Backroom Extortion is Back

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1289270979' post='2507051']
Because the words come from a member of any specific alliance doesn't mean those words aren't valid. Such rebuttals smack of an inability to actually debate the topic. Instead the speaker is attacked in an attempt to marginalize his voice.
[/quote]

I didn't say that his alliance affiliation made what he said invalid. I said that his post was hilarious. After the months, no, the [i]years[/i] pumping your sewage into the river, you're finally learning what it's like to live downstream. The resulting hypocrisy is tremendously amusing.

[Letum]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1289270365' post='2507020']
Firstly, what constitutes reasonable and unreasonable is subjective.
[/quote]

I was responding directly to a post which suggested negotiating to a more reasonable level, so there isn't much subjectivity there.

[quote]
Secondly, what would you have us do? Drop our treaties and decommission our armed forces prior to negotiation?
[/quote]

Oh, I see. You're trying to dismiss the implied threat of military force by making it seem like *any* form of army is a threat.

This negotiation involved the element of MK's ability to curbstomp NSO being used to further MK's goals in the discussion. To have a different negotiation, all you would need is not introducing that element in the first place.

[quote]
Lastly, a member of Pacifica harping on about negotiation buttressed by superior military force is a little rich.
[/quote]

Yeah, it's like we've switched places or something.

[Fernando12]

[quote name='Rafael Nadal' timestamp='1289270700' post='2507039']
lol

Just look at the nation strength make-up for NSO. It wouldn't even be enjoyable for the upper half of MK because none of them would be in range to declare. Just take a second and do some thinking and research sometimes; tough, I know.

[/quote]
Maybe if you guys would have taken a second and done some research you would have found out that extorting an alliance for a trade circle gone bad is not only frowned upon but has never happened; tough I know.

[Letum]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1289271051' post='2507052']
So strong alliances can no longer interact with weaker alliances without being evil or dishonest. Got it.
[/quote]

So what you regard as "interaction" with a weaker alliance involves cowing it with your military.

That is disturbing.

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1289271230' post='2507056']
Do you think we should ignore injustice though, because it's not as bad? Honestly I was laughing at the people screaming about the evil new hegemony too, but here lately it seems as if MK and their buddies are hoping someone will end up getting mad at them. They're pushing buttons praying that they piss off just enough people for someone to do something about it. Eventually they'll go too far.

I wish MK would go back to the way they used to be. Standing up for morals and never backing down. I guess I'm just a naive dreamer though so I won't hold my breath.
[/quote]

I said earlier in this thread that 15m and 250 tech seems a little excessive. At the same time, it's five aid slots, and it's not *that* bad. After this extended attempt at a smear campaign, I probably wouldn't be inclined to back down either. This is really a minor issue- people just want a way to hurt MK's reputation.

[JackSkellington]

I'm just curious MK... What if NSO were to have said no entirely? Not no to that specific number, but simply no to taking responsibility for that nation? What would you have done?

Edited November 9, 2010 by JackSkellington

[Rafael Nadal]

[quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1289271371' post='2507063']
Maybe if you guys would have taken a second and done some research you would have found out that extorting an alliance for a trade circle gone bad is not only frowned upon but has never happened; tough I know.
[/quote]
Don't be upset that your claim that we're somehow foaming at the mouth for NSO is entirely untrue.

[Earogema]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1289270749' post='2507041']
Seriously, if anyone had posted negotiations with NPO back in 2008 in an attempt to make them look bad, a whole bunch of alliance leaders would forbid anyone not in high government to post, and the thread certainly wouldn't reach 30 pages. Then NPO would roll them and impose a Viceroy. The fact that everyone here is unafraid to voice their opinions on this stuff is just an indication of how free these boards really are, and a reflection of the different world which Karma created. Thus, the comparisons between NPO and MK are just ludicrous.
[/quote]
On the flip side, not even NPO 2008 would have forced reps for a dropped trade. They would have probably just asked for 3 million.

[WorldConqueror]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1289270749' post='2507041']
Seriously, if anyone had posted negotiations with NPO back in 2008 in an attempt to make them look bad, a whole bunch of alliance leaders would forbid anyone not in high government to post, and the thread certainly wouldn't reach 30 pages. Then NPO would roll them and impose a Viceroy. The fact that everyone here is unafraid to voice their opinions on this stuff is just an indication of how free these boards really are, and a reflection of the different world which Karma created. Thus, the comparisons between NPO and MK are just ludicrous.
[/quote]


At this point you should probably just follow Kev's earlier advice, or join MK. That you always come off as more MK-like than MK smacks of trying too hard, and certainly does ODN no favours. The work of people like Pingu who have created an intelligent and reasonable public persona for ODN is set back every time you come in to a thread with your attitude of 'yeah we're just like MK, check us out'.

And if you want to debate our history, feel free to start a new thread.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1289271452' post='2507065']
So what you regard as "interaction" with a weaker alliance involves cowing it with your military.

That is disturbing.
[/quote]
Given that we are readily recognized as the GODLIEST MILITARY EMPIRE IN CN, our strength is a presence whether we state it is or not. This is not disturbing, this is fact. MK can't do much other than weaken itself to overcome this fact, which isn't an option. Other parties however can. If you wish to be on equal footing in an interaction [i]act[/i] like you're on equal footing and disregard the military power. The impetus for this is on NSO.

[Denial]

[quote name='Felix von Agnu' timestamp='1289270810' post='2507044']
I believe Tyga is saying that you were abusing your stronger position to force NSO to pay for something that should have been a non-issue.
[/quote]
No, that is not all of what Tyga has been saying. He has been claiming that we are looking for any excuse to roll NSO. That is blatant misinformation.

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1289270818' post='2507045']
Not when your stronger negotiating position [i]is[/i] your military strength plus a fairly obvious desire to see NSO rolled. You can try and pretend the elephant in the room is not here but most if us can see it quite clearly.

If this was anyone else but NSO I highly doubt you'd have pursued it anywhere near as aggressively as you have, if at all.
[/quote]
If this was anyone but NSO, I think the negotiations would have gone much smoother; NSO has a habit of being intentionally obtuse and difficult to work with. If they were negotiating in good faith, I imagine the resolution to this issue would have been quite different.

I do not refute the idea that part of our negotiating strength is the disparity in strength and competence between the Kingdom and NSO. However, you seem to have this misguided idea stuck in your head that we wish to see NSO burn and that we are looking for any opportunity to see this wish fulfilled. If that was true, NSO would be in the process of being reduced to a crater as we speak.

Again, drop the hyperbole and conspiracy theories. I would even be willing to accept your point that the level of compensation is high had you made your case without invoking Henny Penny.

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1289270837' post='2507046']
For this to hold true, then your "superior negotiating position" would have to be backed by nothing but a bluff. Since I am assuming that is not true, then what is going on here is a 'negotiation' where your chances are 'augmented' by your "superior military" via that military being used if your goals are not met.

That is called intimidation, and people not giving in would, in accordance with the above, result in an "excuse" for an attack. Given that the initial demand is unreasonable, that means that said excuse has been manufactured in accordance with a political goal, which is why this is so harshly criticised.

The fact that the other party caved in before that point doesn't really change anything. Force is merely a tool to fulfil the hegemon's goals, force isn't a goal in itself.[/quote]
This is a complete falsification. Firstly, you make the erroneous assumption that we would have immediately resorted to military action had the initial demands not been met. This has been refuted throughout the topic, where Kingdom officials have stated they entered the negotiation with the intention for there to be some back and forth regarding the final figure. You know, kind of the very definition of the word negotiation. Secondly, you ignore the fact that our chances of fulfilling our goals through negotiation are improved simply by the perception of superior military and diplomatic skill; it is not necessary for us to immediately resort to actual warfare. Lastly, there is still a difference, no matter what you and Tygaland may think, between seeking compensation for a transgression and looking for 'any excuse' to attack the New Sith Order.

Overall, it is quite clear that your perception of what constitutes negotiation is still tainted by the precedents your own alliance set. The Kingdom does not involve itself in Pacifican 'negotiation' where an ultimatum is given at the beginning and there is no room for discussion. As has been stated numerous times, there was a clear opportunity for the New Sith Order to have a genuine, good faith discussion with our government regarding the nature of the final resolution. That opportunity was alive and kicking up until the point where it became clear that RV was more interested in playing the victim to score a few PR points than actually negotiating in the best interests of his own alliance.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Denial

[Kalasin]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1289271787' post='2507080']


At this point you should probably just follow Kev's earlier advice, or join MK. That you always come off as more MK-like than MK smacks of trying too hard, and certainly does ODN no favours. The work of people like Pingu who have created an intelligent and reasonable public persona for ODN is set back every time you come in to a thread with your attitude of 'yeah we're just like MK, check us out'.

And if you want to debate our history, feel free to start a new thread.
[/quote]

Feel free to actually rebut anything I said, when you get round to it!

[WorldConqueror]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1289271860' post='2507084']
Feel free to actually rebut anything I said, when you get round to it!
[/quote]
Feel free to not drag yet another thread wildly off-topic with anti-Pacifican diatribes. I know you can do it.

[RePePe]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1289271793' post='2507082']
Given that we are readily recognized as the GODLIEST MILITARY EMPIRE IN CN, our strength is a presence whether we state it is or not. This is not disturbing, this is fact. MK can't do much other than weaken itself to overcome this fact, which isn't an option. Other parties however can. If you wish to be on equal footing in an interaction [i]act[/i] like you're on equal footing and disregard the military power. The impetus for this is on NSO.
[/quote]

Man, it's as if I've heard this party-line before...

[Fernando12]

[quote name='Rafael Nadal' timestamp='1289271619' post='2507072']
Don't be upset that your claim that we're somehow foaming at the mouth for NSO is entirely untrue.
[/quote]
I'm not upset cuz even a blind man can see through your lie. [size="1"]Also, RF > RN[/size]

[TehChron]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1289269976' post='2507004']
[s]You can't[/s] It's inappropriate to hold MK responsible because NSO suffers a vertebral deficiency. If they had even a modicum of fortitude or self-respect away from the limelight nobody would have ever even heard of this. Instead they danced around simple questions to piss us off and then went public.

NSO is an alliance that cannot be communicated with by anybody on the "opposite side of the web". It isn't for a lack of our trying. Every effort to get questions answered is deliberately resisted. Every suggestion or request is trumped up to extortion. Every reasonable and expected request flatly denied. And every time they do it you defend them, encourage them, condone them.

I for one am sick of it. They chose not to negotiate and operate in anything resembling a professional manner. Our demands are our demands. I want a straight answer from NSO, knowing I'll never get it. Yes or no?
[/quote]
Oh get over yourself.

Ashok and Kevin may not have been the most experienced negotiators, but outright claiming that our internal guidelines regarding membership status "don't matter" when discussing a person's membership status, and then having the sheer gall to claim that we were the stubborn ones?

Either find a dictionary or get a clue. Clearly you're using words without knowing their definitions. Especially ironic given just how far your foot is inserted into your mouth.

[Denial]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1289271301' post='2507061']
I was responding directly to a post which suggested negotiating to a more reasonable level, so there isn't much subjectivity there.[/quote]
There is a high degree of subjectivity in any discussion of what constitutes reasonable or unreasonable compensation and negotiation.

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1289271301' post='2507061']
Oh, I see. You're trying to dismiss the implied threat of military force by making it seem like *any* form of army is a threat.

This negotiation involved the element of MK's ability to curbstomp NSO being used to further MK's goals in the discussion. To have a different negotiation, all you would need is not introducing that element in the first place.[/quote]
Oh, please. You know as well as any other that whether the mention of military matters entered the discussion or not, the disparity between MK and NSO would have still influenced the capacity for both parties to meet their respective goals from the negotiation. There's no way around that. Again, you make the false assumption that our [i]ability[/i] to roll NSO automatically translates into an [i]intention[/i] to roll NSO if our original demands were not met. That is quite a leap, and just plain ignorant.

[Kalasin]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1289272051' post='2507086']
Feel free to not drag yet another thread wildly off-topic with anti-Pacifican diatribes. I know you can do it.
[/quote]

Anti-Pacifican diatribes? Where? People are comparing MK to NPO, I stated the reaction that this thread would get if someone made it about NPO back when they were in power, and then you decided, rather than trying to disprove what I said, to tell me to go join MK.

Don't think I missed your attempt to kiss ODN's arse now that you think we could actually be useful to you. It's the same with STA's recent change of viewpoint towards us. Quite a difference from your posts on how optional we were, just a month or two ago!

[magicninja]

I would've laughed at MK.

1. NSO had no idea the contract was made, never mind the contract had no gov approval.

2. You made the right move. let the guy go and if they want to roll him they can roll him. That should've been enough.

3. I would've seen it for what it was. A test. They didn't really care about the money. They wanted to see if they could make you pay or at least what it took to make you pay. I seriously doubt they would have done anything.

[TehChron]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1289272264' post='2507096']
There is a high degree of subjectivity in any discussion of what constitutes reasonable or unreasonable compensation and negotiation.


Oh, please. You know as well as any other that whether the mention of military matters entered the discussion or not, the disparity between MK and NSO would have still influenced the capacity for both parties to meet their respective goals from the negotiation. There's no way around that. [b]Again, you make the false assumption that our [i]ability[/i] to roll NSO automatically translates into an [i]intention[/i] to roll NSO if our original demands were not met. That is quite a leap, and just plain ignorant.[/b]
[/quote]
Yeah, because we totally didnt learn our lessons the last few times we didn't take off the cuff threats seriously.

Ha.

First we're naive, then we're paranoid? Figure it out.

[Denial]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1289271104' post='2507053']
You do realise that bringing up someone's AA in no way invalidates their points, or strengthens yours in this situation. But do carry on, it is amusing to see you resort to 'HURR UR IN NPO LAWL' to somehow reinforce your failing argument.
[/quote]
Hey, guess what. Pointing out the alliance he belongs to (which is entirely valid, as it gives insight into his character and what he will and will not condone from the alliance he is a part of) was just one of several points refuting his claims.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1289271290' post='2507059']
I didn't say that his alliance affiliation made what he said invalid. I said that his post was hilarious. After the months, no, the [i]years[/i] pumping your sewage into the river, you're finally learning what it's like to live downstream. The resulting hypocrisy is tremendously amusing.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]I know you hate the NPO and Valhalla, and though this isn't about either of them, people do change. They experienced life and the top, and now they see what it's like to be at the bottom. There is no hypocrisy anywhere. Just a new perspective on their part. If they get back on top and act like they did in the past, then you might have a case for hypocrisy, but to be honest, the only fellows displaying any sort of hypocrisy or inconsistency here is MK and its supporters.[/color]

[TehChron]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1289272587' post='2507108']
Hey, guess what. Pointing out the alliance he belongs to (which is entirely valid, as it gives insight into his character and what he will and will not condone from the alliance he is a part of) was just one of several points refuting his claims.
[/quote]
Similar to how pointing out your alliance affiliation will make it clear that, as someone who is supporting the clear aggressor in this situation, you are an individual who has no argumentative credibility whatsoever.

I like it. We should use that more often.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Chron

[Denial]

[quote name='Chron' timestamp='1289272557' post='2507106']
Yeah, because we totally didnt learn our lessons the last few times we didn't take off the cuff threats seriously.

Ha.

First we're naive, then we're paranoid? Figure it out.
[/quote]
Maybe, just maybe, you guys should grow up, get over yourselves, and actually attempt some diplomacy rather than being intentionally difficult to work with in any discussion. Every single diplomatic conflict NSO has been involved in has been a result of your own childlike desires to somehow 'stick it to those new hegemonists'. The funny thing is, the only damage that has been dealt because of those tactics is to your own alliance.

[quote name='Chron' timestamp='1289272670' post='2507116']
Similar to how pointing out your alliance affiliation will make it clear that, as someone who is supporting the clear aggressor in this situation, you are an individual who has no argumentative credibility whatsoever.

I like it. We should use that more often.
[/quote]
what

Edited November 9, 2010 by Denial

[Bavaricar]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1289272264' post='2507096']
There is a high degree of subjectivity in any discussion of what constitutes reasonable or unreasonable compensation and negotiation.


Oh, please. You know as well as any other that whether the mention of military matters entered the discussion or not, the disparity between MK and NSO would have still influenced the capacity for both parties to meet their respective goals from the negotiation. There's no way around that. Again, you make the false assumption that our [i]ability[/i] to roll NSO automatically translates into an [i]intention[/i] to roll NSO if our original demands were not met. That is quite a leap, and just plain ignorant.
[/quote]

Straw. Man. From over here, it seems rather that the MK would prefer extracting cash and tech from less favorably positioned alliances over rolling them (or in this case having them rolled by smaller allies). Far more profitable and less "evil," subjectively speaking of course. <rolleyes>