't be spying hurrdurr. A charter is the bare bones of operation procedures for an alliance, I detest charters that explain every little tiny insignificant detail of their alliance, it's worthless. So, no, I will not edit the Nemesis charter to appease the ignorant general public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Yawoo' date='19 May 2010 - 06:10 AM' timestamp='1274245839' post='2303024']
I said if you were a member, if you were a member, it wouldn't be spying hurrdurr. A charter is the bare bones of operation procedures for an alliance, I detest charters that explain every little tiny insignificant detail of their alliance, it's worthless. So, no, I will not edit the Nemesis charter to appease the ignorant general public.
[/quote]

Your charter is actually contradictory to your inward operations. You may want to look into that. Either way this isn't what this thread is about. Have fun crying about every little thing your ally does and good luck trying to dictate who they do or don't ally with. Need more undeserved reps, I guess?

Edited by The AUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:15 AM' timestamp='1274246087' post='2303030']
Your charter is actually contradictory to your inward operations. You may want to look into that. Either way this isn't what this thread is about. Have fun crying about every little thing your ally does and good luck trying to dictate who they do or don't ally with. Need more undeserved reps, I guess?
[/quote]


You may want to look into your weak attempts at insults. Try harder and make an effort, all you do is make people cringe when they read the verbal !@#$ you spew and ofcoarse it's one sided, well maybe to someone who is blind and ignorant. The last part of your post? butt hurt much? seems that way. Enjoy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:09 AM' timestamp='1274245732' post='2303021']
I've as much of a clue as Nemesis' poor charter. :rolleyes:



That's fine but now Nemesis is being called out for its unwarranted hate towards TOOL.
[/quote]

I think your making it into something much bigger then it is. I don't take it as hate on TOOL as much as dislike of the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Left_Behind' date='19 May 2010 - 06:19 AM' timestamp='1274246377' post='2303033']
I think your making it into something much bigger then it is. I don't take it as hate on TOOL as much as dislike of the other side.
[/quote]

Do you expect anything less from him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' date='19 May 2010 - 06:19 AM' timestamp='1274246374' post='2303032']
You may want to look into your weak attempts at insults. Try harder and make an effort, all you do is make people cringe when they read the verbal !@#$ you spew and ofcoarse it's one sided, well maybe to someone who is blind and ignorant. The last part of your post? butt hurt much? seems that way. Enjoy!
[/quote]

I can't even understand what you're saying. Quit chirping the same line over and over again, seriously.

[quote]I think your making it into something much bigger then it is. I don't take it as hate on TOOL as much as dislike of the other side.[/quote]

There really isn't much of a side anymore, which is what makes this all the more stranger. Also I'm not the one that's looking into it, many are and TOOL is left asking why Nemesis is acting the way they are.

Edited by The AUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:24 AM' timestamp='1274246659' post='2303036']
I can't even understand what you're saying. Quit chirping the same line over and over again, seriously.



There really isn't much of a side anymore, which is what makes this all the more stranger. Also I'm not the one that's looking into it, many are and TOOL is left asking why Nemesis is acting the way they are.
[/quote]


Do you need it in crayon? Bigger spaces or capitol letters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad to see that I am still on a plane of intelligence still far beyond the reach of the average reader.

[quote name='Gamemaster1' date='19 May 2010 - 01:05 AM' timestamp='1274245489' post='2303015']
Yes, we get it. Perfect order is great. Everyone should strive for that, and we should all act as one alliance. Or two, that would make the game far more exciting. Treaties should be made entirely on logic and focus on pleasing all of the current treaty partners. I love autonomy, don't you? Oh, and let's not forget strategy in treatying.[/quote]
Your summary display of ignorance or lack of comprehension of my point is telling. Anyone that interpreted my clear points on a clean foreign policy as a call to a two-alliance world is, frankly, beyond help. My views on the way alliances should conduct foreign affairs result in the exact opposite: A vibrant, poly-polar world where very focused groups of alliances and large numbers of unaligned alliances enjoy great freedom to exercise their will as they see fit. As a member of RON, the most powerful housetrained alliance to ever exist and get its tail whipped beside its masters over and over again, you of course know what a unipolar world looks like and results in.
More directly to each of your summaries: 1--I clearly said treaties should never be signed to please everyone, but that a change in treaties will in the best scenario result in the loss or alteration of other existing treaties. 2--Signing new treaties and canceling old treaties IS ITSELF AN EXERCISE OF AUTONOMY, but there again I and many others have already languished the utter ignorance of the average ruler as to what sovereignty or autonomy means. 3--Strategy in foreign affairs ("treatying" to use your word) involves weighing the costs and benefits of any new treaty, assuming that you can amass as many treaties with as many widely-varying alliances as you want is stupid and is not strategy at all.

[quote]Also, TOOL has never requested any signer of a PIAT with them to help in a war. And they never will. TOOL has fought on opposite sides of its PIATs at times. [/quote]
You can call it a PIAT all goddamned night long but the military clause makes it an ODP, Mia has already stated flat that TOOL erroneously calls ODPs "PIATs" so it's an idiotic ploy at this point.

[quote]Nemesis is free to cancel on whoever they want. I still find it sad that they hate TOOL so much, and without cause.
[/quote]
You're talking out of both sides of your butt: Nemesis are turds for cancelling, Nemesis is free to cancel for whatever reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' date='19 May 2010 - 06:25 AM' timestamp='1274246724' post='2303038']
Do you need it in crayon? Bigger spaces or capitol letters?
[/quote]

Coherent English will do.

At any rate I'm out of here. Sorry to see an alliance is playing the ignorant role of "sides still exist!" when it's becoming increasingly apparent they're fracturing everyday.

Edited by The AUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahahahahhahah the predictable jab at the non native English typer. LOL your last post really meant to say


Coherent English will do.

[s]At any rate I'm out of here[/s] [b]I have ran out of insults[/b]. [s]Sorry to see an alliance is playing the ignorant role of "sides still exist!" when it's becoming increasingly apparent they're fracturing everyday.[/s] [b]It is apparent I do not have a clue about this topic and I just wanted to spew !@#$ to look cool[/b]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 06:24 AM' timestamp='1274246659' post='2303036']
There really isn't much of a side anymore, which is what makes this all the more stranger. Also I'm not the one that's looking into it, many are and TOOL is left asking why Nemesis is acting the way they are.
[/quote]

Your adding fuel to the fire here by saying Daggarz pushed for it because he is impulsive and by picking at Nemesis assuming you understand how they run the alliance. Do TOOL expect every alliance to like them? If so I'd give up and go cry in a corner because its not going to happen. Maybe Nemesis don't like who's allied to TOOL so its not strange at all for Nemesis not to want to be associated with TOOL.

Edited by Left_Behind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The AUT' date='19 May 2010 - 01:27 AM' timestamp='1274246857' post='2303041']
Coherent English will do.

At any rate I'm out of here. Sorry to see an alliance is playing the ignorant role of "sides still exist!" when it's becoming increasingly apparent they're fracturing everyday.
[/quote]
I couldn't find a crayon but here it is: As long as an alliance has treaties, it is allied along a certain axis. TOOL has a bunch of treaties that put it on an axis that Nemesis doesn't like. I've also passed up a low-level treaty with TOOL because I don't like their sphere. Nemesis doesn't have to justify why they don't want to be linked to TOOL and its sphere. The fact of the matter is that LoSS's treaty to TOOL would have linked Nemesis to TOOL's sphere, and the cancellation of the treaty is the only logical step to correct the situation Nemesis was put in when LoSS picked TOOL over Nemesis. Alliances base decisions on who they're going to ally on who that prospective ally is treatied to EVERY DAY, I don't understand why it's blowing your mind that Nemesis acted to preserve its own integrity of foreign policy. "Sides" might be fracturing, but they're still there just smaller. CoJ is allied to Nemesis and Browncoats--they're on our side. Invicta has expressed their undying love for NPO, they're on NPO's side. Get it? Rhetorical question, don't reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Left_Behind' date='18 May 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1274247373' post='2303050']Do TOOL expect every alliance to like them?[/quote]

We'd be [i]incredibly[/i] foolish to.

Quite frankly, I don't get what the big deal is - Nemesis has already said they don't [i]hate[/i] TOOL. Only reason I said earlier I'd feel bad if the TOOL treaty was the reason (by which I meant [i]sole[/i] reason - sorry for not clarifying) is out of guilt for inadvertently throwing a wrench in an established relationship.

*sigh* I'm glad I'm not in TOOL gov anymore :P

Anyway, I wish both alliances the best in their endeavours. o/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes alliances are blamed for being always on 'other side' but when they reach out, attempts and actions are made to restrict those moves, (perhaps indirectly and not primarily that as a reason, tho its one of those side-effects) and maintain divisions along the same old lines, lines where one side is hegemonic and where one side is under terms/weak/curbstomped heh, this is the story since end of Karma. Friendships are conditional, you are expected to ditch your friends in order to tie along with someone on the 'other' side, only after that has been done can you become BFFs.

It does makes strategic sense for hegemony-tied alliances to maintain a clear and advantageous division of the web to sustain its power, even if the actions may be primarily done for other reasons.

Edited by shahenshah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jus to clear some things up.

Ben is not a Tri and hasnt been for months. He was our MoD and is currently in Europe on vacation.

Also, we specifically waited for TOOL to be done with their surrender terms before we moved forward on the treaty.

Now at this point the arguing is getting ridiculous. Everyone is going in circles and it is going nowhere. Nemesis had their reasons, we had ours. We are still close however all this bickering on the OWF isnt helping. Much respect, much love, we are moving on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To state two important points (ugh make it three):

1) Nothing is done in Nemesis without the membership's complete and full consent. This is the way the alliance was created to be, and the way it still is. Triumvirate is controlled by the members, as it should be, despite its appointed nature.
2) Nemesis views ODP treaties much stronger than at least 90% of CN. See their ODP with CoJ and the fact that they would go to war to protect them in a heartbeat. To Nemesis, signing an ODP with TOOL is a huge deal, not the minor one that most would view it as (myself included).
3) This isn't an outright cancellation. LoSS and Nemesis still have an ODP, and from what I've heard, they would defend each other still. What terrible, terrible friends. This is hopefully a wakeup call to both sides and serves to fix the relationship, not to destroy it completely.

Enjoy your bickering, I will have no part.

Edited by Penlugue Solaris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Uralica' date='19 May 2010 - 06:44 AM' timestamp='1274247842' post='2303058']
We'd be [i]incredibly[/i] foolish to.

Quite frankly, I don't get what the big deal is - Nemesis has already said they don't [i]hate[/i] TOOL. Only reason I said earlier I'd feel bad if the TOOL treaty was the reason (by which I meant [i]sole[/i] reason - sorry for not clarifying) is out of guilt for inadvertently throwing a wrench in an established relationship.[/quote]

This seems the most relevant thing to quote.

ITT people take one post and run with it because it fits their need for dramaz.

Nemesis doesn't hate TOOL at all, but it seems odd to be indirectly treatied to someone you are currently holding under surrender terms? I can't imagine the potential chaining should TOOL violate the terms (hypothetical, don't get your panties in a twist drama whores) and we have to redeclare on them. At the end of the day it was not even close to the sole reason.

Also it's an ODP. It matters not what pretty letters Mia wants to put on top of it. A treaty with an optional defence clause is nothing but an optional defence treaty. You can't worm out of a mutual obligation by saying you signed an ODP when the text of the treaty is very clearly that of an MADP. It is the text of the treaty that means everything, not the title. That's all mostly irrelevant to be honest, it's just something I picked up on reading through the thread.

Also ITT people respond to The AUT's clueless ranting about the innerworkings of an alliance he's never been a member of when the wise course of action, as it always is with The AUT, would be to forget the ignorance and try not let the fact that people that stupid really do exist ruin your day.

Edited by Poyplemonkeys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='19 May 2010 - 02:25 AM' timestamp='1274253913' post='2303130']
2) Nemesis views ODP treaties much stronger than at least 90% of CN. See their ODP with CoJ and the fact that they would go to war to protect them in a heartbeat. To Nemesis, signing an ODP with TOOL is a huge deal, not the minor one that most would view it as (myself included).
[/quote]

Except that the treaty is labeled as a PIAT, although it does have a few elements that make it seem almost like an ODP.

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...