Mistakes, Selling Out and U-turns
Day 1,657, 09:52
•
Published in Canada 
•
by
•
by SaraDroz
Leaving Eden
A. Basics: Seriously eCanada, having been saved twice by Eden, and granted eUSA as well, should NEED no lecturing on this. Just as a matter of gratitude we owe it eCroatia, eRomania etc to stand by them, afterall who knows when we may need them again? By leaving any alliance we isolate ourselves MORE and are therefore in a worse position if we are invaded.
The core members of EDEN that keep fighting on day in and day out in the Balkans and Europe are the only reason we do not have eSerbia and ePoland in North America everyday. It is no coincidence that the last time ePoland and eSerbia invaded eUSA eCroatia was in eMexico.
Not only that but by 'walking away' you create suspicion... Nobody has explained WHY we left Eden... Do we suddenly disagree? Friends are hard to come by, particularly ones who stood by us for so long. Why have we suddenly fallen out so badly that we have to in effect tell them to 'do one'? Is this wise? What was the arguement that was that serious for us isolate ourselves and become easier to defeat? No explanation has been offered and until one is given I call this a major mistake.
B. Theories and Consequences: So MAYBE we left Eden over the eBulgaria/eTurkey issue? Bit late no? But is proposed that we join the eBulgarian alliance? No... Ok presumably not this issue then. Maybe we just don't like the Eden Command? Is that a reason to jeapordise eCanadas defencive alliances? It costs too much on MPPs? Suppose we are invaded... might want the MPPs then huh? Or are only 'fair weather friends'?
I suspect the real reason is because some of those standing for President and VP (Rylde and Rolo) wish to attack eIreland, blaming them for 'selling out' to eUK in Acacia's term. Certainly what the eIrish did was underhanded but the ONLY beneficiaries of such a war would be those ecountries who wish to invade eCanada - which eIreland, when we members of Eden, could not do. Do you suppose eUSA would support us? I listened to their Presidential Debate (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/enpr/2012/06/02/enpr-june-presidential-debate) and 2 out of 3 of their candidates said they would actively support eIreland. It's quite possible that any attack on eIreland would result in being kicked out of Terra as well as eUSA may well side with eIreland. But again and again the more we strive over petty feuds the only winners are One.
Leaving Eden leaves us less defencible: MISTAKE. Any planned assault on a Terra or Eden country is treasonous to BOTH alliances.
The Rylde Sell Out
Remember not so long ago Rylde was fighting with EPC, living in eSweden (strange huh?), and telling us that we had DO something about the thief and serial Party PTOer among us? Well I and and many others agreed with him then although I couldn't see why he was in a One ecountry and not in an allied enation. So suddenly instead of harming eCanada and lecturing us do things he couldn't he returns and proposes to do what? Have the thief as VP!!!! So... let me get this clear: It's ok to go stay in a One country and fight against eCanada because you want us to deal with the thief but then ok for you come back and endorse him? The "Rylde backflip" doesn't wash with moi! There are backflips and then there's hypocracy. This falls under the latter category.
Selling out for political opportunism just makes me wonder how 'real' everything else this 'fly by night opportunist' has said was. Should ePoland invade eUSA Rylde and Rolo would probably have us join One... which again makes me suspicious of the circumstances. Now I know this is conjecture but look at the 'circumstantial evidence':
A. Rylde moves to a One country to fight for EPC (all the others move to eUSA or eIreland).
B. eIreland 'sell out' in the eUK war: Rolo calls for us to invade eIreland.
C. Rylde comes home and we leave Eden.
D. Rylde and Rolo are suddenly pals and on the same 'ticket'.
E. ePoland and eUSA fighting in eFrance...
Now this may be entirely wrong and all just 'conspiracy theory' I don't know. For me the hypocritical 'backflip' is sufficient for me do a u turn. I cannot vote for a hypocrital political opportunist and that is what Rylde has proved himself to be. By siding with Rolo he is effectively saying to eCanada "Do as I say is your rules. My rules do not apply to me!". Get lost!!! I am SaraDroz and I call hypocracy when I see it. Takes a far more cunning fox than you to fool me. What was the one Bush got wrong? "fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me". Don't let him fool once.
U-turn and Conclusion
It's not often that do u-turns but Ryldes opportunistic hypocracy is an about face à l'outrance. I was evidently misled and it worries me as to his other motives. I shall NOT be voting for Rylde and though I have little idea what Noyst plans that most likely voting ~hyuu~. It's a great shame that the one Party that does NOT bend but remains true through thick and thin and stands by it's principles no matter, the CPF did not forward a candidate. MDP members when they understand this hypocracy should perhaps consider where they stand. Connor didn't do a deal and sell out and I voted for him against Sperry.
In epolitics and in real life politics there are generaly three types of people: Those who 'sail with the wind'; they will shift their course depending on the public mood and if possible try to get the 'weather forcast' to position themselves 'ahead of the wind'; these make up around 80% of 'politicians'. Acacia was good at this and a good 'communicator' to boot. Then there's people who like to think they are clever; these are the types who think they can buy, blackmail, use the press, do backroom deals etc to get into power. This lot make up about 15% and their representative in eCanada is Rolo, in real life a certain Republican in the US is not far off buying his way into a job. Then there are the other 5% most of which are loonie Commies and fascists etc but a very few of which believe something and will stand by it through thick or thin, not because it's popular or makes them and their backers rich, but because it's best for the ecountry or rl country.
Well alot of rl packing to do this week... Vote wisely.
A. Basics: Seriously eCanada, having been saved twice by Eden, and granted eUSA as well, should NEED no lecturing on this. Just as a matter of gratitude we owe it eCroatia, eRomania etc to stand by them, afterall who knows when we may need them again? By leaving any alliance we isolate ourselves MORE and are therefore in a worse position if we are invaded.
The core members of EDEN that keep fighting on day in and day out in the Balkans and Europe are the only reason we do not have eSerbia and ePoland in North America everyday. It is no coincidence that the last time ePoland and eSerbia invaded eUSA eCroatia was in eMexico.
Not only that but by 'walking away' you create suspicion... Nobody has explained WHY we left Eden... Do we suddenly disagree? Friends are hard to come by, particularly ones who stood by us for so long. Why have we suddenly fallen out so badly that we have to in effect tell them to 'do one'? Is this wise? What was the arguement that was that serious for us isolate ourselves and become easier to defeat? No explanation has been offered and until one is given I call this a major mistake.
B. Theories and Consequences: So MAYBE we left Eden over the eBulgaria/eTurkey issue? Bit late no? But is proposed that we join the eBulgarian alliance? No... Ok presumably not this issue then. Maybe we just don't like the Eden Command? Is that a reason to jeapordise eCanadas defencive alliances? It costs too much on MPPs? Suppose we are invaded... might want the MPPs then huh? Or are only 'fair weather friends'?
I suspect the real reason is because some of those standing for President and VP (Rylde and Rolo) wish to attack eIreland, blaming them for 'selling out' to eUK in Acacia's term. Certainly what the eIrish did was underhanded but the ONLY beneficiaries of such a war would be those ecountries who wish to invade eCanada - which eIreland, when we members of Eden, could not do. Do you suppose eUSA would support us? I listened to their Presidential Debate (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/enpr/2012/06/02/enpr-june-presidential-debate) and 2 out of 3 of their candidates said they would actively support eIreland. It's quite possible that any attack on eIreland would result in being kicked out of Terra as well as eUSA may well side with eIreland. But again and again the more we strive over petty feuds the only winners are One.
Leaving Eden leaves us less defencible: MISTAKE. Any planned assault on a Terra or Eden country is treasonous to BOTH alliances.
The Rylde Sell Out
Remember not so long ago Rylde was fighting with EPC, living in eSweden (strange huh?), and telling us that we had DO something about the thief and serial Party PTOer among us? Well I and and many others agreed with him then although I couldn't see why he was in a One ecountry and not in an allied enation. So suddenly instead of harming eCanada and lecturing us do things he couldn't he returns and proposes to do what? Have the thief as VP!!!! So... let me get this clear: It's ok to go stay in a One country and fight against eCanada because you want us to deal with the thief but then ok for you come back and endorse him? The "Rylde backflip" doesn't wash with moi! There are backflips and then there's hypocracy. This falls under the latter category.
Selling out for political opportunism just makes me wonder how 'real' everything else this 'fly by night opportunist' has said was. Should ePoland invade eUSA Rylde and Rolo would probably have us join One... which again makes me suspicious of the circumstances. Now I know this is conjecture but look at the 'circumstantial evidence':
A. Rylde moves to a One country to fight for EPC (all the others move to eUSA or eIreland).
B. eIreland 'sell out' in the eUK war: Rolo calls for us to invade eIreland.
C. Rylde comes home and we leave Eden.
D. Rylde and Rolo are suddenly pals and on the same 'ticket'.
E. ePoland and eUSA fighting in eFrance...
Now this may be entirely wrong and all just 'conspiracy theory' I don't know. For me the hypocritical 'backflip' is sufficient for me do a u turn. I cannot vote for a hypocrital political opportunist and that is what Rylde has proved himself to be. By siding with Rolo he is effectively saying to eCanada "Do as I say is your rules. My rules do not apply to me!". Get lost!!! I am SaraDroz and I call hypocracy when I see it. Takes a far more cunning fox than you to fool me. What was the one Bush got wrong? "fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me". Don't let him fool once.
U-turn and Conclusion
It's not often that do u-turns but Ryldes opportunistic hypocracy is an about face à l'outrance. I was evidently misled and it worries me as to his other motives. I shall NOT be voting for Rylde and though I have little idea what Noyst plans that most likely voting ~hyuu~. It's a great shame that the one Party that does NOT bend but remains true through thick and thin and stands by it's principles no matter, the CPF did not forward a candidate. MDP members when they understand this hypocracy should perhaps consider where they stand. Connor didn't do a deal and sell out and I voted for him against Sperry.
In epolitics and in real life politics there are generaly three types of people: Those who 'sail with the wind'; they will shift their course depending on the public mood and if possible try to get the 'weather forcast' to position themselves 'ahead of the wind'; these make up around 80% of 'politicians'. Acacia was good at this and a good 'communicator' to boot. Then there's people who like to think they are clever; these are the types who think they can buy, blackmail, use the press, do backroom deals etc to get into power. This lot make up about 15% and their representative in eCanada is Rolo, in real life a certain Republican in the US is not far off buying his way into a job. Then there are the other 5% most of which are loonie Commies and fascists etc but a very few of which believe something and will stand by it through thick or thin, not because it's popular or makes them and their backers rich, but because it's best for the ecountry or rl country.
Well alot of rl packing to do this week... Vote wisely.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Voted~!
A solid plan for the future of eCanada is definitely needed.. a master plan.. If we continue like this, we will keep suffering from decisions which have no long-term benefits..
Nice work Sara, the voice of reason again.
You're SaraDroz and you point out hypocrisy when you see it?
really?, Do you point out your own?
And "Rolo, in real life a certain Republican in the US"
shows how little you know, I couldn't be further from being a "Republican Type" in the US
Propaganda = Diaper
Loaded Diaper
This Newspaper is Full of Sh*t
Cool I'm the star of this episode. Maybe the next time I offer people cabinet positions they'll take them including you who refused.
But you'd rather just critisize and not do any true work.
I'll be the first to admit Rolo was not my first choice but after people kept saying no to my cabinet I said well atleast he's active and knows his S***.
that 2 lines there pretty much explains away your whole conspiracy theory. Sorry that something so simple explained away all your verbal garbage
peopledeclined me because they were in the Sperry train. I'm not going back on my word and replacing those who said yes with those who said no to me just because Sperry dropped out.
I needed active people and i'm willing to overlook my personal feelings toward Wally and Rolo in favour of having people who know the job.
i've been done hating on people in game for quite sometime now.
Maybe you can learn something from me.
perhaps we left EDEN because we work more closely with eUSA and they are in TERRA? Perhaps having to divide our attentions between two alliances left us not doing very well in either? Perhaps some players just wanted a change? Perhaps the eWorld is more than just black and white?
Perhaps...
Woah woah woah, I've spoken with the eCroatian Government, and according to the Chinese Government, they have no intention of just abandoning us simply because we left the alliance. We've been with EDEN so long that our friendships stretch beyond treaties and such things.
My communications with other EDEN MoFAs have so far been quite supportive and pleasant. In the PM sent out by Sperry to all EDEN member CPs, there were no concerns expressed...well except one rather funny set of comments by Irish_Rebel_Reborn. People seem to not have taken much notice or interest in eCanada's decision to simplify its command structure and take orders only from one alliance HQ. That was the main reason for the decision, so far as I can tell.It's a small change, really.
@Rylde: Even if I was NOT busy in rl a 'cabinet post' does not buy me. Don't you idiots get it yet? There is nothing that can 'buy' me. I not a common prostitute. You expect me to be on a Cabinet with a thief? No hope and no sale.
@Plugson I am pleased for that the feeling toward us is good, for now. I wonder how long that will remain the case when we can't help them in their battles?
Well Sara, I can assure you it might not be much worse than what we did this month in regards to EDEN plans. We were supposed to go through the Spanish-occupied Azores and take part in the battle that is now raging on the Iberian peninsula. However, getting the okay from TERRA command was not possible, so when the battle began against, we were not there
I had worked quite a bit at the beginning of Sperrry's term to get people on board and ready for that campaign. I felt we let down Portugal.
Then we were supposed to head through Belgium, but that ran into roadblocks as well. Then it was heading towards Hungary, but we came in too late and Hungary retreated
With so many missed opportunities to engage in battle to make fun for eCanada and then missing the boat for our allies, I feel that balancing between two HQs was actually going to cause as much bad blood as leaving. Maybe if we can get things in order and respond faster, then we can better support our allies
That's our hope.
That at least Plugson is a reasoned responce. We are not idiots and can understand reasons.
ahem....I said the same thing, in less word, with less concrete examples in my previous comment. What's a guy gotta do to get a little respect around here? 0.0
"That at least Plugson is a reasoned responce. We are not idiots and can understand reasons."
Well, you clearly are an idiot. Anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together could tell you it's impossible to serve 2 masters. The fact we've walked the fence for so long without picking a side is a miracle. There have been problems balancing the two alliances since the beginning. I'm honestly surprised it took this long for us to leave EDEN some of us have been advocating it for years.
"There is nothing that can 'buy' me. I not a common prostitute. You expect me to be on a Cabinet with a thief? No hope and no sale."
Also, you don't buy prostitutes, now do you rent them.
You pay them to leave. And trust me, if you were a Prostitute we'd have passed the hat long before now.
I didn't know offering a spot to someone who i thought could do the job was buying them. Considering you had nothing to offer but yourself and the skills of the position I wanted u to take.
After I recieved my first rounds of No's from people I asked for positions I said F*** it then Rolo it is.
just because i easily explained away your garbage article doesn't mean u have to get upsetwoman. Take a deep breath and go change the tampon.
This game would be better with no alliances
How typical... can't actualy answer so resort to sexist abuse.
Ahhh Sara....
See You Next Tuesday....
lol and typical of women too:"The fact we've walked the fence for so long without picking a side is a miracle."
Jeez i was so wrong giving you prop on your article about Sperry blah-blah-look-what-i-ate-for-breakfast-zillion-articles-but-i-dont-get-canada-i-a-sexy-war-yet!!!
Man got fool by a woman AGAIN xD
The thoughts of an old time noob come back:
Seen too many PTOs back in the day, and the vote to leave EDEN reeked of it. Too many "cause rylde told me to" reasons for voting no. That's what I hate, when one person feels like voting for something, 10 others do it just cause he said so.
Now then, I do agree that one alliance needed to be dumped, we weren't getting anything done being part of both. I would have liked to see us stay with EDEN and be nice with eUSA, but that's just being picky
I've explained my decisions as well as the reasoning for them. I don't know what more I can do to answer them for you. How do u exactly see that I haven't.
Just because its not what you would do or want doesn't mean i haven't tried to explain it.
I messaged who I thought would be best for the job first and you had first crack at a spot
EPC was the mistake, not Rolo's selection.
EPC was not a mistake.
I like waffles