Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (3) 1 2 [3]   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Reorganizing the pre-WW2 military section
Carol I
Posted: June 28, 2005 08:14 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2250
Member No.: 136
Joined: November 06, 2003



QUOTE (Dénes @ Jun 27 2005, 10:45 PM)
FYI, I would have objected to any other term used in English for W.W. 1, other than W.W. 1...

This same war is also known in English as "The Great War" or as "The Great War for Civilisation".
PM
Top
Agarici
Posted: June 28, 2005 10:16 pm
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 742
Member No.: 522
Joined: February 24, 2005



I would personally opt for WW 1 formula. I think that for the foreign visitors the content of the topic should enlighten them about the particularities of the Romanian involvement in WW 1. The National Reunification War variant is quite new and seems unusual…
For my suggestion about the reorganization of this section of the forum (a new project) take a look here: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=2253
PMEmail Poster
Top
Victor
Posted: July 05, 2005 06:11 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4332
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



The reorganization is done. Hope I didn't leave anything behind.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
dragos03
Posted: July 05, 2005 06:16 pm
Quote Post


Capitan
*

Group: Members
Posts: 641
Member No.: 163
Joined: December 13, 2003



Why did you choose the "WW1" version? The poll ended with a draw.

I voted for the other variant and i think the solution is unfair.
PM
Top
Imperialist
Posted: July 05, 2005 06:36 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2399
Member No.: 499
Joined: February 09, 2005



QUOTE (dragos03 @ Jul 5 2005, 06:16 PM)
Why did you choose the "WW1" version? The poll ended with a draw.

I voted for the other variant and i think the solution is unfair.

I dont think the poll is even closed...!
Only 20 people voted... thats roughly 3,3% of the members.
PM
Top
Victor
Posted: July 05, 2005 06:46 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4332
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (dragos03 @ Jul 5 2005, 08:16 PM)
Why did you choose the "WW1" version? The poll ended with a draw.

I voted for the other variant and i think the solution is unfair.

Read Dragos' post on the first page of this topic, dated Jun 27 2005, 07:07 PM.

The issue of the "National Reunification War" vs. WW1 was never meant to be in the title of the forum, but in the comments section. I left the comments section of that forum empty, until a conclusion in that poll can be reached.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
dragos03
Posted: July 05, 2005 07:07 pm
Quote Post


Capitan
*

Group: Members
Posts: 641
Member No.: 163
Joined: December 13, 2003



Ok, that sounds fair.
PM
Top
Imperialist
Posted: July 05, 2005 07:20 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2399
Member No.: 499
Joined: February 09, 2005



QUOTE (Victor @ Jul 5 2005, 06:46 PM)

Read Dragos' post on the first page of this topic, dated Jun 27 2005, 07:07 PM.

The issue of the "National Reunification War" vs. WW1 was never meant to be in the title of the forum, but in the comments section. I left the comments section of that forum empty, until a conclusion in that poll can be reached.

Yes, it was meant to be in the subtitle.
So the poll is still open, right? Could it still be introduced as subtitle?

Dragos wrote:

QUOTE
WW1 and Regional Wars (1912-1919)
Romanian Army in the Balkan Wars (1912-1913) and in the National Reunification War (1916-1919)



PM
Top
Dénes
Posted: July 05, 2005 07:30 pm
Quote Post


Host
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 4347
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



QUOTE (dragos03 @ Jul 6 2005, 12:16 AM)
Why did you choose the "WW1" version? The poll ended with a draw.

I voted for the other variant and i think the solution is unfair.

The poll's result, as currently is, is irrelevant, as in any context a sizeable number of participants must vote in order the result to have any statistical relevance. In a national referendum, for example, a certain percentage of persons eligible to vote must cast their votes in order the refrendum to be valid. This percentage is set usually between 25-50%. Over here, even 10% would be acceptable, I think. Moreover, a deadline is usually set, as well.

Many forumites are simply not interested in this forced poll thing (myself included, that's why I did not vote). I believe Victor also voiced his pro-W.W. 1 opinion and probably he didn't vote either. And so on...

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on July 05, 2005 07:31 pm
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
dragos
Posted: July 05, 2005 08:25 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



I have introduced the complete formula of "the War for Liberation and National Reunification"
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Victor
Posted: July 06, 2005 04:44 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4332
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



Liberation? What Liberation? :blink:

Why not wait for the poll to reach a conclusion? So far it seems there are 11 against and 10 pro.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
MaxFax
  Posted: July 06, 2005 06:25 am
Quote Post


Plutonier
*

Group: Members
Posts: 255
Member No.: 7
Joined: June 18, 2003



QUOTE (Dénes @ Jul 5 2005, 09:30 PM)
Many forumites are simply not interested in this forced poll thing (myself included, that's why I did not vote).

Gen. Dénes

Forced thing? :unsure:
Do I feel (again?) a kind of tendentiousness here?! ;)
I see it more like a democratic option to have an idea about the members’ opinion.
Well, till now it wasn’t too helpful …
PM
Top
dragos
Posted: July 06, 2005 08:44 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (Victor @ Jul 6 2005, 07:44 AM)
Liberation? What Liberation?  :blink:
QUOTE
Romania, prin hotararea Consiliului de Coroana de la Sinaia, din 21 iulie /3 august 1914 se declara neutra, o neutralitate armata, sub forma „espectativei cu apararea frontierelor", in pofida insistentei regelui Carol I, sustinut de liderul conservator P. P. Carp, ca Romania sa se alature Puterilor Centrale, potrivit tratatului special de alianta din 1883,. Premierul I. I. C. Bratianu a insistat pe faptul ca tratatul nu obliga Romania sa participe la conflict, intru cat nu alianta era atacata ci un membru al ei, Austro-Ungaria, era agresorul. Mentalitatea a fost aprobata de toate fortele politice ca o solutie de moment. Refuzul de a intra in razboi alaturi de Puterile Centrale reprezenta pozitia oficiala a detasarii politice a Romaniei de acestea, incluzand totodata optiunea ce viza eliberarea teritoriilor romanesti anexate Austro-Ungariei. Hotararea Romaniei a fost primita cu satisfactie de romanii din Transilvani si Bucovina care nu ar fi putut accepta o alianta a patriei mama cu stapanitorii lor vremelnici. Toata perioada de neutralitate va fi dominata de miscarea pentru realizarea eliberarii nationale.
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Imperialist
Posted: July 06, 2005 10:00 am
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2399
Member No.: 499
Joined: February 09, 2005



QUOTE (dragos @ Jul 5 2005, 08:25 PM)
I have introduced the complete formula of "the War for Liberation and National Reunification"

Thank you Dragos.
PM
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (3) 1 2 [3]  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0392 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]