The Glory of Manifestos

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
We will, and we greatly appreciate your kind words of encouragement, most noble one. I wish all the members of GS warm and fuzzy feelings even your naughty doggie, Shiber, too.

Thanks. I'll relay that.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by nbarclay
It is possible that GS should have anticipated the GoW/ND alliance, but the reality is that the majority considered it too unlikely that ND would allow Riders to move through their territory to set up the attack. (Edit: Not to mention how corrupt RP's territory would be for GoW, undercutting the value of such an alliance.) And even if we had anticipated that that's how the sides would shape up, a legitimate NAP would have given us just as much right to conquer RP lands in the upcoming war as GoW had. GoW's expectations for our behavior went far beyond the boundaries of a NAP.

We didn't expect much from GS, Nathan. All we expected was for your team to not hinder our war effort. We were willing to respect your interests on Bob and our communication before this manifesto is proof we planned on respecting your cities on Bob if you simply allowed passage of our troops. You cannot deny this or claim they are lies since we have the evidence logged.

The tripwire was the RoP. The moment you did not allow that is the moment we considered GS's actions a hostile act. If you had agreed on the RoP Bilbao would remain standing, giving you a port on Bob, and our troops would be doing what they were meant to do, kicking midget ass.

[nbarclay]

By the time we had those cities, you'd already destroyed any sembalance of reciprocity by siding with ND against us in their demands that we stay off Bob. Had you taken the position that whether or not we could stay on Bob was strictly between us and ND, and, under the terms of the NAP, none of your business, your desires for us not to take actions that undercut your rape of RP would have fallen on far more sympathetic ears.

[notyoueither]

Oh. Now an NAP entitles GoW to demand an RoP, or it is hostility. But an MPP does not include an NAP?

We have 4 stones, but we do not have 2 stones, and in fact our 4 stones equal 8 stones when it suits us.
From the Book of Grudges

[Hot_Enamel]

Just to be clear ... as the message does not seem to be getting through

GS knowingly selected cities directly in the path or our Riders.
GS knowingly selected cities that denied us strategic military invasion points
GS utilised our NAP agreement to hamper our military movements against RP

and the last straw...as we tried to negotiate.

GS refused a request for free movement through the territory while claiming they were neutral in the war.


GoW has already made it clear, that all of these factors combined, was a breach of our NAP of "no hostile action"



GS has already indicated that they define "no hostile action" as attacking GoW units.
GoW believe that the "no hostile action" definition should not be so narrow.



P.S.
I still get a laugh when anyone tries to say a MPP is a NAP

[nbarclay]

We don't define it that narrowly. As I've said before, if GoW troops had been actively engaged in combat with their lives directly at stake depending on our choices, the situation would have been different. But there was no immediate danger to your troops in our actions. Further, the long-term dangers to your troops if we slowed you down a little were not clearly greater than the long-term dangers to our own troops if we let you and ND overwhelm RP before our troops could intervene against ND. Given the absence of immediate danger to your troops and the fact that cooperating with your plans would have placed our own troops in greater danger, our actions have ample explanation independent of accusations of hostile intent.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Hot_Enamel

I still get a laugh when anyone tries to say a MPP is a NAP

How about if we fire up a SP game and see what happens to a civ's reputation when it attacks a MPP partner? Unless I completely misunderstand the mechanics, Civ 3's standard rules treat a MPP as also being a NAP. Thus, the logical interpretation would be that a MP MPP would also include a NAP unless otherwise stated.

[notyoueither]

Just to be clear ... as the message does not seem to be getting through

GoW has failed to keep a single agreement with GS. Every single one has been broken.
GoW entered into one last agreement with GS with the intent to twist the agreement to their advantage. We would be welcome to send troops to kill RP and then we could bugger off.
GoW attempted to twist an NAP into things which it is not, such as an RoP.
GoW is seriously shocked when the patience in GS for GoW and their 'tricks' has been exhausted and we tell them where to get off when they make demands in a... less than diplomatic tone.

I still get a laugh when GoW tries to point fingers in this. What the hell do they know about honouring agreements when they've never met one they wouldn't break?

[WhiteBandit]

Being a member of RP and having a first hand account of the proceedings going on between our two nations, I would like to clear up some misconceptions.

GS knowingly selected cities directly in the path or our Riders.

Nay! In fact, the conversation went something like this:
RP: HEY! We're feeling pretty generous today. We want to give you Bilboa. Yes! That's right, you can have it, no strings attached!
GS: Whoa!@ You guys are rad! We'll accept it next turn...
(next turn)
GS: HEY! #@$#@@ You didn't say there were riders next to it!
RP: DOH! I *knew* we forgot to mention something. :smacks forehead: It's cool though right? I mean you and GoW are friends?
GS: Oh yeah, we're like this :does the fingers crossed thing:

GS knowingly selected cities that denied us strategic military invasion points

We covered this point too.
RP: Say... You think GoW might be mad at you now? I mean... that city could be of... :laughing: strategic value...
GS: :laughing: Hah, right. What kind of value is a city of 1 that you guys founded in a CRAPPY LOCATION and probably has horrible corruption??
RP: :whiping tears out of eyes: You are totally right GS, totally right!
GS: I mean only a fool would think it is of strategic importance!
RP: Haha! YEAH! It's so funny too, you guys accepted it.
GS: :laughing stops:
RP: ew. my bad....

GS utilised our NAP agreement to hamper our military movements against RP

Yup, we even covered this topic too!! Quite a chat we had with those GS fellows...
RP: Wait wait, show me again. You and GoW are like what?
GS: We're like this :does the funky fingers crossed thing again
RP: Haha! That is so rad. We are too. Totally. :more laughing:
GS: Oh yeah. And for gifting us that piece of crap city, we want you to DIE. BUT, you're lucky we're neutral bastards. And we're honorable.
RP:

GS refused a request for free movement through the territory while claiming they were neutral in the war.

Yada yada.
RP: So... like you're still neutral right?? You're not going to let them march through your territory?
GS: Right. Still neutral!
RP: Awesome! So like, can we march through your territory so we can KICK SOME GOW ASS?!?
GS: Umm. No. We said we're neutral.
RP: Oh right. Us too.

There you have it. My team will probably be mad that I posted these uber-secret transcripts. My apologies to the fellows at Gathering Storm and Roleplay. The truth had to be known

[Shiber]

Originally posted by Hot_Enamel
GS has already indicated that they define "no hostile action" as attacking GoW units.
GoW believe that the "no hostile action" definition should not be so narrow.

P.S.
I still get a laugh when anyone tries to say a MPP is a NAP

How can you make those two statements in the same post and keep a straight face?

[DeepO]

He didn't, Shiber. GoW knows all too well this is all a joke, and they are having fun with us, especially because we take it seriously... don't let them get to you! They're just trying to see how much they can bend the thruth, pick stuff out of context, or simply lie (blatant lies even ) to get to our nerves. And it's working, at least sometimes. If it wouldn't hurt our reputation, this would not be so bad...

DeepO

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

DeepO, Shiber's post was seriously a lie, and GS members know it and admitted it. However since the multitude of proofs were from chats GS forced me to edit them from the post so that the proof was no longer public info.

However, GoW and GS know they comments made by Shiber were lies and that's really all that's important.

[Shiber]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
DeepO, Shiber's post was seriously a lie, and GS members know it and admitted it.

We have?
Mind pointing me to the post where we have?

However since the multitude of proofs were from chats GS forced me to edit them from the post so that the proof was no longer public info.

The multitude of logs that were put out of context have proven nothing.
If you REALLY want to know whether we were surprised to see what you dragged us into, ask Trip and he'll tell you what kinds of reactions he saw in our private forum.

However, GoW and GS know they comments made by Shiber were lies and that's really all that's important.

Cut the crap.

[DeepO]

GF, I wouldn't know... so much has happened in the mean time, I forgot in which order everything happened. I do know how I experienced everything, which was close to what Shiber said. And I do know that it's quite easy to grab some chat logs, cut and paste them into the public forum, and 'proof' that the other party is lieing. Without the complete context, that isn't near proof, and you (GoW, not only GF) know it. Much can be explained afterwards by crafting evidence, and I have to say, you have a history of doing it. Whether it is doing some patch work on logs, or on screenshots, you have lost most of your believability. At least in my eyes. But I still can appreciate the joke, as it is one big joke what you want to proof

Plus, I fully support Aeson's comment: GS will not quote diplomatic contacts in public, and neither should any other team. Already, too much 'private' information has
leaked This has nothing to do with keeping information hidden, but everything with decency: those chats and contacts were made under the impression that they would remain secret, so you don't simply publish them without mutual consent.

DeepO

[UnOrthOdOx]

Dear lord,

I take a weekend off from poly and this bastard is still at the top of the forum?

Give it a rest.

We disagree, sort out the details on the battle field...

The Victors write the history after all.

Geeze.