• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Role-Playing Communication Channel
« Previous 1 … 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 … 2165 Next »
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard
Kusari Super Alloy Shipments - 555,650 / 2,000,000
LSF Arms Shipments - 81,350 / 2,000,000
LSF Munition Shipments - 67,130 / 2,000,000
Pirate Black Market Shipments - 314,700 / 1,000,000
Dragon Bounties - 8 / 10,000
KOI Bounties - 15 / 10,000
LSF Bounties - 14 / 10,000
Samura Bounties - 4 / 10,000

Latest activity

To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers
Offline aacc
11-08-2010, 11:01 PM,
#5
Member
Posts: 3
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010

[font=Arial]
{- [color=#CC0000]Additional Data Packet -}
{- Uploading -}
{- Relaying -}
To Arbiter Jack Crow,

To simplify this, we'€™ll only comment on what you'€™ve said, however, what is most important is the final part of this data-packet. However, this is what we have to say'€¦


'€œThe greater good we speak of is Rochester being open to all as a port of commerce. This is not just the good of our people, although it would be to their detriment as well if Rochester were to cease to be useful.'€

Understood. We acknowledge this and agree that if Rochester was to shut down, it would be a valuable asset lost to several thousands of people.

'€œJudging by your comments you don't seem to have any respect for that fact.'€
Please, do not generalise, do not ignore what we said, or falsify our words. We mean our word when we give you respect. We'€™ve given it for a long time, and don'€™t plan on short-changing it now. We'€™ll forget what we heard there.

'€œIf I'm hearing you correctly, you're telling me that you really don't care about any of that as long as your men get what they want.'€

We do care about this '€“ greatly. Yes, we do indeed want the rights back, which is the reason we'€™re here, but we'€™re here to negotiate in order to get them back '€“ in other words, what we really want is alternatives. We value Rochester, you had given us one thing, but that one thing was highly valuable. For it to be taken away, we believe, is to take away a large part of our friendship. It is impractical to be helping someone if we'€™re shut out.

'€œAs for your suggestion that I could have dealt with this differently. I did that in the past.'€

We understand. Although not all people are the same. Whether or not that '€˜person'€™ had close ties with you, isn'€™t something we need to know. But precedent mustn'€™t always happen. Our members are not thick-headed like some individuals, let it be noted.

'€œOne, your people violated our policies knowing we object to this because it was in their interest at the time and that is all that mattered to them'€

We already admitted to the violation. They didn'€™t openly object, but understand that, if you were being openly shot at by several fighter craft, you would have a difficult time keeping other things in interest. Again, we admitted to it.

'€œTwo, you telling me that the interests of the others who use Rochester, including my own people are of secondary importance to you as long as you get what you want.'€

The interests of both ourselves and those that use Rochester are in mind. You are not a secondary importance '€“ you are first. This is why we wish to attend to this matter as soon as it occurred, to figure out a resolution.

'€œYou say if we mess with two of your people, then we mess with them all. We did not make a move toward any of your people.'€

There will be no open hostilities '€“ not at all. Only a close friendship would be broken. And we understand that you haven'€™t made any move toward our people. Whether or not revoking the rights of our people can equal a '€˜move'€™, is a good question.

'€œYou say you are not threatening us. We both know that is not true. If you want hostilities that's fine but tread carefully.'€

We'€™re not threatening you. And please, don'€™t be hasty to believe that we want hostilities. Our purpose here is to form close ties, not to create warfare. If we were giving threats, it would be to the Liberty Navy, and that'€™s final.

'€œYou may find yourself without a place to land in Liberty at all.'€

We'€™re hoping it doesn'€™t come to that.

'€œI'm still willing to keep things as they are. We can still work together and if you show me that it is in my best interest to trust you we may even improve things in the future. The ball's in your court.'€

As much as it is disturbing to hear that you wish to keep the things the way they are, this is what we'€™ve been waiting to hear from you. Tell us what we can do in order to work together so that it can improve our future. If you wish to keep it the way things are, then it'€™s fine. What we'€™re looking for is an alternative in order to gain your trust back. If the ball'€™s in our court, then we ask this: What can we do to gain your respect back?

We eagerly anticipate alternatives to strengthen our relationship again.

Sincerely, Gryphon Squadron.

[font=Arial]
{- [color=#CC0000]End of Stream -}
{- Save :: Y/N -}
{- Complete -}

<span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">
<span style="color:#FFFFFF">The Gryphon Squadron
Azure -- Celadon -- Cerulean -- Alizarin
</span></span>
Reply  


Messages In This Thread
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by aacc - 11-08-2010, 12:13 AM
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by Hawk - 11-08-2010, 01:07 AM
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by aacc - 11-08-2010, 10:32 AM
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by Hawk - 11-08-2010, 02:58 PM
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by aacc - 11-08-2010, 11:01 PM
To the Junker Congress and Related Junkers - by Hawk - 11-09-2010, 04:52 PM

  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode