Jump to content

Joint Poison Clan - iFOK Announcement


Derwood1

Recommended Posts

The following quote is taken directly from the Poison Clan wiki
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Poison_Clan

[quote]Our unofficial motto is: Friends > Infra. [/quote]

I'm just thinking you guys may want to start brainstorming a new unofficial motto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1292938568' post='2548289']
It is BS that you need to put non-chaining clause into a treaty. It's inherent to every relationship.
[/quote]
Well, most non-chaining clauses are poorly written. I generally just write the defense clause in such a way that it only triggers under certain specified conditions.

But no. It's not inherent to every relationship. The obvious example is the MADP.

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1292938568' post='2548289']
Now I know all of this is e-lawyering, and it is really sad that everyone tries to bend the written word for their benefit.

Say you punch my girlfriend for no reason at all, would anyone really dare to take offense when I give you a punch in return?
[/quote]
You are trying to use an analogy based on individuals and apply it to state actions. It doesn't work.

States sign treaties in order to advance their political goals. Sometimes those political goals mean they go to war; alliances sign chaining MDOAPs in order to have the protection of their allies available even when they're the ones initiating the war.

That's the whole point of signing the treaty.

Individuals don't get to go to war. If an individual decides to kill your girlfriend, then that's murder, and illegal. If a state orders it, it's either an execution or war, and (usually) legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='King Wally' timestamp='1292938689' post='2548291']
The following quote is taken directly from the Poison Clan wiki
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Poison_Clan



I'm just thinking you guys may want to start brainstorming a new unofficial motto.
[/quote]
Considering the path NEW took, calling them friends may be questionable. Allies, sure. Friends don't try to pull you into a fight without your consent just for the sake of starting a fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post explaining the concept of an optional aggression clause #3452

Edit: It's not like NEW really has any room for complaint either given their behaviour in BiPolar. Has that been mentioned yet?

Edited by Voytek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1292938900' post='2548295']
Well, most non-chaining clauses are poorly written. I generally just write the defense clause in such a way that it only triggers under certain specified conditions.

But no. It's not inherent to every relationship. The obvious example is the MADP.
[/quote]
This is true, but that's also the only reason to sign an MADP. So you don't get this debate! :P
[quote]
You are trying to use an analogy based on individuals and apply it to state actions. It doesn't work.

States sign treaties in order to advance their political goals. Sometimes those political goals mean they go to war; alliances sign chaining MDOAPs in order to have the protection of their allies available even when they're the ones initiating the war.

That's the whole point of signing the treaty.

Individuals don't get to go to war. If an individual decides to kill your girlfriend, then that's murder, and illegal. If a state orders it, it's either an execution or war, and (usually) legal.
[/quote]
Yes, I was aware the analogy wasn't perfect, but the point came across.

In any case, I don't think non-chaining clauses have to be present in a treaty, since it is the way the war started that makes how you have to interpret a treaty. And I have outlined in an earlier post how I see it in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And people wonder why Planet Bob is on its death bed. Who would have though a bloc that should have been shaking things up would end up making its members timid and the bloc completely worthless. Agree or not agree with what NEW has done but in the end when they get attacked you roll with your allies. I don't know iFOK but, PC I know you and this is not you. Well its nice to see NEWs other allies at least are willing to back them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The Big Bad' timestamp='1292940500' post='2548311']
And people wonder why Planet Bob is on its death bed. Who would have though a bloc that should have been shaking things up would end up making its members timid and the bloc completely worthless. Agree or not agree with what NEW has done but in the end when they get attacked you roll with your allies. I don't know iFOK but, PC I know you and this is not you. Well its nice to see NEWs other allies at least are willing to back them.
[/quote]
Planet Bob is not on its death bed because of optional aggression clauses, sorry!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1292938069' post='2548281']
This would all be relevant if NEW hadn't signed a pile of chaining MDOAPs. Read the treaties, they are clearly chaining MDOAPs.

The whole point of signing non-chaining treaties is so that you can use the logic espoused here.
[/quote]

When are you in charge of deciding if our treaties are chaining or non-chaining? All our treaties are non-chaining. Stop worrying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292939603' post='2548306']
Without looking to speak for either PC or iFOK, I'd say that's a reasonable assessment.
[/quote]
You can speak for them, it's a perk that comes along with the marionette kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='JBone' timestamp='1292945916' post='2548370']
You can speak for them, it's a perk that comes along with the marionette kit.
[/quote]

I'm the GOONS, not PB, Viceroy.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1292948323' post='2548395']
This is true. Sir William speaks for me, in all things.
[/quote]

All part of the job. :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292949910' post='2548418']
I'm the GOONS, not PB, Viceroy.



All part of the job. :smug:
[/quote]
Smoke & Mirrors.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1292950890' post='2548426']
My good man, I no longer cowtow to the one known as.... Archon. Sir William 4lyfe!
[/quote]
There'll be hell to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='King Wally' timestamp='1292938689' post='2548291']
The following quote is taken directly from the Poison Clan wiki
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Poison_Clan

I'm just thinking you guys may want to start brainstorming a new unofficial motto.
[/quote]

I have one for them. Spheres>Friends

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears as if all of [url="http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=nusantara+elite+warriors&input1=poison+clan"]PC won't go in,[/url] that [url="http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=Fark&input1=nusantara+elite+warriors"]some of them will.[/url]

To those in PC who left to fight for NEW, nothing bad can be said of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's as if PC and iFOK won't have NEW's backs if any bandwagoners jump in, or that they wouldn't have NEW's backs under any other circumstances, or that they wouldn't have their others allies' (fellow PB signatories included) backs if needed.

Lets be real, none of that is true.

What is true is that PC and iFOK recognized right from wrong here, and had to make some tough decisions both for themselves but also for their allies (who overwhelmingly weren't on board for NEW's suicide run).

"NEW's actions are despicable. Anybody who supports said actions are despicable... PC and iFOK aren't supporting them!? WTF, those cowards!" Girls, please.

Edited by SirWilliam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292956921' post='2548527']
It's as if PC and iFOK won't have NEW's backs if any bandwagoners jump in, or that they wouldn't have NEW's backs under any other circumstances, or that they wouldn't have their others allies' (fellow PB signatories included) backs if needed.

Lets be real, none of that is true.

What is true is that PC and iFOK recognized right from wrong here, and had to make some tough decisions both for themselves but also for their allies (who overwhelmingly weren't on board for NEW's suicide run).

"NEW's actions are despicable. Anybody who supports said actions are despicable... PC and iFOK aren't supporting them!? WTF, those cowards!" Girls, please.
[/quote]
The idea here is not step up or down according to actions, as you should know what kind of partners you sign treaties with. Rather the issue is how a MDoAP does not grant protection for an ally. The agression was on DF, they need no help there, however they are defending against all other parties. This is where explanatins fall into the realm of excuses. *personal non sanctioned opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292956921' post='2548527'][...]

"NEW's actions are despicable. Anybody who supports said actions are despicable... PC and iFOK aren't supporting them!? WTF, those cowards!" Girls, please.
[/quote]
You forgot this part: "FEAR and WFF support NEW? How good and awesome, hail!"

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...