Jump to content

Security. Stability. Safety.


Recommended Posts

The ends justify the means, if it's a leader than is truly making decisions that aren't even necessarily bad - but not supported by the one's they are leading, then yes a coup is necessary. Now I don't know Seeker well personally, but based on some of the things I have heard it was only a matter of time before someone was going to do something to act out against him. 

You know,  I'm all for leadership change as long as it's done according to what is laid out in an alliance's charter.  That is not what happened in VE's case.  If the membership supported the person doing the "coup" I'm sure it could of been done as stated in the charter. The fact that it was not says a great deal.

Edited by Sylvia
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know,  I'm all for leadership change as long as it's done according to what is laid out in an alliance's charter.  That is not what happened in VE's case.  Thus for whatever it is worth as far as I'm concerned the people who took part in the "coup" are not the true leaders of the alliance.

That's fair, in all honesty a more appropriate motion would have been to just leave and take the people who disagreed along so as to not break charter policy. However, I still think that people are treating the situation much worse than it should be. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fair, in all honesty a more appropriate motion would have been to just leave and take the people who disagreed along so as to not break charter policy. However, I still think that people are treating the situation much worse than it should be.

 

if that's the case on how you feel why did the actual government (who actually follows the charter) have to leave instead of the one who disagrees. It's morally wrong and I think you know it deep down.
Link to post
Share on other sites

if that's the case on how you feel why did the actual government (who actually follows the charter) have to leave instead of the one who disagrees. It's morally wrong and I think you know it deep down.

 

I would argue it's more a technicality than a morality issue. It's no secret VE has had an issue with activity and I assume to get something like impeachment done it requires a good amount of active members and gov to pass. I'll need to go check but I feel it's a safe assumption to say that it is percentage based in terms of what is required with the votes. It is possible Olorin could not get enough votes, but could still have a good chunk of the active people just based off of the requirements to take someone out of office. Does this make him a bad person? No. 

 

Deep down I know that I think he should have just left and taken those he had supporting him with him, for the sake of not breaking the charter and for a few other reasons. However, I won't question morality over a charter that likely was written at (and for) a much different time for the alliance than right now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is pretty cool of UPN. It's a mess, it's not their mess, and they're sticking their neck out a bit anyway. Good stuff.

 

(Unless they get a treaty out of it later. Then they're just scum. :P )

Damn you got me. And here I was with my plan to make VE a vassal of UPN before we move on to conquering the game and recreating that sweet 5026 man alliance we all just declared independence from :P

 

 

But seriously, UPN has had a few unfortunate incidents where we've lost a large chunk of our membership and/or gov over the past decade. We know how much it hurts and we can empathize with the current situation in VE. Our treaty is more to protect from opportunistic DoWs than anything else right now tbh. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alkaline Vs The World.

 

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19005-t-foreign-affairs-update-viridia-update/

 

Alkaline 1, World 0

 

Just because I was the only one publicly claiming seeker wasn't as good as his friends are claiming doesn't mean it's not true :v

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Inquiring minds would like to know if the announced then suspended treaty is now suspended, announced, or about to be flushed down the memory hole. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suspense is killing me.

Is it suspended? Do you wish them luck in a "seeya later we now changed our minds" kind of way, or is it an honest "we wish you the best of luck and you're going to need it" kind of way? Or do you just genuinely wish tVE good luck and fortune in an unrelated context to this thread entirely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.