Jump to content

Vhalen

Members
  • Posts

    626
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vhalen

  1. [quote name='Baldr' date='10 March 2010 - 03:59 PM' timestamp='1268255102' post='2221237'] Wrong. http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=205313 [/quote] Quite obviously not "nothing" there, because you get this error message: Please enter a value for the "Nation BIO" field. Of course, you certainly know this, and are just being contrary. Fortunately, we both know the difference between "nothing" and "the appearance of nothing." Now, which describes Echelon's competence, and which Poison Clan's class, that's another question entirely.
  2. [quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='10 March 2010 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1268253203' post='2221207'] I am not going to delve into the finger pointing wiki/bio/editing/disband drama I am just going to say now and in the future whether their right, wrong, indifferent I will always support in all manners our friends in PC. The next thing I would like to mention, in general, if your a very small alliance (5 to 20 members) you should take great care to make sure any and all protection you might have is highly visible, it would go a great distance in avoiding this kind of drama, once again not going into the right or wrongs just saying, it is the way the world is, help yourselves as much as possible, be visible. @Echelon, hated you since the PG-13 affair, personally hope to launch some nukes at you. [/quote] If I were a very small alliance (5 to 20 members), I think it'd be more fun to roll with the FAN treaty policy. That way you get a different, more exciting form of drama.
  3. [quote name='Supa_Troop3r' date='10 March 2010 - 11:20 AM' timestamp='1268238326' post='2220978'] They do now. The fact is the wiki said SBA had merged. Your ex-Leader said you merged. [b]You had nothing in your bios.[/b] PC did their research. Then SBA does get raided, the wiki is updated, your nations have their bios updated. I would not be paying reparations if we were in this situation due to the fact SBA seemed unprotected. [/quote] Bolded part is obviously, blatantly false. You CAN'T have nothing in your bio. Try it. [quote name='Supa_Troop3r' date='10 March 2010 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1268238659' post='2220983'] There is no miscommunication? This is a 19 page thread, obv there was some sort of miscommunication. But good luck with your quest. [/quote] At this point, it seems like it's intentional miscommunication.
  4. [quote name='Lord Brendan' date='09 March 2010 - 07:32 PM' timestamp='1268181484' post='2219993'] It's debatable whether their surrenders terms allow them to declare war on Poison Clan. Even if they are technically allowed, they're obviously in no position to do so. Public call outs like this can be useful sometimes. I do not believe this one of those times. [/quote] If they're not allowed by surrender terms, then the public call out makes much more sense. Furthermore, one could argue that the alliances they've surrendered to might be obligated to enforce the protectorate, if they've tied Echelon's hands in the matter. [quote name='890765' date='09 March 2010 - 07:41 PM' timestamp='1268181981' post='2220018'] We weren't an alliance that had been officially/unofficially disbanded for 6 months. If someone raided us, there would be issues. [/quote] Not if they edited the wiki first, right? I mean, it could've said ANYTHING before that. [quote name='Thomas Jackson' date='09 March 2010 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1268184057' post='2220120'] And thus began the great Wiki-Vandalizing Craze of 2010. [/quote] Yup, I called that one. [quote name='LegendoftheSkies' date='09 March 2010 - 08:17 PM' timestamp='1268184149' post='2220122'] I bet if someone really did that, it wouldn't take PC several months to fix it. [/quote] As long as you can get a screenshot before it's fixed, that's all that matters, isn't it? [quote name='Mamazlilmistake' date='09 March 2010 - 11:17 PM' timestamp='1268194996' post='2220517'] If i recall you do not support raiding of any kind. I am quite sure you once told me it is barbaric. As such, is your opinion not bias on this topic??? Echelon could have just as well not tried to pull one over on us, and your little kitty cat would still be all sandy. [/quote] You seem to be pro-raiding, so your opinion's also biased, right? Let's throw out all non-neutral opinions in every thread ever. (I invite you to visit the new forums, with 99.9% less text.
  5. [quote name='Aeternalis' date='09 March 2010 - 06:39 PM' timestamp='1268178269' post='2219851'] and what happens if they don't pay? [/quote] Hopefully it'll establish a precedent where someone can just go edit a wiki then treat it as fact. That'll be fun, won't it? What if PC suddenly discovers its protectorates are no longer protectorates, or maybe some treaties suddenly disappear. As long as you have a wik screenshot taken around the time of the attacks, it shouldn't be a problem, right? Certainly PC wouldn't want reps for their "protectorate." Look, I'm not saying anyone's absolutely, perfectly in the right here, but I'd be surprised if anyone who's bothering to argue that an outdated wiki entry justifies attacks can do it with a straight face. As the attacker, it's YOUR BUSINESS to know what you're going into. If you don't, you typically get bad results. Ask NPO. Ask TOP. Seriously, you're embarrassing yourselves.
  6. [quote name='flak attack' date='05 March 2010 - 11:34 AM' timestamp='1267807151' post='2214931'] The guy is in New Zealand, so American law doesn't apply to him. [/quote] Well, the crime crosses international boundaries and takes place on American soil, so I guess you'd charge him, then look at US/NZ extradition: http://newzealand.usembassy.gov/uploads/images/o16y8MOyHW2l-jJTxaMpeQ/ExtraditionUSNZ.pdf Offhand, I'd say you could make argument for a couple of those offenses. (Whee, taking things way too far!)
  7. [quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='03 March 2010 - 10:41 PM' timestamp='1267674377' post='2213295'] This is hilarious. How the hell can someone be a rogue if they are participating in an ongoing war and simply change their AA? You are really grasping at straws. [/quote] Obviously they're not a rogue...they're a deserter! Don't worry. I'm sure TOP will deal with it later. [quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='04 March 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1267730621' post='2213879'] [b]You don't get to decide who is or who is not a member of our alliance[/b] just because it makes your job "easier" in this war. Nevertheless, you can try and argue this all you want. If you sanction a member of our alliance we will take steps necessary to respond in kind. [/quote] Granted. You can say "Joe Average of Average Nation flying the 'Solitary' AA" is part of TOP, but I don't think there's any reasonable expectation that anyone outside TOP would see it that way. If you want to be generally acknowledged as a member of an alliance, you ought to be flying its AA. Otherwise you get all kinds of messy confusion. So, my view is, while the "sanctions for being a rogue" stance is disingenuous here (since everyone involved knows why the AA is changed, who they really are, and who they're with), someone who AA-swaps during an altercation should have no expectation of that AA's protection while they're not using it. Raids and such would be free game. (Granted, it'd be pretty stupid to raid LM, but to each his own.)
  8. [quote name='wickedj' date='28 February 2010 - 03:19 AM' timestamp='1267345422' post='2208000'] It was discussed in another thread and i dont recall what became of it but someone mentioned it would be hard due to international laws [/quote] Maybe you can't do anything legally (I don't pretend to know), but most ISPs, in my experience, don't care to be associated with those types. I've never dealt with an ISP in NZ, but all the ones I've spoken with in the past have been very good about canceling accounts of hacker/troublemaker types. I admit it's been a while since I had the dubious pleasure, though. Regardless, it's worth a shot to ask, especially if you can provide evidence of repeated trouble (and it sounds like you can).
  9. [quote name='Eric Cantona' date='04 March 2010 - 07:40 PM' timestamp='1267749928' post='2214279'] You don't have to insult each other in every single thread, you know... [/quote] I'm not entirely sure you're correct, sir. Anyway, looking over the discussion so far, I've learned that PC and TPF are jerks for, respectively, breaking and having a treaty (which, incidentally, we can all agree isn't the oldest one). A pity, because if it were, that'd be germane to the conversation at hand. I don't know why I bother having idle curiosity. I should know it all ends in flames, by now.
  10. It's a cultural exchange for the betterment of international relations?
  11. Ditto that. I made a big misjudgment this round, and ended up getting nuked for two weeks. Maybe I'll make some sort of effort next round. Think that would be worth it?
  12. This post is its own reward. You should ask for reparations for reading 90% of the rest of the blogs/forums. I haven't bothered Astronaut Jones because he specified rogues, and I was just looking to refill my nukes in order to greedily covet them. Don't get me wrong, a man has to have the option to ride his nuclear weapon down to impact, but still...no reason to drag others into it.
  13. Well, I think it's totally reasonable. We do have colonies on Mars and the moon, after all.
  14. Exactly. Casualties are pixels too.
  15. Interestingly enough, you can even give someone a defeat alert and THEN redeploy and conduct your two ground attacks as normal.
  16. Mine sure hasn't worked that way.
  17. Fronz, this is the most concise summary of the war I've seen thus far.
  18. Actually, I think this could be a really good time for you to be "looking for a home." Giant wars tend to increase activity quite a bit. I'd recommend watching the forums a little, maybe visiting some alliance IRC channels, and seeing who seem like your kind of people. As for color changing, purple's a decent sized color sphere with a good variety of alliances, so you should be able to find common ground with someone. Good luck!
  19. [quote name='Kream' date='03 February 2010 - 12:11 AM' timestamp='1265173892' post='2154811'] Am curious two also best of luck yall 1oo [/quote] We'd better come up with a good story, then! [quote name='sammykhalifa' date='03 February 2010 - 12:25 AM' timestamp='1265174721' post='2155031'] I salute our worthy opponents and the unstoppable march of Modern Technology. [img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2690/4311982490_a3fbcfce81_m.jpg[/img] [/quote] Sammy! You weren't supposed to let that intel leak! Now they'll expect it. *facepalms*
  20. [quote name='admin' date='02 February 2010 - 11:57 PM' timestamp='1265173070' post='2154721'] What is the story behind this? I want it. [/quote] Good sir, that is part of our cutting edge new war technology. Unfortunately, R&D has deemed the details of the project classified, for fear of our wartime foes reverse engineering the traintank.
  21. -4, -142 is 93% 0, -150 is 96%
  22. Vlad, I'm not sure why you think one can't compare and contrast one time period to another. That seems like a recipe for regulated thought. I'm also not sure why you thought it wouldn't take quite a while for a great war, considering the political pressure not to "look like a new Hegemony" that opposed maneuvers (especially early or direct/blatant maneuvers) to seize the power vacuum (either by diplomacy in the case of your A scenario or war in the case of your B scenario). I would also suggest that remolding international norms (even at the temporary/direct cost of damaging one's international position) is in and of itself an advancement of one's international position. So yes, as you said, this is precisely the sort of situation where credibility overrides infra-hugging. I'm confused why you'd suggest this is a bad thing. [And insofar as his final example, I'd suggest it was more a "lack of backroom muggings" before war than a "lack of diplomacy," that he thought was a good thing.] By your last comment, I take it you're of the opinion that this war should necessarily result in a coalescence of power with one side as undisputed king of the mountain? Or is it just that your political theory needs this to be the case? {Edited for clarity.)
  23. You declare war, and peace breaks out. Something's not right...
  24. Tomorrow, perhaps we can expect a "Peace Declaration Web" alongside this.
×
×
  • Create New...