Essentially, we are the Romans and you are the Gauls under our control. The fort exerts our presence and control over your surrounding land.
- 248
It's more like Japan or South Korea, now that the war is over, we can use the fort for defensive purposes to help protect the east, and can help make Madlum better in the long run.TheANgle @ Jan 4 2011, 02:13 AM wrote: Essentially, we are the Romans and you are the Gauls under our control. The fort exerts our presence and control over your surrounding land.
Yes, the treaty was signed by the Madlum Mayor... the same mayor who was never there during the blockade and hasn't appeared in game since the treaty was signed, the same mayor whose own dubious dealings and behaviors garnered us with infamy. Understand right now that the bulk of what was the Madlum community does not support MaikkyWin and most of us have left Madlum because of this treaty.MatTripp @ Jan 2 2011, 06:18 PM wrote:Part of said agreement say's that the building is to stay put, and that it will. It was made to stop trade to your town (or make people aware that going to madlum was deadly) and to "siege" your town. The fort was NATO built and was built in time of war against madlum and there for will stay as only NATO, this will allow us to use our fort in either time of war against you or to help stop the enemy that is trying to get easy access to you. There is no reason to remove the fort unless told to by an admin/ect... it was in our treaty to keep it there and that treaty was signed by the madlum mayor.rens23 @ Jan 2 2011, 03:01 PM wrote: I fully agree but that Barricade wasn't necessarily and most members of madlum want it gone.
I don't get why it was there in first place.
Madlum agreed to live in peace with the other towns but we don't wanna have visitors be intimidated by the giant fort in front around the tunnel.
also there is a really big word hanging in the air: NATO but why isn't there hanging Madlum?
Since we agreed to these terms i believe the barricade needs to be removed, other towns don't get any profit from this thing and its just frustrating us (civilians of Madlum).
Madlum should have stayed an independent and NEUTRAL city as it was intended. I hate that it is part of NATO and I hate more that a symbol of aggression, immorality, mass murder, and oppression remains to forever shadow Madlum.
It is one thing for people to do something wrong and to be prepared for battle, but Madlum was full of easy going people who were just starting out when suddenly a blockade manned by pk'ers full of animosity killed us on sight with dubious reasoning. Our city became our jail as it seemed the whole of Minecraft was out for our blood.
Then our Mayor, who more than likely caused us all this trouble, gets online after a day of grief and without us knowing signs a treaty that not only makes the very symbol of our depression a perminent monument, but forces us to take arms and protect the very people who had sentenced us to condemnation.
This is why this Treaty is wrong and this is why the majority of Madlum's population has fled.
That's a very good argument and i see your point and how the members of Madlum feel.HelsEch @ Jan 4 2011, 01:20 PM wrote:Yes, the treaty was signed by the Madlum Mayor... the same mayor who was never there during the blockade and hasn't appeared in game since the treaty was signed, the same mayor whose own dubious dealings and behaviors garnered us with infamy. Understand right now that the bulk of what was the Madlum community does not support MaikkyWin and most of us have left Madlum because of this treaty.MatTripp @ Jan 2 2011, 06:18 PM wrote:Part of said agreement say's that the building is to stay put, and that it will. It was made to stop trade to your town (or make people aware that going to madlum was deadly) and to "siege" your town. The fort was NATO built and was built in time of war against madlum and there for will stay as only NATO, this will allow us to use our fort in either time of war against you or to help stop the enemy that is trying to get easy access to you. There is no reason to remove the fort unless told to by an admin/ect... it was in our treaty to keep it there and that treaty was signed by the madlum mayor.rens23 @ Jan 2 2011, 03:01 PM wrote: I fully agree but that Barricade wasn't necessarily and most members of madlum want it gone.
I don't get why it was there in first place.
Madlum agreed to live in peace with the other towns but we don't wanna have visitors be intimidated by the giant fort in front around the tunnel.
also there is a really big word hanging in the air: NATO but why isn't there hanging Madlum?
Since we agreed to these terms i believe the barricade needs to be removed, other towns don't get any profit from this thing and its just frustrating us (civilians of Madlum).
Madlum should have stayed an independent and NEUTRAL city as it was intended. I hate that it is part of NATO and I hate more that a symbol of aggression, immorality, mass murder, and oppression remains to forever shadow Madlum.
It is one thing for people to do something wrong and to be prepared for battle, but Madlum was full of easy going people who were just starting out when suddenly a blockade manned by pk'ers full of animosity killed us on sight with dubious reasoning. Our city became our jail as it seemed the whole of Minecraft was out for our blood.
Then our Mayor, who more than likely caused us all this trouble, gets online after a day of grief and without us knowing signs a treaty that not only makes the very symbol of our depression a perminent monument, but forces us to take arms and protect the very people who had sentenced us to condemnation.
This is why this Treaty is wrong and this is why the majority of Madlum's population has fled.