Wag the Dog

[DeepO]

I like it... and as I won't be around much longer today, you can send it for me. Maybe best to wait for nye, as he asked to keep on top of the GoW diplo, but in case he doesn't show fast, we have to move forward.

DeepO

[Shiber]

[Arrian]

Oh, and let's put 2 knights on the mountain.

-Arrian

[Theseus]

AND A WORKER!!!

[Shiber]

I vote for one knight. If we put two knights on that mountain, that's just too much of a price to pay for GoW and they'll forget about the mountain. But if we put just one knight, I think we'll make more use out of him if GoW attacks him on the mountain than if GoW attacks him inside Toledo. More cost-effective, I think.

[nbarclay]

I did a little rearranging and rewording, mostly for grammatical purposes. The words, "The single turn cease fire item may be negotiated, or others added," are unclear enough in their meaning that I was afraid to try to reword them; I can get a general idea, but not an exact meaning.

Glory of War,

The rantings of an insane man about broken treaties holds no water. The fact remains that GS has not acted against GoW. GoW is now demanding that GS honor not only it's agreements with GoW, but GoW's agreements to ND? This is completely unacceptable. GS cannot be held responsible for the agreements that GoW enters into, or GoW's (in)ability to honor those agreements. GS does not exist to facillitate GoW's military ambitions at the cost of GS' wellbeing, and neither does the NAP.

The NAP is still in effect in GS' estimation.

It becomes clear the NAP is not what GoW wishes, and that it will not keep GoW from further threatening GS cities. Both parties signed an agreement without fully understanding the limitations it would place on them in the very near future. GS has hoped that both teams could find a way to honor the NAP in light of these unforseen events, but realizes the difficulty of the situation GoW now finds itself in. GS wishes to help rectify this situation.

To allow GoW to keep their honor intact, and prevent the spectacle of uninformed opinion that public debates become, GS offers to agree to a mutual cancellation of the NAP if GoW reciprocates. GS asks one condition, a single turn of respite from being attacked by GoW or having GoW units moved further into (or through) GS territory. GoW will receive the same guarantees, that GS will not attack GoW and will respect GoW's borders for the duration of the cease fire.

This is an offer that will allow GoW to retain it's honor while still having full right to act against GS to fulfill its contracts. The single turn cease fire item may be negotiated, or others added, but the offer is off the table if GoW were to attack GS or move further into (or through) GS territory before an agreement is reached.

That is all,

[Aeson]

Sorry Nathan, I sent the previous message to UnO, GF, and MZ before seeing your post.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Arrian


Oh, and let's put 2 knights on the mountain.

"the" mountain? Riders can move down off a mountain onto grassland, attack, and move off the grassland back onto a mountain in a single turn. If I recall correctly, three separate mountain tiles, including the one north of Toledo that a ND MedInf ended last turn on (which also happens to be outside our borders), could serve as the starting and ending point of such a maneuver. If GoW ends their turn on any of them, blocking an advance-attack-withdraw combination will not be possible.

By the way, for a cease-fire to do any good with respect to that northern mountain, assuming ND got out of GoW's way, it would have to last through GoW's next turn, not just through their current one, if I'm remembering correctly that that mountain is reachable from GoW's current location. (Note that I don't have a map in front of me at present.)

[nbarclay]

GS policy is not supposed to be set in less than a quarter of a day by whoever happens to be reading our boards at the time.

Aeson, please send them another note letting them know that you exceeded your authority and that while GS will probably extend them an offer the same as or similar to what you just sent, more time will be needed to ensure that the entire team has a reasonable opportunity to express opinions. Edit: In the meantime, if they have any thoughts on the matter, we would be happy to hear them.

[Shiber]

We can cancel the message if it wasn't read yet (via message tracking), but you'd better do it quickly.

[Aeson]

GF has read and responded (in a personal manner) already.

[Shiber]

Originally posted by nbarclay
GS policy is not supposed to be set in less than a quarter of a day by whoever happens to be reading our boards at the time.

A concensus isn't always possible. I think we did OK this time - enough people got to comment about this before the message was sent. These people are (please correct me if I'm wrong): Theseus, Arrian, DeepO, Aeson, Vulture and myself. Out of our current roster of active members, the people who were not able to comment on this matter were NYE, Octavian X, Sleepy and Sir Ralph (who has been the most infrequent poster in recent weeks, I believe; no offense meant or anything). (I excluded you from both lists because I'm unclear about whether you feel that you did or did not get a chance to give your input)
Of course having a concensus over matters is always preferable, but sometimes you can't work things out this way. Observe what happened yesterday - we could not get our act sorted in time to reply to UnO's PM before Ghengis sent his. Had we been able to communicate our feelings in time, the current situation might have been better. But the bottom line is, most of us agreed that silence would not be the appropriate answer to UnO's PM, but since we couldn't work out a PM in time, we ended up delivering just that.

[Arrian]

I think most of our active members commented, and I think the note was fine.

What is it that we're really going to change, Nathan?

-Arrian

[Arrian]

GF has read and responded (in a personal manner)

Was it a "I got your note" or was it more than that?

-Arrian

[Aeson]

It was... expected.