Gathering Storm - correspondence & foreign affairs

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by ZargonX
As for weakening Lego's position, I think that's a bit of stretch. If GS considers this one chat the end-all, be-all of diplomatic relations with us, then they are quite dense. The relation is one that will be worked out through official channels, and is still quite fluid.

Huh?

How do you think our harsh ultimatun sounds after the following sentence:

[Theseus] So, what were your objectives for this chat?
[Sharpe] We would like to avoid war with GS if possible - so to figure out if there is a way for our defensive pact with GoW NOT to be activated.

I don't want to "figure out a way out of our defensive pact", which btw is an alliance. I want to honour it. Because it is a) in our best interest and b) because it is part of a pact.

"pact = a binding and solemn agreement to do or keep from doing a specified thing"

Btw, notice the "we". We who? Sharpe and Nimitz? For GS it sounded "we, Lego", I bet. So much for an unofficial chat.

[ZargonX]

Yes, I agree these issues should be discussed, but no; I don't agree with the way they were being discussed. This was not a discussion, this was a *****-fest. If people will discuss things in a thoughtful and proper manner, I will not tell them to shut up.

[vondrack]

Sorry, Z, I am not going to shut up. Is this approach you suggest something new we're going to adopt from now on? Whatever happened, happened, just get over with it, it was nothing serious (read: no biggie if it happens again)? This was not a casual chit-chat you speak of. Sharpe and Nimitz met with the current de facto leader (or primary player) of GS.

As for weakening the position: if you were GS what would you do now? GoW tells you to stuff your backstab plan up your... ND says nothing. RP is dying, consuming substantial resources of yours in the process. Lego threatens with DoW, but says they want to avoid war, and even tells you they would help you defend Stormia. Perhaps they do not really mean that ultimatum? What would you do?

I would attack, hoping I'd hit GoW hard, making them less stubborn regarding the ND backstab plan. I'd hope Lego is just bluffing, having no ace up their sleeve - and even if not, Lego stated they would not let the Bobians invade Stormia. So, if the chicken on Bob die, who cares? No big deal. Worth giving it a shot.

After this chat, considering that GoW will not agree to GS demands in thousand years, I am pretty sure GS will attack with everything they have. And our knights will have to fight.

Great. Just what everybody here wanted. And the situation looked so promising after we sent that stern warning.

It's not true that only unimportant information was disclosed to GS. The fact that we did not support an invasion of Stormia and actually "held" GoW/ND from invading was something GS would be able to figure out? Suggesting that GoW might be willing to consider a backstab also helped big time to make GS realize their efforts were futile and that they would be better off Bob...

I cannot agree to what you are saying.

But I can agree to debating our position - and letting GS know our official stance then (as if we did not make it clear with the message we sent them). Was the chat not handled the best way? Were Sharpe and Nimitz presenting their personal views only? Just an "unofficial" chit-chat? Cool. Let's determine our official position then and tell GS, explaining the whole chat was just something we did not really mean.

BTW - that's going to do miracles to our relationship.

[Nimitz]

Ok, I figure I need to respond or get killed. Vondrack whats up with you getting so upset, I was at the chat, I was there doing my best to keep it from getting official or them think we could make any thing happen. Further you held several chats while I was FAM with out talking to me, did I get upset, no that stuff happens and can be very usefull. So please every one take a step back and cool off a bit and come at this calmly, the chat had much usefull info that needs studied.

Oh, and on the point of not having an official position I am still ambassador to RP.

[vondrack]

Fine, let's start from here. Nimitz, lead the way.

Be so kind and post a couple of points summing up the new information we learned from the chat and we need to study now. It would be nice if you can put together a list of what GS learned and need to study now, too.

[Tiberius]

I wasn't aware this was a RP chat. Sorry.

Indeed, GS learned a lot of useful info from this chat that needs to be studied.

[Nimitz]

Ok, Vondrack calm down or the team will split. all this argueing is going to far what has happened has happened it can not be changed going at each others throtes will help nothing. A reasonalbe discussion will do much more then attacking each other.

[vondrack]

Nimitz, I was serious. You said we gained "much usefull information". Be so kind and make a summary of what we learned. Let's discuss that info.

Also, make a summary of what GS learned. Let's discuss what they are likely to do now, what they are likely to feel when this or that happens.

Lets talk about whether we do something now or whether we just let it be.

I am serious.

[ZargonX]

Agreed. Let's get a summary made of what exactly was exchanged back and forth in this chat. This will give us some talking points for future dealings with GS.

[Tiberius]

Well, where are the on-topic comments?

I am being told to shut up, yet I am the only one who commented:
1. what the problems with chatting like this are (leaking info, using personal views, etc)
2. what is my opinion about what has been discussed in the chat (war, relation with GS, ...)

[ZargonX]

I am being told to shut up, yet I am the only one who commented

Allow me to rephrase: don't shut up; just change your tone. Being antagonistic isn't going to solve anything. If we're going to learn anything from this, it needs to be as a team. Sharpe and Nimitz should present their summary of what they think the chat accomplished for us, and we can debate the results.

I for one don't think too much critical info was given up. As for changing GS's plans, I don't think it will. They have a gameplan, and they'll go ahead with it. When GoW rejects the offer to backstab ND, GS will probably go ahead with its attack, and we'll have to re-issue our ultimatum. The basic issue is whether they think we'll have enough of an effect on the war to sway things against them. If they do, they'll back off. If they don't, they will attack. We should try and have an official chat soon, though, to try and clarify things that may have become muddled.

[Tiberius]

How many times do I have to repeat myself? Where are your on-topic comments?

I don't care what GS will do, I care about what we are going to do. As long as we are not going to act as a team, we are doomed.

This chat was not done in a team spirit. It was part of a personal agenda and this is why I do not agree with it; besides it wasn't handled professionally; this is why such chats should be held by the FAM; members of the team should be allowed to request such chats; etc. If everyone is allowed to talk freely with whoever they want about whatever they want, our foreign relations will be a mess very soon. So:

1. What do you think (all of you) that our team policy should be regarding non-official chats? (see my previously raised concerns: are we free to chat without the knowledge od the FAM; if yes, can we discuss freely, floating around personal ideas or do we have to follow a protocol, which means: not giving away sensitive info, follow the official stance of the team in international issues, blah blah blah)

2. I told you what I think about our alliance with GoW and ND and the GS proposed variants. (immediately after the chat). Now you tell me what do you think about it. We must have only one official stance in all this. Personal concers are to be expressed here, not in external chats.

[lmtoops]

Well you skip a day and you miss a bunch. I'm going to pass on most of the flames, but I must comment on this "dictator" accusation. Vondrack is "leading" the team. Since he is doing a good (great?) job of it, he has wide support. He makes recommendations, lays out logical arguments, and detail plans. For the most part, the plans are right on the mark and sometimes they need some refinement. In any case, a dictator he is not and never will be.

I don't see a need for further "inter-team" discussions on our position with GS. We have debated this several times and the end result is a two team Bob (GoW and ND) and GS on Estonia only. If you don't agree with this stance, you are in the minority.

An official discussion with GS would be best. The goal of the discussion will be to re-state our position and to smooth over any misconceptions (from the chat).

During the regular weekly GoW/ND chat, the subject must be brought up and any misunderstandings smoothed out. Even if GS has not talked to GoW about the chat, they will and GoW should not have any surprises.

For the future, all members are free to have unofficial chats. As free members of this democracy, I think everyone has the right to discuss issues. When we are involved in the discussion, we must not contradict the official (approved) "position". All inferences must be "qualified" over and over ("this is not an offical stance", "I cannot agree without getting back to the team" , etc.). ALWAY REMEMBER, the true purpose of any unofficial chat is to get information, but reveal nothing and commit to nothing.

[ZargonX]

Non-Official Chats: They are going to happen. I would not in good conscience ban people on this team from speaking to people on other teams about game happenings. This is a game and people do like to talk. That said, it is fairly clear what is verbotten and what is not. Military plans, secret alliances, build plans, diplo with other teams. Also, if you are in a chat, you must make it clear right off the bat that you are speaking unofficially. When I speak to other teams, I always preface it with "I do not represent my teams official position." Any other team will understand this. It's up to them as to whether they want to keep talking to you or not.

GS Proposals: Stick with the original plan. GoW isn't going to bite, so we need to be there to back them up. The no GS on Bob policy is key. Now, of course, we have a new proposal regarding the RP "reserve," so we are going to have to re-evaluate with regards to that.

[lmtoops]

Originally posted by Tiberius
1. What do you think (all of you) that our team policy should be regarding non-official chats? (see my previously raised concerns: are we free to chat without the knowledge od the FAM; if yes, can we discuss freely, floating around personal ideas or do we have to follow a protocol, which means: not giving away sensitive info, follow the official stance of the team in international issues, blah blah blah)

I commented on this in my post, but I will briefly repeat. Yes, all members are allowed to chat with other teams. As you say, they must stay with the official policies, reveal only what is public knowledge, blah, blah, blah. Zargon stated the unofficial chats can be risky, but they are benefial...very true. The perfect diplomatic chat is one were nothing is reveal, but new information is gained.

Originally posted by Tiberius
2. I told you what I think about our alliance with GoW and ND and the GS proposed variants. (immediately after the chat). Now you tell me what do you think about it. We must have only one official stance in all this. Personal concers are to be expressed here, not in external chats.

The official stance is this regard has been discussed and has not changed. The stance is a 2-team Bob (GoW/ND) and GS on Estonia only. If someone disagrees, argue all you want in the team forum.