Cease Fire (Golden Rainbow)

@Goddess of whores, one more disrespectful comment and this ceasefire is off and we come for you personally. You dont not have the right to talk to any UC member that way and i'll be damned if you call Dirt the "B" word, himself alone could clean your clock out, we came to this ceasefire on terms but comments like that may make me come see you live and direct, keep all you your negativity to yourself or we can get things done all over again.

Crossdale.

I agreed to the ceasefire. Respect is earned. I have seen no reason to respect UC so far. Prove me wrong and actions speak much louder than empty words.

I have kept our agreement on LU. You keep yours on GR and we will get along splendidly.

I agree to the ceasefire. I want to see the peace treaty in total before I agree to that.
John L.

Greetings to all parties, I am glad to see Chairman DEFCON, voting member John L, and voting member Her Majesty Daconia of the Allied Forces HQ have posted in favor of Barney Rubble's proposed cease fire. Now I see there is a chance to work out a truce and a possible peace agreement.
In light of that I am going to state that I want all the parties involved to refrian from name calling and disparaging remarks so that there can be a civilized dialogue.
As far as having an open chat session goes this may or may not be possible as there are many different time zones involved. Also many players do have real life commitments that must be given high priority.
Thus it may be best for the present time that all dialogue be conducted in this thread of the sim country dicussion board. This will allow for all parties and all concerned observers to be actively involved. In addition this will provide all the concerned parties with a written copy of all that is stated by everyone involved so that we all can see it in black and white and avoid the entanglement of "he said she said."
Again I must ephasize that I believe that the first ground rule for this open dialogue should be that all parties will address all other parties with respect and refrain from name calling and disparaging remarks. So everyone act civilized.
Nute Gunray the Viceroy

No, we will not carry out a major peace agreement in a public forum. We will have to make other plans. This is a behind closed doors matter now, and that was agreed to.

Mr Nute Gunray,
I second your proposal to negotiating a truce and possible peace agreement in open forum. Attempting to reach a peace agreement in secret places would be difficult for all members to have their inputs and would only lead to future disagreemnt and conficts.

John L

Having discussed this with my fedmates, the Democratic Cooperative Alliance would be happy to host talks within the confines of our own forum to act as mediator during negotiations between UC and AF. We offer neutral ground for this discussion but will allow only members of your respective federations to take part. No third parties, other than ourselves, would have access to the discussion. However, we suggest that a daily(ish) digest summarising the main discussion points be posted to the Simcountry forums, with three-way agreement on its content (UC, AF and DCA). This, we hope, will satisfy those of you who wish to carry out the negotiations in private as well as those who wish to carry it out in public.

If this proves agreeable to the membership of your respective federations, let us know and we shall begin making arrangements to host these talks.

Our forums are hosted on Invision at http://s11.invisionfree.com/DCA/ but note that the server is currently (22.00GMT) down.

With hope of peace to be restored to Golden Rainbow,

On behalf of the Democratic Cooperative Republic,

Zet

After careful reconsideration, I consider this open forum an unsuitabel media for meaningful negotiations.
I made my above comment too quickly. My main concern is that I have first hand information and a way to input my own opinion into any treaty that is drawn up before it is agreed upon.

I agree to the ceasefire and have dereged Sun Sovereignty (formerly Fire Sovereignty) next to Land of Liam as a show of good faith.

Aye to this Honorable Ceasefire~!

I am very new to the *game* in SimCountry, but I want to let all here know that I support this progressive action, as a member of the Democratic Federation Alliance and inhabitant of Golden Rainbow.

Zet is very earnest, seriously proposing a Hall of Honor (suggested) Forum at our neutral location, for the purpose of talks from both sides, to formalise this Noble Ceasefire.

Thank you all for your part in peace, in prosperity.

Quibs Quarkston,
Le Grande Newb

I,ll be deregging C3s as i strip them.

3 deregged to show good will, more to follow

I dereging as well. just selling weapons on market.

Gretings to all who have posted since Sunday, June 1, 2008 - 08:01 am, I am glad to see that you are following Ground Rule #1 - That all parties will address all other parties with respect and refrain from name calling and disparaging remarks.
This is indeed a good sign and shows that we can behave in a civil manner when we want to. Thank you.


Greetings John L,

You are truly wise. You have identified another very important reason for these possible peace talks to proceed in the simcountry forums. "agreement in secret places would be difficult for all members to have their inputs and would only lead to future disagreement and conflicts." In the field of education, management, and corporate leadership this concept is referred to as "ownership" or "buy in" -- this is where all parties who have a vested interest called the "stakeholders" have input into the final product or outcome, and thus they have ownership of it and they will respect it all the more.

Here is web page that addresses this concept to some degree http://www.envirowise.gov.uk/163441



Additionally, John L you have shown me another very important factor to be considered that supports my insistance for conducting these possible peace talks in the simcountry forums -- the need for a person to have time to form opinions and perhaps to change those opinions.



Greetings DEFCON,

You have shown me an important reason why secret talks will not work. You say

" DEFCON
Sunday, June 1, 2008 - 11:27 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, we will not carry out a major peace agreement in a public forum. We will have to make other plans. This is a behind closed doors matter now, and that was agreed to."

Well I have absolutly no recall of any such agreement for there to be secret talks. So this must have been some kind of a secret agreement set up with I am not sure who. So that what we have here a good example of "he said she said" -- the very thing that I wish to avoid. There is no mention of any plans for a secret meeting in Mr. Barney Rubble's opening statement asking for a cease fire.


"The Mourning Star (Golden Rainbow)
Saturday, May 31, 2008 - 03:48 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On this date and time both AF(def, myself, saber, sam houston) and UC(priest, cross and JF) have agreed, in spirit, to a cease fire. All other combatants, on both sides, will be brought up to speed in the next 1-2 days.

As each member learns of this cease fire, they will agree to initiate no further declarations.

There are currently numerous small active wars ongoing. Given the fog of war, neither party should consider it an overt act of disregard for this cease fire if shot are fired. Time is simply needed for this to filter down through the ranks.

More to come.

As a show of good faith I will be un-protecting fire bastion and preparing it for return to John Fire.

This is my own personal act and is not meant to indicate that others should follow suit. Its just the way I play.

I will be dereging over the next week down to a leader nation only.

Barney Rubble."

Therefore once again I must insist upon this being the second ground rule for any peace talks between the United Confederation and the Allied Forces - all negiotions must be conducted in this open forum of the simcountry.



Greetings Mr. Zetetic Elench dam Kahveh,
I express my gratitude for your generious offers. However I must decline to accept either of these offers. I do not believe you can act totaly neutral as you were once aligned and allied with the United Confederation so it would be unreasonable to expect the Allied Forces to accept you or your friends as having a neutral postion in this matter. So there is no way that I can ask you to be a mediator nor do i wish to conduct these talks in any forum other than the simcountry forum. This is where all parties can see it take place and offer their input.



Nute Gunray the Viceroy

NO
Perhaps your fedmates who made the deal will inform you of the privacy matter. These discussions will not happen in a public forum. And the rep you will be discussing them with is Daconia. There is only one party for Allied Forces, represented by her. And it will not change. Thank you for your time.

P.S. No formal negotiations will take place until the privacy issue is met. The condition was made by me for my members, and we feel it should be honored before any peace talks can proceed. Once again, thank you for your time.

And perhaps you did not see this post from John L.

John L (Golden Rainbow)
Monday, June 2, 2008 - 05:07 am Click here to edit this post///After careful reconsideration, I consider this open forum an unsuitable media for meaningful negotiations.
I made my above comment too quickly. My main concern is that I have first hand information and a way to input my own opinion into any treaty that is drawn up before it is agreed upon.

Nute,
My biggest issue with conducting negotiations in a public forum like this...is the time issue. Something that we could figure out and agree on in 5 minutes on MSN can drag on for a week on here. Dizzy has my MSN address and I would be happy to discuss things with you or any other UC member. If you would like..once we have figured things out I would be willing to post our decisions for public debate. If an issue is raised from that debate we can discuss changes we may need to make. I hope that is acceptable to you. This seems like a small point that we should be able to find a common ground on.

Daconia

@Defcon, It was I who made this agreement and it is I who you made this possible for this ceasefire to even exist. Upon this agreement i also made it clear that the current terms were also temporary till I could get ahold of the other many members in the fed. So basically now that most are up to date i think its fair to say we can make terms and offer it to you and AF, So please make it abit clear why you would not want the public to know if its safe on GR or not?

This proposition sounds fairly reasonable and I will back Nute's decision. Our main concern is that history has a bad habit of repeating itself and we hope that having the negotiations done in a public forum would prevent the slide to war that happened in the pre-war negotiations.

It looks to me like all my Fed allies are tuning over to me. It is clear to me that UC has gone way out of their way to settle this dispute regaurdless of the fact we did not start it and we were spankin daylights out of AF and all their Off world buddies.

So whats the scoop brothers and sisters, are we gonna play push me push you and dose ee doe or what?

On the contrary, Nute, I believe that my status as a former member of the UC makes me, and hence my Federation with the support of my fedmates, an ideal candidate for neutral hosts.

I pulled out of the UC precisely because I was unable to determine satisfactorily for myself whether the UC was justified in declaring on AF. The UC accepted my declaration of neutrality, and I believe so did AF going by David Walker's statement:
"https://www.simcountry.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-auth.cgi?file=/2/8778.html&lm=1209464157
This former UC member seems to be open enough to distance himself from the war and deplore the reasons, which cannot be those of defence."

I wouldn't have gone as far as saying I deplored the reasons for the war, it had more to do with being unable to determine the veracity of the reasons, but I took this to mean that AF had no beef with me.

I also have much to gain from peace. My economy and enterprise are still growing as I have only been playing the game since February. My country is host to corporations from both AF and UC players, and in turn I have located a number of corporations in UC and AF states. Should peace break out, I hope to be able to expand again as my expansion is currently on hold until I am sure which countries are safe from the threat of war.

Furthermore, Nute, I would rather wait to hear what the AF leadership has to say about my and my federation's credentials as an impartial host for talks.

As a further gesture of goodwill, I invite you and a representative from AF (DEFCON? You seem to be acting as a sort of foreign minister, correct me if I'm wrong) to inspect the location of the talks. Perhaps you could both register on our forum and take a look before dismissing our offer.

All we intend to provide, and all you should see when you login, is a forum for talks on peace. We hope this will lead to a peace treaty. All members of both AF and UC will be admitted to this forum so ALL members may have their say. Our role as host, will be limited to an introductory message, and perhaps a suggestion regarding a possible direction for the talks. I am sure (though I have not cleared this with my fedmates) that, if either the UC or AF would prefer it, we would stand to one side and post nothing in that forum.

Finally, the suggestion of a digest to be posted in the Simcountry forums, was just that, a suggestion. This is not a necessary condition for the talks to be held in our forum.

I hoped that by offering a neutral forum, that was open to the full membership of both your federations but closed to the general population of Simcountry, that the peace negotiations could at least start, rather than having this seemingly endless negotiation to start negotiation.

I can see both sides. However, I believe Daconia has a great idea, her idea accommodates Ameche by letting the peace talks to be held behind closed doors, it accommodates Nute's and other United Confederation members desire to have the progress posted in the public forum. I cannot understand why this proposal isn't satisfactory to both sides. Although, I aslo don't understand why Ameche is adamant about having it kept secret. The original agreement was 'no forum celebrations', not 'no forum posting' and that was regarding the ceasefire which isn't necessarily a peace treaty. I'm appalled that we are stuck at such a small topic this early in the peace talks! I believe we currently have more parties on both sides that desire peace than that desire war. I'd like to see this move forward.

@ David Wood,

Your comment:"It is clear to me that UC has gone way out of their way to settle this dispute regaurdless of the fact we did not start it and we were spankin daylights out of AF and all their Off world buddies."

Your comment is argumentative and the conclusions you reached are questionable. Furthermore in no way assit in the formative process of reaching a working peace treaty.

John L.

Here is my proposal for reaching a peace treaty.

1. Each Side appoint one negotiator. AF has already appointed the new Chairman of AF GR (Daconia) as it's negotiator. Now if UC will appoint one and only one negotiator, these two negotiatiors can reach one peace treaty.

2. Once the negotiator have reached a peace treaty, they take their joint product and have it ratified by their respective federations.

3. Once each side has had the peace treaty ratified. Then it will be posted here in the forum.

4. Once ratified and posted for the world to see, Each side will be responsible for enforcing it with their individual federation members.

AF history has already done this once with a violator of the old Matt/Yankee/AF Peace Treaty. At which time the violator was evicted from AF and subject to doing battle with Matt and Yankee without any AF support.

In my opinion, this is not a new concept to what Daconia suggested but an improvement and clarification of her suggestion.

I don't want to side track this but David Wood don't suggest for a second that I got spanked on GR.

I lost 3 and gained 9. All three that I lost had already performed their assigned tasks very well.

You're not "going out of your way" to lessen hostilities with comments like that David.

We should stick to the agenda and keep opinions to ourselves at this point.