RailForge

Thanks. The error has cleared. Trade request sent.

The error message is unchanged. What should Oranges and I do?

Here's the error message screenshot taken minutes ago: This may be the most comprehensive list of IPv4 netblocks that our ISP uses: https://www.ip2location.com/as4764 - It doesn't split up the large netblocks into multiple smaller ones for no good reason. So, the netblock list is much shorter than others, but perhaps larger in range and definitely cleaner. Peering info for AS4764 https://www.peeringdb.com/asn/4764

It turns out that the other player, Oranges, does use the same ISP, Aussie Broadband. We're about 5,000km from each other. There's no chance that we've shared a local network. Is our ISP's CGNAT the culprit here? What should we do going forward?

My Nation: https://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=208497 Potential Trade Partner: https://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=543110 Error message: This trade agreement would result in a potential rule violation due to accounts on the same network and is not allowed at this time. Code #2 Despite being in the same alliance, we've never interacted before (I'm relatively new to the alliance). I've reached out to the other player, and we both live in Australia, but thousands of miles apart in different states. Is it possible to clear this "same network" error? Is it likely to recur? Their nation is going to be a long term trade partner, but if we're likely to be flagged again in future, then should I look elsewhere for a trade? My ISP uses CGNAT (shared public IP addresses for many users due to limited IPv4 space). I don't know if the other player uses the same ISP (haven't confirmed that, yet!). Is CGNAT going to cause network rule violations to be flagged against anyone else on the same ISP? https://www.aussiebroadband.com.au/blog/what-is-cgnat/ <-- My ISP

Enjoy your retirement, Impero. It's the end of an era. You'll be missed.

Regarding this rule: [quote]You will never be allowed to aid, trade, or war with/along side of the nation you sit again.[/quote] Can we aid/receive aid from the same 3rd party nation? The example I have in mind: A nation sitter and a sat nation who both buy tech from the same tech seller.

[quote name='K1L1On1Mr4' timestamp='1323841482' post='2877417'] Even tough i'm on the other side, i shall give my morale support for my old friends on GOD. Keep fighting dudes [/quote] K1L1O! It's good to see you still kicking around. Your name comes up occasionally when we get to talking about good ex-GOD people. There'll always be a warm welcome for you over here. Good luck with your wars, man.

Looks like we have a job to finish.

[quote name='Give Me Water' timestamp='1313518317' post='2782269'] Ive got Cattle and Spices. Nation Name: Republic of Alesia Nation Ruler: Give Me Water Nation Link: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=341021 [/quote] Sorry, Give Me Water. Someone accepted via PM about 90 minutes before you posted. I'll get back to you if things fall through, but it looks like the position is filled.

bump

[size="7"][color=red]Trade Circle Is Closed.[/color][/size] A cattle/spices nation [s]is required[/s] has been found for our trade circle. [b][size="6"]3BR + Fish + Uranium[/size][/b] Bonus resources: Fast Food, Construction, and Beer [size="4"]We're a very stable two year old trade circle on maroon. Today we're looking for a new member. [img]http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/9193/resourceso.jpg[/img] 3BR + Fish + Uranium is the best trade set in Cybernations. It focuses on growth by increasing your nation's population, keeping infrastructure cheap, and keeping the money rolling in.[/size] [b][u][size="4"]Required Resources:[/size][/u][/b] [size="4"]Cattle - Spices - Do you have Cattle and Spices? JOIN TODAY! Post here/PM/[url="http://www.cybernations.net/send_message.asp?Nation_ID=208497"]Message me in-game[/url] to [b][size="4"]JOIN[/size][/b]![/size] [size="4"]Successful applicant will need to switch to maroon and have a harbor before trading starts[/size]

bump

[size="7"][color=red]Trade Circle Is Closed.[/color][/size] An iron/lumber nation has joined our trade circle. [b][size="6"]3BR + Fish + Uranium[/size][/b] Bonus resources: Fast Food, Construction, and Beer [size="4"]We're a very stable two year old trade circle on maroon. Today we're looking for a new member. [img]http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/9193/resourceso.jpg[/img] 3BR + Fish + Uranium is the best trade set in Cybernations. It focuses on growth by increasing your nation's population, keeping infrastructure cheap, and keeping the money rolling in.[/size] [b][u][size="4"]Required Resources:[/size][/u][/b] [size="4"]Iron - Lumber - Do you have Iron and Lumber? JOIN TODAY! Post here/PM/[url="http://www.cybernations.net/send_message.asp?Nation_ID=208497"]Message me in-game[/url] to [b][size="4"]JOIN[/size][/b]![/size] [size="4"]Successful applicant will need to switch to maroon and have a harbor before trading starts[/size]

Best of luck to everyone in Ragnarok after this. There were strong pushes by memberships from all sides that tried to prevent a fracture like this. No one can say that the common members of SuperFriends didn't make an effort to reach an understanding with one another. I'd thought it was actually progressing okay. It's unfortunate that FA became the point that none of us were willing to budge much on, if at all. RoK have been a fantastic ally to fight beside. I truly hope that Ragnarok finds their way. While you guys are feeling hurt and angry right now, I don't think anyone in SuperFriends bears you any ill will. I understand why you wouldn't give up one of your best friends just because the rest of us strongly dislike them. GOD, and I dare say every other Super Friend alliance, wouldn't cave either. That's what makes this so regrettable, yet seemingly inevitable. I'm sad to see this happen, but hopefully this will be a better move for all of us. [quote name='KaitlinK' timestamp='1299776174' post='2658593'] We wish the majority of those individuals nothing but the best.[/quote] Couldn't we have split without the negative spin and comments, Kait? It's only going to breed animosity and resentment where there was little to none.

4 years? Crack a beer.

[quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1297816174' post='2634905'] To be honest Weezy and I had left \m/ as a result of the asshatery that went on as evident by those logs. He received the infamous mask for his log dumping gov logs for sure, but he was not expelled, he had left minutes prior.[/quote] I get that. When I spoke about Weezy being banned I was referring to him being banned from \m/'s IRC channel which he was complaining about in the OP.

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1297693061' post='2632939'] there was a HUGE consensus that ODPs are a valid CB for entering a war for an ally...why that opinion has changed with CSN/GOD i have no idea [/quote] It hasn't changed at all. I don't know why you'd think that. When you come in on an ODP you do it because you choose to. It's optional, it isn't an obligation. So when you fight based on an ODP it's because you want to fight those alliances, and the ability to claim that "we were just honoring treaties" is gone, unlike if they'd come in on an MDP. DT deliberately chose to make Legacy their enemy and had no obligation to do so. That blew back on them. It sucks for DT, but this is the path they chose and CN isn't a popularity contest.

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1297689546' post='2632896'] Miscommunication? Rok told you they were rolling with Polar and GOD ran off to the other side as quick as their little legs could carry them. It was a cold and calculated attempt by GOD to save their skin and not leave themselves being in the same position as Rok. They showed guts and GOD showed their infra hugging side. [/quote] I'm not sure if you're lying/trolling or if that's honestly how things looked on the OWF during the first couple of days. That's definitely not how things unfolded internally. GOD has had a permanent MADP with VE for about 4 years now. There's no oA, it's just A. We don't fight on opposite sides ever. Rather than "running off to the other side", we were always with VE, from the moment that Impero had contact with Lennox. If you're that curious about how the spy CB was reacted to by GOD, then you can see Xiph's first response [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97492&view=findpost&p=2590234"]here[/url]. It's the IRC logs between Xiph and Impero as the allegations by Lennox were first revealed beyond VE. The situation with RoK really was a massive miscommunication. It took a little while to untangle. We know that RoK would burn for us, as we'd burn for them, even if the politics of the day means that we're fighting on opposite fronts right now.

[quote name='ace072199' timestamp='1297689197' post='2632890'] All I have to say to this is it does not surprise me in the least that Xiphosis is involved in this. [/quote] LOL, Aurora Borealis. Aren't you and yours the same scum who tried to coup our fellow SuperFriend, Monos Archein?

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297688627' post='2632883'] ahhh so according to you, since Ragnarok entered on Polaris's side, all of SF is against RoK[/quote] SF usually rolls together. That we didn't this time was caused by one heck of an internal miscommunication. It's been resolved. The rest of SF went with VE's side, so we were able to look out for RoK's interests despite them fighting for Polar. RoK are our friends, and we'd never abandon them, let alone be "against" them.

[quote name='Dibbun' timestamp='1297685063' post='2632868'] I don't really know how \m/ operates but if you were throwing this kind of attitude at them it's no wonder they banned you.[/quote] They almost certainly banned Weezy for doing a gov log dump of a very sensitive \m/ leadership crisis. It's no wonder that \m/ are making life difficult for him. I'm not sure that I'd ever forgive Weezy if I were in \m/'s shoes. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97723 Wearing a dead alliance's clothes is a quick and dirty way to setup an alliance, Weezy. It'd be really funny if someone went to war with this alliance for mis-appropriating a former alliance's name, flag, and charter as their own. Does the original Crimson Guard have any allies or friends who're ready to take up arms over this thievery?

[quote name='Kowalski' timestamp='1297683704' post='2632860'] I haven't read the OP, due to the fact that even if I did I probably wouldn't believe any of it due to DT's recent internal actions within NOIR. Maybe someone else can tell me in simple terms, is this just a case of one alliance wants reps and the other doesn't want to pay and the ensuing PR nonsense to try and win over the public and persuade the other side to relent? [/quote] That's exactly the case. The rest of the thread is made up of complaints. I've found them hilarious, personally, but there's nothing of substance here. No one is declaring that they're going to go to war for DT's "rights" or because they're "morally offended" over it. It's just the typical OWF groaning.

[quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1297678802' post='2632789'] You think 40k tech for an alliance Dark Templar's size is lenient? Really?[/quote] Compared to the disbandment or ZI that Xiph would have gone for? Yes. When DT got the 10k/30k split that they asked for, they should have seized the peace deal with both hands.

[quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1297677749' post='2632772'] So here's what I'm hearing: CSN is either able to articulate exactly what they want from DT, and Xiphosis is simply a scribe. If that's the case, you're asking us to believe that CSN is so utterly incompetent that they can't write up a 100 word, 4-5 sentence statement (but are still able to magically articulate to Xiphosis what they want). [i]Or[/i], CSN worked with Xiphosis to create the terms, and relied on Xiph's advice in helping to forge the terms, in which case he did indeed have a role in the "numbers and clauses" you refer to. So you have two choices: CSN is incredibly incompetent, unable to do something that micro-alliances have managed, or Xiphosis had a more active role in the formation of these terms than you'd like to admit. Which is it? [/quote] I know this has been quoted before, but you seem to have missed it. It's right there in the OP's logs. If Xiphosis had had much say in the terms, then there would never have been peace talks. [23:16] <Xiphosis[GOD]> If it was me it'd be no terms, tbh. [23:16] <Xiphosis[GOD]> If someone hit me with an ODP or a PIAT [23:16] <Xiphosis[GOD]> They'd be put down Given the leniency of CSN's opening reps position in the peace talk, it's obvious that Xiph didn't write them. I'm not privy to CSN's convos with Xiph, so I don't know how much, if at all, his ruthless attitude might have influenced CSN's decision making process... but it occurs to me that neither were you. You can speculate all you like, but that's all it will ever be. Speculation.