EVE Search - Curse Alliance Final Statement regarding the CFS.

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Curse Alliance Final Statement regarding the CFS.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Leyla	Posted - 2003.11.02 07:42:00 - [31] Edited by: Leyla on 02/11/2003 08:49:34 Ok, I've just spoken to Kai the CFS representative for the peace talks. Right now in the interests of peace, CA is initiating a full withdrawal of military forces from CFS space (effective at downtime 3hrs and 20min from now). Urgent negotiations will be undertaken immediately. More to follow on this developement. Latest : The statement of the first post of this thread has been suspended pending peace talks. The 3 day ceasefire is still in effect this coming downtime. This will give us 1 day to hammer out the last peace proposal drafted and give the CFS senate 2 days to vote on the bill. Hopefully this will get CA/CFS back on track.
Lola	Posted - 2003.11.02 08:47:00 - [32] Quote: Ok, I've just spoken to Kai the CFS representative for the peace talks. Right now in the interests of peace, CA is initiating a full withdrawal of military forces from CFS space (effective at downtime 3hrs and 20min from now). Urgent negotiations will be undertaken immediately. More to follow on this developement. Just a quick question. If you guys are really on about this peace thing why are you camping choak points within CFS space two and a half hours before you say you will be "withdrawn"? Buell Fan > 2003.11.02 08:29:00 Involved parties: BobGhengisKhan JadeAfterglow As far as I know JadeAfterglow is an admitted alt of PsXDnS, correct? I'm confused by the actions being different from the words. Do you guys want peace? Could someone explain this? XirtamVotf was in Gehi locking on to people too. It didn't happen to me but someone was asking "who is XirtamVotf and why are they locking me?" What's up with that? ----------------------------------------- Sig rented by Drethen Nerevitas.
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 09:06:00 - [33] When the cease fire is issued the CA forces will withdrawal or face strict disciplinary actions. However, to pull back prematurely is unwarrented. War is war. Lola, if you question the sincerity at which CA is seeking peace, then I ask you, why would we offer such a cease fire to begin with? --------------------------------------------------
Lola	Posted - 2003.11.02 09:46:00 - [34] Quote: However, to pull back prematurely is unwarrented. War is war. Lola, if you question the sincerity at which CA is seeking peace, then I ask you, why would we offer such a cease fire to begin with? That's kinda funny. Why don't you tell me why you'd offer such a cease fire but come kill people. Is that logical? I guess we can just wait and see how things turn out. Seems to me like if you guys really wanted peace you'd just leave the area and stop camping the trade lanes. Seeing as how most everything has taken place in JK-FIX. If I'm misinformed please correct me. ----------------------------------------- Sig rented by Drethen Nerevitas.
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 09:53:00 - [35] We want peace. We just don't want you to forget why the cease fire is being called. To end the hostilities until a benificial to all agreement can be negotiated while outside the weapons of war cool. To call attention to the continued WAR while the cease fire is not in full effect is pointless, and quite silly. However, once the cease fire officially begins, if any CA forces remain in hostile array, then by all means, call attention to them. List all individuals involved for all to see. --------------------------------------------------
Enraku Reynolt	Posted - 2003.11.02 10:23:00 - [36] Peace with a gun barrel to your head is not peace ------------------------------------------------ Do not let the world change you. Change the world Here's everything I know about war: somebody wins, somebody loses, and nothing is ever the sa
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 10:34:00 - [37] Thanks for that clichÚ. I am sure we all need another dose of dogma and rhetoric and postureing at this time. Go shaft yourself bud. --------------------------------------------------
Enraku Reynolt	Posted - 2003.11.02 10:38:00 - [38] I was only stating a simple truth and you attempt to insult me I wonder if you treat your allies as poorly? ------------------------------------------------ Do not let the world change you. Change the world Here's everything I know about war: somebody wins, somebody loses, and nothing is ever the sa
Raindrop	Posted - 2003.11.02 11:19:00 - [39] Quote: Posted - 02/11/2003 07:22:00 - Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think all of you are missing one of the biggest points: A three day withdrawal of CA forces from CFS space in which to negotiate a final peace settlement. If none of you get the importance of removing a force who is clearly enjoying success in the battlefield from CFS space, then I wonder where you plug in your neural implants... Wren I believe you fail to see that in the original peace treaty that was already drawn in. So it's just you guys waving a repetition of the same hoping to look good. Failed! Raindrop Trader of low end stuff and NPC goods. Recycler of junk.
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 11:36:00 - [40] Actually, the orginial stated that after the agreement was signed and ratified by all CFS senate and the CA council of CEO's, a cooldown period of one week would be observed. This however is a cease fire to prevent any more losses to CFS ships, and to instill a bit of peace for non involved parties to make sure they are safe. I hate to keep saying this over and over again, but the cease fire is only a good thing. CA could instead keep camping chokes, destroying convoys and generally causing chaos with the CFS. However, in good faith they are stepping back and trying to get some sort of offer on the table. If you are concerned that the CA fleets will not observe the cease fire, then please make haste to catch a CA ship doing so. Post his or her pilot name and ship classification here for all to witness. Otherwise, unless you have something positive to say about the turn of events, try to scream into a pillow instead. --------------------------------------------------
Lallante	Posted - 2003.11.02 11:55:00 - [41] Edited by: Lallante on 02/11/2003 12:29:04 Firstly, the first statement was the joint work of the entire CA leadership. Let me draw you a timeline that will hopefully explain why we came to the decision to do this: War started (as far as i can tell) on October 14th. By October 16th we had won our first large battle for minimal losses By October 20th, fleets larger than 10 ships were rarely put forward by the CFS By October 24th, JK-FIX traffic was reduced to almost nothing. AT THIS POINT CFS finally accepted the need for peace and produced a ceasefire agreement. It favoured them and did not make the concessions (accepting that all CA was not KOS) that were key to the war. REJECTED. By the Next Day, a Counter offer was proposed, It is essentially exactly the same as the deal the council claims they are currently reviewing. By October 27th, CA owned JK-FIX and had presence in the CFS capital Gehi. The CA proposal was rejected on extremely minor grounds. A new-proposal with minor wording changes was submitted. NITPICKING begins. Various CFS members post on the CFS boards that they wouldnt agree to it. Sarkos recieves his first death threat from a CFS member. On November 1st, CFS as a military force was considered dead by any members of the CA still fighting. This was not an agressive statement, instead it is a response to the literally DOZENS of Ceo's who msg CA representatives with requests to be left out of the war, or even to join the CA. CFS leadership can have no idea what scale this has occured on. We presented a reasonable agreement, helped change it to make it more acceptable, but enough is enough, we felt that we would not delay forever. Since the current treaty was submitted, 1 Week and 1 day has past. We have decided to give peace to the Corps that want it now. WE DID NOT WANT TO CANCEL EXISTING TREATIES, WE WERE JUST OFFERING QUICK (and if the official treaty fails, temporary) PEACE TO THOSE WHO WANT IT UNTIL THE CFS COUNCIL GETS THEIR BEAURO-CRAP SORTED. It has had some beneficial effect. The council has been forced into action and the 3 day withdrawel mentioned in the first post is still in force. By the end of this 3 day period, we will KNOW whether CFS wants peace or not. Kai Viqtorr: "until that first post is retracted, discussions cannot commence" "You do realise that based on current CFS Charter, anything we discuss will have to be put to a 2 day vote. The only wayto avoid this is to have a 2 day vote to give our delegation the authority to bind the Senate without a vote. (Senate Procedures)" "once we have a treaty, it will take 48 hours to gain Senate Ratification " "any vote will have to start from scratch again" This kid just LOVES delays. Bet he pulls a 97.5 hour "cooldown period" from somewhere next or a 73.43 hour "good-faith period" Flames to the usual address ;) Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
MyrmeenT	Posted - 2003.11.02 12:57:00 - [42] Edited by: MyrmeenT on 02/11/2003 14:38:33 Lallante, some words from a CFS member who considers himself a typical "carebear" as most CFS members are seen from CA. I dont want to argue about losses / wins or whatever happened in that campaign also your statements are of course a one-sided view. CA did not control A2 or JD-FIX totally. But I want to to give you some insight into the thinking of a different kind of Eve people which forms the bulk of CFS Memberships. Remember CFS was founded with an open-region policy from the start a neutral stance towards other (closed) alliances. This attracted many people who want to be drawn into endless confclicts but to enjoy their vision of eve - mutual coorperation and support not dominance over others. The military situation was therefore clear from the beginning: A bunch of highly skilled PKs was let loose onto a hodgepodge of players consisting of some small number of skilled but a majority of unskilled people regarding PvP. In the posting above above you complain: "The CA proposal was rejected on extremely minor grounds. A new-proposal with minor wording changes was submitted. NITPICKING begins. Various CFS members post on the CFS boards that they wouldnt agree to it. Sarkos recieves his first death threat from a CFS member. .... Now, given the decisive nature of the fighting, and the one sidedness of it, CFSs REPEATED delays (over a week ALREADY for minor wording changes) and minor nit-picking over peace were not only undesirable for most CFS members, but also an extremely arrogant denial of their position in the war." First - CFS is a democracy and you probably know that democracies have a tedious and cumbersome decision-making-process (i.e. there is a minmal 48h emergency voting process which can be further reduced). In the CA the smaller CEO council (compared to the CFS Senate size and voting process) make things much easier. In a democracy there are always people arguing and dissenting - so the delays are a symtom of the CFS structure not because they were intended. Every step in the peace process was done with the fastet way the CFS charter allows. Second - re threats - I dont recount the many threats I had seen from CA members or their alts on the CFS boards or channels. I believe Sarkos had discounted them as CFS members had discounted the CA threats against them. Although Sarkos as your negotiator has naturally came under fire from some CFS members on our boards - many people have great respect for the work he and Kai had done for the benefit of us all. One of the main problems - I see (and I am not alone with that view), is that CA accuses CFS of arrogance (you especially) but the actions and postings of many CA members shows exactly the opposite. You posted on the CFS forum: "would SERIOUSLY like this question answered, preferably without flames. What does CA gain by agreeing to your peace proposal, why would we agree to it? Simply: We already have full and fairly safe access to your space whenever we want. We enjoy fighting you as unexperienced prey, and even you must admit we are winning the war by a large margin. For what reasons would a ceasfire deal of the nature of the one you propose, with no reparations or concessions on CFSs part, benefit us?" If your statement is not arrogance - I dont know what arrongance is then. One of the real causes of the war is that several CA members want an easy prey and to force their will upon others. They have no intention get a real peace process underway. The problem is founded in a completely different mindset - and I honestly dont know what to do about that. I ask you therfore: why should true PK-ler accept a peaceful solution - whom should they kill in such a situation ? Have a nice day and be proud that people like you managed to derail a promising peace on the last minute P.S. English is not my native language - so please excuse any errors Edit1 to include italics Edit2 change some wordings due to Wrens posting below
Asimir Kurdugal	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:06:00 - [43] Quote: If your statement is not arrogance - I dont know what arrongance is then. Arrogance is being crushed at the hands of a superior force and thinking that you should have a say in the terms of surrender. This is war, to the victors go the spoils. If you didn't want to lose, you should have never picked the fight. ________________________________________________ Moving again, comfort of the chase Now and again, this my saving grace Dead on the inside, I've got nothing to prove Keep me alive and give me something to lose I've been gone so long, but I will come back I will come back for you
Alkad Mzu	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:31:00 - [44] Asimir, i'm grateful for your continued efforts at making CA look like complete idiots. I'm sure your council is very impressed as well. ________________________________________________ Head of Public Relations, Fountain Alliance
Lallante	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:38:00 - [45] I for one am glad that Alkad didnt win his leadership bid for the CFS. God knows what would have happened to CFS if that had happened. (It would probably have been messy and involve whining) Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
MyrmeenT	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:41:00 - [46] Edited by: MyrmeenT on 02/11/2003 13:50:12 "WE DID NOT WANT TO CANCEL EXISTING TREATIES, WE WERE JUST OFFERING QUICK (and if the official treaty fails, temporary) PEACE TO THOSE WHO WANT IT UNTIL THE CFS COUNCIL GETS THEIR BEAURO-CRAP SORTED." This is plainly wrong. Sarkos and XirtamVOTF clearly stated in conversations with CFS members that the "CA Final Statement" was made because the CA CEO Council rejected the peace treaty prepared by CFS/CA negotiators in their saturday meeting. The "CA Final Statement" was made instead of the last peace treaty proposal not as an additional option.
Alkad Mzu	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:51:00 - [47] Quote: I for one am glad that Alkad didnt win his leadership bid for the CFS. God knows what would have happened to CFS if that had happened. (It would probably have been messy and involve whining) Get over yourself Lallante. I have been a vigilant supporter of peace all along, much unlike yourself. That doesn't mean i reject the right to let obvious dimwits amuse me. ________________________________________________ Head of Public Relations, Fountain Alliance
Lallante	Posted - 2003.11.02 13:59:00 - [48] thats not what some of the defectors who left CFS have been saying about you alkad.. Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:00:00 - [49] Great, let's all fall into flaming everyone else. Quote: In the CA some corps dominate that make things much easier. In a democracy there are always people arguing and dissenting - so the delays are a symtom of the CFS structure not because they were intended. I urge you to take the time one day to visit the CA in person. Perhaps there you will see that every CEO has the power to affect change within the CA council. Things are done quicker in the CA because no voting is done for anything that isn't absolutely needed, this way, they devote all the time in meetings to voting or discussing pending issues. The CA operates as a team. The only thing is that most members never visit these boards, and the posting of only a few individuals skews the perception of the CA. --------------------------------------------------
Mr Blonde	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:09:00 - [50] "ok guys, it seems that us declaring war on CFS and destroying everything down there was too blatantly obvious pirating, so we are now declaring peace, so that we look like good guys after all" I just wonder who the next victim of "war" will be __________________________________________ Are you gonna bark all day, little doggy, or are you gonna bite??
Lallante	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:17:00 - [51] "declaring war on CFS and destroying everything down there was too blatantly obvious pirating" Are you actually mentally retarded or is it just an extremely clever act? WAR IS NOT PIRACY. JUST BECAUSE YOU GOT INTO A WAR YOU CANT WIN DOESNT MEAN WE ARE PIRATES FOR REPEATEDLY KICKING YOUR ASSES Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
MyrmeenT	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:17:00 - [52] Wren, my apologize. I accept then your statement as fact of the current situation in the CA CEO council. But you confirmed what I was trying to explain to Lallante - CA is much faster in doing decisions and CFS not. Thats all I wanted to say in my first reply to Lallante. Asimir, thanks for the enlightement. I pledge guilty in being an arrogant carebear, guilty in stubbornly defending my home territory against aggressors. I will fight to the last isk and scordite asteroid if cornered. Sorry thats the nature of real (care)bears.
Wren	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:32:00 - [53] Lallente, Mr. Blonde is the local CA stalker. He likes to post jibes and derogatory remarks whenever there is a thread involving CA. Just do like most of the rest of the universe and pretend there is a squelch button and ignore him. --------------------------------------------------
Lallante	Posted - 2003.11.02 14:38:00 - [54] oh sorry, he just sounded like a member of CFS Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
Mr Blonde	Posted - 2003.11.02 16:45:00 - [55] Edited by: Mr Blonde on 02/11/2003 16:47:19 Quote: Lallente, Mr. Blonde is the local CA stalker. He likes to post jibes and derogatory remarks whenever there is a thread involving CA. Just do like most of the rest of the universe and pretend there is a squelch button and ignore him. Ya, its gotta be annoying when people post the truth. Poor Wren, and his house of lies. As to Lallente, who seems to not have quite grasped the concept of reading and comprehension: Instigating a war, to kill pretty much defenseless people is as much pirating as doing the same thing, without declaring war. I saw someone else ask in one of these threads wether TLBC / Biomass would still be considered pirates, if they declared war on the entire universe before killing every person they came across, or wether it could all be excused with "being at WAR". I thought the question quite intruiging and fitting, even if everyone from your pirate alliance avoided it like you avoid the truth. __________________________________________ Are you gonna bark all day, little doggy, or are you gonna bite??
Sarkos	Posted - 2003.11.02 16:53:00 - [56] Let me say this, as I have insight through meetings and negotiation to state both sides. The reason for the war will depend on which side of the fence you are on. The CFS claim piracy. The CA claim that manipulation of the KOS list caused incidents that then lead to piracy claims. The reason for this war no longer matters. The final statement was issued to give those that truely wanted peace a way to avoid the war until a formal peace proposal was finally agreed to. Knowing that there were people on BOTH sides that wanted to continue, and seeing as how the peace treaty was nitpicked to death, this option was voted on, and agreed to by the Councel of CEO's. Since the startings of the peace talks we have been conacted by MANY CFS corporation asking when peace would be ready. Though our Councel of CEO's seem capable of direct decisions and quick action, the Senate of the CFS seem unable to reach ANY decision. Just once, I would have liked to have heard 'Alter this statement to this wording and we will agree to it.' But that was not the case. Over 23 changes were made to the proposal while I still had the patience to work on it. All changes were made in an effort to satisfy the CFS Senate. DUring this time numerous requests and threats were received. The requests were from corporations seeking peace. The threats were from those that stated there would never be peace. So, seeing the split in the CFS, we offered a suitable alternative. Those that want peace can have it and those that want war can continue on this path. With the lack of control the CFS Senate seems to have, this seemed the only possible alternitive. I did my best to word it as non-offensive as possible. I find it funny that after all the stalling and disputes on the content of the peace treaty, that NOW the Senate claims to be willing to pass it. Where was the commitment before? Either free the slaves or we will come and get them.
Tommy Boy	Posted - 2003.11.02 17:36:00 - [57] Sarkos, In order to prevent unwanted comments from both sides i would like to answer the question from a completely unbias and a very outside view. --This of course is not an official CFS statment.-- When in times of great struggle the hearts of my fellow CFS commrades were overtaken by greif and despair. In no manner were they ready to admit failure on something so dear and presiuos to them. For many months they built CFS from nothing to what it is today. Thier works procede them by knowing that CFS is one of the most well known and well respected for their openess and friendlyness to all those they make contact with. I am not on the CFS senate, but i can imagine the debates over giving admitting defeat for it is not easy to do so. However with the senate back in full swing and this proposal on your desk I ask that you see past the time it took the senate, to walk on and forgive, i have asked for it, now all of CFS asks for it and a settlement to the conflict CFS hold you heads down not, walk with pride, walk with freedom, walk with me to peace. _____________________ Times have to change ---------------------
Edward Preble	Posted - 2003.11.02 17:52:00 - [58] I find it mildly ironic that people have never heard of 'negotiations', or 'offer, counteroffer'. Yes, the treaty wasn't accepted at face value, it had to be reshaped, in a way which both sides would agree. Then, at the end, when both sides do have a proposal they'll submit, we put it up for an emergency voting period of 2 days. And THEN CA pulls back, saying we're unwilling to work with them? Interesting time. Edward Preble Coalition of Free Stars
Tommy Boy	Posted - 2003.11.02 18:23:00 - [59] Ok i really getting confused Please let everyone <since we are a part of it> where these "offers" stand? The proposal sent into Curse was not accepted? Update plz _____________________ Times have to change ---------------------
Mned Graydroggen	Posted - 2003.11.02 20:28:00 - [60] Lallante wrote Quote: It has had some beneficial effect. The council has been forced into action and the 3 day withdrawel mentioned in the first post is still in force. By the end of this 3 day period, we will KNOW whether CFS wants peace or not . Realy the voting would have been closed by the same dt you now set as your departure time. And the vote was going well, in favor. This new deal had no beneficial effect, quite the opposite. Please respect our way of doing things. This situation wouldnt even exist if you had withdrawn at any moment in the last few weeks. .

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.