A Statement from the Mushroom Kingdom

[ktarthan]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1289351383' post='2508757']
Insisting they have to pay for damages they didn't cause isn't negotiation.
[/quote]
Well no, I guess not, because NSO wouldn't reciprocate. Need two to negotiate. MK tried, at least.

[quote]
NSO were in the right to deny responsibility that wasn't theirs. No form of convoluted, invented logic can change that.

They didn't offer a lower figure because that would be the same as admitting responsibility. Again, they were not responsible.
[/quote]
It's admitting it every bit as much as eventually accepting the full amount.

[xoindotnler]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1289362717' post='2508982']
Man you come up with a lot of !@#$.
[/quote]
Some times I think he is hired by the other side to make opposite side look stupid.





Even I know that it is lying to myself and that he gets his facts at the place where the sun doesn't shine.

[Cager]

Since showing logs of all backroom dealings has become precedent regardless if they're positive or negative I would like to see all the logs we've missed out on, where dirty laundry could have been aired but wasn't. And you can't say it's private, because RV IS ALL ABOUT AIRING LAUNDRY SO ITS OK!

[rsoxbronco1]

[quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1289363117' post='2508993']
I'll admit I'm wrong when I see an MK/Athens treaty.

And the !@#$ I come up with is better than the !@#$ you guys came up with in this thread and in RV's thread.
[/quote]
I'm not sure how you managed to garble SCY's post and my response, but my point was crystal clear. SCY said former allies would not stand up for MK and I said he was mistaken. The end.

As I said earlier, MK has stood by some alliances during their FA blunders and it would by hypocritical, at the very least, for those alliances to not do the same.

[Fernando12]

[quote name='rsoxbronco1' timestamp='1289364272' post='2509020']
I'm not sure how you managed to garble SCY's post and my response, but my point was crystal clear. SCY said former allies would not stand up for MK and I said he was mistaken. The end.

As I said earlier, MK has stood by some alliances during their FA blunders and it would by hypocritical, at the very least, for those alliances to not do the same.
[/quote]
Do keep up will you...

SCY stated - Hey guys, no one will notice who we're giving the bird to if we cancel on everyone. - referring to MK's mass cancellation thread.

You said he was mistaken.

I said I agree with his assessment that MK canceled on everyone to mask the cancellations such as Athens that they didn't want to individually cancel and that you guys shouldn't expect no matter how much you suck up to MK to have a direct treaty with them any time soon. I also stated that if you do treaty each other then I will admit that I am wrong. I also stated to Bansky that my !@#$ is better than the !@#$, etc. etc.

[Geoffron X]

Looking at the log, it didn't really look like RV was rushing to get the PR. He plainly told MK that this was extortion. MK could have tried to lower the the price when called out on it, but they didn't. I'm not sure why they thought anyone would keep quiet about it?

[magicninja]

Told you, you should've laughed at MK up front. Their demands are absurd and everyone knew it. They wouldn't have done anything except maybe settle for their original $3mil back (which I still wouldn't have given them) and release of the dude who screwed them over.

This is just MK !@#$ting on the world saying they can do what they want. That may be fine for awhile but eventually people will tire of it. I know it's an attempt to stir things up but you may want to do it where you end up winning in the end.

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='rsoxbronco1' timestamp='1289364272' post='2509020']
I'm not sure how you managed to garble SCY's post and my response, but my point was crystal clear. SCY said former allies would not stand up for MK and I said he was mistaken. The end.

As I said earlier, MK has stood by some alliances during their FA blunders and it would by hypocritical, at the very least, for those alliances to not do the same.
[/quote]

Yeah, you actually have me there, I knew it when posted too, that you had already stood up for MK in this thread.

However, there have been a good many NpO, Ronin and STA posters critical of MK the past few days. There have been less Athens, GR, FOB, NV, Genesis, Rok and GOD posters than I would have expected before the mass cancellation* as well. So while you're very definite exception, I think my point still stands that the blow back that MK is facing now is much stronger, and less argued against by non-MK members than we would have seen had they not cancelled their treaties.

As for Rsox and Nando, you both are discussing two different arguments.

1. Was was MK's mass cancellation a PR move?

2. Did the mass cancellation lead a less defended MK (posting wise) both among all the allies they haven't resigned with, and specifically Athens.

*Some one needs to come up with a catchy name for that event.

Edited November 10, 2010 by supercoolyellow

[Lurunin]

wait you even admit to your price being way to high to begin with and shouldnt have been set and yet now your saying it needs to still be paid?

also

[quote]The Sith were disorganized, contradictory in their information, and, later, outright hostile.[/quote]

where was this part? the only hostility i saw in those logs were from MK

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289366149' post='2509040']
wait you even admit to your price being way to high to begin with and shouldnt have been set and yet now your saying it needs to still be paid?

also



where was this part? the only hostility i saw in those logs were from MK
[/quote]

Yeah, they were expecting RV to try and negotiate the price to go lower, instead of agree to it and then complain afterwards.

Crazy right?

[Lurunin]

really?

cause i've never had to negotiate a price down when it comes to reps...walk into a conference with another alliance's govt and you expect them to be moral about !@#$ like this. price is not over inflated yet still enough to cover costs + a bit of punitive fees

guess my idea of govt's acting respectfully to eachother (even on opposite treaty webs) is a wasted thought huh?

[kevin32891]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1289366706' post='2509045']
Yeah, they were expecting RV to try and negotiate the price to go lower, instead of agree to it and then complain afterwards.

Crazy right?
[/quote]

Maybe you should answer his question.

[JT Jag]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1289363056' post='2508991']
I'm surprised people can still argue over this when the truth is so !@#$@#$ obvious. Oh wait, this is the OWF, I'm not surprised.

The original reps demanded were obviously inflated. Yes, MK didn't look too good there. But either RV knows nothing about politics (and I should hope his tenure has taught him something) or he was just trying to be an instigator (something he's known for). Anyone who was actually interested in their alliance's wellbeing would have gone to the next level up, until they hit the top, before trying for public appeal. And by accepting the inflated reps, he lost his moral high ground. Going back on that is hard to excuse, no matter the circumstances. But RV was all too happy to jump the gun to get his PR weapon rather than negotiating a fair settlement. Seems like most diplomatic incidents these days are caused by a simple lack of patience and sincerity.

It just makes me wish I was in RV's place so I could do his job properly. *giggle* If he played this right, he could have had a good solution AND a fair PR weapon. That said, I do hope MK's negotiators are getting a dressing down in private for their part in this, Pip at least, a MoFA ought to know better.
[/quote]It is usually not my policy to agree with any posts that have emotive vocal sounds in them (I'm looking at you, Cortath), but this is a reasonably well thought out and unbiased take on the matter in my opinion.

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1289354371' post='2508827']
You had no problem doing it to NPO. What makes you so special that you're immune to being exposed?
[/quote]

Oh is that a fact? Please, don't leave me waiting for you to back up your words. Step up son.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289367025' post='2509049']
really?

cause i've never had to negotiate a price down when it comes to reps...walk into a conference with another alliance's govt and you expect them to be moral about !@#$ like this. price is not over inflated yet still enough to cover costs + a bit of punitive fees

guess my idea of govt's acting respectfully to eachother (even on opposite treaty webs) is a wasted thought huh?
[/quote]
You're right! It shouldn't have made a blind bit of difference that MK and NSO effectively loathe one another, they should have just held hands sung a few campfire songs, negotiated a fair amount and passed the peace pipe.

I've not actually heard of an instance where the NSO were at all reasonable during any negotiations so why on earth do they think they should be treated with any amount of respect if they themselves are utterly incapable of returning it? Every time I have heard about an incident involving NSO and another party it almost always ended badly. Even after negotiations NSO know how to kick up a fuss about it and give the other party the finger.

[quote name='kevin32891' timestamp='1289367057' post='2509051']
Maybe you should answer his question.
[/quote]

His question has been asked multiple times and answered multiple times. I believe Yevgeni did a pretty good job of explaining that earlier on in the thread.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Lurunin]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1289367809' post='2509059']
You're right! It shouldn't have made a blind bit of difference that MK and NSO effectively loathe one another, they should have just held hands sung a few campfire songs, negotiated a fair amount and passed the peace pipe.

I've not actually heard of an instance where the NSO were at all reasonable during any negotiations, every time I have heard about an incident involving NSO and another party it almost always ended badly. Even after negotiations NSO know how to kick up a fuss about it.
[/quote]

now that wasnt so bad huh?

next please explain to me how NSO was being unreasonable in this...wait did you seriously call that negotiations?

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1289365766' post='2509036']
This is just MK !@#$ting on the world saying they can do what they want. That may be fine for awhile but eventually people will tire of it. I know it's an attempt to stir things up but you may want to do it where you end up winning in the end.
[/quote]
As a neutral observer I couldn't help but notice that MK would have easy won in the end should it have gotten violent.

[Lurunin]

you know i'm still waiting for answers to my questions right?

so instead of dodging around with all these !@#$%^&* posts can someone with half a brain please give me a real answer?

here i'll even quote my post again so i can keep it fresh in your mind while you type up your response:

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289366149' post='2509040']
wait you even admit to your price being way to high to begin with and shouldnt have been set and yet now your saying it needs to still be paid?

also

"The Sith were disorganized, contradictory in their information, and, later, outright hostile."


where was this part? the only hostility i saw in those logs were from MK
[/quote]

[JT Jag]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289368385' post='2509069']
you know i'm still waiting for answers to my questions right?

so instead of dodging around with all these !@#$%^&* posts can someone with half a brain please give me a real answer?

here i'll even quote my post again so i can keep it fresh in your mind while you type up your response:
[/quote]I believe that MK's stance on this, and my apologies if I am misrepresenting it, is that while 15M/250 tech was too much for the initial tradebreaking incident, it is NOT too much after NSO unnecessarily took the matter public, especially considering it's a sum they had agreed to.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289368017' post='2509064']
now that wasnt so bad huh?

next please explain to me how NSO was being unreasonable in this...wait did you seriously call that negotiations?
[/quote]

They agreed to pay an amount of money without attempting to negotiate a lower amount and then proceeded to try and smear MK by claiming they were being extorted. RV has claimed he believed that MK would have rolled NSO had he not accepted the offer then and there, I don't think that's a very reasonable judgement of character for MK. I don't actually recall any moment in time where MK have outright declared on someone because they tried to negotiate a lower reparation amount. I know a lot of you preach this stupid idea that their actions are as bad as the NPOs actions from years ago but they really aren't and it would be just great if you could all just stop and think for a second about what you are actually saying for a second. Maybe then we could move on from this stupid misconception and get on with something a bit more interesting rather than the same lines being repeated in every thread. This place is like one big echo chamber.

Now, I know I went off on a bit of a tangent there but all of that considered, I think that's pretty unreasonable don't you?

[Banksy]

[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1289365893' post='2509038']
1. Was was MK's mass cancellation a PR move?

2. Did the mass cancellation lead a less defended MK (posting wise) both among all the allies they haven't resigned with, and specifically Athens.[/quote]

Since you summarised it concisely.

1) No. I can't believe we are still having to say this to people. 2) This is impossible to answer unless we go back, un-cancel all of our treaties and go through this entire process again. But considering the fact none of our allies have ever had an issue with criticising us in the past (which is part of the reasons we respect them so much) I don't think it would make any difference.

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1289366149' post='2509040']
where was this part? the only hostility i saw in those logs were from MK
[/quote]
One day, if you ever decide to look beyond the OP of a thread, you will notice that the logs contained in the OP were not the entirety of the interactions between MK and the NSO (as stated throughout the other thread, and this one).

Edited November 10, 2010 by Banksy

[Lurunin]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1289368543' post='2509070']
I believe that MK's stance on this, and my apologies if I am misrepresenting it, is that while 15M/250 tech was too much for the initial tradebreaking incident, it is NOT too much after NSO unnecessarily took the matter public, especially considering it's a sum they had agreed to.
[/quote]

so basically after being called out on their own wrong in front of the world to decide their going to keep bringing their name through the PR mud? makes sense i guess?


[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1289368544' post='2509071']
They agreed to pay an amount of money without attempting to negotiate a lower amount and then proceeded to try and smear MK by claiming they were being extorted. RV has claimed he believed that MK would have rolled NSO had he not accepted the offer then and there, I don't think that's a very reasonable judgement of character for MK. I don't actually recall any moment in time where MK have outright declared on someone because they tried to negotiate a lower reparation amount. I know a lot of you preach this stupid idea that their actions are as bad as the NPOs actions from years ago but they really aren't and it would be just great if you could all just stop and think for a second about what you are actually saying for a second. Maybe then we could move on from this stupid misconception and get on with something a bit more interesting rather than the same lines being repeated in every thread. This place is like one big echo chamber.

Now, I know I went off on a bit of a tangent there but all of that considered, I think that's pretty unreasonable don't you?
[/quote]

i'm not comparing MK to NPO at all...though one can not deny that MK does have a high ass ego and if someone tries to throw them off that horse they get attacked by "NO U/DO SOMETHIN BOUT IT" replies.

the way i see it is this...MK has themselves positioned highly to now the strongest bloc in CN, not to mention others through chaining. NSO is probly still in a weakened state after the last few wars they've been dragged into and i doubt any member wants to get dragged into another war anytime soon.

next...should an alliance have to pay reps for a ghost nation? no...even if the guy was a full member, NSO cut them loose and fed him to the wolves because he violated the membership agreement (i can only speculate but pretty sure they operate like any other alliance in regards to this). and even if they should have paid reps, for whatever reason? you're going to tell me that a trade that was bought w/o being sanctioned by NSO govt is grounds for everyone in that TC to get reps paid to?

Hell to the no...

unless MK approached NSO govt when setting up that trade and they told MK that it would cost them 3mil, theirs no reason why their alliance should have been dragged into this at all other than to cut ties with the guy

also when someone walks into the "negotiation room" and flat out says

[quote]<Yevgeni> We expected you to realize who has the upper hand here. Actually, we expected your government members to realize that as it's quite !@#$@#$ obvious.[/quote]

kinda sounds a bit shady to me

[Lurunin]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1289368804' post='2509074']
One day, if you ever decide to look beyond the OP of a thread, you will notice that the logs contained in the OP were not the entirety of the interactions between MK and the NSO (as stated throughout the other thread, and this one).
[/quote]

you see, i came in bout 43 pages late on this thread, yet in the last one i did not come across anything of the sort....if you can link me to a few posts i'd be more than happy to retract my previous statement

[Geoffron X]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1289368543' post='2509070']
I believe that MK's stance on this, and my apologies if I am misrepresenting it, is that while 15M/250 tech was too much for the initial tradebreaking incident, it is NOT too much after NSO unnecessarily took the matter public, especially considering it's a sum they had agreed to.
[/quote]
Answer this, then. Why does bringing things into public, non-secret things mind you, have a cost?

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

Hey, might want to check the context there, Lurunin. At that point in the logs, RV had already agreed to the figure, he was just giving us a nice lecture about his principles and where he considered his alliance to be standing, etc.

[quote]<Rebel_Virginia> Just a power trip, and nothing more.
[b]<Rebel_Virginia> And I realize who has the upper hand here.[/b]
<Rebel_Virginia> I may not like it, but I don't think 15 mil and 250 tech is worth dying over.
<Rebel_Virginia> But that don't mean I won't call this as it is.
<Rebel_Virginia> You can deny it all you want, but it don't change the fact.
<Epiphanus> You call it whatever you want, we aren't doing anything we wouldn't do with anyone else.
<Yevgeni> Now, can we reply?
<Rebel_Virginia> Go right ahead.
<Rebel_Virginia> And Epiphanus, I'd like to see you pull this on RoK or Fark or someone.
<Rebel_Virginia> I doubt you would.
<Yevgeni> We expected you to realize who has the upper hand here. Actually, we expected your government members to realize that as it's quite !@#$@#$ obvious.
<Rebel_Virginia> Because you know, you ain't stupid.
<Rebel_Virginia> You know they wouldn't play for this !@#$.
[b]<Yevgeni> However, having the upper hand and using it are two different things and we aren't using it.[/b][/quote]

Also, considering RV was recognizing it himself, I don't see anything shady in what you quoted.