Fallen Fool Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 NpO rolled CIN for recruiting from their ranksMembers of CIN used their positions of leadership and influence within Polar to lure people to a personal pet project which, unless Doppel is secretly Beachaump, makes this an entirely different situation which is clearly not comparable.Classier then NSO... Not really for [OOC]entirely OOC reasons[/OOC]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) As was NSO's original move of recruiting from Neutral Alliances. The pot shouldn't make a habit out of calling the kettle black. We attempted to negotiate the situation as displayed here. Obviously TDO didn't feel that the conversations with us were enough, but instead of waiting for any considerable length of time for Ivan and without exhausting the diplomatic venues open to them, TDO decided to try and force an apology out of us by making veiled military threats and insulting one of our Dark Lords in the process. So, when a TDO member who's alliances sole purpose behind this thread was to try and humiliate us, starts ranting and raving at us, don't expect us to just bend over and take it, because we won't. If someone wants to voice their opinion, be it positive or negative toward the NSO, then let them be free to do so; just have a little maturity when doing so. Edited July 3, 2009 by Hydro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Some of your members have been making great efforts to mend the Network's reputation around this community. You're not doing them any favours. I forgot that the public opinion of our reputation was at the whim of a Polaris foot soldier. Silly me. Beyond which, please elaborate. Edit: We can take this to PM to avoid derailing the thread if you'd like. Edited July 3, 2009 by Style 386 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Why *does* poaching infringe on alliance sovereignty? All it does it possibly remove those members who aren't committed to the alliance. Do alliance leaders think their members aren't smart/informed enough to decide to stay on their own? Should alliance members not be free to leave if they please? Information about their choices limited? Smells like GOONS in here. Agreed, except I'd say it reminds me more of GGA than GOONS. The whole "You may not leave without our permission" thing is more GGA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 And I completely disagree with the notion that the real world has no parallels to Cyber nations; its participants are both human, and thus any action will be the result of human logic and actions. The main difference is, in my opinion, is that the grounds under which you are participating is different (Cybernations pixels versus the world and society), as well as a different set of history to shape the kind of actions that we now practice. [ooc] Except that people, especially minors and those playing a game, tend to act far differently when the biggest thing at stake is a few pixels... not actual human lives including their own... [/ooc] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Serbitar Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 So you're inferring that NPO, NpO, Sparta, etc have rulers in their membership that are not aware that they have other options? Apologies, perhaps other experiences would be a more appropriate way of putting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) What you have to take into account is, some of these players may not be politically active and may not be aware of their options. And out of 700 or so, there are sure to be a few. That doesn't really matter. The point is many of you have called someone who leaves their alliance because of a recruitment message weak. You did not put in exceptions saying this applies only to those who may not be neutral. While I'm sure there are those in neutral alliances who aren't aware of their options and may be interested in joining the world of politics, it really has no effect on those two contradicting statements. EDIT: grammar Edited July 3, 2009 by Matthew Conrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramneta Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Why *does* poaching infringe on alliance sovereignty? All it does it possibly remove those members who aren't committed to the alliance. Do alliance leaders think their members aren't smart/informed enough to decide to stay on their own? Should alliance members not be free to leave if they please? Information about their choices limited? Smells like GOONS in here. I will say this once more. It is not only the recruiting aspect of the message that enraged us. It was the insulting content. Although we view simple recruiting as an aggressive act as well. But not as half as bad as what NSO actually did. Edited July 3, 2009 by ramneta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramneta Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) That doesn't really matter. The point is many of you have called someone who leaves their alliance because of a recruitment message weak. You did not put in exceptions saying this applies only to those who may not be neutral. While I'm sure there are those in neutral alliances who aren't aware of their options and may be interested in joining the world of politics, it really has no effect on those two contradicting statements.EDIT: grammar Our members know their options. I am not aware of anyone leaving as of now. And if they do, Its unlikely they will join NSO. Edited July 3, 2009 by ramneta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torak Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 That doesn't really matter. The point is many of you have called someone who leaves their alliance because of a recruitment message weak. You did not put in exceptions saying this applies only to those who may not be neutral. While I'm sure there are those in neutral alliances who aren't aware of their options and may be interested in joining the world of politics, it really has no effect on those two contradicting statements.EDIT: grammer Correction we called them dishonest and lacking loyalty not weak. Purging our ranks and the world's of weakness is my opinion on how NSO should act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I will say this once more. It is not only the recruiting aspect of the message that enraged us. It was the insulting content. Although we view simple recruiting as an aggressive act as well. But not as half as bad as what NSO actually did. *Why* do you view recruiting as an aggressive act? What's the rationale? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Correction we called them dishonest and lacking loyalty not weak. Purging our ranks and the world's of weakness is my opinion on how NSO should act. This is interesting too. Assuming you are correct and no one in NSO ever explicitly called them weak, are you saying you actively recruited members whom you expected to be dishonest and lacking in loyalty? According to you, those are the main members who would leave to join NSO it would seem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 As originally posted on TDO's forums: I am here for three reasons. One, to acknowledge wrongdoing by the NSO. Two, to acknowledge that we challenged TDO's sovereignty as an alliance. Three, to ensure and let TDO know that this stunt won't ever again be done.I'd like to start off with saying to each member to TDO, it was wrong to send those messages to you. The messages were unwarranted, and you did not deserve the tone in which the messages were written in. The statements and tone were a challenge to your sovereignty. I assure the government of TDO and the members of TDO that this will not happen again and I wish for us to be able to move past this wrongful situation. Yes, you may consider this official. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I'm glad to see that NSO and Ivan admit wrong doing not only in their actions, but in the way they conveyed their message. Glad to see TDO wasa able to resolve this diplomatically Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Alright, lets move on everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warbuck Posted July 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 As originally posted on TDO's forums:Yes, you may consider this official. Thank you for the official apology Voodoo. I'm glad to see that this made it to the boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Alright, lets move on everybody. No kidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramneta Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 *Why* do you view recruiting as an aggressive act? What's the rationale? Because it is an impingement on our sovereignty and just plain out spam. The big question is, how do you feel about other alliances mass recruiting your members? I think you will find an answer there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I forgot that the public opinion of our reputation was at the whim of a Polaris foot soldier. Silly me.Beyond which, please elaborate. Edit: We can take this to PM to avoid derailing the thread if you'd like. It's unseemly when the leader of an alliance (assuming that's still what SecGen means) acts like a tough guy towards randoms on the BBs, especially for an alliance that's been trying hard to regain a lot of lost respect. Feel free to disregard. Whether or not my opinion is indicative of a general feeling towards the ODN is for you to decide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torak Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 This is interesting too. Assuming you are correct and no one in NSO ever explicitly called them weak, are you saying you actively recruited members whom you expected to be dishonest and lacking in loyalty? According to you, those are the main members who would leave to join NSO it would seem. You misunderstand this whole issue is a mere PR stunt. The NSO don't actively recruited members who are dishonest and lacking in loyalty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 As originally posted on TDO's forums:Yes, you may consider this official. I'd like too see an actual apology like they wanted from Ivan Moldavi and Doppleganger... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joracy Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) You misunderstand this whole issue is a mere PR stunt. The NSO don't actively recruited members who are dishonest and lacking in loyalty This is an interesting PR stunt, I must admit. But on that subject, did you not recruit from Karma PoW? Edited July 3, 2009 by joracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coursca Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Move along...move along... Congratulations for coming to a diplomatic solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 You misunderstand this whole issue is a mere PR stunt. The NSO don't actively recruited members who are dishonest and lacking in loyalty I didn't say such. I'm merely pointing out your own statements and assembling them together into a coherent picture. I'm asking you the question, not making statements. Anyways, it seems this issue has been resolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Alright, lets move on everybody. You must be new here. Rule #16: NEVER MOVE ON. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.