i don't really see the problem here anoniem. i really am out of the loop recently and busy with rl, but you actually personally requested my response here since i arranged most of those pacts and can answer the questions (since most are related to previous resets).

[quote poster=anoniem; 12874; 227179]I'm only posting this for the sake of truthfulness.
+++++++++++
Preamble:
+++++++++++
Friday 29th July 2011
[01:24] Don_Hanlong: i like SOL
[01:24] Don_Hanlong: actually
[01:24] Don_Hanlong: well let me clarify that
[01:25] Don_Hanlong: i have nothing against htem
[01:25] Don_Hanlong: i just want them to be more on par with the rest of the server
[01:25] Don_Hanlong: so we dont have to spend so mcuh time worrying about the bs they try to cook up every reset
[01:25] Don_Hanlong: im fine with netgainig 3 resets then fighting a prearranged war with SOL to take my turn doing so with all the netters
[01:25] Don_Hanlong: or whatever [/quote]

i don't see what's the problem or point here? is there something i said wrong in that chat? i just said what i thought and reading it again i still think it is a valid point.

now here's where things go different:



you should ask your own VP. it was asked. you said no. do you guys really don't communicate with each other?



see below since it will be answered there



we did too. so what's the hypocrisy here, unless you are hypocritical also?

From: Makinso
To: hanlong
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Pacting
Date: Aug 5th, 09:53
Message Body:
Looks fine to me.

Signed,
Me myself and I for SOL ;-)

----------------------- Original Message -----------------------
i just want a DP clause:

This pact is unbreakable unless one of the parts declares war on the other part's LDP or FDP. In this case, the pact may be declared void.



EXCEPT...

[quote poster=anoniem; 12874; 227179]
6) The pact states 50% majority; however there are only 2 alliances in the coalition, so they CANNOT be a 50% majority with only two member alliances.

1/2 = 50%

[quote poster=anoniem; 12874; 227179]
7) " The coalition can also act preemptively if there is (super-majority, ie 66% ?) agreement on an aggressors supposed future entrance into war."
Is it just me or is half of 100% equal to 50%, and not 66%?

wait you just said it was 50% here, but it doesn't apply to #6?



yes i did sign it on 6/8.

[quote poster=anoniem; 12874; 227179]
++++++++++++++++++++++
THIS RESET
++++++++++++++++++++++

From: hanlong
To: anoniem
Subject: RE: renew uNAP
Date: Oct 3rd, 16:02
Message Body:
? not sure what you are referring to. our old pact stands unless explicitly cancelled. unless you want to sign two pacts for one reset? not sure how that works

----------------------- Original Message[Anoniem] -----------------------
I'm not asking to be friends. just whether u want to renew the uNAP or not :P
++++++++

--
[The key word there is *explicitly* cancelled, so our pact apparently stands when it suits LaF and when it doesn't they will break it without warning and FS evo.]
-- [/quote]

yes i didn't want to sign a uNAP, i said i was continuing our old pact. and i said that. again what is the problem?