This is where I stand (H/C war)

Yes...that is true, but we can also glean at least something from the language and the definitions behind the words chosen, can we not? (I mean...that's not going too far out on a limb, right?)

NAP = Non Aggression Pact  implies one "level" of relationship

while

"Confederation" implies quite something else (these, woven into the very fabric of the words chosen to represent them).

Sure...you could call that splitting hairs I guess, but there's some mighty important distinctions that live between those two sets of carefully chosen words, and the devil is always in the details.

Always.

That's why (strictly IMO) you guys get dinged so regularly here, and diplomatically.  

Because in the public arena, words are important.

Sure, sure...you can play as a military alliance.  You can ignore diplo, but IF you do, then it should come as no great surprise when you get dinged....kinda like you are now by in about a dozen different threads.

Believe me, I don't mention this to stir the pot or to cause trouble...as I said from the start, I only wanna better understand the mindset, cos it is very different from my own.  But I do enjoy diplomacy, and I understand the metagame.  In the above, I'm simply pointing out that TO YOU, the two (NAP vs Confed) might be no different in your mind.

But this does not hold true consistently, even within your own ranks (large groups of people kept intentionally in the dark about the true extent and nature of "friendships" as evidenced and supported by several H? posts in this very thread, for example)....so, while you personally might not find much difference between the two, I think it does not put me far out on a limb to say that your opinion is not universally held, and the space between the two explains much (but not all) of the reason you guys seem to struggle in the diplomatic arena, and it's cool.  It's understandable.

By your own admission, it's not something you care about, so it naturally follows that you wouldn't be top notch at it.  $0.02

Much appreciate the reply, HM...thank you.

Out of curiosity, how do you wish he would have handled it?  - He found out that the alliance wasn't what he thought it was, he voiced his dissent, and now, is leaving.

What would you have had him do in place of those things?  (Edit:  Bearing in mind that we've already established that this isn't "just a game" and that this issue, taking place in full public view, was obviously something very important to him, and therefore, also likely to unfold in full view of the public--this isn't something that was ever going to go away in a series of quiet, backroom conversations, I don't think...not based on how much is already in the public eye)

~Scribe