Disease of the elderly threatens thousands

[Solaris]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1298759983' post='2645624']
You're saying you didn't know?

Everyone else did. It had been in the works for months at that point.

This was back in the day when people used to plan wars for months using diplomacy, instead of now where you guys like to launch with 24 hours notice.
[/quote]
I personally didn't know. I don't think everyone else did either, unless your definition of everyone is very very different from what I understand it to be.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]I was afraid you would mistake my meaning. I'm serious, it would have been better--back up, since they were too afraid to fight--it would have been better if they had just moved off Green like Grämlins.[/quote]
Then, my apologies. But I disagree, Green was (and is) an important part of Viridia's identity. They were correct to not permit that to be taken away from them by force. (Perhaps you folks from other teams don't understand the strength of Green identity, particularly in 2007.)

[Cornelius]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1298759983' post='2645624']
You're saying you didn't know?

Everyone else did. It had been in the works for months at that point.

This was back in the day when people used to plan wars for months using diplomacy, instead of now where you guys like to launch with 24 hours notice.
[/quote]
I personally didn't know until Doitzel's log dump which happened about a week after the treat cancellation. If the war with FIST hadn't happened, we likely would have done our best to stop the war before it happened, as we would have been heavily tied to both sides. Since we likely would not have been successful with that, the only choice would have been to stay neutral or choose a side. I can see a dozen different fronts we could've been involved in from our treaties at the time. I can't say what would have eventually occurred, as I was not Lord among other things, I can say siding against Polar would've been a very unpopular choice within gov and the alliance. Heck, the fact that some Viridians left the alliance when we dropped the treaty shows that they still held some support after the FIST war.

[Monster]

Instead, they used to start wars over ooc: rerolls.

[HalfEmpty]

I just want to echo Maximum Bob about the [i]Strength of Green[/i]. It is long lasting and has a new package that can be displayed anywhere with pride. I remain yours, in black and white and GREEN.

[size="1"]doyle and deh dane und Berbach (the serious one)[/size]

Edited February 27, 2011 by HalfEmpty

[leprecon]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1298759983' post='2645624']
You're saying you didn't know?

Everyone else did. It had been in the works for months at that point.

This was back in the day when people used to plan wars for months using diplomacy, instead of now where you guys like to launch with 24 hours notice.
[/quote]

[b][size="7"]SO WHAT?![/size][/b]

How the hell is that relevant?
Even if this were true,[b] which it isn't[/b], how does that make attacking our protectorate ok?
You guys attacked a protectorate of your MADP partner giving [b]90 minutes[/b] notice. Not two months, not 24 hours, but 90 minutes.[b] And this wasn't the amount of time your give your enemies, it was the amount of time given to your allies.[/b] I am pretty sure that isn't ok.
Even if we knew you were getting rolled [b](which we didn't)[/b] it wouldn't change the fact that you guys decided to decimate our allies. In any other circumstance rolling a protectorate like that will get you rolled in less than a day.

[quote]<+electron_sponge>[i][To Ardus, lord of the VE at the time][/i] #1 Your cancelling that treaty was some childish !@#$%^&* and our members want you guys dead[/quote]
The arrogance. We cancel a treaty and we are the bad guys? We decide who we ally ourselves to and who we don't ally ourselves to makes us childish?

We all know how those negotiations ended, and as I said before I regret that I have to dig up ancient history but I will do so for as long as you pretend that Polaris never did anything wrong. You attacked an MADP partners protectorate with 90 whole minutes as a warning. Allies don't attack each others protectorates, only enemies do. We had every reason to cancel our treaty and in the events after that you only gave us more reasons.
[quote]<+electron_sponge>[i][Again to Ardus][/i] I suggest you go $%&@ yourself[/quote]

And please don't whine about me bringing up the 90 minutes build-up since it isn't relevant today because you thought that bringing up the two months build-up was relevant. I truly regret having to bring this up but I will do so for as long as people pretend it is relevant today. (Which it isn't to neither side, unless you want to know which side prefers rewriting history)

Edited February 27, 2011 by leprecon

[Believland]

[quote name='leprecon' timestamp='1298738489' post='2645451']
[b]YOU DON'T ATTACK YOUR ALLIES PROTECTORATE![/b]
You just don't. Especially not if you hold an MADP with that ally.
But I suppose everything we could have done would be criticised.
[list][*]We join in on the fight for FIST; we are backstabbers to our MADP partner NpO.[*]We join in on the fight for NpO; we are backstabbers who raid our own protectorates.[*]We cancel on NpO; we are backstabbers who knew the WOTC was going to happen 2 months beforehand.[*]We cancel on FIST; our protectorate agreements are worth nothing since we don't protect the alliances that sign one with us.[*]We don't cancel on anyone; our protectorate agreements are worth nothing since we don't protect the alliances that sign one with us.[/list]
You don't put allies in a really crappy position like that.
[/quote]

So where does attacking your OTP's come into play?

[Kevanovia]

I just pray that I'm not next.

[color="#FF0000"]*Goes to the pharmacist for appropriate medication to prevent this horrible disease* [/color]

[Bob Janova]

[quote name='Believland' timestamp='1298768506' post='2645712']
So where does attacking your OTP's come into play?
[/quote]
In before someone non-Citadel asks what 'OTP' means. Also, I don't believe we've attacked anyone who is a treaty partner of a bloc we're a member of, have we?

[Believland]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1298769335' post='2645717']
In before someone non-Citadel asks what 'OTP' means. Also, I don't believe we've attacked anyone who is a treaty partner of a bloc we're a member of, have we?
[/quote]

I wouldn't say that OTP(Outside Treaty Partner) is specific just to blocs. I know OTS uses the idea of non OTP aggression. While your treaty with RoK never said you couldn't attack an OTP we both know it's bad form. By the way, this isn't a shot at VE but everyone who hits OTP's.

[leprecon]

[quote name='Believland' timestamp='1298768506' post='2645712']
So where does attacking your OTP's come into play?
[/quote]

It doesn't.

How about writing your post a little more like this:
[quote]What about attacking OTP's that comes into play like this: [...][/quote]

Do you expect me to state your argument against my position myself?

[Believland]

[quote name='leprecon' timestamp='1298769684' post='2645719']
It doesn't.

How about writing your post a little more like this:


Do you expect me to state your argument against my position myself?
[/quote]

Because I didn't want to see your response.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Cornelius' timestamp='1298762753' post='2645650']
I personally didn't know until Doitzel's log dump which happened about a week after the treat cancellation.
[/quote]
Uhh... Did you guys not talk to anyone in Citadel back then?

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1298765377' post='2645682']
Instead, they used to start wars over ooc: rerolls.
[/quote]
TOP, who had been campaigning for quite some time at that point, didn't start a war over rerolls.

That whole business came later to be honest.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1298769335' post='2645717']
In before someone non-Citadel asks what 'OTP' means. Also, I don't believe we've attacked anyone who is a treaty partner of a bloc we're a member of, have we?
[/quote]
You guys hit someone who was a treaty partner of a direct ally, which was the beef you guys had with Polar over FIST to be honest.

[Ashoka the Great]

I must apologize for being so late to this august gathering of medical minds. Moreover, I must also apologize for not sharing information with other world leaders.

Nearly two years ago, my nation's scientists [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=61826&view=findpost&p=1648345"]identified a strange malady[/url] that caused people to criticize actions they had themselves previously partaken in.

We did not share this discovery with the world because we believed that it was non-viral. Indeed, we were of the opinion that it's likely cause was some kind of fall, blunt trauma to the skull or some other kind of brain injury.

However, one 'renegade' scientist, a certain Dr. Manamana-Doo-Doo-Doo-Doo-Doo IV, insisted that the disease was viral in nature. Although we now know that this brilliant young man was right, he was nevertheless wrong as to its origin. (Dr. Manamana-Doo-Doo-Doo-Doo-Doo IV identified the unfortunate Mr. Janova as the so-called 'Patient Zero'.)

[Ardus]

[quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1298757657' post='2645603']
Sounds a lot like the current rhetoric against NPO .

It's obviously representative of the alliance. [b]You don't reform with the exact same name and with literally over 50 members (as I recall anyway) in a very short time frame and then claim you're totally brand new.[/b] If NPO is held to their actions during the Viridicide, then I believe VE should also have to carry that burden.

Although I will grant that disbandment has less stigma associated with it than forcing/supporting that disbanding but both paths can be made up for.
[/quote]
Except Viridia never did that. To the contrary, it insisted that it was the same. Same culture, same alliance, same people, same everything. Critics repeatedly suggested or claimed otherwise, that somehow the "new" Viridia was fundamentally different from the "old" Viridia, that it had lost its "honor", or some other rhetorical crap. And yet despite these barbs that Viridia changed during its absence, these same critics love to cite the Green Civil War and mock the Entente for it, suggesting that it remained the same. You don't get to have it both ways.

Furthermore they mock an alliance for the decision of one man who not only is not in Viridian government, but is not in Viridia at all and has not been for [i]years[/i]. The Entente is led by a man who did not exist until after the GCW. It's government is populated by faces uninvolved in the decision making for that conflict. Meanwhile the same individuals defend Pacifica as a "changed" alliance since Karma with a fresh leader in Cortath, ignoring that he was an influential individual in Pacifica during and before that war, further ignoring that much of the government below the Emperor remains curiously similar to what it has always been.

The current problem with NPO is that there is no reason for anyone to believe that it has changed in the least. It has made few to no attempts to reconcile with those it wronged nor has it truly admitted to its crimes for what they are. A second [i]Pax Pacifica[/i] would be little different from the first and an absolutely unacceptable outcome. It is to be prevented at any cost, by any means necessary.

To whom does Viridia owe an apology for its maneuver in the Green Civil War? Only its own for failing to protect them. And I did that. Repeatedly.

Edited February 27, 2011 by Ardus

[D34th]

[quote name='Bergerland' timestamp='1298710143' post='2645345']
Polar members showing their ignorance as usual...

I can make vague passive-aggressive statements too! It's so fun!
[/quote]

VE member doing "NO U" posts, how surprising!

[Believland]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1298776300' post='2645787']
Except Viridia never did that. To the contrary, it insisted that it was the same. Same culture, same alliance, same people, same everything. Critics repeatedly suggested or claimed otherwise, that somehow the "new" Viridia was fundamentally different from the "old" Viridia, that it had lost its "honor", or some other rhetorical crap. And yet despite these barbs that Viridia changed during its absence, these same critics love to cite the Green Civil War and mock the Entente for it, suggesting that it remained the same. You don't get to have it both ways.

Furthermore they mock an alliance for the decision of one man who not only is not in Viridian government, but is not in Viridia at all and has not been for [i]years[/i]. The Entente is led by a man who did not exist until after the GCW. It's government is populated by faces uninvolved in the decision making for that conflict. Meanwhile the same individuals defend Pacifica as a "changed" alliance since Karma with a fresh leader in Cortath, ignoring that he was an influential individual in Pacifica during and before that war, further ignoring that much of the government below the Emperor remains curiously similar to what it has always been.

The current problem with NPO is that there is no reason for anyone to believe that it has changed in the least. It has made few to no attempts to reconcile with those it wronged nor has it truly admitted to its crimes for what they are. A second [i]Pax Pacifica[/i] would be little different from the first and an absolutely unacceptable outcome. It is to be prevented at any cost, by any means necessary.

To whom does Viridia owe an apology for its maneuver in the Green Civil War? Only its own for failing to protect them. And I did that. Repeatedly.
[/quote]

I have to say, while I do understand what you're saying, I believe you're completely off. Even if they have changed their alliance's views and thoughts when you do reform you take on that history. To make a modern day example, it's when someone mentions that ODN are terrible allies because of their history. Now, ODN's allies have claimed that it's changed but you still have that history. Now please don't over-analyze the analogy because that's not what matters. It's the fact that when you carry a name you carry what that name means.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1298776300' post='2645787']
Except Viridia never did that. To the contrary, it insisted that it was the same. Same culture, same alliance, same people, same everything.
[/quote]
Right, which is why it is logical to criticize them for actions that they took in the now-distant past; if they are the same alliance as they were in 2007, then well, you can see the obvious inference.

The real problem is it's just basic lunacy to think that any alliance is the same as it was in 2007. But while VE continues to insist that they are, well they open themselves up to the whole "Disband at the first sign of trouble" canard.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1298778709' post='2645818']
Right, which is why it is logical to criticize them for actions that they took in the now-distant past; if they are the same alliance as they were in 2007, then well, you can see the obvious inference.

The real problem is it's just basic lunacy to think that any alliance is the same as it was in 2007. But while VE continues to insist that they are, well they open themselves up to the whole "Disband at the first sign of trouble" canard.
[/quote]
But you don't get to play that card while playing the "you changed" card at the same time. That's the point I'm hammering at.

[Earogema]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1298776300' post='2645787']
snip
[/quote]
Believland said exactly what I meant.

[quote name='Believland' timestamp='1298777916' post='2645808']
I have to say, while I do understand what you're saying, I believe you're completely off. Even if they have changed their alliance's views and thoughts when you do reform you take on that history. To make a modern day example, it's when someone mentions that ODN are terrible allies because of their history. Now, ODN's allies have claimed that it's changed but you still have that history. Now please don't over-analyze the analogy because that's not what matters. It's the fact that when you carry a name you carry what that name means.
[/quote]
Although I suppose I gave off the wrong impression by relating VE to NPO. I was more saying that the VE action sticks because it's what you did, even if it was 4 years ago.

[Schattenmann]

derp, wrong thread.

Edited February 27, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1298779519' post='2645822']
But you don't get to play that card while playing the "you changed" card at the same time. That's the point I'm hammering at.
[/quote]
Yep, true enough. However generally with me at least I try to stick to the second card, which I don't consider a card really as it should be completely obvious that no alliance of any size is more than generally similar to its four-years-ago version.

The problem here is that 90% of all posters here are, well, idiotic hypocrites, and that's regardless of side. So you get ... a sense of confusion.

[Bergerland]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1298777186' post='2645799']
VE member doing "NO U" posts, how surprising!
[/quote]

I'm amused that you have a problem with my post when it's essentially your own post. You might want to rethink things.

Edited February 28, 2011 by Bergerland

[Kowalski]

[quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1298231787' post='2639678']
It's tough to watch him turning into a self-caricature
[/quote]
That's a bit rich. Pretty much anyone who starts threads in this area pointing out the flaws in others has already become that.

[Cornelius]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1298775103' post='2645774']
Uhh... Did you guys not talk to anyone in Citadel back then? [/quote]
I'm pretty sure that was around the time that Gramlins left Green, so ties there were rather strained. So yes, we didn't really have any ties within Citadel at the time.
[quote]You guys hit someone who was a treaty partner of a direct ally, which was the beef you guys had with Polar over FIST to be honest.
[/quote]
Except RoK's leader at the time the war began, Taut, gave us his support when we laid out all the evidence in front of him. It seemed to us that they recognized the spy attack as an aggressive act towards us. Only later did we learn that they only consider a DoW as an aggressive attack. Theoretically you could spy them, and if they attacked you for it you could claim that you were defending ourselves.