I don't see a problem with it at all. I've never had any run-ins (bad thing) with any of their guild members. Have actually enjoyed a few fly-by chats with a couple of them. What little I'm at the keyboard I've not seen any issues that would sway me away from trusting any of their members so I'd give it a vote of yes.
Post by Coffeehunger on May 12, 2015 14:04:40 GMT 1
The people from K&M that I've run into seems friendly and shows mature behavior so I dont see a problem with an alliance. I am not a fighter however so my point of view might not really matter all that much but otherwise it's a yes from me as well
Leaving aside that this is an 8 month old thread, I don't see what they offer us that requires an alliance... While I agree that most seem friendly and mature, there are a few that I'd rather not see running around on our guild map, or have friend access to our bots.
As I see it, the only thing an alliance would get us is that we cannot be attacked by them in PK, and that we would be safe from their summons. Otoh, they would get that, and free access to our guild map (de facto, as Perun cannot attack members of allied guilds). Map access can always be granted by whitelisting members, or if needed, the guild.
And don't forget that PvP training etc. are also impossible between allies.
Post by Coffeehunger on May 17, 2015 20:30:11 GMT 1
agreed revi I have since my last post realised that there are a few people whos behavior on ch6 doesnt really make me comfortable to be associated with. Tho may it be said that I still like most of the K&M people there are a few I defo dont like or trust
This one self died a while ago and there are no gain for IRON in it really so alliance request denied. The friendly ones can always ask for a WL from one of the IRON Leaders as Revi said so we will leave it at that.
I am what i am Nothing more Nothing less
Aliquando et insanire iucundum est
[radu @ 6]: wow, the Drunken_duck bot looks so pr0]
Post by Coffeehunger on Feb 14, 2016 18:52:06 GMT 1
Ok, so today it was brought up again if we could make an alliance with K&M. I think it'd be good, the ch6 hotheads seems to be gone, and only see the K&M tag on people I enjoy associating with, so reconsider?
I agree with Coffee, K&M have some Friendly players, and as far as I know we have had no issues with them. I for one Would vote yes to a friends tag. As Far as I know we have a Verbal agreement that we will not attack a K&M member and they will not attack us. According to them they thought we had a verbal agreement and today there was a Incident where a Friend tag ( Green ) would have prevented a #IG from them. So Lets Please vote on this again.
Last Edit: Feb 14, 2016 21:02:41 GMT 1 by SirCamolot: Making sure I Put (Green) Tag.
As far as I know, there never has been an official no-attack agreement between the guilds (which would correspond to green tag) and jedi's reply there confirms that... Also, I can't say I like Rosabel's way of approaching the problem by assuming IRON's member was at fault (and it's not the first time her attitude rubs me the wrong way).
As nothing else seems to have changed, I still don't see any reason whatsoever to go into an alliance with K&M: they still have nothing to offer us other than the no-attack, and I count easily 6 members in Mercator's list that I don't want to give access to our guild map (and that I have seen online recently).
Green tag (no-attack) could be considered; full alliance, not for me.
Edit: Frankly, I start wondering why they won't take 'no' for an answer: the question has come up twice before, each time the answer was 'no'; now it seems at least some members of K&M assume we had an agreement with them because they asked for one... So for me, repeat the 'no' until they understand it.
When I think K&M, I think of one person only: VinoVeritas.
Vino is a person I would trust with just about anything, but Vino is also perfectly capable of speaking for himself; and so long as he himself does not consider it necessary to propose an alliance, thereby putting his weight and resources into the proposition, then I think the prior decision made in this thread needs not to be changed.
Always be yourself. Unless you can be Batman...then always be Batman.
Clearly you can see my name in the screenshot and you can notice IRON is tagged green for them - which I assume is their color for no aggression. If there is no such agreement between our guilds, why do they have us tagged as such. I think this should be brought up to their council and fixed, so next time there is no confusion.
I returned the bag to the person that I PKed because at the time this happened, I was lead to believe we do in fact have a NAP. If this is not the case, next time this happens, I may act otherwise and keep the bag, just to teach the person not to go into PK with valuable items. And I hope the people in K&M, that I am friendly with, understand my point of view.
They have never been tagged anything other then neutral as far as I know. I guess I was misinformed on the Pact, due to me not being one to PK unless attacked, and them having us green tagged (I Didn't Know) the occasion never presented itself to prove it any different. My opening this whole topic up again was, if there was any verbal type of friendship agreement then there should be a (Tag) involved so these things cant happen in the future.
I agree with you, SirC, if there is a verbal agreement, it should be shown in the tag colour. But, such agreements engaging the whole guild are usually made on council level. In this case, I get the strong impression that a few members are pushing very hard to get an alliance and that neither council is really enthousiastic (or even getting included).
As I don't PK, a NAP would be fine with me, but I haven't seen anything indicating that even such an agreement was reached (no mention on forums, no specific tag colour...).
There has never been any such agreement on a guild basis.
There are individual understandings between certain members, but such understandings are personal and on a case by case basis.
I believe any serious diplomatic tie should be prosecuted by guild leadership, and every other guild with which IRON presently has cooperative ties, has been in touch on a leadership level to ensure that such diplomatic relations were forged. This isn't the case with K&M.
Now, given that:
1. You (SC) aren't an active PKer, 2. You have not been aware of any presence or absence of understanding between the guilds, 3. You don't know K&M leadership and (I'm quite certain) haven't spoken directly with K&M leadership on this matter,
wouldn't you say that the correct response to this situation would have been to check the tag (no NAP), then this thread (no agreement) and then IRON's charter (Amendment 1 Rule 8) and finally withholding judgement instead of instructing said member to return items won?
Our personal ties with other guilds aren't binding ties on co members of IRON.
Last Edit: Feb 17, 2016 9:09:46 GMT 1 by TuDaeFadda
Always be yourself. Unless you can be Batman...then always be Batman.
@tuedafadda: SirC is a council member, and as such has access to the same information as the other council members. Nor do I see any indication that he told Katakil to return the bag. And if you knew that from private conversations, it might have been more polite to keep that matter private, and let the persons concerned make it public, if and when they wish to do so.
Now more general: I talked about this with Vinoveritas this morning, and according to him, K&M asked once for an alliance, and, given an initial positive respons, set us to friends (non-attack). That alliance fell through, but it seems they left the friendly tag in place. So it looks like there never was a mutual agreement in the first place.