Explanations, SUNny side up

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Partisan' timestamp='1305709309' post='2714253']
SUN should have cleared the attacks with Exodus before hitting a nation on our AA, regardless wether he was already accepted or not. Its common decency, really.
[/quote]
It's also common decency to not accept nations already at war* (which he apparently was). For one it's hard to distinguish between "is just ghosting" and "legitimately joined," but even then you have the loose ends of figuring out the war and why it was going on in the first place. That sort of thing should be resolved and dealt with before the person joins another AA. If it's not, you're pretty much consenting to whatever baggage they're bringing with them with the war. The war then becomes your responsibility, and the fact that they continued to attack with more wars is just something that Exodus set themselves up for.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL1.jpg[/img]

* = At least, I used to think it was. People actually do this to us all the time. But I suppose, if GOONs does it (it being "not accept nations at war"), it's the wrong thing to do.

[Varianz]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1305746615' post='2714429']
Just because something is wrong doesn't mean it isn't their decision to enforce. If Exodus wants to let in an unaligned person who is being attacked, there are two avenues. One is to negotiate the release of the person, and the other is to not negotiate and say that you will defend the person from any attacks, which is generally when war would start if neither side wishes to stand down. However, the major issue is that SUN's protector is letting another alliance interfere with their protectorate and threatening the war, and then not only not helping them out, but outright dropping them.
[/quote]
Exodus tried to negotiate, SUN refused to negotiate and insisted on PZI. That is, until Ragnarok was like "lolno" and kicked them out for continuing to refuse to be reasonable.

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305746304' post='2714425']
What both of you need to understand is that when you accept a member with active wars and no alliance affiliation, you don't get some intrinsic right to demand "an apology and compensation of damage done" because the damage done was not to your member and the perceived wrong was not to your member. You accepted a nations in the process of being ZIed or PZIed--the distinction is immaterial to the circumstances of his application--and while many alliances might say "oh, ok, well you can have him" many (I dare say most) would not, and would tell you he's free from attacks when he gets to ZI (ie: <LA[SUN|XBOX]> i said you can have him, i did not say with infra).
[/quote]
Hey Schatt, remember that time you accepted nations into CoJ who we were at war with and you and Nemesis threatened us with war over it?

Because I do.

[Partisan]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305746304' post='2714425']
Don't tempt [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjfR6d_VEuA"]Mad Shatt[/url]; his eyes are wide.


I only see NSO with the endorsements.


Paint? I'll have you know the Schloss Eggenberg Productions Support Agency uses Firework MX Education 2002.


I like to think that by sticking to the truth I can transcend politics; everyone is welcome to join me up here


What both of you need to understand is that when you accept a member with active wars and no alliance affiliation, you don't get some intrinsic right to demand "an apology and compensation of damage done" because the damage done was not to your member and the perceived wrong was not to your member. You accepted a nations in the process of being ZIed or PZIed--the distinction is immaterial to the circumstances of his application--and while many alliances might say "oh, ok, well you can have him" many (I dare say most) would not, and would tell you he's free from attacks when he gets to ZI (ie: <LA[SUN|XBOX]> i said you can have him, i did not say with infra).
If it came down to Exodus decided that treaties with NSO, IAA, and Val meant they can tell SUN to get bent, fine. But the idea that you are owed reps for "6 - 7 subsequent hours of my night" is repugnant, and you and ironchef should resign your positions if you don't want to do your jobs.
Don't get me wrong--I don't dislike elfarto, I don't dislike Exodus (yet), I don't like SUN, and I don't agree that a ZI or PZI is necessarily correct, but the simple fact of the matter is that your demands for compensation are absurd when it is Exodus which is breaking all protocol.
[/quote]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1305746885' post='2714431']
It's also common decency to not accept nations already at war* (which he apparently was). For one it's hard to distinguish between "is just ghosting" and "legitimately joined," but even then you have the loose ends of figuring out the war and why it was going on in the first place. That sort of thing should be resolved and dealt with before the person joins another AA. If it's not, you're pretty much consenting to whatever baggage they're bringing with them with the war. The war then becomes your responsibility, and the fact that they continued to attack with more wars is just something that Exodus set themselves up for.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL1.jpg[/img]

* = At least, I used to think it was. People actually do this to us all the time. But I suppose, if GOONs does it (it being "not accept nations at war"), it's the wrong thing to do.
[/quote]

I see both of your points and would agree if it werent for the fact that the actual issue had been resolved. Ironchef sat down with el barto and the aggrieved "Founder" before we were even informed of his ZI sentence. (This was because of the war we noticed.) The two of them solved the issue under Ironchefs eye. All seemed well and we were of the understanding that peace would be offered soon. As such, Barto joined the Exodus AA and was accepted. At that point the other two attacks happened.

To recap for those who apparently dont understand: We came to them when we saw something wrong and were led to believe that the issue was resolved. After that however, the attacks on barto were made WITHOUT clearance.

[wickedj]

Why am i not surprised to see drama revolving around GGA 2.5.008

SUN, you seem to be following in Exoderp's footsteps..you two are made for each other, create a bloc and add Gotham

[Swatch0]

For all of you that want to talk !@#$ about us, go ahead. We could care less.
We had our reasons for what we were doing since El Barto could not admit to his mistakes and left without causing to much trouble. However he decided to and from our side of the story we were right. I agree we were making a stupid mistake for PZI'ing him or atleast saying it but we wanted our chance at him. I sent out a message to all nations in Bartos range to attack him the previous night and one of them attacked WHILE HE WAS UNALLIGNED. I was at school coming back to realize that Barto had switched back to Exodus and another 2 nations still attacked him. If I knew he was going to do this, I would of held the attacks back. However even when Exodus accepted him into the alliance while they had the knowledge that he was going to be ZI'ed and HE WAS AT WAR with a SUN member, they still made no effort to come and contact us about this. Things wouldn't have turned out this way if you guys had done that. We could've negotiated this. As for Dacian, he came to SUN by his own will and was not a "spy". He simply did not agree with Exodus reasoning's. Then Ragnarok left us, if they understood our point of view I hope they wouldn't have but I guess they didn't. No clue what Exodus and allies told Ragnarok but it surely convinced them. We had 3+ alliances ready to hit us, and we did not want to put our other SUN nations at risk.

However what happened, happened for the best. This is my point of view. Everyone has there own opinions about us. Feel free to think about whatever

[Partisan]

[quote name='Swatch0' timestamp='1305751795' post='2714481']
For all of you that want to talk !@#$ about us, go ahead. We could care less.
We had our reasons for what we were doing since El Barto could not admit to his mistakes and left without causing to much trouble. However he decided to and from our side of the story we were right. I agree we were making a stupid mistake for PZI'ing him or atleast saying it but we wanted our chance at him. I sent out a message to all nations in Bartos range to attack him the previous night and one of them attacked WHILE HE WAS UNALLIGNED. I was at school coming back to realize that Barto had switched back to Exodus and another 2 nations still attacked him. If I knew he was going to do this, I would of held the attacks back. However even when Exodus accepted him into the alliance while they had the knowledge that he was going to be ZI'ed and HE WAS AT WAR with a SUN member, they still made no effort to come and contact us about this. Things wouldn't have turned out this way if you guys had done that. We could've negotiated this. As for Dacian, he came to SUN by his own will and was not a "spy". He simply did not agree with Exodus reasoning's. Then Ragnarok left us, if they understood our point of view I hope they wouldn't have but I guess they didn't. No clue what Exodus and allies told Ragnarok but it surely convinced them. We had 3+ alliances ready to hit us, and we did not want to put our other SUN nations at risk.

However what happened, happened for the best. This is my point of view. Everyone has there own opinions about us. Feel free to think about whatever
[/quote]

I just refuted your point that we never tried to solve the first attack 2 posts above. Its quite possible that your guy did not relay that message but that would still be an error on SUNs part.

We told ragnarok nothing other than what we told you. Perhaps they saw the facts as they were.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1305748728' post='2714452']
Hey Schatt, remember that time you accepted nations into CoJ who we were at war with and you and Nemesis threatened us with war over it?

Because I do.
[/quote]
Hey Sardonic, remember that time GOONS was aiding a guy roguing me for the second time in a row (while charging other alliances $90m for aiding rogues attacking GOONS, no less), and at the same time CoJ wanted to help a GOONS raid target, so we offered to make a deal and forget the rogue aid if you forgot the micro raid, and you told us to FOAD? Yeah, I remember that.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1280031346' post='2388008']
The alliance U.S.S.R. is under the protection of Cult of Justitia until such time as the Presbyter withdraws protection. [b]Any current wars have been covered by diplomatic agreement between U.S.S.R., CoJ, and GOONS, and peace offers have been sent.[/b] Cult of Justitia understands, expects, and believes that no new wars will be declared pursuant to terms in place, and peace in all active wars is dependent only upon the effected nations [OOC]logging in and getting the message[/OOC]; should any U.S.S.R. nation fail to accept peace in current wars due to inactivity, CoJ expects that no new wars will be declared on that nation while currently-active wars expire, and that currently-active wars will not be renewed.[/quote]

Thank you for bringing up a good example of how an alliance has no intrinsic right to just demand that attacks on an applicant already at war be stopped. Rather, we negotiated an agreement whereby USSR fulfilled some terms to stop current war, and CoJ ended future wars.

I think it's pretty funny that you're so obsessed with trying to one-up me that you would implictly argue against GOONS own policy of telling alliances that accept nations at war (UOMB-UPN) to expect more attacks. It's sort of sad.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Ardus]

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

But no, seriously, picking sides on this is a fine balance of the classic moralism/sovereignism debate. On one hand, Exodus is stepping into the internal affairs of another alliance. On the other hand, "wang" is about as poor a basis for ZI/PZI/ABC/123 as I've ever seen.

I'm just glad I don't actually have to give an opinion, but may instead observe with cheap jokes and laughter.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Ardus

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305752988' post='2714496']
Hey Sardonic, remember that time GOONS was aiding a guy roguing me for the second time in a row (while charging other alliances $90m for aiding rogues attacking GOONS, no less), and at the same time CoJ wanted to help a GOONS raid target, so we offered to make a deal and forget the rogue aid if you forgot the micro raid, and you told us to FOAD? Yeah, I remember that.
[/quote]
You're slipping, Schattenmann, you call that a spin? Nice touch calling the UOKMB incident a "micro raid" instead of "mass rogue attack on GOONS" as it actually was though, it would be believable to anyone who wasn't familiar with the situation. We rejected your deal and offered to compensate you for said accidental tech deal with the rouge, but you declined, so don't even begin to complain about your treatment.

But that's besides the point, I just wanted to highlight how your positions change to suit whatever the situation is. In this case, regarding the accepting of nations at war.

Also that agreement you quoted was only reached after you and nemesis stopped vainly trying to jerk us around.
[quote]
I think it's pretty funny that you're so obsessed with trying to one-up me that you would [b]implictly[/b] argue against GOONS own policy of telling alliances that accept nations at war (UOMB-UPN) to expect more attacks. It's sort of sad.
[/quote]
I'm [b]implicitly[/b] arguing no such thing. You not only fail to erase my point about your shifting positions, but you fail to analyze my argument correctly. Attacks are to be expected on rogues who attempt to flee to other AAs, I never claimed otherwise.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Sardonic

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1305753561' post='2714507']
You're slipping, Schattenmann, you call that a spin? Nice touch calling the UOKMB incident a "micro raid" instead of "mass rogue attack on GOONS" as it actually was though, it would be believable to anyone who wasn't familiar with the situation. We rejected your deal and offered to compensate you for said accidental tech deal with the rouge, but you declined, so don't even begin to complain about your treatment.[/quote]
If I am slipping, why is it you who can't differentiate between two events (the micro raid I cited, and GOONS's pursual of UOKMB nations after UPN accepted them with no active wars which I cited as a separate example) or spell rogue correctly? But nevermind, that.
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1305753561' post='2714507']
You not only fail to erase my point about your shifting positions, but you fail to analyze my argument correctly. Attacks are to be expected on rogues who attempt to flee to other AAs, I never claimed otherwise.
[/quote]
You have no point about my position changing that I should refute. We accepted two nations at war, asked you to stop attacking them and in exchange not make a fuss about your aid to a rogue, you rejected, so we negotiated another deal which met our aims. We asked for no reps or anything other than peace., and in fact CoJ/USSR fulfilled some mercy board essay for GOONS. We were adamant in our want for peace for those two applicants, enough to go to war, but we did not have any illusions that GOONS was required to give them peace just because we had accepted them; that is why we [i]asked[/i] for peace rather than demanding it and demanding reps as Exodus is doing.

When the vaunted GOONS raiding force failed to stagger 3 UOKMB nations, they applied to and were accepted by UPN at peace. GOONS proceeded to demand something-like-$15,000,000 per nationfrom UPN, and continued attacks on those nations and raided a 4th UPN member. Yet here you stand, so wrapped up in trying to score points on the Schattenmann that you are arguing against my stance that SUN owes Exodus nothing and that attacks on elBarto until he hits ZI or SUN gets tired of him.

The USSR/CoJ Applicants were innocent; they committed no offence against GOONS, they were just raid victims looking for peace.
The UOKMB nations attacked GOONS, and GOONS had a reason to go after them.
The only one of the two situations that is similar is UOKMB, and in that instance GOONS demanded reps from UPN. Exodus is UPN, elBarto is UOKMB. If you think I am wrong now, you argue against your own history.

You are hamstrung by your hate, and I find it amusing.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Wu Tang Clan]

You know the thread's a winner when there's a lot of posturing, confusion, and it ends with a Sardonic/Schattenmann argument.

Awesome.

[The Pansy]

[quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1305755782' post='2714539']
You know the thread's a winner when there's a lot of posturing, confusion, and it ends with a Sardonic/Schattenmann argument.

Awesome.
[/quote]
Not really Wu, chaos theory dictates if a thread is allowed to run long enough, Schatt and Sardonic will get into an arguement.

[Wu Tang Clan]

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1305755935' post='2714541']
Not really Wu, chaos theory dictates if a thread is allowed to run long enough, Schatt and Sardonic will get into an arguement.
[/quote]

This is true. But it's always fun.

[Williambonney]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1305746885' post='2714431']

* = At least, I used to think it was. People actually do this to us all the time. But I suppose, if GOONs does it (it being "not accept nations at war"), it's the wrong thing to do.
[/quote]


Excuse me but that is reserved for NPO, thank you.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1305755935' post='2714541']
Not really Wu, chaos theory dictates if a thread is allowed to run long enough, Schatt and Sardonic will get into an arguement.
[/quote]
I'm too irrelevant to ignore.

[Wu Tang Clan]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305756252' post='2714545']
I'm too irrelevant to ignore.
[/quote]

You'll always be relevant to me, sweetie.

Anyways, good luck SUN. Nothing personal, and I hope you get back on your feet quickly.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Partisan' timestamp='1305749023' post='2714456']
To recap for those who apparently dont understand: We came to them when we saw something wrong and were led to believe that the issue was resolved. After that however, the attacks on barto were made WITHOUT clearance.
[/quote]
While true that the incident could've been avoided had they not continued attacks on the AA without clearance, it also could've been avoided had Exodus not accepted a nation already at war. I don't see this as one side being wrong and one being right. It seems clear to me everyone made mistakes.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL7.jpg[/img]

[Wu Tang Clan]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1305757006' post='2714553']
While true that the incident could've been avoided had they not continued attacks on the AA without clearance, it also could've been avoided had Exodus not accepted a nation already at war. I don't see this as one side being wrong and one being right. It seems clear to me everyone made mistakes.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL7.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

No arguments from me. However close, I am not perfect.

[hewhoisgod]

I can honestly say that SUN didn't mean to breach the sovereignity of any other alliance.

I mean...it's not like we accepted a member that was on someone's ZI list then demanded reps because we didn't like the way they handled their internal affairs.

[KainIIIC]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305746304' post='2714425']
I only see NSO with the endorsements.
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure Valhalla has said plenty throughout these threads, but what can I say? NSO has the most active OWF presence of X's 3 allies.



[quote]What both of you need to understand is that when you accept a member with active wars and no alliance affiliation, you don't get some intrinsic right to demand "an apology and compensation of damage done" because the damage done was not to your member and the perceived wrong was not to your member. You accepted a nations in the process of being ZIed or PZIed--the distinction is immaterial to the circumstances of his application--and while many alliances might say "oh, ok, well you can have him" many (I dare say most) would not, and would tell you he's free from attacks when he gets to ZI (ie: <LA[SUN|XBOX]> i said you can have him, i did not say with infra).
If it came down to Exodus decided that treaties with NSO, IAA, and Val meant they can tell SUN to get bent, fine. But the idea that you are owed reps for "6 - 7 subsequent hours of my night" is repugnant, and you and ironchef should resign your positions if you don't want to do your jobs.
Don't get me wrong--I don't dislike elfarto, I don't dislike Exodus (yet), I don't like SUN, and I don't agree that a ZI or PZI is necessarily correct, but the simple fact of the matter is that your demands for compensation are absurd when it is Exodus which is breaking all protocol.
[/quote]

Yeah but you see, just about every event and action taken by SUN reeked of strangeness and stupidity. Starting with the fact that SUN had poached El Barto and tried to poach X members in the first place. El Barto didn't leave the alliance with any knowledge of even the slightest bit of suspicion that he'd be attacked, and surely not PZIed (something I'm sure you'd oppose). And the fact of the matter is, the application, acceptance, attacks and AA switch happened all within the span of an hour or two, and the first attack was supposed to of been resolved in the first place.

They tried to get them to back off and stop the attacks, but as you can see SUN pissed off just about everyone they were in the room with. They even tried to go to NATO and ASU for help (rofl yeah, it's kinda funny to ask those two of anyone..) to the point that Partisan increased the amount he was asking for (maybe it was too high, but what would've been a 'fairer' amount?). Basically, SUN had every intention of escalating this until RoK dropped them to the curb.

But hey, at least someone might've learned (if not flunked) FA 101, so let's hope SUN improves for the next semester

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1305761239' post='2714597']

But hey, at least someone might've learned (if not flunked) FA 101, so let's hope SUN improves for the next semester
[/quote]
Let's see NSO get tuition for that class from someone their own size.

[PMoses]

These explanations still do not take away from the fact that you A) failed a Perma ZI that you shouldn't have even attempted and B) you are now paying 24 million to a Micro alliance less then half your size to not punish you for attacking one of there nations. <3 Exodus

Also, you can't use the excuse that El Barto was unaligned. Your own members in the CNSPARTA chan said they knew he was leaving and rejoining X, they just forced an attack on him before he switched AA's in hopes that you could trap him from join an alliance and be perma zi'd.

Perma ZI over insults is totally a Pacifica thing to do, and SUN that means your doing it wrong already..

Anyways, thanks for the lols.

Hail NSO, and Valhalla for being great X allies and standing up for those you befriend.


[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1305761788' post='2714598']
Let's see NSO get tuition for that class from someone their own size.
[/quote]

To be honest and fair here.. I haven't seen anyone in the game NSO hasn't commented to, or about. They tangle with Sparta all the time, who by more then doubles NSO's size.

Edited May 19, 2011 by PMoses

[kevin32891]

[quote name='PMoses' timestamp='1305764100' post='2714605']
To be honest and fair here.. I haven't seen anyone in the game NSO hasn't commented to, or about. They tangle with Sparta all the time, who by more then doubles NSO's size.
[/quote]

Don't forget Xiphosis' ego.

[RePePe]

Schattenmann, your oratory and debate are usually refreshing against the backdrop of childish mud-slinging.

However, I think in this case you have forgotten that El Barto was sentenced to some form of ZI on the basis of telling someone to "suck on [his] wang." I hope you are just being argumentative or playing devil's advocate, and that the absurdity and humor of this event have not escaped you.