ace072199

I wish you the best of luck BRAIN, I am certainly shocked considering the history many of your members and theirs have with each other. Drop by our IRC and chat, I have always thought highly of many of your members and every time I read a post of yours XIAO, I gain even more respect for you (if that is possible) Again, I say good luck!!

[quote name='Natan' timestamp='1299445028' post='2654611'] Xiph is what is wrong with CN, plain and simple. A CN without him is a far brighter world and anyone who thinks different needs to open their eyes. He is the sole member of the upper echelon of alliance leaders trying to carry on the New Pacific Order's old style of play that we all fought so hard with to destroy. [/quote] [quote name='pd73bassman' timestamp='1299461855' post='2654874'] I really have nothing further to add, well said. [/quote] I second this. As for CSN, I don't think they are terrible, Maybe I am wrong but I think the recent issue with DT was the first time CSN has demanded anything as unreasonable as this. Actually, isn't it the first time CSN has demanded reps at all? I knew a lot of the members of CSN from years ago and I know their leader is competent and very intelligent. I am hoping they learn from this and don't make this standard for future wars. Although, I have a feeling if they stick with SF, they wont need to worry about demanding reps.

[quote name='camerontech' timestamp='1299282297' post='2652829'] We've been fighting them for far longer than this current conflict, in fact, we were fighting several alliances at the same time at first since UPN asked their allies for help. Also, we are 2 nations now but we did have higher numbers previously, we can get more members later as well. ps. Hi ace [/quote] Hey camerontech, it's been a while i didn't even think you were still in the game until I saw this post. As for my post it was not really directed at you, it was directed at Fighting UPN and Having flat graphs. I didn't mean to imply that you guys did that as I really have no clue.

[quote name='CptGodzilla' timestamp='1299277588' post='2652755'] when they are facing UPN they are. Destry, keep on fighting [/quote] you mean, when they are fighting UPN who is already outnumbered and outgunned and you choose weak targets, then I guess you are right.

[quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299276913' post='2652745'] Okay, but that would exclude all but the very highest of reparations from your definition of unnecessary. The New Polar Order for example, has the potential to send over 800k in tech in 90 days (granted, that's with unrealistically high participation rates), which is almost three times as much as they currently have. I think most would agree that's somewhat excessive, or "unnecessary" as you put it, but by the standard you proposed here it would be fine. [/quote] For one, if it requires participation by every single member to meet it, I would consider that difficult to pay. For two, I really don't agree with reps at all, but I can see certain instances where reps may be appropriate. 40,000 tech for an alliance of less than 50 is excessive.

[quote name='blueski' timestamp='1299221131' post='2652190'] What's illegitimate and not respectable? As far as I can see Revenge is a group of nations at war, just like your alliance was until it surrendered. They don't need to have a reason that pleases you to go to war, and they don't need to behave in some narrow minded definition of an alliance to be respectable. Hell, I can't fathom why anyone would have a problem with individual nations going to war. The only thing separating Revenge from you is they choose to exist independently, without formal allies. [/quote] GROUP OF NATIONS? They are 2 nations. I am not arguing for or against them, I am just stating a fact.

[quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299209626' post='2651881'] How does that work? If reparations [i]aren't[/i] very high then they don't serve any practical purpose, and are thus unnecessary. In a practical sense only high reparations can possibly be considered necessary. [/quote] Ok, I should reword that, rather than Extremely high, I should have said unreasonably high. By unreasonably high, I mean reps that would be difficult for the alliance to pay within a reasonable amount of time, say 90 days.

this has always been my way, so not really different for me, but i would love to see others follow this.

[quote]2. They want to look tough so no one will mess with them. They won a battle and think that if they throw in some reps people won't want to fight out of fear of the same treatment. This is again making up for what they lack in other areas. They think they are projecting strength when in reality they are showing just how weak they are. 3. They want to cripple the losing alliance. Well this just outright shows fear and weakness. It may be the "smart" thing to do but it certainly is the scared and paranoid thing to do.[/quote] I think these are the 2 reasons certain alliances (I will leave unnamed) demand reps. I am not going to go into detail on whether i think it is right or wrong. I Think reps are unnecessary especially if they are extremely high.

good luck exodus, I hope everything works out for you

[quote name='CptGodzilla' timestamp='1299194535' post='2651613'] Sorry, but USN humiliates themselves every day they exist [/quote] You humiliate yourself every time you post

Congrats on peace

Congrats on PEACE!!

Congratulations on the new Government UPN!!!

Congratulation UoU, You have joined an excellent BLOC.

[quote name='welshgazza1992' timestamp='1298550237' post='2643775'] Yes, We were at war. I do not hate somebody for the past actions of my/their alliance. I am judging them on what is happening today, and with this war, I hope that they win. I don't mindlessly hail alliances just because my allies happen to be allies with their allies... or something similar.[img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img] secondly, Why does it always have to be about "Ragnarok"? I have no official position in RoK. So why can't my opinion be taken for that, my own? why do you assume it is what RoK is thinking? [/quote] He has a point, individual nations have a mind of their own, just because he is routing for NSO, does not mean that the whole alliance has to have the same view.

Congrats, and good luck! I hope to see your 1 year celebration!

Good luck Wu, I know what you are going through to a point.

Congratulations!!!

Congratulations and good luck to those elected

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1298335253' post='2641134'] As far as I know, someone brought up the logs in our public channel and began making a fuss out of it. Sorry if the announcement wasn't super serious and professional for your standards. [/quote] I think all he was saying is that it appears as the the original post was made to create a reaction about the CSN/DT Issue. Which is understandable, that was the impression I got as well. Edit: typo

[quote name='Sir Humphrey' timestamp='1298296628' post='2640588'] It's a bit rich to blame the 'peanut gallery', or to assert that this should be an acknowledgement of hard working members of CSN, when CSN deliberately designs its announcement with reference to the CSN/DT drama to provoke a reaction. [/quote] I was thinking the same thing!!!

[quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1298316148' post='2640824'] You get to pick them. Rerolling resources would be more applicable to SE though. [/quote] Not only do you get to pick them, you can change them every 7 days if I read that correctly.

Congrats to those elected!!!

Good luck Gotham