The RoundTable

[peter grimes]

Another solution is to extend the turn-timer to 48 or 72 hours. That way the teams would rarely need an extension

Babe is still a player in this game, for better or worse. I'm ok with recruiting a player to take over from Whomp, but I don't think that player should continue to hold membership on one of the other teams.... [ref. Peter the Piffle, in the cIV MTDG, and the problems that caused ]

 

[Chamnix]

For various reasons I do not think that's a good idea. Sure I want to speed up the game too, but BABE is not in a position where what they choose to do could not affect the game.

I didn't realize Babe had any choices once they swore fealty to their blue overlords.

After all, it was SABER's actions that led to all the recent extensions.

Ah, yes, the memory of Council's playing turns quickly before the war still lives on.

Seriously, I didn't see that as a serious suggestion, especially when it is us and FREE who are asking for extensions anyway.

Whomp's been doing a good job, opening up a save, hitting return, and closing it. I dunno if people are being snarky or not, but I don't think Whomp has been the one slowing things down - it's been teams trying to figure out how to handle situations.

I agree that Whomp is doing fine, and I know Babe is not taking long compared to other teams. The point was that other teams need that time - Babe doesn't, and whatever time the save spends in Babe's mailbox is just wasted.

Our thinking was that if FREE played the turn, then opened Babe's turn, hit enter, and sent it on to Council, then it would cut out waste, but if people think it is a bad idea, we'll let it drop.

It was Calis' suggestion anyway - I never liked the idea either.

 

[Cyc]

Who are you going to get to play the save without giving spoiler info?

Maybe we can get Vinnie to do it. He wouldn't tell, would he?

 

[Marsden]

WHAT?? You are not taking me serious?

First they call you a natsi and then they don't listen when you try to say something helpful.


I'm happy the free press in coucil reasserted itself and siezed it's propery back from the council propaganda machine. I don't think a little thing like wanting you dead with your head on a pike should get in the way of delivering me my newspaper. Am I right, people!

 

[General_W]

It will only matter to the historians – but we at the Council want to do everything in our power to make sure that history records the truth…

"ExODAT" (Exchange On Demand Alliance of Technology)

--------------
Article 1: Nuclear Non Aggression

Saber and The Council both agree to never ever use a nuclear weapon on each other no matter what, as long as there are other teams existing on the map.​

<snip>

Received 5/28/2010

Nuclear missile hits
The Gulag killing 6 citizens and
polluting 8 tiles.

Further documentation:






We are realists (a century of bombing will do that to you) and we recognize that the international community lacks the resources to meaningfully respond to this gross injustice. Doubtless, this reality played into Saber&#8217;s decision to flagrantly go back on their word and murder thousands of non-combatants at a stroke.

But let the world know and history record the price Saber was willing to pay to achieve victory. They may indeed rule this world someday soon &#8211; but they will do so without honor. They will rule with the knowledge that they chose military victory over truth and justice. Perhaps, in some forgotten future the people of the world will rise up and cast off their orange masters. In that day, we can only hope that &#8220;Remember The Council&#8221; is a rallying cry that will unite people of goodwill against their Saber overlords.

​

----------------

 

[Whomp]

Uhoh...that sounds bad.

 

[Chamnix]

Umm... Team Saber did not feel bound by that agreement once the Council so blatantly violated it seventy years ago. Or are you going to try to claim that The Council did not provide any modern age techs to Team FREE ?

 

[remake20]

Just another reason why team SABER should be sent to hell.

 

[General_W]

You didn't feel bound by it!? That's a shock! The mushroom cloud over the Gulag was such a subtle hint - it's shocking to hear you openly say that you feel that way!

I am honestly confused by what you're referring with our "blatant violation 70 years ago" - is that before or after we honored the terms of the ExODAT treaty and sold you technology even after you started bombing our land, sinking our ships, and killing our soldiers?
Whatever it is that you're alleging we did - It's puzzling how that bad behavior isn't covered under the no-nuke terms of "never ever... no matter what."
I guess that's wasn't clear enough to stop someone who wants something bad enough...

 

[Chamnix]

Whatever it is that you're alleging we did - It's puzzling how that bad behavior isn't covered under the no-nuke terms of "never ever... no matter what."

I'm sorry, but this argument is laughable. Suppose The Council had launched 10 nuclear missiles at Saber. Using your argument, Saber still couldn't use nuclear missiles against Council because that would violate the "never ever... no matter what" clause.

The simple fact is that once Council violated the terms of the Exodat treaty, all other terms of the treaty were annulled. You can't just rip up part of the treaty that you don't like and expect us to follow the rest of it.

 

[General_W]

Really? My dear, dear, Chaminx? That's the best you've got?

The logical fallacies in your argument are so glaring and absurd that even five or six more "lol faces" couldn't cover them up. I fear that everyone who read your "counter argument" (using the term loosely) has lost a few IQ points just for having read it.

I will not further insult the intelligence of the readers of The Roundtable by even responding to that.



Note that our original post was for history and 3rd party observers. It was never intended to persuade the butchers of Saber in the first place.

 

[Krill]

Can't you guys just, you know, kill each other and open the fora?

 

[Chamnix]

You can't just rip up part of the treaty that you don't like and expect us to follow the rest of it.

Really?

Yes, really. You actually disagree ?

 

[donsig]

The simple fact is that once Council violated the terms of the Exodat treaty, all other terms of the treaty were annulled. You can't just rip up part of the treaty that you don't like and expect us to follow the rest of it.

Didn't SABER attack The Council about 20 turns after we made that agreement? It sounds like you are saying that The Council was bound by the entire agreement even though SABER declared war. That seems a bit much.

The Council took article 1 to mean we wouldn't use nukes on each other no matter what. Silly us.

 

[Cyc]

YEAH!

The Council took article 1 to mean we wouldn't use nukes on each other no matter what. Silly us.

EVEN IF ARTICLE 1 IS NULL AND VOID!

 

[Niklas]

This will teach us the value of being VERY explicit when writing treaties. Yes, The Council most honestly believed, both at the time of signature as well as now, that article 1 was intended to hold forever, orthogonal to any other points in the treaty. It was already implicit that it would keep holding even in the face of war between us - it's hard to use nukes on someone you're not at war with, after all.

We did consider the rest of the treaty null and void when you attacked us. We were honestly baffled when you came to us asking to exchange techs after first bombing us to cinders, but complied since we realized that the treaty text was ambiguous. Still, we certainly didn't look twice at the treaty by the time we started giving techs to FREE, considering it null and void.

... EXCEPT for article 1, which we truly read as forever and ever and ever no matter what. Naive perhaps, but honestly so. This isn't just us calling names and pointing fingers for the sake of appearing righteous.

 

[Chamnix]

Didn't SABER attack The Council about 20 turns after we made that agreement? It sounds like you are saying that The Council was bound by the entire agreement even though SABER declared war. That seems a bit much.

Yes, Council was bound by the agreement even though SABER declared war. The treaty in no way promised peace. It anticipated that war might be declared and explicitly specified that the treaty would remain in effect:

* Cancellation of the trading arrangement is a separate matter from the peace/war status of the teams.

This will teach us the value of being VERY explicit when writing treaties. Yes, The Council most honestly believed, both at the time of signature as well as now, that article 1 was intended to hold forever, orthogonal to any other points in the treaty.

Saber most honestly believed, both at the time of signature as well as now, that the entire treaty was intended to hold.

We were honestly baffled when you came to us asking to exchange techs after first bombing us to cinders, but complied since we realized that the treaty text was ambiguous.

There is nothing ambiguous about the Exodat treaty’s continuation despite the war. What is there about the above quoted term of the treaty that is not 100% crystal clear?

The Council took article 1 to mean we wouldn't use nukes on each other no matter what. Silly us.

Article 3: Exclusivity

* No modern era techs may be traded/sold/gifted outside of the alliance for any reason without express permission of the other team.​

Saber took Article 3 to mean no modern era techs may be traded/sold/gifted outside of the alliance for any reason without express permission of the other team. Silly us.

But let the world know and history record the price Saber was willing to pay to achieve victory. They may indeed rule this world someday soon – but they will do so without honor. They will rule with the knowledge that they chose military victory over truth and justice. Perhaps, in some forgotten future the people of the world will rise up and cast off their orange masters. In that day, we can only hope that “Remember The Council” is a rallying cry that will unite people of goodwill against their Saber overlords.

Council has admitted they broke the treaty. The Council is not only wrong in their accusations of deceit on the part of Saber, they are blatant hypocrites.

​

 

[Niklas]

There is nothing ambiguous about the Exodat treaty’s continuation despite the war. What is there about the above quoted term of the treaty that is not 100% crystal clear?

You are right, the ambiguity is not in the treaty text as such, but rather in the question of whether it was annulled or not.

This is an excerpt from what we sent to you when we received your asking for a tech exchange:

During a break in the bombing, your note fell from the sky into the very crater The High Council was using for a meeting. While the ExODAT treaty does contain a provision which would seem to indicate such a trade as being correct, we would like to refer you to your note of 11/14/2008, in which you state:
"Sadly, today has brought an end to our long relationship of
friendship. It has been great working together with you over the past
millenia..."
Our legal experts assure us that this notification you sent us includes an ending of the tech relationship, as well. As far as we are aware, only the No nukes, "never ever... no matter what" part of the treaty remains in force.

Even if your note to us did not mean the annullment of the treaty, our response should leave little doubt that, at least from that point on, only article 1 remained. All trading of techs to FREE happened after this point in time.

 

[Chamnix]

There was no ambiguity - Council was pulling that out of their arses. Saber did not cancel the tech trading, and Council was reading words that quite simply were not there.

The best you could argue is that Council intended to cancel the tech trading portion when they sent that note, but even then they did not wait the required 10 turns before giving modern age techs away in complete violation of the treaty.

 

[Cyc]

Right on, Chamnix. You've stated our case as well as it can be. Bravo. The Council is smart enough that we don't have to take their hand and lead them down the rosy path showing them pictures and drawing them maps. Let history do that for them.

You are right, the ambiguity is not in the treaty text as such, but rather in the question of whether it was annulled or not.

This is an excerpt from what we sent to you when we received your asking for a tech exchange:

During a break in the bombing, your note fell from the sky into the very crater The High Council was using for a meeting. While the ExODAT treaty does contain a provision which would seem to indicate such a trade as being correct, we would like to refer you to your note of 11/14/2008, in which you state:
"Sadly, today has brought an end to our long relationship of
friendship. It has been great working together with you over the past
millenia..."
Our legal experts assure us that this notification you sent us includes an ending of the tech relationship, as well. As far as we are aware, only the No nukes, "never ever... no matter what" part of the treaty remains in force.


Even if your note to us did not mean the annullment of the treaty, our response should leave little doubt that, at least from that point on, only article 1 remained. All trading of techs to FREE happened after this point in time.

Niklas, look. You guys know we luv ya and all that, couldn't find better opponents if we tried (not counting FREE's Commando Bob), and all that entails, but let's be honest here. The above has to be the biggest load of crap I have seen a politician throw my way in a long time. Seriously.

How much is the Council paying you as a propagandist? Team Saber may be able to beat that amount. We're looking for someone who can twist words and politely misconscrew the meaning of important paragraphs, if not entire documents. Chamnix is just to factful and honest. We realize, as you have shown us, that sometimes it is advantageous to go beyond the truth, even if it appears to be in a sickening, whining sense.