Diplomacy Master Thread- Helping Your Opponents Beat Themselves

[scooter]

I was sort of hoping if I just ignored ASM's post nobody would take it seriously, but apparently not. No, we are not NAP-stabbing, period.

[NobleHelium]

Stop calling it NAPstabbing. I am just questioning the clause, and yes I honestly do think it was put there so that they can use it to break the NAP should they so wish. The clause has never made sense to me and I've mentioned it before. If you don't agree that's fine, we won't do it.

[scooter]

Okay fine if you insist I'll give this dumb thing a real answer . Let's keep in mind this "loophole" was discovered with this attitude.

Can someone post the section from the NAP treaty with CFC about cancellation again? We were trying to figure out ways of wiping out their border city.

So there's no way you're convincing me that a sane, good-faith reading of the deal could lead to allowing us to end the NAP. But let me humor you all. Here is 3.1:

3.1. The members agree not to conduct actions which will lead to a declaration of war between the members of this pact for the duration of the pact.

If you can tell me with a straight face that my chat with Yossarian fairly qualifies, then a distant relative of mine needs some help getting some money out of Nigeria, and I'd be happy to put you in touch with him. I heard he's willing to pay quite a bit for your help.

I don't like "we aren't doing X, period" statements that much even though I just did it. So let me reword it. If we declare war on CFC prior to T175, I will resign my position and probably quit the whole team. I think that's more fair to say.

[scooter]

Sent that CivFr draft by the way. 

[NobleHelium]

I honestly don't see why you posted that, I would have just said "yeah I don't agree."

[MWIN]

Please no more quitting.

Sulla didn't want to be a turn player, but he can still give his feed back. Instead, I don't see him at all...

I honestly don't see why you posted that, I would have just said "yeah I don't agree."

[NobleHelium]

The main thing is that scooter said he would give a real answer and then proceeded to not give a real answer. If you just don't agree that's fine, as I said we won't do it.

[scooter]

Sorry for being overly confrontational, just a little annoyed that I posted a draft for discussion for CivFr that I feel is fairly important, and I wake up to a full page of posts talking about abusing a non-existent loophole to break our NAP with CFC and 0 posts discussing how to talk with CivFr which was far more important. The discussion quality in here has been dropping for quite awhile.

And no I'm obviously not seriously quitting, because we are obviously not going to raze that city before T175. But I do feel that strongly about it.

[pindicator]

Sorry scooter, I was the cause of the NAP-stab talk. Which is funny because I think I spent more time talking about what to say to CivFr with you last night than I did mentioning NAP-stabbing CFC. Although I couldn't give a care about a loophole, I just think it's silly for us to sit on our hands and wait for our neighbor to build up and attack us. I'm fine being in the minority in that opinion because I really haven't invested much into the game anyway.

I'll try to post more when I'm in agreement with a draft. So far I've just been not saying anything when I think it's fine, but I can see how from your point of view you are getting frustrated at a lack of feedback.

[mostly_harmless]

I think lots of people actually read the drafts, going by the list of people browsing the forums, but don't feel the need to comment an "agree" statement, if they don't have anything to add.
And with each message you sent your handling of each team got better and better, so less to criticize. That's a good thing!

Also, I think we are like a little rabbit staring into the headlights of the approaching truck, transfixed in the middle of the road. At least at the moment.

mh