Cager Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1300008315' post='2662751'] Well, I cannot give Vlad's opinion on this apology but I do want to ask Cager how easily his opinion changes when it comes to FAN. After all, it was cager who said this in regards to FAN being given white peace. Also, why do you care so much Kalasin? How does it work Cager, NPO cannot apologise but you can? Actually, have you ever apologised to FAN for your part in the hostilities against them? Or am I asking a hypocrite a question he cannot answer with an honest answer or did FAN suddenly become your best friend when you left NPO? If only NPO made friends as easily as you do Cager, they wouldn't be friends of merit but that is beside the point isn't it? [/quote] I've been namedropped. I love being name dropped. Anyway. At the time of that posting which I'm guessing is from 2009, yeah I didn't agree with white peace. We had fought them for two years and I didn't like them. Did I think the war was right, personally no I did not. However I had orders to do my job and fight and did so. Going against the flow in Pacifica is something you get chasitised for so I kept quiet, said my rah rah boo FAN and did my job. Do I owe FAN an apology, nope because you just issued one on my behalf. If you're apologizing for rolling and rerolling FAN then you're apologizing for me. I hold no ill will towards FAN. Also cheap shot with the friends of merit. You just insulted members of your Imperial Staff who I consider good friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaciaut Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) [quote name='WarLaw' timestamp='1300042050' post='2663132'] This is between NPO and Fan. This apology is meant solely for Fan. Others who pass by who are not in Fan can read it and take it for what it's worth. If you are not in Fan and you really think your opinion should be heard on this part, then please let us know, we would like to hear it, but do so in a respectful and intellectual manner, preferably some where else than this thread. [/quote] Why is this here and not on FAN grounds then? Edited March 13, 2011 by uaciaut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='uaciaut' timestamp='1300042335' post='2663138'] Why is this here and not on FAN grounds then? [/quote] In general, people seem to prefer these sorts of things be done in the public venue. Also, during times of war it is sometimes difficult to maintain direct lines of communication between the general populace of opposing alliances. This delivered by the NPO government to the FAN government may have held some official impact but it would not have held the same level of strength for the overall membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktarthan Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='WarLaw' timestamp='1300042050' post='2663132'] This is between NPO and Fan. This apology is meant solely for Fan. Others who pass by who are not in Fan can read it and take it for what it's worth. If you are not in Fan and you really think your opinion should be heard on this part, then please let us know, we would like to hear it, but do so in a respectful and intellectual manner, preferably some where else than this thread. [/quote] If you want the whole world to see your apology, then you get to hear what the whole world thinks about it. If you cared about giving this only to FAN, then it could have been delivered to them directly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='ktarthan' timestamp='1300042646' post='2663143'] If you want the whole world to see your apology, then you get to hear what the whole world thinks about it. If you cared about giving this only to FAN, then it could have been delivered to them directly. [/quote] Please see my comment above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktarthan Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300042703' post='2663144'] Please see my comment above. [/quote] Sure, that's fine. If you think that this has more weight in a public forum, then I won't disagree. But the key word here is [i]public[/i] forum, and if you want the benefits of such a venue you must also accept that it is freely available for the public to comment on it. Expecting otherwise is almost as laughable as when Peggy Sue asked for no negative replies in a thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='mikk206' timestamp='1300029390' post='2662946'] Well if you'd read the OP it pretty much says so as well. PS. When did you wonder off to Umbrella? [/quote] About seven months ago, where did you think I was? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300042575' post='2663140'] In general, people seem to prefer these sorts of things be done in the public venue. Also, during times of war it is sometimes difficult to maintain direct lines of communication between the general populace of opposing alliances. This delivered by the NPO government to the FAN government may have held some official impact but it would not have held the same level of strength for the overall membership. [/quote] Each venue has upsides and downsides. Making this apology before the entire Cyberverse might possibly give it more weight, but it also gives everyone who sees it an opportunity to comment upon it. In other words, you've got to take what comes with the territory. It doesn't make any sense to make an apology in public and then get ticked off when it is commented upon by individuals not in FAN or NPO. Edited March 13, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='ktarthan' timestamp='1300042864' post='2663145'] Sure, that's fine. If you think that this has more weight in a public forum, then I won't disagree. But the key word here is [i]public[/i] forum, and if you want the benefits of such a venue you must also accept that it is freely available for the public to comment on it. Expecting otherwise is almost as laughable as when Peggy Sue asked for no negative replies in a thread. [/quote] I will agree with that sentiment. I don't believe anyone is stating that you and the rest of the gallery can not have your opinions, simply that such opinions are not important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrenster Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='ktarthan' timestamp='1300042864' post='2663145'] Sure, that's fine. If you think that this has more weight in a public forum, then I won't disagree. But the key word here is [i]public[/i] forum, and if you want the benefits of such a venue you must also accept that it is freely available for the public to comment on it. Expecting otherwise is almost as laughable as when Peggy Sue asked for no negative replies in a thread. [/quote] Expecting negative comments or no is not the point. The point of clarification is whom the apology is for. And some people seem to think that it is for themselves and seem to be critiquing it as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1300043358' post='2663162'] Each venue has upsides and downsides. Making this apology before the entire Cyberverse might possibly give it more weight, but it also gives everyone who sees it an opportunity to comment upon it. In other words, you've got to take what comes with the territory. It doesn't make any sense to make an apology in public and then get ticked off when it is commented upon by individuals not in FAN or NPO. [/quote] I do not believe anyone in the Order government carries any sort of fantasy with them regarding how their comments will be addressed by the masses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300043422' post='2663164'] I don't believe anyone is stating that you and the rest of the gallery can not have your opinions, simply that such opinions are not important. [/quote] There have been a multitude of heated replies towards those who have accused this apology of lacking genuineness; as such, I'll need to disagree with you here. [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300043492' post='2663168'] I do not believe anyone in the Order government carries any sort of fantasy with them regarding how their comments will be addressed by the masses. [/quote] I enjoyed this line of discussion much better before you brought the victim complex back into it. Edited March 13, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) double Edited March 13, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1300036771' post='2663036'] Well I won't claim to know the intricacies of NpO/NPO relations but it still feels to me like something more could have been done. [/quote] And substituting a "feeling" for knowledge does tend to be one of the key steps in irrational judgements. [quote]It is not us who are dragging the war out.[/quote] Actually, it is. This is one of the most clear-cut cases in history which places sole responsibility for this war on you. There have been no actions which can be reasonably be construed as providing a cause for initiating or continuing this conflict. That includes any refusals to abide by demands you might wish to impose. I've seen a lot of statements like this from your grouping that seem to try and shift the "blame" for their actions, and it is quite disturbing. I don't know whether you truly work by that sort of twisted logic or you're aiming for revisionism early, but it is rather disappointing to see this kind of thought alongside the more forthright declarations of a desire for conflict and the pursuit of long-term national interest. [quote]Though it would never have convinced everyone, the results would likely have been much better had the NPO given this apology while not under duress.[/quote] We have been under duress for the entirety of the two years you reference Crymson. Please do not pretend that any other timing would not have led to you adopting a similar stance, given that both the factors of duress, and the your image of us, would both be the same. As for this specific timing, it is because it is a result, rather than a start, of our various communications with FAN. Such communication has not always gone smoothly in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1300043554' post='2663169'] There have been a multitude of heated replies towards those who have accused this apology of lacking genuineness; as such, I'll need to disagree with you here. [/quote] A heated reply can be manufactured. A pointed comment can be disingenuous. The solicitation of response, politically and in the germane, is paramount in maintaining relevance for any such announcement. It may be necessary to have this conversation carry forward for a few days so that it is read by the largest number of those to whom it is truly addressed, even if that means hostile exchange with those to whom it is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1300043554' post='2663169'] I enjoyed this line of discussion much better before you brought the victim complex back into it. [/quote] Your enjoyment has never been my concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrenster Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300000508' post='2662632'] Wasn't maskofblue a long time NPO member? According to the wiki she was and I recall hearing that name associated with NPO. I don't think it's an accident that so many NPO members speak badly of it after leaving. That being said it's hard to judge the sincerity of this, it's always hard to judge the sincerity of an apology. On the one hand it's not usual for NPO to swallow their pride of anything and this appears to be voluntary. On the other hand it's in the middle of a war where they want peace and stand to gain from it. It's really up to FAN to decide how they'll take this. [/quote] If your implication is that her being a former member provides her insight to the current Pacifica, then you are wrong. If I leave an alliance two years ago or even a year ago, that does not mean I get to say how it operates currently. Also, it would appear that a lot of Pacificans stay in Pacifica. Is that also not an accident? Regardless, I don't presume to know the general psychology of people that leave Pacifica, and neither should you. So your point there (whatever it was) is moot. Yes, I agree, the timing is awkward. But this is not because we want to vie for peace. The timing is more because communication between our two alliances seem to be more open than before, so it would behoove us to take advantage of such open communication to issue an open apology. The timing matter is nothing but sheer coincidence and people should look beyond that. Now I don't blame you for casting suspicions, but suspicions do not make a fact. Something many people are claiming to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1300043712' post='2663175'] We have been under duress for the entirety of the two years you reference Crymson. Please do not pretend that any other timing would not have led to you adopting a similar stance, given that both the factors of duress, and the your image of us, would both be the same. As for this specific timing, it is because it is a result, rather than a start, of our various communications with FAN. Such communication has not always gone smoothly in the past. [/quote] Actually, it would have looked different to me. The NPO could have done many things after leaving terms to attempt to [i]demonstrate[/i] that it had at least undergone some form of change. Instead, as FAN quite well put it--I'm sure you remember, so I won't link the thread--the NPO kept with the same behavioral structure inherent to it in the pre-Karma days. Letum, the backbone of many arguments--yours included--I've seen in this thread is that it would not have had any effect in the least had the NPO behaved differently since leaving terms. This is an excellent attempt to absolve your alliance of any responsibility; and you know as well as I how escapist and illegitimate a claim it is. Edited March 13, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakamitai Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 Does anyone have any questions about this, beyond what's already been said? Especially any FAN members? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Taget' timestamp='1300027770' post='2662929'] What NPO needs is not more "sincerity" or "effort"... what they need is for the world to change to the extent that they become useful to ally with against an enemy that is far more hated. Then people will let bygones be bygones. While they are weak... why forgive? They are a fun little pinata you can beat and blame for every grievance you ever had. Who doesn't like that? [/quote] Not so, our own (well publicized) example serves as a great object lesson. VE and NPO relations were bettering post Karma, that all got erased in an instant when we moved from our embassy to theirs, that incident has already been talked to death in other places so going over it yet again serves little purpose, but the point remains. Its possible to climb out from even the deepest holes if you stick at it, and possible to slip back down to the bottom of that hole with one mistake. Its far far easier to reset relations to a negative baseline than it is to build them back up. And for a lot of people indifference would have been a major step forward in opinion for NPO, implying its not progress to go from hated to indifferent is disingenuous at best. No I don't expect them to become best friends with everybody over night, but walking away from progress just because its not fast enough for your attention span is all on NPO, not anybody else. [quote name='Brenann' timestamp='1300032943' post='2662988'] NPO can donate millions to a charity, spread goodwill and help the downtrodden, give candy to babies and we will still be painted as the evil monsters. So be it. [/quote] The problem is you haven't done any of those things yet. Get back to us if you ever do. You've spread around lots of words, but words are cheap and easy, and easy to take back, as you've done in the past. Its easy to claim that nobody will ever take you seriously if you changed and then proceed to use that as justification on why you shouldn't do anything meaningful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1300035454' post='2663021'] For those Pacificans who feign a lack of understanding as to why Planet Bob does not take their words at face value, it is as simple as one ... two ... three. 1. NPO's so called apology was not presented by the exalted Clown Prince Chuckles nor even by the Fantabulous Clown Princess Mary. Each of them was given an almost-but-not-quite plausible excuse for their absense. This appears to be a set up for a typical NPO denial down the road to the effect that because it lacked their official stamp of approval, it did not not happen. 2. The apology is offered during a time of war, when NPO is getting its collected rear-end kicked around the proverbial block and one of the prime kickers is the apologee. 3. NPO is famous for smiling ever so sweetly while it carefully plans to shove a shiv into its next intended victim. TL;DR: Can you say "ploy"? [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]I'm certainly not a fan of the NPO anymore than you, but this is getting to the point of being ridiculous. Their "next intended victim." Give me a break. The NPO hasn't been able to do anything for two years, regardless of your paranoid fantasies, and that will not be changing anytime soon. I wonder how long it'll take you to get over this bogeyman now that you've finally kicked it for a second time.[/color] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 [quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1300043966' post='2663184'] Letum, the backbone of many arguments--yours included--I've seen in this thread is that it would not have had any effect in the least had the NPO behaved differently since leaving terms. [/quote] I do not know whether it is intentional or not, but your words an implication that our behaviour didn't change. It has; NPO has been the least aggressive and damaged the fewest people out of any major alliance since Karma, save for neutrals. What accusations of a lack of change refer to is not our behavior, but rather that the basis for our behavior is insincere. In that context, what "it would have had no effect" refers to is the various theories that are being proposed of actions that might have assuaged our opponents about our intentions. Our counterargument is quite valid there; we did not sit idly twiddling our thumbs for the past 2 years, even though it is of questionable moral character to assert that an alliance making no threatening moves has the onus to prove it is not a threat. Yet we tried that. We did talk to people, we did get good relationships with former opponents. However, for some of our opponents - conveniently the very same ones in whose interests it is to maintain a belief that we are dangerous to them - none of our actions were enough. Hence, what our argument is advancing is that were we to have taken the extra actions that have been claimed, it would have still not been enough. In such an alternate reality, we would have still more conditions imposed on us in order to prove that we should not be attacked. To put it plainly, what that means is that all these "actions" that people claim we could have done are merely excuses to serve as a necessary justification in lieu of any actual provocation on our part. A different geopolitical situation would have simply brought with it a different set of excuses. [quote] This is an excellent attempt to absolve your alliance of any responsibility; and you know as well as I how escapist and illegitimate a claim it is. [/quote] We have not attempted to escape the responsibility for our actions in the distant past, and have made no actions in the more recent past that have some form of controversy attached we might seek to escape from. And whilst those actions we are responsible for might have colored the perceptions of people, thereby attaching some of our responsibility on to that as well, those third parties are responsible for their own actions. Any implications to the contrary would be an escapist and illegitimate claim of its own. [quote]The problem is you haven't done any of those things yet. Get back to us if you ever do. [/quote] The closest things we have been able to do, such as giving large packets of aid to our friends who faced war or trying to protect raided red nations, were either viewed with absolute indifference or as a deliberate provocation at worst. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daimos Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 “It will be unpopular. The timing will be unpopular. The whole thing is unpopular. But it is the right thing to do.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 Please tell me you're doing this because someone is forcing you to do it. Please tell me you're not trying to brown nose FAN when they have you under their boot. Please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted March 13, 2011 Report Share Posted March 13, 2011 This is the most hysterically transparent thing I've seen since GOONS did literally the same thing in the Unjust War. If you had done this months ago or even years ago, maybe you wouldn't still be a pariah. But it's far too late for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.