 |
|  |
 |
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999 time: 23:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Theseus
Nathan, even your edits were fairly minor. I think we did OK from a consensus perspective. |
And how about two posts down from that where I realized that if the mountain ND's MedInf was on is clear, a 1-turn truce interpreted as this turn for GoW and next turn for us won't slow them down at all in attacking Toledo (assuming I remember the map correctly)? What else might I be missing because I'm at work instead of sitting down with a map in front of me (not to mention more time) and looking at all the possibilities? And what thoughts might others, especially NYE, contribute that deserve consideration? That's what bothers me about handling diplomacy in a "come up with a brand new idea and make a final offer within six hours" fashion, especially regarding something as major as offering to let an opponent off the hook for violating an agreement. I might very well have ended up all for the idea after further discussion, but I want to make sure that discussion has a chance to take place in the future because if we keep doing this sort of thing, it will probably bite us sooner or later. I just hope it doesn't this time.
I can see a need for haste in presenting the idea to GoW before they played their turn, but that could have been done without wording the message as a firm offer. That way if they were interested, they would have known to hold the turn while we made a final decision, but if someone thought of an angle that would make the idea not so good after all, we would have had room to back out. Please, let's not be in such a huge hurry with firm offers should a similar situation crop up in the future.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999 time: 23:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DeepO
Nathan, you have a point, however allow me to remind you of one thing: the NAP with GoW was decided in chat, between 3 people, while all the rest was unaware of what was happening. I'm not saying I would have objected, and I don't say it wouldn't have been better to wait just a bit longer this time, but there have been precedents where time was more critical then unamousity. |
The final decision on the NAP was made more quickly, with less input, than any of us would consider ideal, and both NYE and I felt pretty uncomfortable making it. But the issue of NAPs in general had been under discussion for several days, and the current direction of the team seemed to favor a NAP with GoW to stir things up on Bob. Several people had expressed support, and I don't recall anyone's having expressed serious opposition. My view was that the discussions already held had provided a sufficient consensus and opportunity for discussion, if only barely, to justify agreeing to the NAP since the rest of the chat seemed to hinge on our approving that. But it was most certainly not a case where a final offer was made mere hours after an issue was first discussed at all.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|