jerdge
-
Posts
5,860 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by jerdge
-
-
4 hours ago, Canik said:
In some cases the enemy might only return home only after they are safely out of range. If you can't attack them, then the alliance they're in isn't really protecting them now are they? That's where it gets tricky. In general I think the attacked alliance doesn't truly accept the narrative, they just think they can't do anything about it. Not without risking extreme punishment, which indeed they may get if the enemy's side is overwhelming powerful and morally corrupt.
They might be out of range at the moment they "return home", but what about what happens from then on? I think it's more about that "extreme punishment" part.
IMHO people should never just give up and hope that the bully doesn't come back, they always do. But what would and could a useless hippie like me know about it?
-
7 hours ago, Lord Hitchcock said:
You've been around long enough, what are your thoughts on this?- I really want to know.
I have been around for a long time but most of it I've been in an alliance that notoriously didn't hold grudges - more for lack of interest than anything else - and which has been barely existing for the last years. Before my GPA time such "opportunistic" alliance hopping wasn't a thing.
With that said, when a conflict ends each party should IMHO bring to the table all the issues they have, and work to have them addressed. This issue should too totally be expressed, if not for another reason to force the other party to make an effort to defuse it, making concessions or spending part of their diplomatic capital on it.
Then of course it's very different depending at which end you are. If you're the losing side, going after this or that of your opponents makes little sense, either you're ready to give everyone peace or you go back to the battlefield. If you're the winner you should keep people accountable, no matter what absurd e-lawyering they try to defend themselves with.
The only instance in which my alliance was involved in a case like that was when oyababy attacked three/four GPA nations. When we didn't just give him peace, in fact the very day we staggered him with a 30k tech nuke turret, several DBDC nations formed one of those expendable alliances we're talking of, and that threat was used to put pressure on our government in our talks with the DBDC over the issue.
It was several years ago and the GPA is basically dead now, I think I can share my point of view about that crisis without betraying anyone or breaking any clause of confidentiality. I wasn't part of the negotiations, I wasn't even there and I saw the logs only after the facts, IMO unfortunately we totally screwed that up, failing to push our point of view and to get the most out of the situation. Our government didn't really raise the issue of accountability, which was one of their major mistakes IMO. They just panicked, I'm afraid. Others may disagree, at any rate we'll never know what would have happened if things went different, as they didn't. Had I've been part of the talks things would have probably went totally south and full war would have been assured, also because the DBDC, especially Cuba and their more-FA oriented guy (I now honestly can't recall the name of, a former GPA member anyway) sincerely hated me (RL hate, on a game, for my posts in the Suggestion Box, that's how far RL stupidity can go... but I digress).
In short, the threat of great destruction - "extreme punishment", in Canik's words - convinced our top government that it wasn't worth it, that the general membership had to be protected from that. I disagreed and I still strongly disagree but alas, I was already little really active and it was that much time ago.
Also note that in our case Oya hadn't changed his DBDC affiliation to attack us and the "fake" AA (I used to refer to them as Squirrel-something, I don't recall the real name, it might have had an 'S' in front of it) never exchanged blows with us, so that situation wasn't really the same of what we're discussing here. Although it had to do with accountability, thus it's not totally off topic.
-
8 hours ago, Lord Hitchcock said:
I will bite on this because I understand this frustration. Having fought Doom Squad for years and their alias as other alliances, it was sorta ridiculous. One minute they were part of Doom Kingdom and the next minute they'd run off and form Doom Squad and waive any accountability back from the alliance they were just on- and ultimately went back to. [...]
Having spectated this from the outside numerous times, I have to say that I still can't completely wrap my mind about (what from the outside seemed to be) the usual response from the attacked party.
If a nation attacks your Alliance they're an enemy, if they then unilaterally (without having been cleared by you) switch Alliance Affiliation they are still an enemy, if their new (old) Alliance protects them from the consequences of their actions then they're enemies too. If the notion of Alliance still makes sense, at least.
I can't understand why anyone ever accepted to be fed any other narrative.
(I understand not having the firepower to engage everyone on the other side, but that's not my point.)
-
2 hours ago, White Chocolate said:
The only thing "legal" in CN is that which the "powers that be" agree upon. [...]
Quite the opposite, the very idea of legality is to replace power as a mean to solve disputes. The powerful can of course use power instead, and call it however they wish - even saying that it's "legal" - but nobody is really obligated to actually believe such a nonsense.
Logic obstinately disregards authority, guns have no effect on language or ideas, in this text-based and text-made world convincing people is, in fact, paramount.
Furthermore, and not only in CN, no individual can be powerful enough to be completely independent or self sufficient. Even the most powerful has to provide justifications for their actions, if they want to endure.
-
Peace Works!
-
Obligatory Peace Works here.
-
3 hours ago, Johnny Apocalypse said:
Why does the name Bob Illyani ring a bell? Was that a Gramlin?
Not a Grämlin.
-
1 hour ago, Stewie said:
Sorry, we don’t have picture books.
You mean, not that kind of picture books.
-
1 hour ago, Stewie said:
Elements of these were the logs used by the CLAWS coalition to justify war.
[...]
Just to be clear (and just because I'm curious): the evidence presented to you is based on stuff provided to your current adversaries by LH, do you confirm this yes/no?
-
18 hours ago, Lyanna Mormont said:
You are #972638446 in the queue.
It should have been 9,998,383,750,000.
-
4 hours ago, janax said:
Was "my mom says I'm special!" one of your favorite sayings growing up?
JFYI everyone's special, mothers just know better.
-
2 hours ago, Stewie said:
[...] We died as we lived, standing shoulder to shoulder with our brothers and sisters in Arms. [...]
You don't look that much dead, yet. My prediction is that this conflict won't kill you either.
[OOC]
1 hour ago, Stewie said:[...] Apparently having Charismatic leaders who don't sit down and do what they're told, whilst inspiring growth in membership is a bad thing these days. [...]
No, you're just the only object around which can offer any challenge to their members and they're taking that opportunity to try keep them a minimum entertained.
Tech, Land and any other stuff are just empty numbers without people manning them, the real asset anyone has (and ever had) in CN is the people, the members. Pacifica of all alliances understood this circa 2006 and has gone to great length to both nurture their community and to keep it separate from the rest of the planet - think of it as a cult (which it isn't, but the metaphor can do) which isolates its members from the outside simply to keep them.
Going meta, all of this might suggest that a good way of opposing them is to work to undermine that dynamic... although there must be reasons for nobody having successfully done it in 14 years.
At any rate, the interest of most of your opponents (minus Pacifica, which is culturally self-reliant and self-sufficient) is to keep you around as a sparring partner, they won't really try to remove you from the planet.
[/OOC]
-
12 minutes ago, defiled said:
Who are you, little man?
Little man, who made thee?
Now we "only" need to summon Tyga to complete the set.
(Sorry just now I was just drinking a bit...)
of tea
-
3 hours ago, Dajobo said:
I think that's a fair comment. You'll also recall that war had stuff all support from our members and Polar was generally lackluster for that reason.
You have to note I'm not Government though then or now. I think that war was pathetic and disgusting and I think this one is as well. There's no double standard here.
Hello Dajobo, you're full of it as usual.
I mean full of class of course.
And now in general and about other posts in the last couple of pages, yes, Grub can be maybe accused of many things, but not of providing hypocritical excuses for his shenanigans.
Not that I'm saying that hypocritical excuses are what's being presented here, and not even that they're anything bad in the first place. TBF off the top of my head I can hardly recall any significant war of aggression I could be in agreement with - the (ancient) ones I've been part of included.
Bad excuses are discussion fodder and they often provide entertainment and psy ops opportunities.
-
5 hours ago, Thrash said:
Jerdge, come join NG and have some fun.
That would mean to actually put effort in CN, which is something I definitely have no time or desire for.
TBH, had I time for CN, I'm not sure that I'd choose NG - although I'll also admit that I have always had a soft spot for you, all the way back to my tenure as diplomat on your forums (which could be ten or more years ago). I'm the kind of person that enjoys Caustic's posts... Maybe that makes me a bad person, I don't know.
My (too many!) other priorities anyway prevent me - and will always prevent me - from considering anything else than continuing my years long retirement. Sorry for that.
-
6 hours ago, Thrash said:
[...] against the mediocracy [...]
Thank you for having used the word "mediocracy", I like it.
-
7 hours ago, Lucius Optimus said:
What year are you from?
No disrespect intended but this comment just seems alien
It's just class, evidently.
And yes, class might seem alien here... that makes one think, doesn't it?
-
Surviving 15 years is quite a feat but doing it and remaining consistent across eras and through that many changes of government and membership is... terrific great.
Congratulations, old cat.
-
What a gravedig! Olorin isn't supposed to play with necromancy like that... Are you sure it's you? 😜
-
50 minutes ago, The Big Bad said:
I do not even remember a war with them and that is not a good sign. [...]
Ah ah this made me smile old man... 😉
-
On 1/1/2021 at 7:19 AM, starschwar said:
&lat=38&lon=-62 for 100%
Confirmed, thank you people! 🙂
-
Usually I totally enjoy JA's prose (although I seldom know/care of what he's posting about) but I must confess that this time... Well, I don't want to be that guy that makes it a big deal for the one instance in which he's almost completely, but not quite, non-entertained. I look forward to the next episode.
On the conflict itself my stance is obviusly of neutrality.
Judging from the raw military values the, er, "combat" in the upper part of the ladder should be a walk in the park for the Knights. They should also have the numbers to stand their ground in the other ranges. I'm not sure that this COBRA assault is military savy but, as a useless
nurturerhippie myself... what would I know? 😉 -
5 hours ago, Lucius Optimus said:
Certain elements of green team have declared that sphere a "sanctions free zone" or as they say "free trade" .
Thats the last I heard anyway. I don't typically hang around those that spout such nonsense 😒
GPA Senators don't sanction on a whim and always try to check any allegation before they act, but they have also always sanctioned rogues. This has always been valid for VE, too. I couldn't say anything about others as I don't know their policies.
If you need to have a rogue sanctioned on Green, approach GPA or VE Senators and you should be fine.
-
6 hours ago, Lucius Optimus said:
Sanctions are a function of the world economy designed to bring consequences to those in community that ignore international norms like nuke rogues, or sponsors of terror. Any policy to abolish sanctions can only result in the decline of a sphere.
I'm sure green team will soon realize such decline if they continue to promote their brand of "free trade"
Please explain further the green team part, thanks.
The Day Today - A Brief History of January 2021
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
Defending ourselves was totally compatible with neutrality. Trust me, inside the GPA I have always been considered one of the less orthodox about neutrality - and I probably was, TBQH - but no one even thought to raise that issue, in that situation. For everyone it was clear that our self defence was totally a neutral thing.
I wouldn't say we have been another victim of Doom either. In the end they walked away and they didn't harass us until it didn't really matter anymore. We even signed a NAP (which I obviously campaigned against, why trust them on anything regarding us?) and everything was fine and dandy for a long while... also because I hadn't been involved in anything about them.
To be clear: IC-ly I hadn't really anything against the DBDC and at their rise I also thought they were good for the game. But their success was based also on flawed mechanics (land and tech), not to mention the exploitation of ill-acquired huge tech levels (to beat again this dead horse: 60,000 tech levels later erased from Steeldor's count, when Cuba and many of the tech heavy Doombirds had already left the arena - what about them?) Their way of trolling in the Suggestion Box to discourage any possible fix was disgusting. Their in-game threats over OOC stuff would have been ridiculous, hadn't people took that seriously. I suppose I can console myself with the notion that, at least, their silly personal insults were not totally unamusing, albeit ultimately pointless. They did almost all that could have possibly been done to be hated on an OOC level, short of going straight in criminal territory, but despite that I never hated them. Now I would have knowingly allowed any OOC aversion to influence my IC behavior towards them.
When they threatened or damaged the GPA I simply pushed (for the little I could) for action to be taken to counter that, as I would have done with any other threat.