Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 164

Thread: A Treaty for Neutrals

  1. #61
    ((I've been thinking over this for a few days, take the following IC or OOC i dont mind ))

    Omni-Tek has the lease for Rubi-Ka for 'x' more years.

    The ICC has deregulated some areas off Rubi-Ka for anyone to start their own mining facility. So apart from these plots OT still has the lease to everywhere else on RK, in fact without the Tir accord they can lay legal claim to all the clan lands ie the entire planet is Omni's except for those regions designated by the ICC to be 'free for all'.

    Would taking that non-designated land for your own put you in conflict with OT? well as they are the legal holders then legally yes. The exception being the areas open for mining which anyone can legally hold.

    Holding that land does not put you in the conflict as it is your right, granted by the ICC to hold the designated areas and to defend them as best you can, doing so doesnt make you a part of the war. Should you go on the offensive i feel that is a different matter and you should accept the consequences of your actions. Attacking a clan base doesnt make you an employee or ally of OT but it sure as heck makes you an enemy of that clan and their allies, the same applies for attacking OT.

    However as wars are fought over and using strategic resources any mine is liable to be attacked by one of the big two players (OT or clan), but being attacked doesnt make you a side or ally you with any side.

    The Newland treaty allowing neutral/independent or whatever to defend themselves is a good thing and only a natural reaction to events. Most neutrals groups (there ARE exceptions IMHO) simply want to 'live and work' on Rubi-Ka and almost all have a legal right to do so, they are legally under omni/ICC protection and juristiction. Given the recent events I dont blame legal neutral groups for wanting to defend their interests as best they can. should neutral group(s) go to war against one side or the other it is their business with that side and, dependent on their reasons eg attacking clans under an agreement with OT, does not make them a part of the OT/Clan conflict.

    I also believe there are some neutral groups, naming no names, who are trying to get involved in the conflict in one way or another and i think the members of those orgs should do some soul searching.
    Omni-Pol intelligence report for Peregrinus Praecautus
    Known applicant of Third Faction
    Warning! Record is being accessed by an external source of unknown origin.
    Recovering file

    be on your guard pilgrim
    File ends

  2. #62
    Originally posted by Lady Kali
    ((Cemetarygate, read the following thead (http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...hreadid=124982), your biased view is identical to the ones that have been defeated numerous times, in several posts covered by Slice. I have a lot to say but it has already been said.))
    (( I'm not talking about a token board, I'm talking about the conflict itself. Are you that thick headed that you have no clue what I'm talkinga bout? Get off your high horse already and educate yourself. ))

  3. #63
    Dr Tiny has a very good understanding and explination of the political/land control situstion. Bravo!
    Glarawyn L220 OT Adventurer
    It's good to be furry.
    ----
    Lilredhot L220 OT Enforcer
    Don't mind me, I tank without a helmet.
    ----
    Gunslinger19 L150 OT Soldier
    There's a word for people who think everyone's out to get them: perceptive.

  4. #64
    Originally posted by Dr Tiny
    I also believe there are some neutral groups, naming no names, who are trying to get involved in the conflict in one way or another and i think the members of those orgs should do some soul searching.
    Hope you are searching within yourself, Dr Tiny. Borpac sounds quite similar to what such clan organizations as Gaia and Eco Warriors (( Funcom run organizations )) are attempting to accomplish.

  5. #65
    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    (( I'm not talking about a token board, I'm talking about the conflict itself. Are you that thick headed that you have no clue what I'm talkinga bout? Get off your high horse already and educate yourself. ))
    ((You obviosuly didn't do your reading; if you did you would know the discussion was mostly about neutrals, the conflict and why we are not a part of it. From your response it's obvious you can't read, or were too lazy to see where the discussion on that thread went. I did specify the posts made by Slisce, did I not, to make your reading easier? I don't have time to argue with idiots who don't do their homework.))

    -Note: small edit
    Last edited by Lady Kali; May 15th, 2003 at 18:30:44.

  6. #66
    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    Hope you are searching within yourself, Dr Tiny. Borpac sounds quite similar to what such clan organizations as Gaia and Eco Warriors (( Funcom run organizations )) are attempting to accomplish.
    Not to defend BORPAC, but you certainly don't have to be Clan to care and act upon your motivation to protect the environment.

  7. #67
    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    Hope you are searching within yourself, Dr Tiny. Borpac sounds quite similar to what such clan organizations as Gaia and Eco Warriors (( Funcom run organizations )) are attempting to accomplish.
    you might want to search the CoT records for Dr Malcom "Drtiny" Neblett.

    ((can we say pwned?))
    Omni-Pol intelligence report for Peregrinus Praecautus
    Known applicant of Third Faction
    Warning! Record is being accessed by an external source of unknown origin.
    Recovering file

    be on your guard pilgrim
    File ends

  8. #68
    Originally posted by Lady Kali
    ((You obviosuly didn't do your reading...
    Actually, I did, and that's why I asked you, again, to read up on the conflict.

    What is the clan/omni conflict?

    - Notum mining where income is distributed equally amongst the people (clan, but should also be noted certain clan groups oppose that view) versus mining where the income is the corporations (Omni-Tek).
    - Democratic Rubi-Ka (clan) versus a corporate rule (Omni-Tek).
    - Free choice, speech, press and thought (clan) versus following orders (Omni-Tek).
    - Free travel (clan) versus restricted areas (Omni-Tek).

    The term neutral means neither for or against either side in a conflict. By applying the term neutral to the clan/Omni-Tek conflicts (which is not black and white as there are many different conflicts) we see there are neutral persons who are for and/or against these conflicts in regard to clan or Omni views.

    Take the first one alone. Neutrals don't care if clans have their way and all income is distributed equally, nor do they care if Omni-Tek pockets all the income for themselves. However, neutrals would like to establish their own mining facilities and pocket the income for themselves. This is both for and against the clan side of the conflict and against the Omni side. Which, goes against what is meant to be neutral as being applied to the clan/Omni conflict.

  9. #69
    Originally posted by Dr Tiny


    you might want to search the CoT records for Dr Malcom "Drtiny" Neblett.

    ((can we say pwned?))
    (( Searcing your name alone will result in all 700+ of your posts as well as any time your name was mentioned. Little help on as to what you're referring?

    And yes, pwned. That wasn't so hard to say. ))

  10. #70
    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    Actually, I did, and that's why I asked you, again, to read up on the conflict.
    ((Umm, no you did not. You proved that when you assumed the thread's discussion was all about token boards in your previous post. Meanwhile the discussion I directed you to went into (and defeated) ALL of what you list below in your most recent one. Once again, I don’t need to prove you wrong. It’s already been done in that thread which you don’t care to read. Furthermore, if you so wish to contribute to that thread, please do so as it does not belong here.))
    Last edited by Lady Kali; May 15th, 2003 at 20:17:50.

  11. #71
    ((Still I hear it. 'You are playing the game the wrong way. Neutrals are supposed to sit in their little box and do nothing at all.'

    Maybe FC should just remove the neut tag to make the rest of the world happy. Then yall can concentrate on the red vs blue game Bionitrous keeps talking about.))

    Ohh and let me help you Cemetarygate. Drtiny is a scum sucking clanner.
    Garret "Necc" Scheer press officer of Desert Winds (MSAS)

    Karma, the world's true equalizer.

    Free Rubi-Ka!

  12. #72
    ((Yeah Necc, more or less we have people who try and fail arguing against the following facts:

    1) ICC deregulated mining. Neutrals are allowed to mine.
    2) Neutrals are allowed to attack first in PVP.

    If it were not Funcom’s intention to let neutrals mine and still remain neutral while fighting for their land, the option simply would not be available. This is an inarguable fact. People who quarrel that mining makes a neutral “not neutral” have a rather persistent problem of not accepting reality. Opinions don’t mean jack. The fact that neutrals can mine and fight are intentional on Funcom’s part- meaning we are allowed to mine and fight and still stay in the neutral alignment. If people have a problem with that, fine, but their opinion is not the word of god. If they treat is as such they're gonna start arguments such as this. I agree with you Necc, 100% that would be nice if they didnt try to tell me or any other neut how to play this game. I don’t go around preaching to Omni and Clan how to play, and I expect the same courtesy in return. It makes me wonder if their mother taught them any manners.))
    Last edited by Lady Kali; May 15th, 2003 at 20:22:57.

  13. #73
    Neutrals come from both sides, omni and clan, that are disinterested with the continuing war that neither side is winning (storyline wise).


    The clans open attacks will never bring omni to their knees, and there will always be more people disinterested in following orders to join the clan. The war will continue until both sides are dead.


    The neutrals merely are people that do not wish to follow along that path in most part. What you have interest wise is merely the collective wants of the group of people disinterested with war, not a set perogative laid forth by their leaders.


    Neutrals are neither interested, or uninterested in notum mining. Some with the omni background will be more interested in hoarding wealth, while the clan background will be more interested in a democracy when war is finally gone. There might be a mixture, and this is where the true sanity lays, and these are the people that most sided factions dislike, as they have goals laid out for themselves, and its neither fully in the interest of omni or clan, but for themselves, the mixture of both groups. A bastard child of Romeo and Juliet as it were. Two groups hating eachother, creating what is ultimately an amalgamation of their desires, but a seperate entity in and of itself.



    Above all else, change scares people.
    Last edited by Sepulcher; May 15th, 2003 at 20:25:38.
    Just because I have a metalic jaw, doesn't mean I've ever been in a 007 movie.

  14. #74
    Originally posted by Lady Kali
    ((Cemetarygate, read the following thead (http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...hreadid=124982), your biased view is identical to the ones that have been defeated numerous times, in several posts covered by Slice. I have a lot to say but it has already been said.))
    ((Defeated?!?!? It was two people expressing differing opinions. I didn't know it was a competition. Why is everything BLACK & WHITE to you? The problem is we have two sides who refuse to see the other sides point. So threads like this deteriorate into a pissing match.

    Clan/Omni : Neutrals are Fence Sitters
    Neutral: No they are not
    Clan/Omni: Oh Yes they
    Neutral: Not
    Clan/Omni: Are
    Neutral: Not
    Clan/Omni: Are

    /me wonders when Cz or a moderator will dump this thread into a non IC forum))

  15. #75

    OOC

    I think there was a "Neener-Neener-Neener" in there as well that you missed.
    Bliqz, Agent, Omni, Atlantean, "Iron Chef of Rubi-Ka"
    God is a bullet.

    ((The IC only RP forum is back. Bliqz is an Omni Extremist, and his posts IN THAT FORUM reflect that attitude. I can be reached by PM if you feel I have personaly offended you, and I will be happy to change/temper my post. Thank you, and have fun!))

  16. #76
    Originally posted by Lady Kali
    ((Umm, no you did not. You proved that when you assumed the thread's discussion was all about token boards in your previous post. ))
    Rotflmfao. That one brought me to tears. Yeah, quoting a title of a thread proves someone didn't read it. Too funny.

    Actually, I was mocking the title of the thread as compared to the content. No one understands my 'dry' sense if humor and that is quite alright. You're forgiven.

    That aside, I followed that thread in very much detail while it was active and read only Slice's posts when you said to read the thread. And if you bothered to read my latest post you'll note that my recent statements follow precisely to Slice's guidlines as to how a neutral should be viewed and I don't follow the black and white views (as people seem to use and not use when it's convienent for their argument) of the conflict.

    There's a few more posts here I see that I havn't read yet, but I'm laughing too hard to read and reply to any of them. Have to wonder off a bit and compose myself. Again, too funny.

  17. #77
    Originally posted by Tifanyx


    ((Defeated?!?!? It was two people expressing differing opinions…. *SNIP*…))
    ((I think you forget that the reason you lost is that you were trying to argue your opinions as facts, which Slicse repeatedly pointed out. Cemetarygate is doing the same thing you did in that thread- which is why I directed him there.))

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    Rotflmfao. That one brought me to tears. Yeah, quoting a title of a thread proves someone didn't read it. Too funny.

    Actually, I was mocking the title of the thread as compared to the content. No one understands my 'dry' sense if humor and that is quite alright. You're forgiven.
    Nothing for you to forgive. It was entirely obvious you didn't read that thread by your remark, with you barely gancing at the first post at best and then thinking it wise to insult me. And it all made you look rather foolish in the process. Saying now “it was a joke” doesn’t cut it to save face, and I doubt anyone buys it. Rather than take a good look at reality, you just want argue for the sake of hearing your own voice. Luckily I have a plane to catch tomorrow and will enjoy some sun, surf and fine male company while you beat your dead horse. All your opinions on what a neutral is means absolutely nothing compared to the fact that neutrals can/do/will mine and fight and still keep their neutrality. Funcom lets us do just that, and its not a bug or an exploit. You can’t deny that, therefore, you loose. Yep, that’s a fact and not an opinion. You can certainly have all the opinions you like, but arguing them as truth and telling neutrals they are playing all wrong is pure bull and you will continually fall flat on your face.))

    I have business on old Terra for a few days. When I return I hope to see some nice input on the treaty by interested parties.

    /me turns from her terminal to begin packing her bags.
    Last edited by Lady Kali; May 15th, 2003 at 22:13:52.

  18. #78
    Originally posted by Necc
    ((Still I hear it. 'You are playing the game the wrong way. Neutrals are supposed to sit in their little box and do nothing at all.'
    Not saying you can't play the game how you want, just saying don't expect to be treated the same when you start interacting in our conflict.

    Originally posted by Necc
    Ohh and let me help you Cemetarygate. Drtiny is a scum sucking clanner.
    D'oh. The term "CoT records" got me to thinking back to when the CoT was active and what "Dr Malcom "Drtiny" Neblett" did while the CoT was active.

    However, I did overlook "Drtiny's" current status. Touche.

    Originally posted by Lady Kali
    ((Yeah Necc, more or less we have people who try and fail arguing against the following facts:

    1) ICC deregulated mining. Neutrals are allowed to mine.
    2) Neutrals are allowed to attack first in PVP.
    I concure with the manner in which you presented these statements. Neither of these have anything to do with the clan/Omni conflict, why attempts to argue otherwise would be an exercise in futility and why I have not attempted to argue either (although you seem to think I am/was? Either you're not reading my posts, not understanding them, too concerned with throwing insults to read and/or understand the posts or too busy maintaing your elitest/houlier than thou/I'm better than you attitude? Regardless, how about you actually read what's written for once and stop pretending you now anything about what I'm doing on my end.)

    I also concure with the point Bionitrous made in his response to Rejkavik. (Meant to say that earlier, but didn't). His point, PvPing has nothing to do with the conflict and he's correct.

    However, as I've mentioned, and the fact some are ignoring, where does the neutral income from mining go? The income is a section of the clan/Omni conflict many are overlooking. Granted, this does not fully involve the neutrals in every aspect of the clan/Omni conflict, and certainly doesn't negate netural status, but does invovle neutrals in that aspect of the clan/Omni conflict and why some go to bat against neutrals. This is also why I've said some neutrals are more invovled than they know.

    On the other hand, the neutral involvement is so small that if we were to see things in black and white one would be left with one logical conclusion. That being, neutrals are not invovled whatsoever and no one can state or argue otherwise. By that token, the "shades of gray" view in latter paragraph is wrong.

    Guess it all boils down to which way one sees things. Shades of gray or black and white. But, since I'm not perfect like you, I know that by agreeing with you I'm still wrong.

  19. #79
    OOC-

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    Not saying you can't play the game how you want, just saying don't expect to be treated the same when you start interacting in our conflict.
    Yet you said this a few post before:

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    “C'mon, do you really take us for idiots that we don't know what neutral means? We can read the dictionary and know very well you're anything but neutral with half the crap you pull.”
    Sniveling out of character alleging neuts are not such, which you did do a few post back, is indeed rudely trying to tell us how to play the game. Furthermore, if you talk like that to anyone ooc, anywhere, they are not going to be polite to you. This is a topic for a treaty to get hammered out for Pete's sake! If you're not interested in the treaty, what are you doing here if not to cause trouble?

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    I concure with the manner in which you presented these statements. (blah blah blah blah)…Regardless, how about you actually read what's written for once and stop pretending you now anything about what I'm doing on my end.)
    Your definition of the omni/clan conflict is your view. My problem is that you’re trying to certify that by neutrals mining notum:

    1) they are not neutral
    2) support a side
    3) want to be a part of the Clan vs. Omni war
    4) Are a part of the Omni/Clan war
    5) And are therefore not neutral

    If that’s your opinion, fine. But it’s not valid to use in an attempt to define neutrals, delimit where they stand on the conflict (already covered by Slisce) or dictate to them how play their characters.

    Funcom lets neuts mine and PVP without having to forgo their neutral alignment (which you agree is the case). That’s the way the game works, and it contradicts these opinions you are trying to force neuts to swallow as verity. If mining meant you couldn’t be neutral, the game designers wouldn’t have permitted it.

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    His point, PvPing has nothing to do with the conflict and he's correct.
    Then why imply that if neuts participate in Notum Wars (which is PVP based) they are seeking the conflict? You contradict yourself again.

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    However, as I've mentioned, and the fact some are ignoring, where does the neutral income from mining go? (snip)
    You’re not stating a fact. You are posing a question that you droll on about without answering.

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    The income is a section of the clan/Omni conflict many are overlooking.. … (snip), neutrals are not invovled whatsoever and no one can state or argue otherwise. By that token, the "shades of gray" view in latter paragraph is wrong.
    As far as I know no one gets money in game from mining, the income from towers is purely RP. The real tangible income is from the individual player’s efforts, which has no regard to the conflict. If you are talking about a competition between Omni and Clan to become wealthier than the other, that’s another tangent I am not interested in getting sucked into.

    Originally posted by Cemetarygate

    Guess it all boils down to which way one sees things. Shades of gray or black and white. But, since I'm not perfect like you, I know that by agreeing with you I'm still wrong.
    Never said I was perfect, but you can drop the sarcasm. Feel free to think anyway way you please, but I would watch yourself when you decide to preach “what constitutes a neutral” like you were on the FC dev team or something. Neutral players don’t take it lightly, neither would you if we outlined how Omni and Clan players should play the game.

    If you want to be constructive, you could offer up some pointers or suggetions to improve the treaty that would help make it work. That would be appropriate and on topic. If you don't want to contribute, and instead go about your business then by all means.

    I'd be interested in knowing how many guilds out there recognize neutral land, maybe get a better feel for what parts of the treaty could use work. I hope more people post about that.

    Anyway, I must get to bed now. Got an early plane to catch. Take care, be well, and I hope to see more good stuff happening on the NLC treaty.
    Last edited by Lady Kali; May 16th, 2003 at 06:12:13.

  20. #80
    Originally posted by Cemetarygate


    However, as I've mentioned, and the fact some are ignoring, where does the neutral income from mining go? The income is a section of the clan/Omni conflict many are overlooking. Granted, this does not fully involve the neutrals in every aspect of the clan/Omni conflict, and certainly doesn't negate netural status, but does invovle neutrals in that aspect of the clan/Omni conflict and why some go to bat against neutrals. This is also why I've said some neutrals are more invovled than they know.
    I would argue that some neutrals are effecting the conflict. However thay are not involved. But that's another issue, and one that Lady Kali reffered to earlier.

    It is, however, a good question you pose. Where does the income go? There are other perks but monetary ones to the mining that much is sure. But I'd too like to know in who's pocket the creds go. And I'd like to see official facts on it, not opinions and hearsay. Because if the money goes to OT eventually, as been argued, then the conflict is a joke. If ot gets rich anyway, than there really is no point to the war. But as I said, I'd like to know for sure.
    Garret "Necc" Scheer press officer of Desert Winds (MSAS)

    Karma, the world's true equalizer.

    Free Rubi-Ka!

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •