EVE Search - CVA Warning to ISS

All Channels

Corporations and Alliances Summit

CVA Warning to ISS

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Scor Angel	Posted - 2006.04.21 13:48:00 - [391] For all that you hold dear people, please let this stop. Are ISS in the worng? - in some respects yes. Are CVA in the wrong? - in the same way yes. If we let them do it, will this issue be concluded in a fasion suitable for all involved? - YES. please just let them do it.
kincajou niten	Posted - 2006.04.21 13:52:00 - [392] Originally by: Chain Gang Quote: Even giving them room for a misinterpretation of the agreement Right, so its their fault for not reading between the lines and making mistakes any normal person would make given your incorrect guidelines during the agreement. In my book, if I'm going to place POS near friendly territory and I'm not sure on the borders, I will ask the friendly alliance. No need to read between lines, communication is your friend.
Mattduk	Posted - 2006.04.21 13:59:00 - [393] I read all of that and I am still confused. I am looking at the map in game. How is 3KB CVA space? Now before I start, or rather continue, I wish to state neutrality in this dispute. At this time I take neither side. Just looking at the map and giving an outsider's point of view. CVA are a good few systems away from 3KB, and do not have sovereignty on any of the systems between 3KB and Y6AB. It's a good 6 jumps away from CVA space, as the in game map shows it. Now.. I don't know the inner workings of either alliance. And I wish them both the best of luck, but if CVA haven't explicitely told the rest of EVE (not just ISS) that they lay claim to 3KB, and I can totally see how one might put a pos there, innocently, and not realise the problems it may cause. That said, good luck to you both, and I hope you resolve the issue with minimal bloodshed. Nobody wants that, I am sure. Fight with honor, and pray the diplomats come to an amicable agreement quickly Best regards Mattduk
O Thief	Posted - 2006.04.21 13:59:00 - [394] Originally by: kincajou niten In my book, if I'm going to place POS near friendly territory and I'm not sure on the borders, I will ask the friendly alliance. No need to read between lines, communication is your friend. I feel your pain. Marginis Imports is outraged that the ISS have placed POS in a previously unclaimed system we have now decided to claim. This behaviour shall NOT be tolerated. Equally, we are displeased that CVA continue to operate an outpost in a system we have decided to claim. This has been 'noted' by our leadership.
Chain Gang	Posted - 2006.04.21 13:59:00 - [395] Quote: In my book, if I'm going to place POS near friendly territory and I'm not sure on the borders, I will ask the friendly alliance. No need to read between lines, communication is your friend. CVA policy = War Dec
Cell Satimo	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:10:00 - [396] This whole thread is a classic. Has anyone in the Entire 110k eve community ever seen an Alliance leader other than CVA's claim to own something that hadn't been recogonised by CONCORD or the Map Maker? And people take it seriously! It must be a first! Maybe we should give the whole incident a memorable title .. like, erm .. an Acryonm like 'GNW', perhaps .. CVA Claimed Vacant Area? Claims Vaguely Alleged? CVAISS Claimed Vacant Area In non-Soverign Space! Couldn't Validate Amarrians Incredulous Speculative Sovereignty?
kincajou niten	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:12:00 - [397] Originally by: Chain Gang Quote: In my book, if I'm going to place POS near friendly territory and I'm not sure on the borders, I will ask the friendly alliance. No need to read between lines, communication is your friend. CVA policy = War Dec Please read up from the start and you will understand that you are completely wrong.
Mr Trouble	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:15:00 - [398] Originally by: kincajou niten CVA policy = War Dec Please read up from the start and you will understand that you are completely wrong. Really? But didnt CVA wardec ISS while they were still negotiating behind the scenes. I understood thats what annoyed ISS so much.
kincajou niten	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:18:00 - [399] Originally by: Mr Trouble Originally by: kincajou niten CVA policy = War Dec Please read up from the start and you will understand that you are completely wrong. Really? But didnt CVA wardec ISS while they were still negotiating behind the scenes. I understood thats what annoyed ISS so much. Are you ISS official representative? :-)
Garreck	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:19:00 - [400] Originally by: Mr Trouble Really? But didnt CVA wardec ISS while they were still negotiating behind the scenes. No, no, no, no, NO. This has been gone over many times! Not a shot was fired until an official "no, the stations stay" was given by ISS on this very thread! That is the ROOT of this conflict! This is not some random warmongering taking place here. An agreement was made in good faith. That agreement was broken. Private diplomatic means were ignored. Public diplomatic means failed. We chose war. What else are we to do? Ah, that's right...we're supposed to look at a larger, richer alliance with mercs on retainer and roll over and play dead. Not gonna happen.
Chain Gang	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:28:00 - [401] Edited by: Chain Gang on 21/04/2006 14:28:46 Quote: No, no, no, no, NO. This has been gone over many times! Not a shot was fired until an official "no, the stations stay" was given by ISS on this very thread! That is the ROOT of this conflict! This is not some random warmongering taking place here. An agreement was made in good faith. That agreement was broken. Private diplomatic means were ignored. Public diplomatic means failed. We chose war. What else are we to do? Ah, that's right...we're supposed to look at a larger, richer alliance with mercs on retainer and roll over and play dead. Not gonna happen. Complete rubbish .... even your own corporation members have stated the Agreement could be taken "x" ammount of different ways. The simply fact is the CVA declared War while the ISS asked all members to stay away while your "could be taken "x" ways" agreement was sorted out. Your action CVA are wrong and no amount off justification is going to rebalance your actions
Riddari	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:29:00 - [402] Neutrality doesn't exist in 0.0, no matter how many times ISS try to pretend it does. ¼+¼ a history
Mr Trouble	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:30:00 - [403] Well of course not, but if talks were still on-going or the CHANCE of diplomatic resolve was still there, then making the wardec 'official' doesn't look good. CVA were aggressive in their approach from the outset. Aralis has been quoted from a private conversation as being anti-ISS generally speaking, which causes people to ask questions about his real motivations in this.
Garreck	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:31:00 - [404] Originally by: Chain Gang The simply fact is the CVA declared War while the ISS asked all members to stay away while your "could be taken "x" ways" agreement was sorted out. Official ISS response was "no, the stations stay." Doesn't sound like any "sorting out" to me. ISS pilots in our space has never been an issue, so offering to withdraw them is a moot point. The stations are the issue, and ISS has shown zero interest in withdrawing them. Hence, war.
Jasmine Constantine	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:33:00 - [405] Originally by: Riddari Neutrality doesn't exist in 0.0, no matter how many times ISS try to pretend it does. Course it does. Every I see a standingless ship pass me by without me trying to kill it or it trying to kill me is proof of a very pragmatic grass roots neutrality existing between fellow pilots. The whole NBSI theme is a very powerful meme to be sure and it attracts a lot of adherants because its easy and thoughtless to implement but that doesn't mean its the only engagement meme on the frontier. ISS try to implement the don't shoot if not red concept and its to be applauded - its not taking the easy option and running with the herd. _________________
Zooish	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:35:00 - [406] Edited by: Zooish on 21/04/2006 14:34:58 Quote: Official ISS response was "no, the stations stay." Doesn't sound like any "sorting out" to me. ISS pilots in our space has never been an issue, so offering to withdraw them is a moot point. The stations are the issue, and ISS has shown zero interest in withdrawing them. Hence, war. If an alliance is talking to you to resolve problems caused by your own inaccurate territory information (you own words) then declaring war has to the utmost insult.
Garreck	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:39:00 - [407] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Originally by: Riddari Neutrality doesn't exist in 0.0, no matter how many times ISS try to pretend it does. Course it does. Every I see a standingless ship pass me by without me trying to kill it or it trying to kill me is proof of a very pragmatic grass roots neutrality existing between fellow pilots. The whole NBSI theme is a very powerful meme to be sure and it attracts a lot of adherants because its easy and thoughtless to implement but that doesn't mean its the only engagement meme on the frontier. ISS try to implement the don't shoot if not red concept and its to be applauded - its not taking the easy option and running with the herd. Hmph. Interestingly enough, I agree with the Fractionite. CVA have always operated a strict "not red, don't shoot" policy in Providence. We open our arms to any and all who abide by the rules of our space (no piracy, and respect our claims for future industrial development...which is to say don't put up stations in our space without permission.)
Garreck	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:40:00 - [408] Originally by: Zooish If an alliance is talking to you to resolve problems caused by your own inaccurate territory information (you own words) then declaring war has to the utmost insult. Yes. If an alliance is talking to us to resolve problems.
Ric Tishek	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:51:00 - [409] After thinking a bit about the whole incident there can be only one reason for this: ISS saw that CVA had laid claim to some ressource rich systems and wanted to steal them. IF ISS really was interested in peaceful cohabitation and trade, they would have tried to get good standings with current residents of the space they want build a trading outpost in. Seeing that they tried to initiate a war with the current claimants of this space, means that this is not their intention and can only mean they seek to replace them finally. I'm a bit surprised that they believe they can sell to the public that they are following their charter of honoring borders, if at the same they refuse to remove stations, which were placed within the claimed borders of another 0.0 entity. And wether CVA lays claim to the systems or not is the decision of CVA, not ISS. is it really your spirit that manifests in your clone or is this just a Jovian trick to get fresh DNA for their minds?
Whoe	Posted - 2006.04.21 14:52:00 - [410] Originally by: Cell Satimo This whole thread is a classic. ... Maybe we should give the whole incident a memorable title .. like, erm .. an Acryonm like 'GNW', perhaps .. I'm thinking providence-gate?
Mr Trouble	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:03:00 - [411] Originally by: Garreck Yes. If an alliance is talking to us to resolve problems. Which they were. As I recall you declared war while count was ill and unable to connect to Galnet to resume full discussions.
Manfred Doomhammer	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:04:00 - [412] Originally by: Mr Trouble Originally by: Garreck Yes. If an alliance is talking to us to resolve problems. Which they were. As I recall you declared war while count was ill and unable to connect to Galnet to resume full discussions. wich isnt CVAs fault, and wich didnt prevent ISS from deploying these POSes, so what? ---- Manfred Doomhammer CEO ShadowTec Inc.
kincajou niten	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:06:00 - [413] Originally by: Mr Trouble Originally by: Garreck Yes. If an alliance is talking to us to resolve problems. Which they were. As I recall you declared war while count was ill and unable to connect to Galnet to resume full discussions. Again I recommend you to reread from the start. His post here was the reason of the war declaration.
Riddari	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:06:00 - [414] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Originally by: Riddari Neutrality doesn't exist in 0.0, no matter how many times ISS try to pretend it does. Course it does. Every I see a standingless ship pass me by without me trying to kill it or it trying to kill me is proof of a very pragmatic grass roots neutrality existing between fellow pilots. There is a distinct difference between being neutral and being agressive. ASCN operate on a NBSI within their claimed space and RSI (red shoot it) outside our space (exception being northern operation where NBSI was enforced). But the movements of pilots and if they shoot or don't at each other is not the crux of this issue. An entity which claims space can never be neutral towards other entities in its vicinity. ¼+¼ a history
Mr Trouble	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:06:00 - [415] Originally by: Garreck Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Originally by: Riddari Neutrality doesn't exist in 0.0, no matter how many times ISS try to pretend it does. Course it does. Every I see a standingless ship pass me by without me trying to kill it or it trying to kill me is proof of a very pragmatic grass roots neutrality existing between fellow pilots. The whole NBSI theme is a very powerful meme to be sure and it attracts a lot of adherants because its easy and thoughtless to implement but that doesn't mean its the only engagement meme on the frontier. ISS try to implement the don't shoot if not red concept and its to be applauded - its not taking the easy option and running with the herd. Hmph. Interestingly enough, I agree with the Fractionite. CVA have always operated a strict "not red, don't shoot" policy in Providence. We open our arms to any and all who abide by the rules of our space (no piracy, and respect our claims for future industrial development...which is to say don't put up stations in our space without permission.) Well your space is kind of vauge, you change your mind, and not only are you stopping people developing space you actually claim, but even space you 'plan' to claim at some point in the future. The real reason behind this is simple. Aralis doesnt like the ISS and he doesnt want their outposts in Providence (I understand they are being constructed some time in May), so he is going out of his way to cause them problems. Well, good on ISS for calling your bluff.
Mr Trouble	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:07:00 - [416] Originally by: Manfred Doomhammer wich isnt CVAs fault, and wich didnt prevent ISS from deploying these POSes, so what? CVA didnt even claim the space! They 'planned to claim it'. This whole thread is joke. CVA you are digging your own grave.
Riddari	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:08:00 - [417] Mr Trouble is hereby advised to attend reading classes at the University of Caille, his previous academic institution seems to have done a woeful job in the "reading comprehension" seminar. ¼+¼ a history
Garreck	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:08:00 - [418] Originally by: Mr Trouble As I recall you declared war while count was ill and unable to connect to Galnet to resume full discussions. You recall incorrectly.
Tharrn	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:11:00 - [419] A solution was even offered to ISS in this very thread: Both sides agreed that the wording may have caused a misunderstanding. The offered solution was to move the POSes with the help of the CVA. The answer 'no, they will stay' hasn't changed it seems. ISS thus seems to have a particular reason to want exactly that system. If they'd be neutral they could move as they did in the past. If they don't some other motives (or egos...) must stand in the way of that fairly straightforward solution (like the CVA being a rather small alliance that looks easy enough to force to accept the system being occupied). I can't see how another interpretation is possible unless you just want the CVA to be wrong. Now recruiting!
Tharrn	Posted - 2006.04.21 15:12:00 - [420] Originally by: Mr Trouble CVA you are digging your own grave. How many times have people said that in the past three years? Now recruiting!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.