Well I decided I would make this one. Vote your opinion, you don't have to post and argue, but I'm not saying its not allowed.

Look at sig.

You forgot the "I hope they blow each other up" option.

I don't care.

So yeah, I'm an !@#$%^&?

I will admit, I voted neither. I don't have time to support anyone as I am too busy eating popcorn.

CG all the way, baby.

yay CG. <333

This.

Neither. Both must burn.

You don't have to work hard to guess my opinion.

well, seeing as lolpink is lolpink, I voted IS. No, just kidding, CG even though Hell Scream is a pain in the $@! sometimes .

Crappy raiders vs Attention whores.

CRIPPLE FIGHT!

I don't like anyone in CG, though two of those people have already left, on the other hand I feel a small amount of support for IS, purely because to me, it seems like people are mindlessly supporting the underdog or just have some problem with IS.
This was basically a tech raid like any other, and all of a sudden there is this incredible moral outrage people feel about it? It seems to me at least, that since Karma arose, along with vocal supporters painting the hegemony as pure evil bringing everyone together to fight evil, everyone is just trying to paint each other as the next big evil entity on planet bob, and everyone wants to throw themselves out there as moral crusaders for good, or maybe justice.

And no, I have no idea why i was putting that in italics.

yes, because obviously if people support someone YOU don't like, then it is just mindless supporting. And having a problem with IS could very well be the reason but it seems you don't support CG because you do not like them and have problems with CG...... but please continue showing your hypocrisy.

As for it being a tech raid, does it truly matter? seriously, IS attacked the entire alliance. raid or not, it is still a DoW that does not need to be taken lightly. Most alliances do not tend to attack an entire alliance for just a tech raid. And obviously, IS was fundamentally wrong in the amount of friends that CG actually has.

but yes, continue to paint IS as some idyllic and smart alliance.......

I'm not really showing any hypocrisy... Anyway, in the threads that have spewed forth from this issue, everyone and their dog are just following the crowd's general opinion, voicing whatever everyone else does. These days when one small group is up against a large group, almost always everyone will support the small group, very vocally as well, for example rebel Virginia against sparta, against the Family and also GDI against the Family.
Pre-NoCB war, if a small alliance did anything the large alliance members would harass them and troll them and follow exactly what we are seeing today except in the opposite direction. I would know, because I was in a small alliance back then, most announcements we made were trolled for no reason.

This is mindless supporting, everyone just suddenly changed their views on the world? I don't really think so, people are just tooting each others horns. This is what annoys me, people shouldn't be walking around as sheep here. Nothing to do with my personal opinion of CG.




Like above, if this happened pre-NoCB war, public opinion would be totally different, so does that change how fundamentally right or wrong they are? I don't really care to be honest.
Also, I never painted IS as anything, I stated my disdain with the people swaying their stance on everything the moment it benefits them more or shows them in a better light.

CG, has been a victim of an unprovoked and unwarranted attack. I think it's obvious where my support lies. Even if atm its only moral support.

Thank you to the 7 other voters [at the time of my post] who decided to vote for Internet Superheroes.

Obviously I'm going to support my alliance because indeed I am a member of this alliance.

See, the funny thing about the "Immoral" sigs is that yesterday I indeed made a statement claiming that my alliance was not lulz, but in fact Immoral. On these very forums, I proved this point.

Putting "Pink/IS is immoral, sig if you're down" is just like putting "NPO stands for New Pacific Order, sig if you're down". There's no point to be made.

Depends on how you veiw it.

Pink is neat.

These polls fail, but I still gotta go with CG.

I find IS despicable.

CG, but not because I have any problem with raiding. What I do have a problem with is that IS used spy attacks, bombers, and CMs violating every established rule of raiding etiquette. I raid, but I always just hit with GAs and send peace launching other attacks that just cause shows this wasn't a raid, but an unprovoked war without a DoW. Now it's clear that IS was the aggressor and did not even have the courtesy of offering a CB (however weak it may/may not have been).

It's up to the raider, or the raider's alliance if they have one, to determine the etiquette required.

I for one very nearly bought the MP this month purely to raid people in my NS range and nuke them whilst I was at it. I don't care that nuking them eradicates tech that I can steal.

What I don't understand, is why everyone is labeling an entire sphere immoral lately? There are more people than IS on that sphere, or even RAD.

So you are blanketly telling everyone here that ANYONE on that sphere is immoral and you don't like them? Sounds childish to me.

On the other hand, this war is just stupid. So people aren't using their heads too much I suppose.

Because it's pink. Pink is always immoral. Obviously.

Seriously though, it's an exercise in absurdism.

It's humor. Learn it. Breath it. Live it.


What does a (in my opinion) absurd philosophy one step away from existentialism and nihilism have anything to do with this?

sigged

Perhaps I worded the poll wrong, but its too late to change a handful of votes.

The "pink is immoral" thing is essentially meaningless. People getting bent over it adds the laughs.

NPO stands for New Pink Order, sig if your down

It's the only logical conclusion.
NPO=immoral
Pink=immoral
therefore,
NPO=Pink

Transitive Property ftw!


icwutudidthar

I'm going to have to go with this answer

Obviously I voted for IS.

This was a pretty easy choice. CG

You know, it was a hard decision until I looked at my sig, and then the decision became clear to me.

It's teh interwebz. Absurdity is OK sometimes. Especially if it's sigs.

But if this sort of raiding/warring happens to CG (who I had become friendly with during Baseballergate), it's going to happen to someone else in the future. I can't sit back while people do it.

I think you're on to something here, but for one thing, that's nothing new. People have always painted themselves as honorable defenders of justice/peace/order/freedom/etc, and painted their foes as evil aggressors. Sometimes sincerely, sometimes not. That said, I'm not sure that's the main reason people support CG. For one thing, CMs and bombers on a raid, especially against a 15-man alliance, is gonna get you some flak no matter who you are. For another, IS have a history of going out of their way to be jackasses. Some people pull a jackass move every once in a while, others try to do it as much as possible. I think a lot of people wouldn't care quite as much if someone without such a history were to do this. But people view this as par for the course for IS. It's not a case of someone pulling one jackass move, it's just one in a long series for IS. So yes, I do think that people are more outraged because it's IS... But with good reason. They've shown that this sort of thing is how they roll, not just an anomaly.

-Bama

I think Hellscream is the man, so my hat goes to supporting CG

My sig reflects my opinion.

Pink is immoral. End of Story.

Nah, I'm just not a fan of a lot of their alliances. I'm more against IS than pink sphere.

Raiding is by it's very nature an attack meant to steal items, an attack meant to destroy the targets nation is not a raid, it is a war. War itself is fine, but should always come with a declaration of purpose or intent.
[OOC]When you bust open a bank and take the money you are a thief, set a series of car bombs which kill hundreds of people and then rob the bank during the commotion you are a terrorist.[OOC]
Quite simply you are a douchebag, and if you want to just destroy stuff admit it and don't hide behind terms like raiding, because that sure isn't what IS is doing, nor what your are/were planning to do.

Heh, I've always been a big fan of this view: do whatever you want, but don't try to kid yourself or anyone else about what you're doing. Wanna go into a nation, tanks rolling and guns blazing, stealing their tech, land, and money? Fine, good for you, blah blah blah. It's your life, it's a free world, all that stuff. But trying to dress it up as anything less than a violent act of war is laughable.

BURN IS AT THE STAKE! IMMORALITY SHALL NOT GO UNPUNISHED!

So basic tech raids have to be accepted by those being raided because they are basic raids?

So if everyone decides to tech raid you and your alliance you will just accept the "Tech Raid Peace Sent"????
Or will you put up a fight?

By that logic, the sanctioned alliances can tech raid each other and they have to accept the "Tech Raid Peace Sent"????
Or will they put up a fight?

If you tech raid someone, you should expect them to fight back, but not bawwwwwww about it. And no, most alliances have rules on tech raiding to prevent getting rolled. CG fits into IS's, it just happens.

Except that they used more than GA's, thus nullifying the term "tech raid".

To be honest, I couldn't care less.

My foreign affairs encounter with IS was...less than pleasant. So CG in this case.

I don't use CMs and air attacks in raids, unless I need to improve the odds a little. It's still a raid either way.

CM's and air raids are one thing, I can understand that. Spying away nukes and naval attacks though?

Just because your primary goal is raiding doesn't mean you can't be a little sadistic.