iamwalrus

[quote name='Buzz Lightyear' timestamp='1319740787' post='2833072'] not sure yet. we are voting now [/quote] Perhaps you can fight someone your own size.

Congrats on your new government CCC! IT is a pleasure being acquainted with you all.

[quote name='Fedora Prefontaine' timestamp='1318029352' post='2820212'] What makes NEAT left again? Treaties with commies or something? I could never figure it out... Anyway, congratulations friends. [/quote] I am not really sure? People just started labeling us a left alliance and I went with it.

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1316029437' post='2800498'] So recap: We have went from you don't like to lose stats, to oops I didn't really know who I was directing that at, to why don't you war now then? Nice way to deflect away from the fact that you were speaking utter garbage in relation to that. How come with your confidence in your military prowess your casualties are not higher? [/quote] No, that is totally wrong. That is how your brain processed this conversation. What actually happened is that you just confessed to being a rogue. Why are my casualties not higher? I choose to fight in battles which are worth fighting. I don't fight for the sake of fighting, and I don't fight for power. I fight to defend integrity and friends. There is no integrity in going rogue on nations. You do not do service to your alliance or to others. There is also no integrity in destroying nations for the sake of destroying them. I seek to build community, not destroy. To preserve life, not eliminate.

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1316028405' post='2800488'] You do know I declared on omasnams an ex gremlin member with 10k tech to my 3 yes? Do you know the damage a 10k tech nation does with a WRC? You do know that pretty much 100% of the people I have fought have had nukes yes? So limiting damage is hardly the case. Again you really should think before you start saying tripe like that. Edit for clarity, I didn't begin raiding until I was much larger. so It wasn't defenceless little small nations. Just thought I'd point that one out before you come out with some other mad comment. [/quote] Then it seems like you shouldn't have a problem finding war...Why don't you war now?

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1316027715' post='2800480'] But your happy if I just say I like tech raiding because I smash nations and take their land and tech and profit? [/quote] Yes, because that is showing the character which you are role playing in this "game." Just like Comrade Craig justifies his as his calling to being a "true commie" but liberating tech from capitalist pigs. I am ok with you being a bully [i]in character[/i] who gets pleasure out of exploiting the weak. I disagree with it, but at least we can be honest about it. *edit* I know what nation is yours and I checked it out. I said you were afraid to lose stats, because if you purely liked the thrill of warring, then you could war a friend. However, you don't war friends or nations in alliances who can destroy you. Thus, your actions suggest you choose targets based on whether or not you can defeat them or get easy tech without too much damage in return.

"You're going to denounce tech raiders as evil, I will always denounce game stagnation due to stat collectors or peace loving hippies evil. " This is your statement that I protest. There is no place in this forum for your OOC comment about a "game". Like I said, I have no problem with you defending tech raiding in character. If you want to discuss how it effects the game, do so in the OW RP, not in Alliance Announcements. As for your "pride in casualties"; I have no concern. I do not rely on casualty numbers to secure my confidence in my fighting abilities.

We are getting closer to communication. I was saying that you wanting to destroy innocent nations in the world of Digiterra is dysfunctional. Whether you agree or not, there is a precedent set through wars, and tradition that the world of Digiterra has a code of ethics. This is why there are CB's stated before wars. If there were no ethics, then no one would explain why they were warring, they would just war. However, there is not a history of ethics when it comes to alliances who are outside the alliance politics, those who sit in "none". In fact, historically, it is frowned upon to be sitting on the "none" AA. This is why there is rarely a CB given publicly before raids on unaligned nations. There seems to be no code of ethics anyone needs to "please". There is a mentality in this world that no nation has any dignity or right to life unless they are in a AA. This statement made by NEAT confronts that mentality and states that ALL nations deserve a right to life, as long as they are not harming those around them. Also, I do not care about "Casualties". If you want to fight, come up to my NS and rogue me. I will gladly pound you back down.

Every time you call this a "game" or mention "war function" you are stepping out of a character from within the world of Digiterra. I have no problem if you want to play this "game" as a evil dictator or a world conqueror, and to that end I will treat you as one, by acting as a freedom fighter and underground organizer. However, when you talk about boredom, you are talking about your personal self and that is out of character. That is the point I am making. This is why you don't find topics such as "solutions to this game" in the IC sections of the forum. Also, why do we need to organize mass amounts of duels for everyone? Just find a buddy and fight him/her. Or are you afraid of actually losing your pixels rather than taking advantage of an innocent person? *edit* Now, Comrade Craigs post he made above is a good example of arguing [i]for[/i] tech raiding [i]in character[/i]. You don't need to have the same reason of support and you don't need to agree with it, but at least his point allows us to discuss politics and ethics [i]in character[/i] and according to our world of Digiterra. I am tired of all this "boredom" crap, and every time that is used as a reason, you kill a good conversation. If your bored, your boring.

*OOC* @ Hiro Nakara My comment about raiding nations being "dysfunctional" is a [i]In Character[/i] comment. In your real life I would think that you would be opposed to beating people up for the sake of pleasure, and so in this world the same ethics are in play. Now, when you argue Out of Character pleasures for a reason to justify attacking other players who are In Character, you begin to have problems, and there are other ways (such as duels) to get your Out of Charcter pleasures than picking on innocent people. When you do this, you drive people from the game for your own selfish pleasures. Now, if you want the theme of your nation or alliance to be that of Hitler, Napoleon or the Roman Empire then by all means you can play the role of the "world conqueror". However, you will be met with those who view that as corrupt. So, pick your justification for raiding and learn to understand the difference between IC and OOC comments.

That is why I said 99% and not 100%., and even in your situation it would be more beneficial to have a "duel".

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1315912002' post='2799700'] I want to hear your creative thinking on how to make this world more interesting without tech raiding. Please enlighten me and be creative. Sit around and wait on the next global war that may happen within a suitable time span? [/quote] Tech raids 99% of the time involve a well prepared and financed nation attacking an unprepared and/or ignorant nation. This adds no "interesting" features to our world of Digiterra. If you get pleasure out of destroying peoples nations for no purpose then that is your own dysfunctional problem. What would be far more entertaining and beneficial is if alliances started funding "duels". They could arrange fights and fund them, this would give younger nations war experience and build general interest in the [i]*OOC Game Mechanics OOC*[/i]. Thus, you could get people interested in the world of Digiterra. As it is right now, only small nations can find targets, they are few, and they cause people to leave the world perminantly. Personally, I have saved nations from tech raiders who were going to leave Digiterra, aided them to health, taught them about the game and they have become active participants in the world by selling tech and trading and they will probably fight when called upon.

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1315756888' post='2798730'] So, what exactly is NEAT doing? Nothing really. I mean good on them for not directly allying tech raiders, but they have a decent amount of indirect ties, and these indirect ties could easily be used to get NEAT to defend a tech raiding alliance in a war. So, really, what has NEAT done exactly? [/quote] You are right, we are still allied to alliances who tech raid, but those treaties are not Mandatory clauses. Through non-chaining treaties and careful examination, we can be sure that our military actions stay true to our principles. More importantly what we have done is set a standard for ourselves which aligns our foreign affairs with our moral standards. We have also set a standard for those who wish to be treatied with us on a more intimate level. What have we done in the grand scheme of things? Probably not much (if anything), but what can we do as an alliance of 1 million NS, 21 members and 321 nukes?

[quote name='Kevin McDonald' timestamp='1315730632' post='2798629'] It is ironic that those who are against tech raiders are also some of the people who seek to make digiterra "more interesting". [/quote] Because rolling small defenseless nations for their tech make this world "more interesting". Be a bit creative.

BOO Non Grata BOO!

[center][img]http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj264/thericardo/NEATSC2.jpg[/img][/center] [center][quote]Preamble Members of The Sandwich Confederation (SC) and Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism (NEAT) have established a long-term relationship of trust and friendship. In celebration of this relationship, and in order to assure that both alliances prosper, both hereby agree to abide by the following: Article I: Sovereignty SC and NEAT are, and shall remain, free and sovereign alliances -- independent of each other in both internal and external policies. Neither takes responsibility for the independent actions or statements of the other in public, or otherwise, unless explicitly identified as such. Article II: Non-aggression A state of peace shall exist between SC and NEAT. Article III: Intelligence Should either become aware of a possible threat that could cause harm to the other, they will inform the other via secure channels in a timely manner. Members of each alliance may share any additional information between themselves as desired. Article IV: Military Action Section 1: Mandatory Should either signatory come under attack (military, spy or otherwise) that is not the result of treaty obligations with another alliance, the other signatory is required to help defend the first through military, diplomatic and/or financial assistance as requested. Section 2: Non-Chaining/Optional If one signatory becomes involved in a conflict via the activation of a treaty with another alliance or in some other fashion, the other signatory is not required to assist, but retains the option/right to do so. Article V: Cancellation Should either signatory see the need to dissolve this agreement, they shall notify the other signatory via their respective forums two weeks in advance.[/quote][/center]

[size="2"][center][img]http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/6796/brownflagheadertext.jpg[/img][/center][/size] [center]As Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism we have been doing some internal reflection and have decided to pass this new foreign policy. [quote]As Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism it is our goal to ensure a just and ethical Digiterra which stands against the structure of violence and oppression which is manifested through the act of waging war for the purpose of tech, money, land, experience and/or boredom.† We recognize a right to life for all nations and thus can not and will not form Mutual Defense pacts with alliances who legalize these types of wars. We expect our treaty partners to uphold a strict code of honor when it comes to war.† We recognize that the rights national leaders have to rule their nations, ends when the fist meets the face of an innocent man/woman.† No nation has the inherent right to invade, bomb, blockade, launch missiles or conduct acts of espionage against another nation who has initiated no act of violence. We will invite all nations to reflect upon their policies of war and encourage them to take actions which move to protect the right to life.† We consider no individual nation evil and thus recognize that it takes extreme courage and enlightenment to free yourself from the oppressive structures that exist and have always existed in the world we know as Digiterra.[/quote] [/center]

It is great to see two friends unite! I hope your unity is prosperous for both alliances! /o SWF /o UCR

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1312896272' post='2775786'] You have the essentials here mostly correct, but as one of the people who was directly impacted by this, I have to say there's stuff wrong in this paragraph. The ruler in question was RicoVacilon, a former member of the VG Coalition who had moved to Black Team after VG left Red. He was raided by GOD and ArGo. He demanded that they pay reps or he was going to nuke them; they refused to pay reps so he nuked and was promptly sanctioned by Sparta. (Yes, years ago, Black still had the same policy it does now - be at war with a well-connected alliance and we will sanction you). [b]One reason GOD gave for attacking LoFN (an unannounced ODP bloc) was that LoFN awarded RicoVacilon a medal for heroically nuking his raiders. Rico deleted not long afterwards of course. [/b] He did nuke first though. Learz's thread about RicoVacilon: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=22199 GOD, ArGo, Andromeda DoW with a CB of "It's Walford": http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=23632 [/quote] Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism was one of the alliances grouped together in this witch hunt. I contest the statement that LoFN was an unnanounced bloc, and the intel on LoFN was awful. We in NEAT signed a document stating that LoFN was a sovereign group of nations, and because of that statement we were destroyed and forced to disband. I would like to point out again, that the logs used to bring us to our demise were falsified...Our alliance has been proven innocent, and thus we have risen to be much stronger since then. In the words of a wise nation..."We have buried the hatchet, we just remember where."

So glad to have finally made ties with the CCC. It is a pleasure to be united with my brothers and sisters in Christ. Let our two alliances grow strong and in peace.

You have \M/ added here?

I am glad that our relationship has grown! PPO are some great folks!

[quote name='Balder' timestamp='1304430638' post='2705142'] Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism - 1 (This is a remake remake of a dead, then remade, then dead alliance yes?) [/quote] We have actually been around for over 3 years. Only once, early on, were we forced to merge into Blackwater. We have since part-took in the demolition of THL, UBD and MCXA. Don't worry though, we don't like your alliance either.

ROMA has been a large success so far and I am glad to have an ally such as SC sign onto this agreement. Cheers! Thanks for the support from all of our other friends as well.

It sure was hard finding a target