Kzin and Feds are allies. They can do whatever they want regarding base placement without any advisory assistance from the Klingons.
Saying the Feds cannot place a base in Kzin base and vice versa in allied territory is tantamount to saying that the US could not place bases in the UK during WW2. Saying that the Germans had to invade the UK first before the US can place a base there is ludricrous in the extreme. Same goes for, saying the Feds cannot place a base in Kzin space unless the Klingons took it first.
Churchill to FDR: "We would dearly like you to base the 8th Air force in the England and base a big US army in Surrey so we can invade Normandy soon. BUT, we have to persuade that bad, bad, man with the mustache to coduct Operation Sealion first and invade us. Then you can go take that UK despoiled land back and use it for your base."
German OKW: "Damn Right!! ZAT!! *snicker*. Now, vere is zat map of Russia. We have no worries about a 2nd front, hehe".
Your misplaced, though somewhat comical diatribe aside, that isn't what I said at all, Karnak.
I was talking about failing missions on a base to flip it neutral so it could be turned to the allied race's side. To my knowledge, this hasn't really been addressed directly in some time. I mentioned that I think both sides probably do a little of this when a freshly captured asset "turns the wrong color." However, I don't believe anyone has specificly run down a starting asset so it could be turned over to an ally since way back in the old CW fun servers (before your time). This is what I understood was being discussed.
I was merely suggesting a possible snippet of language that would perhaps help us formalize a rule. I wasn't looking to dictate anything.
I
never said anything about
placing bases. Obviously, that can be done anywhere pursuant to the rules currently in force.
I've always been on record as believing allies should be able to fully cooperate with each other. That's why I felt like the incident on CW5 was poorly resolved.