A Statement from Doomhouse

[Williambonney]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1301695909' post='2682472']
On page one hundred and sixty-freaking four of this godforsaken topic, I'm going to bring this back up, an image that was posted way back on page 39.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/UEiEz.png[/img]

I'm fairly sure the conversation has not meaningfully expanded one iota from this in the last 125 pages.
[/quote]
Judging by the recent flow of this thread I'd say we're somewhere in the top left corner right now. Roq posted so I'm going to guess it is Doitzels turn?

[Kilkenny]

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1301693971' post='2682450']
TPF doesn't regret betraying UJP in that war, so there's really no reason for people to get over it. You even said specifically that when you join an alliance, you take on the baggage that alliance has - in Umbrella's case, it's involvement in the GPA war, which you're now using to state has tainted Umbrella forever. So in your case, wouldn't you say your being in TPF means you have to take the responsibility of betraying the UJP and forcefully disbanding NoV?
[/quote]


Uhm, sure... I don't regret anything I did during the UJP... not a bit of it.***







[size="1"]***at the time of UJP I was in BANG, not TPF. We did not participate in that war in any shape at all. We merged together after UJP occurred and I am the 15th most senior naiton in TPF, counting the previous time I was in TPF(I was in Atarax, a protectorate of Polars during no-cb in my streatch out of TPF). So therefore I don't regret what I did.[/size]

[Williambonney]

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1301660355' post='2682129']
I don't think anyone wants an apology from NPO. They've already made it clear how much those are worth.

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Great_War_I

And I think FAN illustrated that point the last time they made one.

And for that one guy who said they didn't have a clear path into the war, we've already established they had two, 1) through the Legion-NpO treaty and 2) through the TPF-STA treaty. Neither were activated as NpO was slowly burned to the ground, thus raising incredible levels of paranoia throughout Doomhouse (read: HC's entire argument this war). Surely, if GOONS came to the aid of iFOK or Poison Clan or something, Invicta, Legion, TPF, and NPO would have remained out of the conflict and left us to our one-sided victory.

I for one am ashamed of my government and the feeble military minds of our allies, and they can expect my resignation henceforth regarding this blatant abuse of common sense.
[/quote]


Yawn

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=96133

[quote]What gives you the right to decide the FA path of others? [/quote]

Or does your government have some seekrit clause concerning Sardonic too now?
Never did care for Xiphosis much myself, but that was one smart move I must say.

Edit: Still waiting on Doitzel by the way

Edited April 2, 2011 by William Bonney

[mattski133]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301685979' post='2682372']
So for your first example you use Ivan who was no longer Emperor at the time he retracted that apology? Yup, totally represents NPO. Not to mention, that apology was forced by the CoaLUEtion as well. So, it is hardly typical of an apology. [/quote]

Yeah it'd be just as forced now as when they saw the storm clouds gathering and said sorry about that FAN, like, years later. I don't hate NPO, for the record, I just hate what they do, what they stand for, and what their plans for all of us are. You know...I was never much one for being used as a tool OR being wiped off the planet, as my two alternatives since Francoism doesn't appeal to me. So often I find myself at odds with those who are fine with those three options.

And Bonney...I'm not sure what you're inferring. I have some theories but they're pretty wild.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1301714537' post='2682644']
Yeah it'd be just as forced now as when they saw the storm clouds gathering and said sorry about that FAN, like, years later. I don't hate NPO, for the record, I just hate what they do, what they stand for, and what their plans for all of us are. You know...I was never much one for being used as a tool OR being wiped off the planet, as my two alternatives since Francoism doesn't appeal to me. So often I find myself at odds with those who are fine with those three options.

And Bonney...I'm not sure what you're inferring. I have some theories but they're pretty wild.
[/quote]

What exactly have they done since Karma?

What exactly do they stand for?

What exactly are their plans?

To me it appears that it is DH who is trying to force NPO to be a tool of theirs or wipe NPO/their allies off the planet. So I would venture that you are just fine with those two options.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301715559' post='2682661']
What exactly have they done since Karma?

What exactly do they stand for?

What exactly are their plans?

To me it appears that it is DH who is trying to force NPO to be a tool of theirs or wipe NPO/their allies off the planet. So I would venture that you are just fine with those two options.
[/quote]


The prevailing theme of this thread is that it's fine when they do it. Not good when anyone else does it.

[Borsche]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1301718383' post='2682684']
The prevailing theme of this thread is that it's fine when they do it. Not good when anyone else does it.
[/quote]

What about: it's fine when we do it to people who also did it?

[Letum]

[quote name='Borsche' timestamp='1301763406' post='2682910']
What about: it's fine when we do it to people who also did it?
[/quote]

Then pretty soon it'll be fine to do it to everyone.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Borsche' timestamp='1301763406' post='2682910']
What about: it's fine when we do it to people who also did it?
[/quote]


Then you become one of those people that it's fine to do it to. Which is fine by me. As long as you guys (DH) admit it and stop acting like white knights trying to rid the world of oppression when you are the main source of it the past two years.

[Beefspari]

Maybe we're more responsible with our power and won't use it to install viceroys, force disbandment, or eternal war. The lesser of two evils.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL3.jpg[/img]

[Lurunin]

really....you are still using the whole argument of "we are only doing it to them because they did it first"?

that just breeds hate because you are saying that you are not only the same as them, but that might makes right and whoever is in power at the time can do whatever the hell they want

though this line just keeps making me laugh:

[quote]We near the end. The end of forced disbandment. The end of terms that cripple alliances forever. The end of silence for fear of persecution. The end of the influence of those who would overthrow these goals in favor of their own return to power. The end of cowardice. The end of myth and fear. The end of this war.[/quote]

i, for one, dont believe this in the slightest (and i'm on the DH side of the treaty web unfortunately)...especially since NPO hasnt done anything since they got out of terms really yet are still receiving punishment for actions done what...2years ago? past grudges ftw? alliances change, there are many examples of that on Planet Bob (NATO strikes out the easiest for me currently).

It was also brought up before that people who joined after the Karma war are pro-NPO...again not something that holds up. Just because you do not agree with DH does not make one pro-NPO, it just means that not everyone agrees with the !@#$%^&* that you try to pull. thought i should bring this up again before someone starts another !@#$ tossing contest by saying "your argument is invalid because you're on their side"

[Lurunin]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1301769537' post='2682976']
Maybe we're more responsible with our power and won't use it to install viceroys, force disbandment, or eternal war. The lesser of two evils.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL3.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

[OOC]viceroys are against the TOS now are they not?[/OOC]

and who's to say this war will ever end if NPO just does not comply with your terms? even if it comes down to that would anyone but those truly loyal to their friends in NPO like TPF actually speak out against it? DH/PB is/are on top with strong connections to CnG and SF along with other strong alliances, anyone who tried to break up the war would be crushed easily

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1301769756' post='2682983']
[OOC]viceroys are against the TOS now are they not?[/OOC]
[/quote]

((While I am neither a lawyer or CN staff, I believe the part of the TOS you are thinking of (I can't copy/paste it for some silly reason) is the part about not extorting real life possessions in response to in game actions.

This piece of the TOS does not explicitly ban viceroys, however it would forbid me from demanding access for said viceroy to any of your offsites. You can see how that takes most of the teeth out of the position with no way to monitor the population the viceroy supposedly is controlling.))

[quote]
and who's to say this war will ever end if NPO just does not comply with your terms? even if it comes down to that would anyone but those truly loyal to their friends in NPO like TPF actually speak out against it? DH/PB is/are on top with strong connections to CnG and SF along with other strong alliances, anyone who tried to break up the war would be crushed easily
[/quote]

Not so much, our 'domination' of the political landscape is nowhere close to the scale of WUT or the Continuum. As has been pointed out by several other people, with the math to back it, this has been one of the closest wars CN has ever seen. Fighting ability and superior organization carried this war as much as weight of NS did.

Its not so much that any body butting in would get crushed, its that NPO is that unpopular. Nobody cares to try and bail them out. So if they want to sit in peace mode indefinitely while their allies all get reduced to ZT because of stubbornness, that's exactly whats gonna happen. Considering GOONS membership has shot up something ridiclous like 150 nations over the course of the war (I want their recruiters, geeze) I seriously doubt we'll see DH getting bored and just decide to give up after a while.

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301772424' post='2683002']
((While I am neither a lawyer or CN staff, I believe the part of the TOS you are thinking of (I can't copy/paste it for some silly reason) is the part about not extorting real life possessions in response to in game actions.


Its not so much that any body butting in would get crushed, its that NPO is that unpopular. Nobody cares to try and bail them out. [b]So if they want to sit in peace mode indefinitely while their allies all get reduced to ZT because of stubbornness, that's exactly whats gonna happen.[/b] Considering GOONS membership has shot up something ridiclous like 150 nations over the course of the war (I want their recruiters, geeze) I seriously doubt we'll see DH getting bored and just decide to give up after a while.
[/quote]

I am not sure if you are deliberately distorting the truth to try to score some kind of PR point here by trying to paint NPO in a negative light, or if you literally this oblivious to what is transpiring on this front. I would assume the former and certainly hope it is not the latter. Regardless, the fringe alliances still remaining in this war (and for the sake of argument I will leave Invicta, Legion and TPF off that list because of our direct ties to NPO) are certantly not in this war still due to some stubbornness on NPO's part. They are still fighting because they were never granted a reasonable exit from the conflict. I can guarantee you that should white peace be put on the table for these alliances tomorrow a large portion of them would be out of the conflict.

Instead when it was made known to your side that we would be interested in finally sitting down to discuss terms, and are looking to draw down the conflict to a close and get people out of the war, these same alliances, who up to that point were going to be allowed free exit from the conflict, were all the sudden levied with terms, and then piled on by you and your friends to further force the issue that they pay these terms. So no, their continued involvement here has nothing to do with NPO or theri decision to release peace mode nations to fight.

Like I said give these alliances a white peace offer that most of them were never offered in the first place (or honor those that were on the table with no timeframe attached and then yanked when the alliance in question requested to take the offer), and I can damn well guarantee that most of those same alliances you are claiming NPO is keeping in the war through their actions would be at peace by the end of the weekend.

[Borsche]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1301765693' post='2682939']
Then pretty soon it'll be fine to do it to everyone.
[/quote]

Then we are in agreement. It's fine to do it to you.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301775358' post='2683024']
I am not sure if you are deliberately distorting the truth to try to score some kind of PR point here by trying to paint NPO in a negative light, or if you literally this oblivious to what is transpiring on this front. I would assume the former and certainly hope it is not the latter. Regardless, the fringe alliances still remaining in this war (and for the sake of argument I will leave Invicta, Legion and TPF off that list because of our direct ties to NPO) are certantly not in this war still due to some stubbornness on NPO's part.
[/quote]

Sorry guess I wasn't clear enough, I meant stubbornness on the part of NPO's allies, I'm fairly sure they all have offers on the table, they haven't taken them.


[quote] They are still fighting because they were never granted a reasonable exit from the conflict. I can guarantee you that should white peace be put on the table for these alliances tomorrow a large portion of them would be out of the conflict. [/quote]

White peace is for people who get out early and periphery alliance. White peace is not something that people who fight for months typically see. I think GOONS gov even specfically mentioned that terms got discounted for getting out early. This is a flawed mindset that alot of people seem to have, the idea that you are entitled to white peace for some reason.

[quote]Instead when it was made known to your side that we would be interested in finally sitting down to discuss terms, and are looking to draw down the conflict to a close and get people out of the war, these same alliances, who up to that point were going to be allowed free exit from the conflict, were all the sudden levied with terms, and then piled on by you and your friends to further force the issue that they pay these terms. So no, their continued involvement here has nothing to do with NPO or theri decision to release peace mode nations to fight.[/quote]

They waited too long. White peace is a reward for getting out early, when the defeated alliance has something significant to offer and still fight. Now they all are either hiding in peace more or stoogeing around in the 10-20k NS range where they can't do any real damage. These alliances are all loseing horribly and have no hope of even inflicting meaningful damage considering their unwilling to leave peace mode. They want the beat down to stop, what exactly are they going to offer to get what they want?

[quote]
Like I said give these alliances a white peace offer that most of them were never offered in the first place (or honor those that were on the table with no timeframe attached and then yanked when the alliance in question requested to take the offer), and I can damn well guarantee that most of those same alliances you are claiming NPO is keeping in the war through their actions would be at peace by the end of the weekend.
[/quote]

Guess they should have taken white peace while it was on the table instead of abusing the generosity of our side by refusing and thinking they could get some free nukings in and still walk away whenever they wanted to.

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301775904' post='2683032']
Sorry guess I wasn't clear enough, I meant stubbornness on the part of NPO's allies, I'm fairly sure they all have offers on the table, they haven't taken them.


Guess they should have taken white peace while it was on the table instead of abusing the generosity of our side by refusing and thinking they could get some free nukings in and still walk away whenever they wanted to.
[/quote]


I'll tell ya what, i will bypass the rest of your point here for a moment. You show the white peace offers that were ever on the table for alliances like TOOL and TSI, where they requested those terms be handed to them, and where they were refused, and I will pay every bit of tech being requested by them myself to get them out of the war tonight. While you are looking see if you can also find the timeframes given to the other alliances as to when they had to accept deals (that they never asked for in the first place) or they would be taxed for not taking them.


When you want to claim that people are being charged reps for refusing deals that were on the table for them you should first make sure that they actually requested the deals themselves or that a deal was ever present for them to take in the first place.

Edited April 2, 2011 by The Crimson King

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301776915' post='2683048']
I'll tell ya what, i will bypass the rest of your point here for a moment. You show the white peace offers that were ever on the table for alliances like TOOL and TSI, where they requested those terms be handed to them, and where they were refused, and I will pay every bit of tech being requested by them myself to get them out of the war tonight. While you are looking see if you can also find the timeframes given to the other alliances as to when they had to accept deals (that they never asked for in the first place) or they would be taxed for not taking them.


When you want to claim that people are being charged reps for refusing deals that were on the table for them you should first make sure that they actually requested the deals themselves or that a deal was ever present for them to take in the first place.
[/quote]

Well seeing how as I'm not involved at all in negotiations, I wouldn't have a clue what each alliance was offered.

But since you in your post said white peace had been on the table to start with for some, and I figured you wouldn't talk out your ass about something as easily verifiable about what you have and have not been offered for peace I figured you were telling the truth. Are you saying now you lied about white peace being offered and then revoked?

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301777439' post='2683053']
Well seeing how as I'm not involved at all in negotiations, I wouldn't have a clue what each alliance was offered.

But since you in your post said white peace had been on the table to start with for some, and I figured you wouldn't talk out your ass about something as easily verifiable about what you have and have not been offered for peace I figured you were telling the truth. Are you saying now you lied about white peace being offered and then revoked?
[/quote]

What the hell are you talking about. You are making the claim these alliances should have got out of the war earlier when they had white peace offers on the table, and because they did not they deserve the reps they are being charged.

I am making the crystal clear point that the majority of these alliances could never have taken the white peace offer you are decrying them and charging them for not taking because they were never at any point offered such an exit from the war. Should they be granted that opportunity then they would most certainly take it. How the hell you got anything else aside from that out of my point I have no idea.

This is not hard to understand...you made the claim that your side oh so generously offered these alliances white peace and had said offers refused...all I am simply saying is show me where that happened with the alliances I listed. If you can then I will totally concede all of your points including the fact that those named alliances should be paying reps and I will even pay them. IF you can't produce that then it is certainly not me who is talking out his ass here.

[Lord Boris]

It's sad when just about every tired and rehashed argument ever used by the community on Planet Bob can find its way into a single thread. That said, kudos on keeping this massive trainwreck going for so long. Apparently ADD is not an issue the community here suffers from.

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1301769756' post='2682983']
[OOC]viceroys are against the TOS now are they not?[/OOC]
[/quote]

[OOC]Not quite. It's against TOS to force an alliance to give you administrative control or have some type of controls over their forums/IRC stuff, but a viceroy in the broader sense of having general operations control and decision-making power would, to the best of my knowledge, still be allowable.[/OOC]

[Sardonic]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301775358' post='2683024']
I am not sure if you are deliberately distorting the truth to try to score some kind of PR point here by trying to paint NPO in a negative light, or if you literally this oblivious to what is transpiring on this front. I would assume the former and certainly hope it is not the latter. Regardless, the fringe alliances still remaining in this war (and for the sake of argument I will leave Invicta, Legion and TPF off that list because of our direct ties to NPO) are certantly not in this war still due to some stubbornness on NPO's part. They are still fighting because they were never granted a reasonable exit from the conflict.
[/quote]
"Legion" and "Fighting" should not even be in the same paragraph. Unless said paragraph consists of "legion is not fighting".

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1301769756' post='2682983']
and who's to say this war will ever end if NPO just does not comply with your terms?
[/quote]
You mean the war won't end if NPO has no intention of meeting peace terms? That's a serious shocker! What are we supposed to do in that case? Our enemies just don't feel like doing stuff, so we're required to give them white peace? It doesn't work that way. If it did, nothing but white peace could even exist. People would just say "Nah, don't feel like paying reps. White peace me, bro." Is it seriously our fault if enemies just shake their heads at every offer? We're the ones imposing eternal war if our enemies just refuse anything but white peace? We aren't obligated to offer white peace.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeris9_9L2.jpg[/img]

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301778135' post='2683054']
What the hell are you talking about. You are making the claim these alliances should have got out of the war earlier when they had white peace offers on the table, and because they did not they deserve the reps they are being charged.
[/quote]

Well clearly my statement doesn't apply to people who were never offered white peace in the first place, use a little bit of common sense now and again will you?

As for if they deserve reps or not, that is an entirely different point.


[quote]I am making the crystal clear point that the majority of these alliances could never have taken the white peace offer you are decrying them and charging them for not taking because they were never at any point offered such an exit from the war. Should they be granted that opportunity then they would most certainly take it. How the hell you got anything else aside from that out of my point I have no idea. [/quote]

I don't know, maybe when you posted this bit.

[quote]these same alliances, who up to that point were going to be allowed free exit from the conflict, were all the sudden levied with terms,[/quote]

This implies they [i]had[/i] white peace offers at some point, and didn't have it once they decided they wanted to leave.

That being the case, those people (Whoever they may have been) should have taken white peace when they had the chance. Generous offers don't stay open forever, they waited at now they pay for their choices.

[quote]
This is not hard to understand...you made the claim that your side oh so generously offered these alliances white peace and had said offers refused...all I am simply saying is show me where that happened with the alliances I listed. If you can then I will totally concede all of your points including the fact that those named alliances should be paying reps and I will even pay them. IF you can't produce that then it is certainly not me who is talking out his ass here.
[/quote]

I didn't make the claim, you did.

I and others have stated the opposite. GOONS specifically have made it a point to state their policy that anybody who declares war on them for whatever reason will always be paying some reps, they even further went out of their way to clarify that those who got out earliest would get the cheapest terms.

[Gobb]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1301765693' post='2682939']
Then pretty soon it'll be fine to do it to everyone.
[/quote]
That is how NPO works. We however are Doomhouse, and we don't work that way.

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1301779221' post='2683061']
"Legion" and "Fighting" should not even be in the same paragraph. Unless said paragraph consists of "legion is not fighting".
[/quote]

We are still waiting to see how influential NPO's war on NADC will be to draw this conflict to a close. If it works the target lists are already drawn up for Legion.....


[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301779392' post='2683064']
Well clearly my statement doesn't apply to people who were never offered white peace in the first place, use a little bit of common sense now and again will you?
[/quote]

Well I would think common sense goes out thew window when someone who was never offered white peace is then being charged reps for not taking an offer they never had. I personally think this is totally devoid of any logic or common sense, however it appears certain friends of yours find this totally rational.



[quote]
I don't know, maybe when you posted this bit.



This implies they [i]had[/i] white peace offers at some point, and didn't have it once they decided they wanted to leave.

That being the case, those people (Whoever they may have been) should have taken white peace when they had the chance. Generous offers don't stay open forever, they waited at now they pay for their choices.



I didn't make the claim, you did.

I and others have stated the opposite. GOONS specifically have made it a point to state their policy that anybody who declares war on them for whatever reason will always be paying some reps, they even further went out of their way to clarify that those who got out earliest would get the cheapest terms.
[/quote]


In regards to the rest of this, perhaps I was not that clear in my first post but I was referencing 2 specific issues. The first being someone simply cannot accept an offer they were never given, the 2nd being that there is a difference between someone requesting a peace offer (and subsequently rejecting it) and getting a peace offer they never requested. If an alliances comes to you and says...hey if you leave tonight you will get white peace....and gets an answer of sorry I am not sure why you gave us this offer but we never requested it and are not looking to leave at this time, then it is a bit disingenuous of that alliance to then start complaining that their offer was denied and punitive damages are owed for this.


Also I don't think I ever mentioned goons at all in my post. Like you said they have been pretty consistent from the outset on what they would want. They have yet to put something on the table and then yank it at the last minute right when someone was about to take it.

Edited April 2, 2011 by The Crimson King