ktarthan

[quote name='Baldr' date='07 April 2010 - 01:29 PM' timestamp='1270672129' post='2252011'] You have no right to raid without consequences. [/quote] I do believe the meaning of that is "You will not infringe, without consequences, on nations "right" to raid", not that raiding has no consequences.

[quote name='Vilien' date='06 April 2010 - 03:14 PM' timestamp='1270592051' post='2250774'] When you attack someone without justification you should be willing to deal with the consequences. If you attack someone with nukes, expect nuclear retaliation. This raider mentality of being able to do things without consequences is inherently irresponsible and unrealistic. [/quote] I think the point is that if a raider gets nuked, they aren't going to just sit there and take it. That would be silly. Nobody is saying that it's not within the raided nation's right to send a nuke, but exactly as you said: "If you attack someone with nukes, expect nuclear retaliation". Understand the consequences of your actions. And - what raiders nuke first? That seems foolish to me, and I've honestly never heard of it.

[quote name='D34th' date='06 April 2010 - 12:18 PM' timestamp='1270581517' post='2250577'] But if they nuke him, he would ask his alliance for help him to them destroy all the raided nation's infra just because they can. All glory to the brave raiders. [/quote] Believe it or not, some raiders take their lumps when it comes to it. At the very least, though, sending a nuke at a raider is a quick way to invite more than just ground attacks.

[quote name='Baldr' date='05 April 2010 - 10:45 PM' timestamp='1270532719' post='2250099'] It's so sweet that you care so much for the nations that are getting attacked for no reason. Or, more likely, you're just upset that those nations might be given a chance to fight back. [/quote] I wish no ill will towards raid targets, also 'no reason' is demonstrably false. Second, as I have already stated, I expect that my raid targets will fight back. I really don't care. What I [i]do[/i] care about is individuals attempting to cause harm to members of my alliance and expecting no form of retaliation. What I am saying is this: aid raid targets all you want. It is your choice to make. I am not even saying it is a bad thing to do. But I am saying that in my eyes and the eyes of GOONS, it constitutes a hostile action and those sending the aid should expect a response accordingly.

[quote name='Tritonia' date='05 April 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1270531765' post='2250073'] As a personal matter, I refrain from aiding nations at war because I do not support war. Any aid sent following the termination of the war is to be used for the purpose of reconstruction. But as I said, that's my individual policy. I presume it would ruffle no feathers. [/quote] I think that this is a far more constructive policy than aiding the nation during war. Firstly, you put the emphasis on rebuilding - which is what the nation probably needs most. There's no risk of the money being stolen before it can be used, and no wasted funds on warfare. Secondly, it leaves no ambiguity about the message being sent to the raiding nation/alliance. As I have said, some alliances will regard aid during a raid a hostile act.

[quote name='kulomascovia' date='05 April 2010 - 04:59 PM' timestamp='1270511927' post='2249742'] As you may have noticed, each alliance can implement article 3 in any way they can. What Vilien has suggested has been considered before (a public guide is available on the CB forums for everyone to view) and any of the signatories can follow it. What CB does is a bit different. We would ask the raided nation to join our applicant AA as a temporary member. Should the nation agree to do so, we shall send aid as soon as we can and ask the nation raiding to stop raiding one of our temporary members. [/quote] At least in the eyes of GOONS, you might run in to a few issues with this approach. I do not try to criticize your reasoning, but simply offer advice from an alliance that you could be trying to deal with in the future. Simply having the raided nation join as a temporary member would give you no authority to speak on their behalf. If they have the intent of joining your alliance for good and you come speak to us, we may be willing to talk, although it is just as likely we will ask for the nation to talk to us themselves, or let the war ride itself out. Also, messaging the raiding nation directly will not go over well at all. If you have any diplomatic issues to discuss with GOONS at all, talk to our government. Further, having the raided nation temporarily join your applicant AA will not change our view on aid, as I have expressed above.

[quote name='Doitzel' date='05 April 2010 - 04:22 PM' timestamp='1270509748' post='2249692'] Your members should be aware and prepared, then, that in raiding their targets might have friends. If you don't want war, don't declare war. [/quote] Absolutely. As long as these "friends" understand the exact same thing. If they wish to assist via military means, they must be themselves ready for war.

[quote name='Guffey' date='05 April 2010 - 04:04 PM' timestamp='1270508651' post='2249660'] many unaligned nations that are doing tech deals get raided, but the people they are dealing with are not classified as "at war" with the raider. Whats the difference if we aid them or not. [/quote] I'd say that's up for interpretation for each individual alliance, or even individual members of government, but I would say that the intent is definitely a huge difference. Tech deals are done primarily for nation growth. Sending aid to a raidee because they got raided is done primarily so they can build military and cause greater harm to the raider. I do not make any distinction between causing direct harm via war versus indirect harm via aid.

[quote name='Vilien' date='05 April 2010 - 03:35 PM' timestamp='1270506922' post='2249630'] We'd first point the raidee to our public guides on how to counter raids, fight back, and attempt to get peace on an individual level. If a signatory felt it was necessary, they might talk with you to see what they could work out. Some signatory alliances might choose not to sell you tech (which isn't a problem for your alliance). That's the extent of our current policy. [/quote] Amazing, I actually have no problem with this whatsover. The part in the document that talks about optional military and financial aid is what concernes me, and probably many others. Providing that kind of aid to a nation being raided by GOONS (and most likely other raiding alliances) is regarded as an act of war. Also, you might want to change "and attempt to get peace" to "or attempt to get peace". I have no problem with raidees fighting back - in fact I plan on it in most cases - but it is an absolute fact that fighting back before asking about peace will reduce their chances to more or less nil.

I actually have an honest question regarding this document, because despite all the nice words and intentions, I am unclear on the real outcome of the words. Let us say that a nation with no alliance affiliation is being tech raided by a nation in, for example, GOONS. You wish to assist the raidee. What actions will you proceed to take? Edit: grammar

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='05 April 2010 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1270497818' post='2249463'] [color="#0000FF"]Well, aren't you cool? Tell me, how come you haven't been rolled yet? I can think of few who deserve it more than you.[/color] [/quote] I'm not sure why you are asking us this. It's obviously through no fault of our own that we haven't been rolled yet.

I would rather Article III be mandatory. Being optional as it is, it feels very opportunistic - it is easy enough for the signatories to only interfere when it is assured they will not incur any significant damage.

This is a bad idea. [quote name='Azural' date='05 April 2010 - 08:35 AM' timestamp='1270481682' post='2249152'] So this only affects those who attack a raider who is in an alliance? [/quote] We've already covered the unaligned nations in our Pro-Piracy Act of 2009.

[quote name='jerdge' date='26 March 2010 - 04:39 PM' timestamp='1269646778' post='2237870'] 1. The Land of Midgard did not attack GOONS, they were attacked by your alliance. 2. You said that you put him on your "EoG" list, and you later said that you didn't: 3. The Land of Midgard is obviously not a rogue nation. 4. You requested that no one aided The Land of Midgard, but the objective of your announcement is ADI, not that nation: you wouldn't really mind if someone helped it (this may not be a "fact", but I challenge you to claim otherwise...) Now I really exceeded my daily quota of "paying attention to silly things". Bye! [/quote] 1. The attacks in question were not through soldiers or planes or missiles, but with words. The second paragraph, detailing the actions the nation took against GOONS, indicates as much. Apologies if I was unclear. 2. I am unable to edit the public list myself. There are other areas on the boards where it is clear this nation is a target for all. 3. I was torn between the term ghost and rogue - as this nation both left his AA and joined ours, he's technically both. I chose the term used in this thread's progenitor. 4. While it is true that if someone did aid the nation it could prove profitable for ours, it would still be regarded as an act of war against GOONS and would not be taken kindly. I'm sure we can both agree that this is more in-depth of a discussion than this thread actually deserves. Farewell. [quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='26 March 2010 - 04:46 PM' timestamp='1269647158' post='2237876'] [color="#0000FF"]Yes, PZI a nation for no reason. That certainly is something to be proud of. Well, I'll be sure to yell quite loudly, and I'll let you know that I have a long memory. You CnG types, especially the bottom feeders like PC and GOONS, you're all alike. And I know I speak for a lot of people when I say I hope to see you burn real soon.[/color] [/quote] I'm not sure who told you the nation is being PZI'd. Let me know and I'll make sure they stop spreading false information.

[quote name='jerdge' date='26 March 2010 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1269645794' post='2237845'] Since many of the things you reported didn't happen as you reported them, and you (more or less) openly admitted that this thread is just a piece of satire over ADI, I kindly ask you to please don't waste our time anymore. I know that it may sound SHOCKING to you, but for many people this forum isn't meant to be cluttered by such a silly form of - [i]cough[/i] - "entertainment". Your announcement is IMHO just a mildly annoying way of wasting some space, and it's not unreasonable to think that you don't look smarter now that you posted it. [/quote] I respect your opinion on the style of the OP, but I'd like to know what parts of the OP you feel were misreported.

[quote name='Letum' date='26 March 2010 - 03:59 PM' timestamp='1269644374' post='2237820'] I don't get it. Why do you need to make a parallel of ADI's announcement, and why do you need to put some random guy you raided and who complained on an enemy list? What is your objective? [/quote] There was no "need"; I felt it was prudent. And because he is ghosting GOONS while actively ridiculing our members.

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' date='26 March 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1269640968' post='2237744'] [color="#0000FF"]You guys really are a pathetic excuse for an alliance. You raid someone, and he fights back and doesn't take your "tough guy" attitude and you put him an a list for "insulting you." I got news for you, but people are not obligated to roll over when you raid them. If you can't take a little insults and damage when you decide to start something then don't start something. Grow a thicker skin. I have no sympathy for you.[/color] [/quote] Mr. Virginia, I'll have you know that this nation hasn't even fought back. Please get your facts straight. [quote name='Ejayrazz' date='26 March 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1269641001' post='2237746'] I don't pay much attention to the forums, such as little bits that mean nothing -- like ADI's conflict. I saw a GOONS thread and figured I have only seen reasonableness since their foundation so I, being an idiot, thought they wouldn't waste a thread in their name over something so stupid. Since you're trying to play dumb and act like this is for real -- Good. You're the aggressors, take whats coming. [/quote] I guess satire isn't your cup of tea. That's fine; I dig. You shouldn't be so hard on yourself though, you're not an idiot. GOONS threads can be quite entertaining.

This thread simply exists to inform the cyberverse of the existance of a rogue, and ask them not to not aid their cause. Also note that the rogue in question has [i]sold all of his infra, sent away his tech, and is not fighting back[/i] if you want to suggest we are whining about a "raid gone wrong". [quote name='Baldr' date='26 March 2010 - 02:58 PM' timestamp='1269640688' post='2237735'] What is an EoG List? [/quote] "Enemy of GOONS" List. GOONS nations have a free ticket to war with an EoG whenever they feel like it. Though, the nation in question is not on our public EoG list yet - you would not [i]believe[/i] the paperwork.

[quote name='Cyber Nationz' date='26 March 2010 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1269637803' post='2237657'] Maybe this little guy is giving you a taste on what it likes to be raided. I support the little mans crusade against oppression. DIE GOONS DIE. Filthy tech raiders. shouldn't have raided him. [i]Now that you cant hit him[/i]. you have wasted much binary codes to post this announcement. anyways goodluck. Hope you guys get your peace. [/quote] This nation is exploiting GOONS's greatest weakness: nations too small to declare more wars on. Our strategists are working as we speak to find a way to counter this tactic. But, who said anything about peace? [quote name='SirWilliam' date='26 March 2010 - 02:15 PM' timestamp='1269638124' post='2237663'] You won't be needing it here, I know, but MK's here for you guys if you [i]do[/i] need anything, ktarthan, as always. [/quote] Shucks, you guys.

I am just here to let Planet Bob know what is going on regarding some recent attacks on GOONS and to inform you all of what we are facing. GOONS requests that no one aid the individual that is involved in these attacks. One day ago, one tiny nation switched their alliance affliation to GOONS's after being tech raided by one of our members, and sent a hurtful message to him in horribly broken English. GOONS would request aid from its allies in this matter, but frankly we don't think they have anyone in range. This nation has sent away all of their tech, sold nearly all of their infra, and has collected taxes while in anarchy, which we find puzzling to say the least. They have been placed on GOONS's EoG list, and we request that you do not admit them into your alliance should they seek shelter and also ask that you do not aid them in any way. Dealing with a puny rogue is never pleasant, but GOONS has full faith in our resolve to overcome our hurt feelings. Here is the nation that we are dealing with at the moment- http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=387483 We would like to thank all the alliances who would have given us their assistance if we needed it. It would have been greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and for listening to this report. Signed Ktarthan, [i]MoMTST[/i]

[quote name='AirMe' date='12 March 2010 - 04:32 PM' timestamp='1268440641' post='2223774'] Londo commenting on PC's honor is as funny as Hitler saying Ghengis Khan was a stand up and respectable guy. [/quote] [ooc]Reminded me of this: [url=http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=25]http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=25[/url][/ooc] Honestly I don't know Londo's history, but even if he were such a terrible authority on the subject of honor, that'd only be a valid analogy if he was simply asking us to take his word on it. He backed up his statement with a reason; one which has been ignored in favor of simply making attacks on Londo's character.

[quote name='silentkiller' date='12 March 2010 - 03:23 PM' timestamp='1268436516' post='2223699'] You dont know the meaning of debate. Your posts shall not be read next time. Thank you, Sk yeah I am bored. Edit: not worth it Where did I say that I was countering Londos post about Pc's character? I am just saying its funny how he says that for an alliance to have character they shouldnt Pzi people, I pointed out that indeed Londo's own alliance Athens did the same thing until 10 days before K war, which he claims was to end there injustices. Do you in point in my post see me claiming that PC doesnt not have character or something? Nope my post's point was to call out Londo on his bs that he somehow fought some moral crusade during Karma war against injustices of unthinkable proportions, when his own alliance allowed similar practises just 10 days before Karma war. [/quote] The part where you quoted his statement about PC having character in a thread about PC and started your statement with the word "and" without further reframing it at all sure made it look that way. If you had simply answered my initial question like a normal person instead of layering on the , this could have been [b]so[/b] much easier. Edit: "PC doesnt not have character"? Get a hold on your double negatives, man - but I think I got what you're trying to say.

[quote name='silentkiller' date='12 March 2010 - 03:10 PM' timestamp='1268435739' post='2223678'] Your opinion has been noted. It shall [b]not[/b] be taken into account next time a post is made by me. Thank you, Sk [/quote] Your inability to debate has been noted. You shall [b]not[/b] be taken seriously the next time a post is made by you. Thank you, Ktarthan

[quote name='silentkiller' date='12 March 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1268435258' post='2223667'] I guess I'll have to explain it to you. See Londo said PC has character because they dont P/Ezi people like ex-hegemony. And I showed that infact Athen did the same thing. Now either Londo is sayin that Athens itself didnt have any character/honour or he is talking out of his $@! again(something he clearly loves). I'll let you be the judge of that. [/quote] Thanks for (sort of) answering my question and confirming what I thought - it was just a really bad rebuttal and you didn't address Londo's statement at all.

[quote name='Baldr' date='12 March 2010 - 02:57 PM' timestamp='1268434951' post='2223664'] If they thought it was the right thing to do *before* the long public discussion, that would be believable. But they said "No reps, nothing" in private when first approached, and they continued that for days in public. Then they changed their minds. If you want to pretend that the public thread and the general perception of what PC did had nothing to do with them changing their minds, you can, but it won't change what actually happened. [/quote] Newsflash: People change their minds, often for their own reasons. News at 11. I don't know how so many people are missing it, but I thought it is pretty clear from the OP that PC is saying that they have decided to pay reps [i]despite[/i] the public thread, not [i]due to[/i] it. [quote name='Baldr' date='12 March 2010 - 02:57 PM' timestamp='1268434951' post='2223664'] That's funny. SBA was just doing their own thing, when they got attacked. So was Knights of Ni, so was FoB. You talk about people being able to allowed to live without threat, without force, but what you actually do is to find people who haven't done anything to you and then you go attack them simply because you are bigger than them. [/quote] Correction, because we are bigger than them [b]and[/b] they have something we want.