A Message to Acti from Olympus.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]If the offender is a member of government there's plenty of precedent for it being considered a CB against the whole alliance[/quote]
Yes, indeed. Though like you I'm not that comfortable with using OOC IRC chats as an in game CB. What I'm arguing against is the idea that you can declare on one member of an alliance without declaring on the alliance as a whole.

[kwell]

[quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1311799151' post='2765521']
Pansy was the one who saw Batallion acting like an ass and he threatened war. Batallion, as his usual self, acted like a fool and dared him. Clear cut CB to me.
[/quote]
Sounds to me that Pansy shouldn't be a gov member if he gets his feelings hurt that quickly. Ban him next time. If you really wanted roll them, just say we don't like, your a d**k.

Either way. Acti: -1 (for not keeping a check on battalions tounge) Olympus: -2 (+1 for causing drama, -1 for Pansy not banning Battalion, -1 for not knowing how to respond to d**ks, -1 for being purple)

All in all, this better esculate because my nuclear arsenal is collecting dust (gr . . . cleaning crew, your fired : P )

Edited July 27, 2011 by kwell

[Alterego]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1311802856' post='2765560']
Yes, indeed. Though like you I'm not that comfortable with using OOC IRC chats as an in game CB. What I'm arguing against is the idea that you can declare on one member of an alliance without declaring on the alliance as a whole.
[/quote]
They can and they did. Its up to the other alliance how they react. Regardless of the reaction nothing impedes an alliance doing what you said cant be done.

[Hyperbad]

[quote name='Vladisvok Destino' timestamp='1311792303' post='2765435']
I really like the people who say "I haven't seen the logs" and still think they can comment, please go read them then come back (I won't criticise if you read them, then come back and say it's stupid, that's up to you.)
[/quote]
Where can I find them?

[President S O]

[quote name='Sir Keshav IV' timestamp='1311781880' post='2765289']
o/ Olympus

Roll them all except SO's target
[/quote]

He already wants peace.

[quote name='Lord Hershey' timestamp='1311791374' post='2765423']
Olympus is taking this way too personal, I don't see why they would escalate a war over a guy whose feelings got "hurt" by being called a tranny. I haven't seen the logs yet but this is really ridiculous and childish.
[/quote]

Hershey hatin' on us? I for one am [b]not[/b] surprised. Olympus is responding to a situation with action that we deem necessary. We haven't escalated anything, AcTi have themselves to blame for that. Also, not knowing what happened isn't doing you any favours. If you have such a problem Hershey, do something. We are.

[quote name='MitchellBade' timestamp='1311795730' post='2765486']
Judging from the DoW's alone, I believe there was ample communication on the matter before AcTi escalated it. Olympus declared that they were only going after Batallion and sparing the rest of AcTi from his fate, which they were adhering to at the outset of the war. Then Teddyyo acknowledges in his DoW that Olympus is only attacking Batallion but rushes the rest of AcTi to his defense and declares on Olympus. The escalation is solely on teddyyo.
[/quote]

This is pretty accurate.


[quote name='Sloane' timestamp='1311797134' post='2765504']
If attacking one is attacking all, then it stands to reason that Acti has no choice but to escalate this into a full fledged war.
[/quote]

Olympus is family, it is how we've always been. As such we're doing what we said we would -- protecting our family. AcTi was given an opportunity to avoid destruction, they didn't seize it.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1311801190' post='2765542']
It really doesn't make sense to declare on one member of an alliance. Typical procedure is to ask the alliance to expel the member beforehand. (And yeah, peace mode blah blah but if he is unaligned and on a hit list you can prevent him from getting membership to another alliance and that's a lot more effective than rolling a few pixels anyway.)

As for using personal attacks as a CB, that has something of a history, and can be justified – though if you support this and complained about the start of Bipolar, you might want to take an objective look at the two situations. Batallion is an utter clown though and it amazes me that he still has an alliance after what he's done in the past.

(edit: HTML entities don't work here)
[/quote]

Batallion is Emperor of AcTi. He wasn't going to expel himself, that is why we've had to declare on him while he is on the AA. We can't forcefully remove him. And he certainly wasn't going to leave if we pleasantly asked him.


[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311802995' post='2765562']
Sounds to me that Pansy shouldn't be a gov member if he gets his feelings hurt that quickly. Ban him next time. If you really wanted roll them, just say we don't like, your a d**k.

Either way. Acti: -1 (for not keeping a check on battalions tounge) Olympus: -2 (+1 for causing drama, -1 for Pansy not banning Battalion, -1 for not knowing how to respond to d**ks, -1 for being purple)

All in all, this better esculate because my nuclear arsenal is collecting dust (gr . . . cleaning crew, your fired : P )
[/quote]

Pansy is very experienced member of this community. He didn't get his feelings hurt, he was protecting one of his fellow Olympians. You're probably unaware of all the facts, but the channel it happened in WAS NOT ours. We have no moderating controls over it. We didn't 'want' to roll AcTi, we wanted to roll Batallion. We're doing it, and for good reason.

[hizzy]

literally the only people who are allowed to support this move are NpO members/supporters. everyone else is a hypocritical turd.

Edited July 27, 2011 by hizzy

[kwell]

[quote name='President S O' timestamp='1311805181' post='2765587']

Pansy is very experienced member of this community. He didn't get his feelings hurt, he was protecting one of his fellow Olympians. You're probably unaware of all the facts, but the channel it happened in WAS NOT ours. We have no moderating controls over it. We didn't 'want' to roll AcTi, we wanted to roll Batallion. We're doing it, and for good reason.
[/quote]

How can I know the facts when you are unwilling to post them here? Scared that the public will see them as flimsy? Oh wait, they already do : P Try again, if the ooc attacks are that bad, surely the public will agree with you. By not posting them either as screen shots or link tells me thay you even question how flimsy they are.

Again, I speak only for me, not my aa. Wait, that doesn't matter for Olympus, now does it : P

[MaGneT]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1311796571' post='2765494']
To be fair they can and they did.


Its not a precedent OOC attacks have resulted in serious consequences for years. A sustained verbal personal attack is nothing like a comment on a person’s background.
[/quote]
But is it the correct precedent? I agree with everyone who is saying that Batallion went way overboard with this. There's no place for talk like that. So I certainly understand the outrage and this reaction, but is it appropriate? I don't have a concrete position here and this is a good opportunity to discuss where, exactly, the "line" is.

That being said, where is the line between a sustained verbal personal attack and a harmless comment? It's purely subjective. What you're saying here is that if something that occurs OOC is offensive enough, it is appropriate to take IC action. For argument's sake, let's say that I weigh 350 pounds (I'm much lighter than that). You come into #DT every day, and when I say "hey, Alterego" you reply "hey, fatty". Is that okay, or should I attack your nation? Let's step it up. How about one day, you decide to troll me and go on about how fat people suck, trying to goad me into a fight. Is that okay, or should I attack your nation? Now, one of these days, I'm in a bad mood and I bite. I tell you to shut up, you tell me that I'm so fat that someone needs to play a Pokéflute to get me out of bed in the morning. I tell you that I'm fed up with it, you tell me "go eat yourself to death, tubby". Is that offensive enough, or is it acceptable?

Let's say I just kick you from the channel and it's done. There will be an obvious IC effect as I would avoid aligning myself with you. Common OOC interests or OOC disputes certainly reflect themselves in FA here on Planet Bob, right? We can't control that and it'd be silly to. I think that there is a happy medium somewhere between this sort of thing and wars for OOC reasons. No one would support having an ally who insults their Earthly persona, but at the same time, no one would support a war because two people had an argument about OOC politics, right? What I'm really wondering is if this particular incident is an example of the line itself. After all, if this was slightly less severe, I think we can all agree that it will have a lot less support, but if it was slightly worse, there would be no doubt about the validity of Olympus' CB.

EDIT:
Noticed this guy posted between me and hizzy
[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311806204' post='2765595']
How can I know the facts when you are unwilling to post them here? Scared that the public will see them as flimsy? Oh wait, they already do : P Try again, if the ooc attacks are that bad, surely the public will agree with you. By not posting them either as screen shots or link tells me thay you even question how flimsy they are.

Again, I speak only for me, not my aa. Wait, that doesn't matter for Olympus, now does it : P
[/quote]
The logs were very inappropriate and I have a feeling that the deities who rule these parts would make them disappear quite quickly. Any abridged version would really take the impact out of them. If I had to guess, Olympus avoided posting them as a matter of taste and as a matter of protecting their member's personal information.

And your second part. First, you don't need to announce that you don't speak for Umbrella in everything you post. It's understood on here that everyone does not necessarily speak on the part of a government. Second, of course it matters for Olympus! It's hard to take someone seriously who clearly did not even have the capability of reading and understanding the OP. What part of [i]only declaring on Batallion[/i], not all of AcTi, do you not understand?

Edited July 27, 2011 by MaGneT

[Alterego]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311806204' post='2765595']
How can I know the facts when you are unwilling to post them here? Scared that the public will see them as flimsy? Oh wait, they already do : P Try again, if the ooc attacks are that bad, surely the public will agree with you. By not posting them either as screen shots or link tells me thay you even question how flimsy they are.

Again, I speak only for me, not my aa. Wait, that doesn't matter for Olympus, now does it : P
[/quote]

These logs are public, go and find them if you really care this much. However, he doesnt need to prove didly squat to you or anyone else. They attacked Bat for his actions and AcTi declared war.

[Grendel]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311806204' post='2765595']
How can I know the facts when you are unwilling to post them here? Scared that the public will see them as flimsy? Oh wait, they already do : P Try again, if the ooc attacks are that bad, surely the public will agree with you. By not posting them either as screen shots or link tells me thay you even question how flimsy they are.

Again, I speak only for me, not my aa. Wait, that doesn't matter for Olympus, now does it : P
[/quote]

We have our justification for war with Battalion, and we feel no need to propagate the root cause by posting the information for the lazy. The information is not hidden and is in a public location. Anyone willing to take the time to educate themselves on the subject feel free but we do not need to do your work for you. This is between us, Battalion and AcTi [plus appropriate treaty partners]. We posted what we are doing, never for a moment did we desire or intend on the body public of Bob to vet our actions. Our OP is a statement of intent and action everything else is moot.

[President S O]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311806204' post='2765595']
How can I know the facts when you are unwilling to post them here? Scared that the public will see them as flimsy? Oh wait, they already do : P Try again, if the ooc attacks are that bad, surely the public will agree with you. By not posting them either as screen shots or link tells me thay you even question how flimsy they are.

Again, I speak only for me, not my aa. Wait, that doesn't matter for Olympus, now does it : P
[/quote]

Wow, you really don't understand do you? You would fit in well over at AcTi. AcTi members had the choice to avoid war. The leader/s of AcTi decided that the rest of AcTi should pay for Batallions idiotic actions -- as Bat still does. We're not going to post something here, that could result in individual punishments against those posting. If you want it, come in private and ask where you can see it. Its publicly available if you actually care for it, you probably don't and just want something to condemn us about -- without knowing any information.

Olympus gave all members of AcTi a chance to avoid war, they don't deserve to take damage because of their big mouthed leader. They are still being given that opportunity if they so choose to take it. Other alliances would have just declared on the entire alliance in the first place.

From reactions here, looks like people see it as solid.

Edited July 27, 2011 by President S O

[kwell]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1311806549' post='2765598']
These logs are public, go and find them if you really care this much. However, he doesnt need to prove didly squat to you or anyone else. They attacked Bat for his actions and AcTi declared war.
[/quote]

Thats not a reason and you know it : P

I have looked, not on irc (I am sure I can find them though). I don't care really. It just makes Olympus looks like they don't even believe in their cb when they can't post it. If they don't believe it, then why should the public? I can look for it, but I shouldn't have to. Make available the logs available to everyone, and you won't have me complaining that it is not readily available. By not doing this, Olympus makes itself look unconfident in their evidence.

[Grendel]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311807398' post='2765606']
Thats not a reason and you know it : P
.....Make available the logs available to everyone, and you won't have me complaining that it is not readily available. By not doing this, Olympus makes itself look unconfident in their evidence...
[/quote]

You act as if we have to clear what we are doing with the OWF and you. Well guess what we do not and will not.

Note - We are doing what we are doing for our reasons and do not care what any unrelated party thinks about it. Confident enough for you?

[Alterego]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311807398' post='2765606']
Thats not a reason and you know it : P

I have looked, not on irc (I am sure I can find them though). I don't care really. It just makes Olympus looks like they don't even believe in their cb when they can't post it. If they don't believe it, then why should the public? I can look for it, but I shouldn't have to. Make available the logs available to everyone, and you won't have me complaining that it is not readily available. By not doing this, Olympus makes itself look unconfident in their evidence.
[/quote]

You the expert in CBs? Your alliance attacked NPO for no reason at all in the last war. They were sitting minding their business doing nothing and your alliance attacked them. Perhaps you haven’t noticed but Olympus did not declare war on AcTi so drop the CB bs argument. They hit one guy for his actions and it was well deserved.

[D34th]

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1311805340' post='2765590']
literally the only people who are allowed to support this move are NpO members/supporters. everyone else is a hypocritical turd.
[/quote]

Exactly. This thread and the posters on it are CN's politics at their best. The same people who is hailing Olympus were the same who were saying one month ago that OOC actions weren't reason enough for an IC war and wre crying about OOC/IC line. Consistence isn't a quality who is easily found in cyberverse.

[MaGneT]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1311808352' post='2765616']
Exactly. This thread and the posters on it are CN's politics at their best. The same people who is hailing Olympus were the same who were saying one month ago that OOC actions weren't reason enough for an IC war and wre crying about OOC/IC line. Consistence isn't a quality who is easily found in cyberverse.
[/quote]
For once, I find myself in complete agreement with you. The last part of course, about consistency. Edited to clarify.

Edited July 27, 2011 by MaGneT

[aboooe]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311807398' post='2765606']
Thats not a reason and you know it : P

I have looked, not on irc (I am sure I can find them though). I don't care really. It just makes Olympus looks like they don't even believe in their cb when they can't post it. If they don't believe it, then why should the public? I can look for it, but I shouldn't have to. Make available the logs available to everyone, and you won't have me complaining that it is not readily available. By not doing this, Olympus makes itself look unconfident in their evidence.
[/quote]
Oi Lazy I'll link you next time you're in #stoners

[xR1 Fatal Instinct]

For those of you who haven't seen the logs they are posted here (note there is VERY STRONG language in these logs and viewer discretion is advised):

http://tinyurl.com/AcTi-Batt

Edited July 27, 2011 by xR1 Fatal Instinct

[Indian Bob]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1311807398' post='2765606']
Thats not a reason and you know it : P

I have looked, not on irc (I am sure I can find them though). I don't care really. It just makes Olympus looks like they don't even believe in their cb when they can't post it. If they don't believe it, then why should the public? I can look for it, but I shouldn't have to. Make available the logs available to everyone, and you won't have me complaining that it is not readily available. By not doing this, Olympus makes itself look unconfident in their evidence.
[/quote]

they don't lack confidence, they just know that what he said doesn't automatically become less repugnant just because it's being copy/pasted and not live. if you want to be titillated by the bad words, make a little bit of effort, readily available does not mean delivered on a silver platter for your prurient viewing.

[Grendel]

Did I tell anyone I love Indian Bob and his fellow SNAFUians

[2burnt2eat]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1311808352' post='2765616']
Exactly. This thread and the posters on it are CN's politics at their best. The same people who is hailing Olympus were the same who were saying one month ago that OOC actions weren't reason enough for an IC war and wre crying about OOC/IC line. Consistence isn't a quality who is easily found in cyberverse.
[/quote]

Yea.. uhm.. show me some contradictions.

...Because I haven't made any.

[D34th]

[quote name='2burnt2eat' timestamp='1311809015' post='2765628']
Yea.. uhm.. show me some contradictions.

...Because I haven't made any.
[/quote]

Since I wasn't specifically talking about you I don't know why I should show you something...

Also It's hard to make a contradiction when the majority of your posts consists in write "bump."

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1311808352' post='2765616']
Exactly. This thread and the posters on it are CN's politics at their best. The same people who is hailing Olympus were the same who were saying one month ago that OOC actions weren't reason enough for an IC war and wre crying about OOC/IC line. Consistence isn't a quality who is easily found in cyberverse.
[/quote]

Now, I'm not 100% familiar with this instance, but I can tell you that I personally take an ooc attack against a member of my alliance much more seriously than I would take what another alliance does on their [i]own[/i] forums, and I would bet that's a distinction many others would make as well.

Edited July 27, 2011 by supercoolyellow

[Aeros]

[quote name='xR1 Fatal Instinct' timestamp='1311808653' post='2765624']
For those of you who haven't seen the logs they are posted here (note there is VERY STRONG language in these logs and viewer discretion is advised):

http://tinyurl.com/AcTi-Batt
[/quote]

That was truly amusing. At least Batallion thinks highly of himself, even if nobody else does

[2burnt2eat]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1311809528' post='2765631']
I cannot list any contradictions, but yet will tar and feather everyone with the same brush.
[/quote]

Okay, thanks.