jerdge
-
Posts
5,858 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by jerdge
-
-
Oh, Holy Admin...
I would have loved that we avoided the (now) coming nuclear holocaust...
-
Congratulations!
NATO
(Pretty woman, btw...)
-
Welcome back, kingzog.
I certainly didn't like you the first time I knew of you (looooong ago), but I admit that you later gained my respect. I am glad you're here again.
-
Quality announcement, would read again.
-
I very much doubt we will be seeing any sort of valid CB.
This is the point I agree on.
-
but Im Already Panicking!
(Stare at the writing until you feel better.)
-
Now where is the TOP, MHA and Bloc announcements?
Who is "Bloc' ?
Anyway, my government always leaves me lagging behind: it's frustrating!
I will have to go and write them a 5 pages letter, or something.
(OOC: funny avatar, shahenshah, I like it.)
-
MHA tonight
You're panicking. Don't!
I voted MHA because Chickenzilla told me to do so...
-
GOod luck, Gabe. I hope we will hear many positive news about CDC in the coming future.
-
I heard they were going to betray Grämlins, can you confirm this?
You can't think that TOP would tell me, thus I can only imagine that you're asking about yourself (in tune with your character, by the way).
Since you said it and I have no reason to doubt you on it yes, I can confirm that you heard that TOP was going to betray The Grämlins.
[/joke]
-
Expected and waited for, the eventual just happened. Who is next? TOP? MHA?
*looks towards TOP*
TOP, don't betray the MHA!
-
Okay, I decided to start a petition to free FAN.
I wish I could encourage the NPO to give peace to FAN: their "disagreement" is now very old and FAN isn't much a threat anymore for Pacifica. While it's true that FAN kept trying to harm the NPO, they can't be blamed for having fought the war the (legitimate) way they chose to.
On the other hand I don't see the MHA giving an unilateral white peace to FAN: they need to repent for their unwarranted aggression, they need to stop their hostile operations against us and also to show interest for concluding a deal with us.
Being this the situation, I encourage the NPO to stay at war against FAN, to support our just cause against them.
(Besides, the appeal is anyway vague. Was it addressed to the NPO only, or what?)
[Edit]
( these are my viewpoints and mine alone and do NOT reflect those of my alliance or it's leadership )This forum is Out Of Character and you shouldn't need to be worried for what expressing your opinions might bring to you.
-
Stumpy Jung Il, you're one of the best posters that CN ever had. Your Trashcat's Corner is pure quality. Thanks.
-
Hiya jerdge. I'm not saying maintain a master list of IP addresses, that is just a dick move.
I'm saying say who in your channels can perform IP searches, so if an alliance has a suspect IP, they can ask the right people and not bug the wrong gov members to check an IP
Unless the IP one would be inquiring about happens to be in use in our channel when one comes to ask, how could we provide any useful information, considering that we don't mantain IP lists?
Also, I seriously doubt that many hoopy froods would help in that, anyway (I certainly wouldn't).
-
The MHA still loves you, Sparta. I don't think that your leaving makes any practical change for us.
In short if Sparta has conflicting treaties they're no longer obliged to defend NPO, if that causes them to attack a treaty party. But I could be reading this wrong.I think that you're basically reading it right, althought the bloc mechanism is a bit more complicated than that: the reason, the CB and the story of a conflict would also play a major part in determining how tC's accord ultimately "functions" (signatories are forbidden to attack other partners' allies, etc).
If TOP betrayed attacked Sparta, for example, tC wouldn't be obligated to defend TOP from counter-attacks coming from Sparta's allies. At least, this is how I read the treaty (although there's always a bunch of people that each read any treaty in his/her own way - generally not as I read them - thus I don't recommend taking my words as pure gold...
) -
Well done in quickly agreeing on peace, MK and UBD.
My special admiration goes to the UBD, for having gained MK's respect in such a short time. Somebody there musts really be doing it right.
-
Spies are a !@#$%* to catch, so why don't we make it easier for us to catch spies?
My solution?
Post your alliance, your IRC channel, and people who can perform a search by IP Address (or email or name or whatever), so we don't just query all of the government members sitting in the channel
List:
<snip>
Hello.
The MHA shall not maintain a list of IP's or other OOC information to track or hunt CN players -
IRON
(This must be CN's love day?)
-
<snip!>
Well done, NV.
I like you even more now.
-
<snip!>
All of this is so excellent that I am speechless.
Everybody now
! WUBS teh NPO !
-
Here is a logically acceptable reason to me.
If I do not hit the UBD as a whole, then that is telling every alliance that all they have to do is send in a spy who is willing to take the hit for the team. Then deny everything when he is caught.
Logic dictates that if I do not want countless alliances to spy on me, I have to make it undesirable to spy on me.
Since most alliance leaders either want to retain power, or care about their members...sometimes both, it becomes counter productive to send spies since if they get caught they will hurt their alliance and almost certainly lose power.
Deterrence: that's one of the things I was thinking of. You're correct as always, Machiabelly.
But if you insist: The alliance is represented by its government. The government (or at least ranking member(s) thereof) spied on multiple alliances. Therefore, the alliance spied on multiple alliances. The alliance as a whole is thereby culpable for said spying and the alliance as a single entity thereby forfeits its own sovereignty to whoever they spied on, effectively wrapping a collar and leash around their neck and handing it to the other alliance and painting "abuse me" on their chest.Hello Heft, I am happy that I have the opportunity to talk with you. I consider myself still in debt towards you.
About your post, the government indeed represents the alliance, and that representation bears with itself the concept of approximation, and simplification.
The government is a symbol, a tool, a procedure (and many other things) set - hopefully - to further the development of the alliance as a whole. The government isn't identified with the alliance (except in a few cases, like the LSF).
There's a gap between "representing" and "being", otherwise the general membership would have to consider itself responsible (and culpable, with the obligation/option to punish itself) in case its government betrayed them - which is a clear absurdity.
Actions of course transfer even less than responsibility, thus the UBD "as a whole" certainly didn't spy on anybody. This last fact is not only "common sense" but it's also (at least) implicitly acknowledged - considering the special treatment they reserverd to the three guilty rulers only - by the Kingdom itself.
-
(Pre-emptive fake edit: sorry Haflinger for my "copying" of the dialectic method you used a few posts above this. Also, I use Heft's words but I am actually replying to the many posters that said something similar to what he wrote.)
While MK and other alliances have endured harsher treatment than what is being done here, that doesn't necessarily make this any less harsh, fair enough. But UBD seems to have done just about the one thing that has for almost the entirety of CN more or less revoked an alliance's right to exist in the eyes of the general population by apparently running a prolonged, organized, sanctioned spying operation on multiple alliances including MK. If there is any justification to ever completely obliterate an alliance that would ever be accepted by a majority of the populace, that is probably it.So regardless of what has happened in the past to MK or others, this can hardly be considered anything other than lenient, simply because at this point MK would be very well within their rights to basically stomp out UBD entirely, or do whatever they want with them, from multi-year viceroys to famine-inducing reparations or just converting the alliance into a target range.
^^^ This argument contains reasoning. I don't "completely" agree with that reasoning, but I still recognize that it exists.
That it was the actions of a few and not every single individual is an argument that was dismissed and generally accepted as being false years ago, so isn't relevant and should never really be brought up as it will probably just make most people roll their eyes and skip over the rest.^^^ This is not even an argument, but rather some sort of referencing to the alleged opinion of a vaguely identified "public". As such it can't justify or support anything.
In fact, responsibility about something musts be matched by the faculty of acting about that same thing, or it's not "real" responsibility. If the UBD rank and file did not even know about the spying they are obviously not responsible for it, no matter how many people keep repeating the same mantra about that.
The UBD members are responsible for what their government is, but again their responsibility is limited to what they (can) know of what their government is.
Also, please note that all of this is just logic and (IMHO) it should be considered completely objective; it's not "morality".
Finally, there may be other logically acceptable reasons to hit the UBD rank and file: what I wrote does not mean that I think that the Shrooms are doing it wrong.
-
They resigned.
For pity's sake I wish people would actually get the facts right before coming here and saying anything.
I hadn't the time to check "everything", and in fact if I spent all my time "getting the facts right" I would never been speaking (that may be good in and by itself, anyway).
However, the opportunity you have to reply is useful for that also: so that you can correct me when I am wrong. Thanks for your clarification.
About that specific point, AFAIK the MK didn't ask for their resignation, thus my point is still valid, I'd imagine. Thoughts?
-
You know, I can't help but love seeing all of these hegemony fellows whining about how those who are canceling on the NPO are "opportunistic." It's just delicious for so many reasons. Let's see now, half of them got their treaties with the hegemony as a reward for ditching an old ally when the good old boys decided to go after them. Not only that, but I remember several of them being lauded for their "maturity" and their "diplomatic savvy." I could say a bit more about that, but I'll leave it to someone else.
But yes, let's see now....why are people canceling on the NPO. Well, firstly the NPO does alienate most of its allies with its policies. In case you haven't noticed, they aren't exactly popular. Never have been. Quite frankly the only reason most people ever sign with the NPO is because for the longest time it was necessary for survival. Unless you were tied to them you had a big target on your back. Those days are over. These people most likely never even wanted to be an ally of the NPO to begin with. Why should they keep a treaty they do not have to? NPO is unable to attack any of those leaving them without triggering a war in which victory for them is not certain.
Yes, now, I'm digressing aren't I? The NPO is not on the verge of being rolled, so they aren't really being abandoned in their hour of need as some of you are trying to imply. Then again, the only people who are actually taking such nonsense seriously these days are the very ones spewing it. But who exactly is it now? Why the very leeches who latched onto the NPO. Who were allowed to suckle at its teat in exchange for betrayal or abandonment of friends.
You know, it is interesting to look at many of these alliances before and after they were allowed a kiddie chair at the hegemony's table. Most of them you would never hear a peep out of. Mild mannered alliances. Very respectful, and ever so passive. But once they get that treaty with the NPO, then they start running around acting like they're the single baddest thing to ever happen to this world. The change in demeanor is stagger. Take that single treaty away from them though, and then everything changes. They once again become themselves as they truly are. Small individuals, cowering before whoever holds power. Knowing that the only thing they'll ever be good for is sadly following the current power superstructure, like a rejected dog hounding its master, hoping that one day he might throw it a bone.
I spit laughing at you, you very people thinking you have the time of day to speak of honor, or loyalty, or any other desirable human trait. You people are nothing. Deny it as you will, but you know what I say to be true. RoK, FOK, VE, and all others doing what you condemn, you know that they are all worth more than you ever will be. You only dream of doing what they have all just done. So go right ahead, and pull up your soap box. Nobody of any consequence is listening to your incessant babbling.
You know, RV, I generally like you. I've not always liked you, but I certainly enjoyed when you stopped looking like one of the "bullies" (the kind of people you just spat laughing at?)
I hope I won't see you turning again to the dark side, albeit under a different flag, RV. Good luck with that.
Your essay (above) is certainly well written but also hard to be believed when you think that you're trying to summarize and explain hundreds of people's behaviour with just one rationale, and reason.
Pacifica has and had many allies. Each of us is unique and, sometimes, completely different from any of the others. RoK, FOK and VE are all fine people and I don't believe that they signed with the NPO just out of "opportunism", nor they and/or the global climate suddenly changed, woke up and "realized" that it was time for a shift.
I read Gen Lee's post, and VE's, FOK's (and others') cancellations notifications, and they all express positive feelings towards the NPO: are they all lying again?
If I were to buy your explanation, RV, I'd say that the alliances that remain allied with the NPO - when there's no need to do that anymore, according to you - are showing consistency and congruence (integrity?), while the ones cutting the ties are the "opportunists" of the situation.
Considering that FOK, VE and RoK (and "others") didn't change in just one night I'd be forced to conclude that they were just plain opportunists: the doubts about them would start smouldering in my heart.
Fortunately, RV, I don't agree with your explanation: the situation is much more complex than that - starting from the fact that there isn't just one situation, but many different ones - each with its own peculiarities.
(I openly admit that I am not even starting to scratch the surface of the political situation with this post: sorry. My point is just to criticize the "explanation"/"speech" quoted above, not to provide my own theory - that would be an horribly long read that nobody would want to deal with.)
*gets off his high horse*
)
Imperial Decree
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted · Edited by jerdge
Nobody is going to win a global war of the size needed for the NPO to risk defeat, thus there's no issue here.
[Edit: sadly]