18-07-2003 14:00									#1
	For the love of god, NO LIES!!! Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

GhengisFarb posted this in the public forum:

quote: When Roleplay offered us the MPP it also rejected a NAP clause that GoW had written in the clause. I believe they specifically said they felt a NAP would be unduly restraining on their team at that time.

This is false. I handled the whole MPP affair, in fact, it was one of the first things I did while CoFA and at no time did RP ask us for a NAP, nor did we ask them for one.

I ask GF and any other GoW member for that matter not to make any false accusation or lies in the public forum as this only hurts our reptutation with the other teams. If the others teams even feel that we are being deceitful, our whole delicate propaganda machine will go to hell.

I will not tolerate what has so far taken a lot of effort on our part and what has been successful in the eyes of Lego and GS (or so it seems) to be thrown in the garbage by false comments, and I WILL make public apologies on behalf of GoW on such comments while throwing the blame on individual members of our team if need be.

Don't make me do this. I am dead serious about it.

-MZ

	18-07-2003 14:25									#2
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Lets not get involved in a flame war. That was a GS mistake that we should try to avoid.

Our argument is

MPP is not a NAP, and Togas can sit on

	18-07-2003 16:11									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

MZ, guys

RP DID ask for an NAP in my negotiations at the end. The contract sent stated it was to be BOTH an NAP and an MPP. They therefore know they are seperate. Focus on that.

	18-07-2003 16:37									#4
	Got spare money?

Ask for permission on the main forum to present our case (by posting correspondence) that RP knew that our MPP was not a NAP.

Also.. can you post the correspondence here ?

Regs

	18-07-2003 20:31									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

They did reject the NAP clause, it wasn't a lie. I specifically remember it because I was pissed off about any NAP clause with RP and was completely bewildered by Togas's misgivings to agree to one. I don't think it ever made it into the treaty, I think the whole thing was discussions and RP simply told us they didn't feel comfortable with the NAP concept.

Anyway I edited the post until I dig up the chatlog/emails where it was discussed.

Last edited by GhengisFarb on 18-07-2003 at 20:55

	19-07-2003 04:26									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx MZ, guys RP DID ask for an NAP in my negotiations at the end. The contract sent stated it was to be BOTH an NAP and an MPP. They therefore know they are seperate. Focus on that.

Yes, but RP was refering to our original MPP, not the one right now. This MPP extension did include a NAP of course and it's our proof that they knew that MPPs were not equal to NAPs.

	19-07-2003 04:29									#7
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by GhengisFarb They did reject the NAP clause, it wasn't a lie. I specifically remember it because I was pissed off about any NAP clause with RP and was completely bewildered by Togas's misgivings to agree to one. I don't think it ever made it into the treaty, I think the whole thing was discussions and RP simply told us they didn't feel comfortable with the NAP concept. Anyway I edited the post until I dig up the chatlog/emails where it was discussed.

If this is so, then I apologize for sounding so harsh. But I remember handling that MPP business myself, in fact, I still have somewhere the original e-mail they sent in which the only thing we edited was the border clause and the 100 turns that they wanted it to last.

Please double-check anything you say in public, a mistake can really screw us. That goes for everyone including myself.

	19-07-2003 21:20									#8
	Increase Your PM Length

Here is a link to the extension:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...999#post2172999