Benjamin Arouet

Does CSN care if Jack ends up in a public IRC channel that he was banned from? No, not particularly. It's hardly a complex manner to simply ban him again if you don't want him there, and we don't appreciate OWF threats as the method of pursuing your distaste for it, if it is genuine.

We love presents of all sorts, NSO, just make sure to wrap them in some kind of pretty paper.

I think SOM does a fairly good job of summarizing the various reasons for this little sideshow here, but I'll just emphasize that there isn't any "smear campaign" coming from us, just the feelings of individuals and the fact that Goose has no longer chosen to force them to suppress their opinions. With that said, I congratulate both Invicta and USN on this treaty. As this is the path USN has chosen to take with their foreign relations, I only wish to offer my best wishes to our fellow Maroon alliance. We have enough of our own redundant ties that I can hardly criticize this one, and I hope your relationship continues in such a positive trajectory. Edit: Hi to you too, AUT. Shoot, Superfriends is Aqua? I always thought it was the Maroon shadow government... better go withdraw our sigs.

Congrats Silence! We may not be formally allied to GATO anymore, but I know for a fact that there's some good folks over there. o7 Silence o7 GATO

We have some vocal members with strong opinions out on the OWF these days, the expression of which we encourage as long as it is in a productive manner. As NSO is an alliance which seems to try to differentiate itself from the pack regularly, it is only natural that some of those opinions will be directed towards NSO. I'm pretty sure it's nothing personal beyond what people see from you guys on the forums, as I don't believe we've ever interacted with NSO at a higher level either.

Oh thanks a lot, you sent him the wrong way. You were supposed to have him help us contain the advance of the powerful forces of Justice.

I mean, yes. B)

We wouldn't want to put too big a burden on him, he can't be everywhere at once you know.

Shame it came to this, but I think getting to use the title of this thread is its own justification. Now off to fire up the tanks. Well, a few of them, anyways.

Sad to see another old institution like OUT start to officially die out, but as you guys said it probably lost its purpose awhile ago. Classy announcement as always, FOK, everyone has to clear out defunct and outdated treaties once in awhile. FOK

I was wondering if maybe I should've made this clearer. Just because we dislike PZI doesn't mean we want known aid scammers or other idiots in our alliance. If our screening fails, we live with the consequences, but we don't ignore evidence about it. Edit: Autocorrect did something weird....

I recognize it's more of a preference thing per alliance, but CSN does not PZI, ever. If someone wants to build up again and attack us or whatever, we'll dispatch him to ZI in that incarnation, and if he wants to build his nation back up and do it again, that's more practice for some more CSN members, that's about it. Our thoughts are that no one person can do enough damage to justify the distastefulness of PZI, and if it's really a repeat case like this, there's no particular reason to think they'd stop just when they deleted, meaning it really demands EZI otherwise. Also, I have nothing against GC and don't want to portray them as barbaric. I don't like PZI in the least, and we don't practice PZI. That doesn't mean we want to accept confirmed aid scammers into our alliance, it just means that if we accidentally do our punishment won't be PZI. I don't think he deserves mercy, I just don't agree with PZI under any circumstances. It's a difference in opinion, not a challenge.

Nothing is. I, like Wicked, thought we had more or less banished that scourge from our world.

Overthrow our leaders and use their fatty carcasses to power the destructor fleets

Not fair, don't tell people. They have to figure it out on their own.

First of all, as Big_Z said, NAP partner does not equal ally, just someone you've committed to refrain from aggressive action against. Secondly, unless I have my timeline wrong, the NoV thing started on May 10, more than a week after we were engaged against the Continuum in a war of our own, and more than a week after we had withdrawn from lol, Maroonity. Therefore, even if we had had information of your impending doom, it wouldn't even have been a case of not telling a treaty partner of any kind, just of not telling some random alliance. I don't intend to point back to that situation at any time to justify current actions, but when you question us for not standing up for what is right, this is the obvious situation to go back to. The reason it is brought up in relation to CSN often (usually by people who are not members) is that it is one of the few times we were in the spotlight, not that we particularly like to bring it up. If you rate us down because you don't like us, fine, but saying it's because we "don't stand up for what is right" or don't support our treaty partners is ridiculous and patently false.

We signed that treaty and included Norden Verein because even though we might not have had much love for NoV (and we had certain reasons for those feelings, such as the fact that NoV and its predecessors long treated Maroon as their playground which we were simply allowed to exist in), we recognized the importance of sphere unity and thought promoting that cause was extremely important. We might not have loved you but we certainly were committed to stopping inter-Maroon conflict. While I agree with Big_Z about the very minor level of relevance of lol, Maroonity, I would also point out that we withdrew from it only a couple days prior to the GATO-1V war, and we were a bit distracted to be focusing on things like NoV at that point. We violated neither the letter nor the spirit of a treaty which was built solely on the principle of non-aggression. All of the Maroon treaties have been building towards the Chestnut Accords, and this was but the lowest initial rung on that ladder. I don't think we ever claimed to be heroic, but we always have and always will follow our treaties and attempt to do the right thing both behind the scenes and in public.

Dang, there's a name that takes me back to the good days of GUARD...

I'm sorry, I was going to let this fly until I saw this reasoning as you're entitled to your opinion, but what on earth are you talking about? We didn't hold a treaty with NoV outside of a sphere-wide NAP as best as I can remember from those days, nor did we particularly ever like NoV. You can think what you want about that war or any other, but I've never seen it considered any particular moral imperative to defend those you don't like, regardless of the circumstances, unless you were dumb enough to sign a treaty with them. Nothing happened outside of the spotlight, as far as I'm concerned, except us not particularly wanting to stand up for an alliance which had a strong history of hegemonic ambitions on Maroon and was included in any NAP pacts as merely a courtesy to a neighbor. If you want to go after us for that, go for it. Edit: Okay, my memory might indeed by faulty, Lol Maroonity was effectively disbanded before the NoV situation came to pass. Doesn't change any of what I said, though.

ALL HAIL THE GREATEST MAROONER OF ALL.

All true, obviously. Something can become inevitable without being actively planned, though.

Obviously this was brewing well in advance. OV was what touched it off, but the fact that you (and everyone else) knew that the next action by the NPO similar to the OV situation would trigger such a conflict is all the more reason I remain confused as to why they went through with it. In any case I do agree that there were *rough* sides long before the OV situation, though as you said they contained a few glaring errors and miscalculations as to certain large alliances' stances, notably including NpO. I don't want to distract from the conversation that was going on, but I just don't think anyone could realistically think "Karma" was entirely spontaneous.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, deja was responding to mpols post about KDII. I agree with most of what you sai in this post, but he did not call out FAN for CSN, thus proving mpols point. He suggested that mpol would not actually attack KDII.

As I pointed out before, most of the references to CSN in this thread were third parties (such as yourself) commenting about dejas post, which, as SOM said, was merely a response to an equally dramatic statement by mpol. There has been 1, arguably 2 of our members since then who decided to take the bait of everyone who started rambling about how "we" called FAN out. I believe a member of FAN has already pointed out how silly this is, and I will take this moment to reiterate that. No one is challenging FAN except in the most satirical sense, and in fact deja's original reference was to a threat against UED, not CSN. Stop making something of nothing.

Understandable, I've made my own errors in that regard on occasion, thanks.