EO Referendum Roiled By Allegations Of 'Quid Pro Quo'

[Lethen]

So now you're excuse shifted from promoting EuroChoice to this article being an exaggerated response? Though you failed to provide the explanation for those comments until your post above so, in a vacuum, no readers will know the "why" and simply have to fill in the blanks.

? Also I don't go after you for whatever reason is convenient that day. I go after you when you're intentionally or unintentionally being a hypocrite, and your tactics used leave something to be desired.

 

[Xecrio]

Was this necessary? The relationship between OD and I is at the point where he feels he can no longer talk to me in private. I repeatedly told people that I did not want any article or any action to be taken as a result of the conversation we had. Yet, here you are. Thank you for that.

If you didn't want people to know, then (1) why did you tell anyone and (2) doesn't that imply you know this in the very least reflects poorly on your (and OD's) character?

Aex thanked me for intially voting against it. I explained that OD had persuaded me to change otherwise, which I realise is gullible on my part. I did not expect anyone to say anything, perhaps I had my expectations too high. I am fully aware that this was have reprocusions on my reputation, but we all make mistakes and it's now my task to try and rectify this and not let anything like this happen in the future.

 

[Lethen]

Was this necessary? The relationship between OD and I is at the point where he feels he can no longer talk to me in private. I repeatedly told people that I did not want any article or any action to be taken as a result of the conversation we had. Yet, here you are. Thank you for that.

If you didn't want people to know, then (1) why did you tell anyone and (2) doesn't that imply you know this in the very least reflects poorly on your (and OD's) character?

Aex thanked me for intially voting against it. I explained that OD had persuaded me to change otherwise, which I realise is gullible on my part. I did not expect anyone to say anything, perhaps I had my expectations too high. I am fully aware that this was have reprocusions on my reputation, but we all make mistakes and it's now my task to try and rectify this and not let anything like this happen in the future.

Thank you for your explanation, Nate. To be clear I don't think this is something major or career-killing, and other much less capable players have come back from worse. You'll be fine. Adversity is part of life and this game. How you handle it speaks volumes.

 

[Olde Delaware]

So now you're excuse shifted from promoting EuroChoice to this article being an exaggerated response? Though you failed to provide the explanation for those comments until your post above so, in a vacuum, no readers will know the "why" and simply have to fill in the blanks.

? Also I don't go after you for whatever reason is convenient that day. I go after you when you're intentionally or unintentionally being a hypocrite, and your tactics used leave something to be desired.

I mean anyone could see disdain and put two and two together Lethen with the exception of...you? I wouldn't necessarily say that, you have a habit of targeting me specifically even when I am doing nothing wrong and just have a difference of opinion. Like right now for instance and its not exactly a new habit of yours or tactic either I might add. You accused me of trolling, I explained the comments and now I am somehow a hypocrite? For...explaining the disdain? Alright then. Good talk.

 

[Xecrio]

Was this necessary? The relationship between OD and I is at the point where he feels he can no longer talk to me in private. I repeatedly told people that I did not want any article or any action to be taken as a result of the conversation we had. Yet, here you are. Thank you for that.

If you didn't want people to know, then (1) why did you tell anyone and (2) doesn't that imply you know this in the very least reflects poorly on your (and OD's) character?

Aex thanked me for intially voting against it. I explained that OD had persuaded me to change otherwise, which I realise is gullible on my part. I did not expect anyone to say anything, perhaps I had my expectations too high. I am fully aware that this was have reprocusions on my reputation, but we all make mistakes and it's now my task to try and rectify this and not let anything like this happen in the future.

Thank you for your explanation, Nate. To be clear I don't think this is something major or career-killing, and other much less capable players have come back from worse. You'll be fine. Adversity is part of life and this game. How you handle it speaks volumes.

Thank you Lethen. I understand mistakes that were made yesterday and I appreciate your comments.

 

[Kari]

Interesting article and events, thread has turned into a shitshow due to the usual suspects (trolls, people claiming to be misinterpreted, people being thin-skinned because of being critiqued/called to account, etc.) though.

Also something which members who are not in the Discord had no way of knowing, which is something that should be covered more often in general by Europeian media imo.

 

[Izzy]

This is just stupid and I frankly don't care.

 

[Lethen]

This is just stupid and I frankly don't care.

In Europeia, we cover every part of the political spectrum, including apathy

 

[Prim]

Is Euro so starved for drama that this tempest in a teacup has been drummed up?

Look, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the Punchwood situation and backroom dealings -- but this doesn't really feel like a very critical issue to me, honestly.

The one key takeaway here that I'd like to address is @Xecrio's desire to please everyone and keep everyone happy -- that's not going to work out for you in the long run, Nate, you should just decide for yourself and stick to your guns. That'd serve you better than trying to make everyone happy. This is Euro, someone's going to be miffy about everything.

 

[HEM]

Is Euro so starved for drama that this tempest in a teacup has been drummed up?

Look, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the Punchwood situation and backroom dealings -- but this doesn't really feel like a very critical issue to me, honestly.

The one key takeaway here that I'd like to address is @Xecrio's desire to please everyone and keep everyone happy -- that's not going to work out for you in the long run, Nate, you should just decide for yourself and stick to your guns. That'd serve you better than trying to make everyone happy. This is Euro, someone's going to be miffy about everything.

I mean, this makes me worried that people's expectations of what is "newsworthy" are getting incredibly high.

I don't think something needs to be Punchwood levels to merit media attention. We'd only have one or two articles a year! Of course, the nature of reporting news is that a story is reported and everyone gets to make their own determination about the relevance and importance etc. So maybe that natural process is just playing out here.

 

[Prim]

I'm not saying everything has to be Punchwood-level drama to be newsworthy, but this still feels like it's grasping at some controversy for the sake of an agenda, personally.

And that's me saying that while also personally opposing this referendum/legislation, so take that how you will.

 

[HEM]

I'm not saying everything has to be Punchwood-level drama to be newsworthy, but this still feels like it's grasping at some controversy for the sake of an agenda, personally.

And that's me saying that while also personally opposing this referendum/legislation, so take that how you will.

You don't think it's relevant for citizens to know that one of their leaders changed positions on an issue, apparently, because he was offered a favor?

It seems relevant to me, personally. I'm also glad that we learned our Minister of Communications wouldn't rule out pulling an EBC article if the subject of the article complained, which might be a subject worth returning to once this thread wraps.

 

[Drecq]

I think its newsworthy but its also uninteresting. It treads that very fine line.

 

[GraVandius]

nvm

 

[GraVandius]

nvm

 

[GraVandius]

Is Euro so starved for drama that this tempest in a teacup has been drummed up?

Look, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the Punchwood situation and backroom dealings -- but this doesn't really feel like a very critical issue to me, honestly.

The one key takeaway here that I'd like to address is @Xecrio's desire to please everyone and keep everyone happy -- that's not going to work out for you in the long run, Nate, you should just decide for yourself and stick to your guns. That'd serve you better than trying to make everyone happy. This is Euro, someone's going to be miffy about everything.

I mean, this makes me worried that people's expectations of what is "newsworthy" are getting incredibly high.

I don't think something needs to be Punchwood levels to merit media attention. We'd only have one or two articles a year! Of course, the nature of reporting news is that a story is reported and everyone gets to make their own determination about the relevance and importance etc. So maybe that natural process is just playing out here.

As Prim said, I think the title and tone of this article suggest this has/should have an broader impact, perhaps on the referendum itself, when it in reality it is barely registering at all on my scandal meter. It seems that either consciously or unconsciously this is because of your personal views on the referendum. Generally, I would think that is the cause of the push back on this article, not because this occurrence isn't worth at least noting but that the article itself hypes it up to be much more than it really is.

 

[HEM]

Is Euro so starved for drama that this tempest in a teacup has been drummed up?

Look, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the Punchwood situation and backroom dealings -- but this doesn't really feel like a very critical issue to me, honestly.

The one key takeaway here that I'd like to address is @Xecrio's desire to please everyone and keep everyone happy -- that's not going to work out for you in the long run, Nate, you should just decide for yourself and stick to your guns. That'd serve you better than trying to make everyone happy. This is Euro, someone's going to be miffy about everything.

I mean, this makes me worried that people's expectations of what is "newsworthy" are getting incredibly high.

I don't think something needs to be Punchwood levels to merit media attention. We'd only have one or two articles a year! Of course, the nature of reporting news is that a story is reported and everyone gets to make their own determination about the relevance and importance etc. So maybe that natural process is just playing out here.

As Prim said, I think the title and tone of this article suggest this has/should have an broader impact, perhaps on the referendum itself, when it in reality it is barely registering at all on my scandal meter. It seems that either consciously or unconsciously this is because of your personal views on the referendum. Generally, I would think that is the cause of the push back on this article, not because this occurrence isn't worth at least noting but that the article itself hypes it up to be much more than it really is.

I actually wrote this headline because the original one seemed a lot more sensational to me and I wanted to avoid that lol

Anyways, I don't think there's any way to successfully defend my motivations behind this article. I think I've presented a case as to why it's newsworthy, and now that the subject is out there people get to make their own judgments as to (1) what happened and (2) the article itself.

 

[Izzy]

You don't think it's relevant for citizens to know that one of their leaders changed positions on an issue, apparently, because he was offered a favor?

It's an enormous stretch to call what OD did "offering a favor". No one can reasonably conclude that OD was speaking on behalf of Drecq. Even without Drecq's explicit denial, the thought is just ludicrous on its face. He was merely suggesting/implying that Drecq would look favorably on it and might then, in the future, be partial to supporting things Nate might do. That's hardly a quid pro quo, in my opinion, and really seems more like political advice that speaks favorably to the magnitude of Drecq's social standing in the region. Can you realistically say that no one has ever changed their mind on an issue because of Drecq's influence? I'm not knocking him for this, mind you, just saying.

 

[HEM]

You don't think it's relevant for citizens to know that one of their leaders changed positions on an issue, apparently, because he was offered a favor?

It's an enormous stretch to call what OD did "offering a favor". No one can reasonably conclude that OD was speaking on behalf of Drecq. Even without Drecq's explicit denial, the thought is just ludicrous on its face. He was merely suggesting/implying that Drecq would look favorably on it and might then, in the future, be partial to supporting things Nate might do. That's hardly a quid pro quo, in my opinion, and really seems more like political advice that speaks favorably to the magnitude of Drecq's social standing in the region. Can you realistically say that no one has ever changed their mind on an issue because of Drecq's influence? I'm not knocking him for this, mind you, just saying.

I actually think the whole thing is weirder that someone is offering a favor from someone else without their consent lol

 

[Lloenflys]

You don't think it's relevant for citizens to know that one of their leaders changed positions on an issue, apparently, because he was offered a favor?

It's an enormous stretch to call what OD did "offering a favor". No one can reasonably conclude that OD was speaking on behalf of Drecq. Even without Drecq's explicit denial, the thought is just ludicrous on its face. He was merely suggesting/implying that Drecq would look favorably on it and might then, in the future, be partial to supporting things Nate might do. That's hardly a quid pro quo, in my opinion, and really seems more like political advice that speaks favorably to the magnitude of Drecq's social standing in the region. Can you realistically say that no one has ever changed their mind on an issue because of Drecq's influence? I'm not knocking him for this, mind you, just saying.

Although when people change their mind and agree with Drecq there's a 75% chance he'll flip his vote to keep the discussion going because Drecq likes political arguments so much ?

Sorry Drecq, too good of an opportunity to pass up