Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: SLCB Harboring Rogues?
Cyber Nations Forums > Cyber Nations Gameplay and Roleplay > Open World RP > Alliance Announcements (IC)
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
Jorost
A few days ago, member nation Kurtopotamia of Seaworthy Liberian Cardboard Boxes (SLCB) launched an unprovoked attack on two Invicta nations. Well, maybe "unprovoked" is not the right word. Certainly Invicta didn't take any military action against SLCB. But, to be fair, our alliance and our Purple Unity brothers did have the temerity to unseat the Stickmen senator, Michiel de Ruyter. So I can see how that might have made Stickmen member SLCB feel a little threatened.

But, to be fair, SLCB carefully and painstakingly looked into the matter. I know they must have done so carefully and painstakingly because of how much time it took them to figure out what was going on. Now, someone might very well suggest that more than 24 hours to establish that a member had gone rogue borders on dithering. Someone might very well suggest that. But I would never say such a thing. smile.gif

But, finally, it was established that Kurtopotamia had not acted with the support of the SLCB government or their allies. It was a pretty straightforward matter of a member who had gone rogue. Easy. We've all been there. Member goes rogue; member is reprimanded and ordered to stand down; member either does so or is ejected from the alliance to be dealt with as the victim's alliance sees fit; and, of course, member is expected to pay reps. These are pretty established procedures between alliances when a member has gone rogue. Easy, like I said. Right?

Well, apparently not. Apparently SLCB has taken it upon themselves to decide that their member – whom they concede was in the wrong by going rogue – does not owe any reps at all:

QUOTE
<Matt-Shovel[SLCB]> Well, sorry, but we aren't paying reps.


QUOTE
<ogodai> Well, we aren't going to pay - with regards to that, my apologies.
<Waltar|Invicta> We've come to a reps number too.
<ogodai> Hooray
<Waltar|Invicta> Yep. As Imentioned to Matt, we're looking for 3m for each nation at Invicta that he attacked.
<Waltar|Invicta> Figure that's fair.
<ogodai> It certainly SOUNDS fair
<ogodai> Well, very sorry.


So, SLCB admits that their member went rogue, and that the reps requested (a paltry $3M for each of the two victims) are fair, but they refuse to pay it. And they continue to harbor the rogue.

Hmm.

You know, someone might very well suggest that such a scenario would be an excellent way to goad an alliance into starting a war. Yes, indeed. Someone might very well suggest that. But of course I would never say such a thing. smile.gif Besides, who would be dumb enough to fall for such a hamfisted ploy?

Certainly not us.
Penlugue Solaris
QUOTE (Jorost @ Oct 28 2009, 11:32 PM) *
A few days ago, member nation Kurtopotamia of Seaworthy Liberian Cardboard Boxes (SLCB) launched an unprovoked attack on two Invicta nations. Well, maybe "unprovoked" is not the right word. Certainly Invicta didn't take any military action against SLCB. But, to be fair, our alliance and our Purple Unity brothers did have the temerity to unseat the Stickmen senator, Michiel de Ruyter. So I can see how that might have made Stickmen member SLCB feel a little threatened.

But, to be fair, SLCB carefully and painstakingly looked into the matter. I know they must have done so carefully and painstakingly because of how much time it took them to figure out what was going on. Now, someone might very well suggest that more than 24 hours to establish that a member had gone rogue borders on dithering. Someone might very well suggest that. But I would never say such a thing. smile.gif

But, finally, it was established that Kurtopotamia had not acted with the support of the SLCB government or their allies. It was a pretty straightforward matter of a member who had gone rogue. Easy. We've all been there. Member goes rogue; member is reprimanded and ordered to stand down; member either does so or is ejected from the alliance to be dealt with as the victim's alliance sees fit; and, of course, member is expected to pay reps. These are pretty established procedures between alliances when a member has gone rogue. Easy, like I said. Right?

Well, apparently not. Apparently SLCB has taken it upon themselves to decide that their member – whom they concede was in the wrong by going rogue – does not owe any reps at all:





So, SLCB admits that their member went rogue, and that the reps requested (a paltry $3M for each of the two victims) are fair, but they refuse to pay it. And they continue to harbor the rogue.

Hmm.

You know, someone might very well suggest that such a scenario would be an excellent way to goad an alliance into starting a war. Yes, indeed. Someone might very well suggest that. But of course I would never say such a thing. smile.gif Besides, who would be dumb enough to fall for such a hamfisted ploy?

Certainly not us.

Talk to Waltar please.
AlmightyGrub
Interesting times. One can only wonder where this leads?
USMC123
I would have DoWed. Just sayin'

EDIT: Does this mean you are giving into SLCB?
Epiphanus
I'm not sure this post was the best course of action.
Sandwich Controversy
This announcement was not a good idea.
Heracles the Great
Well this has been an interesting evening...
Penlugue Solaris
SLCB, pathetic move. I may not like Invicta, but they do not deserve this treatment.
King Hobbs
QUOTE (USMC123 @ Oct 28 2009, 10:35 PM) *
I would have DoWed. Just sayin'

EDIT: Does this mean you are giving into SLCB?


We are nice people. We dont need to DoW over one small insignificant rogue!


... biggrin.gif
Shovel
Yes, because 3 million per nation for what amounts to a total of a couple of thousand is totally reasonable.
Arrnea
Unsurprising. Especially since you spoke to Shovel and ogodai, of all people.
darkfox
It is a sad thing to see something so routine as paying reps for an unauthorized attack fail. I hope you guys work things out.
Willaim Kreiger
QUOTE (Sandwich Controversy @ Oct 28 2009, 10:36 PM) *
This announcement was not a good idea.

I don't really see why. Politics and all that.
imbored24470
QUOTE
Now, someone might very well suggest that more than 24 hours to establish that a member had gone rogue borders on dithering. Someone might very well suggest that. But I would never say such a thing.


Because of that statement you more or less just did.
Stumpy Jung Il
This was a very bad call. Seriously, this is ridiculously dumb.
GopDrager
tldr: We're pushovers, please walk all over us? Also, really, its sad on your part you had to rally the votes to get that seat back, not something you should be proud of.
xR1 Fatal Instinct
o/ Jorost

I know the whole not paying reps deal. (cause for my ZI) Whatever SLCB has coming for them they deserve it.
scythegfx
Welp, good luck with that.

But did you really expect them to do the right thing?

"It's fun, It's fun to do bad things"
rsoxbronco1
Invicta afraid of war?

No doubt SLCB is operating under some...uh...interesting rules of diplomacy (and by that I mean completely dickish), but this really does come off as posturing to me. It's not like the OWF is going to physically force SLCB to pay reps.
Mr Damsky
And relations between Stickmen and Poseidon further deteriorate.

G'luck Invicta

cool.gif
Willaim Kreiger
QUOTE (imbored24470 @ Oct 28 2009, 10:39 PM) *
Because of that statement you more or less just did.

Really, you caught up on that?
tamerlane
When I want something done, I go straight to the forums and post my complaint!
AlmightyGrub
QUOTE (Sandwich Controversy @ Oct 29 2009, 01:36 PM) *
This announcement was not a good idea.


Private channels FTW?
Penlugue Solaris
QUOTE (Stumpy Jung Il @ Oct 28 2009, 11:39 PM) *
This was a very bad call. Seriously, this is ridiculously dumb.

Not really sure why, at all. They are making public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.
wickedj
missing some facts..

NS of the rogue/nations hit? damage done? reps being asked for
MagicalTrevor
I really hope that SLCB get rolled but purple dont, just because i dislike them as an alliance and it'd be funny as hell to watch... In fact ...

*MT goes to backchannels*
Delta1212
I'm confused as to the objective of this announcement.
Van Hoo III
Wait, is SLCB refusing to pay reps at all? Or are they saying the amount is too high?

Lord Boris
QUOTE (Van Hoo III @ Oct 28 2009, 10:42 PM) *
Wait, is SLCB refusing to pay reps at all? Or are they saying the amount is too high?


It read like outright refusal.
imbored24470
QUOTE (xR1 Fatal Instinct @ Oct 28 2009, 09:40 PM) *
o/ Jorost

I know the whole not paying reps deal. (cause for my ZI) Whatever SLCB has coming for them they deserve it.

So.. we deserve nothing?

QUOTE (Willaim Kreiger @ Oct 28 2009, 09:40 PM) *
Really, you caught up on that?

Just stating something.

QUOTE (wickedj @ Oct 28 2009, 09:40 PM) *
missing some facts..

NS of the rogue/nations hit? damage done? reps being asked for

Rogue was around 5k. I assume the other nations were similar
Penlugue Solaris
QUOTE (wickedj @ Oct 28 2009, 11:40 PM) *
missing some facts..

NS of the rogue/nations hit? damage done? reps being asked for

5,000 NS. Reps being asked for, the damage done. Damage done, to be calculated. SLCB has stated no reps will be paid.

QUOTE (Delta1212 @ Oct 28 2009, 11:42 PM) *
I'm confused as to the objective of this announcement.

To show the public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.
Boogeyman657
So, I was told that the stupid is about to begin. So this thread caught my interests.
ni431
I'm confused
Stumpy Jung Il
QUOTE (Penlugue Solaris @ Oct 28 2009, 11:40 PM) *
Not really sure why, at all. They are making public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.

6 million is way more than damages done, just sayin. Also, this doesn't do anything but strengthen the resolve of the people they just called out publicly. Its just a idiotic move.
AlmightyGrub
QUOTE (ni431 @ Oct 29 2009, 01:43 PM) *
I'm confused


I am not surprised.
Delta1212
QUOTE (Penlugue Solaris @ Oct 28 2009, 11:43 PM) *
To show the public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.

Well, yes, obviously, but I'm still not entirely sure what that accomplishes.
tamerlane
QUOTE (MagicalTrevor @ Oct 29 2009, 03:41 AM) *
I really hope that SLCB get rolled but purple dont, just because i dislike them as an alliance and it'd be funny as hell to watch... In fact ...

*MT goes to backchannels*



Comments like these are why we keep you in a cage, LHT.

QUOTE (Penlugue Solaris @ Oct 29 2009, 03:40 AM)
Not really sure why, at all. They are making public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.


Because going public shows a serious lack of fortitude and class. In fact, it makes you look kinda like a !@#$%*. Especially over a molehill like this one.
imbored24470
QUOTE (Van Hoo III @ Oct 28 2009, 09:42 PM) *
Wait, is SLCB refusing to pay reps at all? Or are they saying the amount is too high?



QUOTE (Lord Boris @ Oct 28 2009, 09:43 PM) *
It read like outright refusal.

Isn't it cool when people don't post full logs?

SLCB said we weren't paying 3mil per nation for what was worth far less.
Waltar
QUOTE (Penlugue Solaris @ Oct 28 2009, 11:34 PM) *
Talk to Waltar please.


About what?

We will not be going to war, even though there has been plenty of speculation. All we'd like to get is our fair share of reps from the attacker - the same as iFOK had asked of us when one of our guys had aided a tech raid target of theirs (in case you didn't notice, the fellow who did that left the alliance and spent about 700m instead fighting them) - with the exception of the reps being considerably less.

What I don't understand is why they sent the 3m to Legion (just found this out) and didn't talk with us about it when I was actively trying to pursue communications with them. And why I had to find out from a third party that the reps were paid to Legion to begin with.
Stumpy Jung Il
QUOTE (tamerlane @ Oct 28 2009, 11:45 PM) *
Comments like these are why we keep you in a cage, LHT.



Because going public shows a serious lack of fortitude and class. In fact, it makes you look kinda like a !@#$%*.

That was well said. To both comments.
Lennox
QUOTE (Shovel @ Oct 28 2009, 11:38 PM) *
Yes, because 3 million per nation for what amounts to a total of a couple of thousand is totally reasonable.


I don't think it was so much the amount, as the fact you refused to pay reps altogether.
scythegfx
QUOTE (Stumpy Jung Il @ Oct 28 2009, 11:44 PM) *
6 million is way more than damages done, just sayin. Also, this doesn't do anything but strengthen the resolve of the people they just called out publicly. Its just a idiotic move.


And 9 million was way more than the damage done buy the tech raid target AMonra aided managed to do.
wickedj
QUOTE (Penlugue Solaris @ Oct 28 2009, 11:43 PM) *
5,000 NS. Reps being asked for, the damage done. Damage done, to be calculated. SLCB has stated no reps will be paid.


To show the public the ridiculous actions of SLCB.

5k NS nations can do 6 million in damage? shoot im 75k and i dont think i can do 6 million in two days of attacks
Penlugue Solaris
QUOTE (Stumpy Jung Il @ Oct 28 2009, 11:44 PM) *
6 million is way more than damages done, just sayin. Also, this doesn't do anything but strengthen the resolve of the people they just called out publicly. Its just a idiotic move.

6 million is no longer what Invicta wishes to receive. that was the original statement of Invicta, however in talks held with them Waltar has stated that the damage done would be acceptable to them.


QUOTE (Delta1212 @ Oct 28 2009, 11:44 PM) *
Well, yes, obviously, but I'm still not entirely sure what that accomplishes.

Hopefully get SLCB to back off their stupidity.
Mundokiir
Halloween is making this thread difficult sometimes.

Also, delightful thread.
i surge i
SLCB i expected better from you guys
draov
QUOTE (Van Hoo III @ Oct 28 2009, 10:42 PM) *
Wait, is SLCB refusing to pay reps at all? Or are they saying the amount is too high?



Reps are considerably high compared to damage done
Donnerjack
This is IC. Going to Alliance Announcements.
Mamazlilmistake
QUOTE
No doubt SLCB is operating under some...uh...interesting rules of diplomacy (and by that I mean completely dickish), but this really does come off as posturing to me. It's not like the OWF is going to physically force SLCB to pay reps.


speak for yer self. PAY REPS NOW SLCB. Or fear the wrath of an angry non binding letter of dislike from the OWF!

Shovel
QUOTE (Waltar @ Oct 29 2009, 03:45 AM) *
About what?

We will not be going to war, even though there has been plenty of speculation. All we'd like to get is our fair share of reps from the attacker - the same as iFOK had asked of us when one of our guys had aided a tech raid target of theirs (in case you didn't notice, the fellow who did that left the alliance and spent about 700m instead fighting them) - with the exception of the reps being considerably less.

What I don't understand is why they sent the 3m to Legion (just found this out) and didn't talk with us about it when I was actively trying to pursue communications with them. And why I had to find out from a third party that the reps were paid to Legion to begin with.


Because we are iFOK?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.