Official United Equestria Policy Annoucement

[Groucho Marx]

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1330030639' post='2926955']
Wow Death actually has a good point. A really good point.
[/quote]

When the hell does that ever happen? This should be immortalized.

[RePePe]

Just look at the actual language.

[quote]A foreign aid offer has been submitted by RePePe for the reason of '3 mil for 100 tech'. Please review your Foreign Aid screen to accept or deny this foreign aid offer.[/quote]

It is pretty clear that it is an [b]offer[/b] and that it is clearly marked as to its purpose. The nation has full freedom in accepting it (agreeing to do the deal) or denying it (not agreeing to do the deal).

There's no way around the very clear language. If I use my presidential credit card to order some digital music from my nation's Itoons store, the owner of Itoons, Orange, can't take my money [b]AND[/b] not give me what I bought.

Edited February 23, 2012 by RePePe

[King Wally]

[quote name='HellAngel' timestamp='1330013179' post='2926695']
Oh great, now it apparently was an government order. What the hell were you smoking MK...


[16:04] <Teh1337Guy> Around?
[16:04] <HellAngel[gre]> yap
[16:04] <Teh1337Guy> I wanted to personally apologize for the AA jumping business.
[16:04] <Teh1337Guy> Was my order so I should be the one to blame, I was hoping that people wouldnt have jumped to Gre/TOP
[16:04] <Teh1337Guy> 's AA to do that.
[16:05] <HellAngel[gre]> Just to get that right
[16:05] <HellAngel[gre]> you ordered people to jump into other AAs?
[16:05] <Teh1337Guy> Drai hasn't woken up yet but I assure you he will be off the AA in the morning.
[16:05] <Teh1337Guy> I was hoping more the AA's like TPF and 64digits, just to send the aid, not a long-term ghost.
[16:05] <HellAngel[gre]> so MK did loose their minds, after all
[16:06] <HellAngel[gre]> i should have ordered the strikes immediately
[16:06] <Teh1337Guy> I've clearly lost all sanity.
[16:06] <Teh1337Guy> Given I'm trying to protect the rights of tech buyers.
[16:06] <HellAngel[gre]> you remind me of an alliance that has fallen from grace and will never be relevant in CN politics again
[16:06] <HellAngel[gre]> yadda yadda
[16:07] <Teh1337Guy> Never relevant again?
[16:07] <HellAngel[gre]> its a thing called Karma, or "annoying people just as much to want them to kill you"
[16:07] <HellAngel[gre]> take that as you wish
[16:08] <Teh1337Guy> I see I've really become a thorn on your side with this eh?
[16:09] <HellAngel[gre]> you're purposefully violating alliances sovereignity
[16:09] <HellAngel[gre]> thats about as arrogant as it can get
[16:09] <Teh1337Guy> *Were. It was a mistake, hence why I'm eating the loses and apologizing.
[16:10] <Teh1337Guy> I'm not quite as arrogant as you may perceive me to be.
[16:11] <HellAngel[gre]> its not my job to work around the image you give yourself
[/quote]

Ok well this thread got interesting overnight I see. Continue on.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='RePePe' timestamp='1330038180' post='2927038']
Just look at the actual language.



It is pretty clear that it is an [b]offer[/b] and that it is clearly marked as to its purpose. The nation has full freedom in accepting it (agreeing to do the deal) or denying it (not agreeing to do the deal).

There's no way around the very clear language. If I use my presidential credit card to order some digital music from my nation's Itoons store, the owner of Itoons, Orange, can't take my money [b]AND[/b] not give me what I bought.
[/quote]


Well with this policy being a very big and well known public deal at this point, it'd be crazy to blindly send the offer to someone you hadn't spoken with or tried to work a deal out with before you send the aid.

Honestly it's completely idiotic to try and tech deal in that way any way.

The rest of this thread is hilarious. MK and allies in full blown shoot the messenger mode with HA/GRAM members now for "sinking to MK's level" is the funniest of all.

[ruzihm]

[quote name='RePePe' timestamp='1330038180' post='2927038']
Just look at the actual language.



It is pretty clear that it is an [b]offer[/b] and that it is clearly marked as to its purpose. The nation has full freedom in accepting it (agreeing to do the deal) or denying it (not agreeing to do the deal).

There's no way around the very clear language. If I use my presidential credit card to order some digital music from my nation's Itoons store, the owner of Itoons, Orange, can't take my money [b]AND[/b] not give me what I bought.
[/quote]

The contention is over how these pending aid offers actually occupy foreign aid slots until they are canceled, which can interfere with foreign aid communication among nations across different time zones.

(OOC: There was a suggestion thread for changing this pending slot mechanic but nothing came of it. Edit: [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=78801]here[/url])

Edited February 23, 2012 by ruzihm

[Domingo the Honored]

I know I'm very late to the party, but this is easily one of the most idiotic policies I've ever seen instituted.

I'm eager to see the outcome the first time you try to enforce this against one of the many alliances more powerful than you with no grievances about militarily resolving the dispute.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Aeros' timestamp='1330011653' post='2926683']
Here is a brilliant idea. Stop trying to control who buys tech from where. Its policies like this that contribute to increasing costs of purchasing tech, as it reduces the number of available sellers to large segments of Bob. Furthermore, its bad for the sellers because they become a captive producer who have to hunt for potential buyers rather then having the buyers come to them. It also opens the door to shenanigans, especially when you say you now have a policy of theft if someone offers a tech trade who is not on your "list". Which is far and away beyond the normal accepted procedure of just not accepting the deal.

Also, you guys owe me 50 tech from several months ago. I just chalked it up to casualties of war, but this thread makes me want to demand it now.

*EDIT*

And it seems GOONS and MK are offering your noobs tech deals. I seriously hope you all have good control over all your noobs (lol, no you don't). What are you going to do if the deals get accepted? Tell Doomhouse to shove it?

This policy is stupid. You would have to spin this like my avatar is spinning in order to make it something even remotely resembling a good idea.
[/quote]I hear a lot of whining about increased tech prices. That's good, that is the goal - We do not want to sell tech and help out alliances like those in DH when we disagree with what they use that tech for. Deal with it or cry some more, I care not. This is us responding to the call to "do something about it." That DH and friends take such offense means we're doing it right.

If you want your alliance to be able to purchase our tech, you are free to contact us with an application for our white list.

As far as your personal tech, please contact our gov (I personally am rather occupied as of late) with the name or nation who you did a tech deal with. We have some guys on our end who are looking for the people they owe tech to as well, so maybe we'll make a match. In the absence of mutual agreement ("yeah, I owe him tech, I remember now"), proof would be required at this point due to the significant delay, as UE consists of many new nations and deletions are common, and we do not in any way not have we ever insured non-whitelisted tech deals.

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1330013652' post='2926702']
Is ghosting a violation of sovereignty
[/quote]
Yes it is you idiot. Are you being purposely thick now?

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1330016554' post='2926732']
If you and I ever get into a discussion about a situation remind me to never be honest with you about anything. Yeah Leetguy screwed up, I gave him !@#$ for it as well but this logdumping is a cheap shot from an alliance which I expect better of.
[/quote]The only claim of a "screwup" was "Sorry we didn't tell them to not ghost PF because we need your strength to keep stepping on everyone else." There was no admission of any actual wrongdoing. It was shallow and vapid and I am thankful that their ridiculous antics are being exposed for the world to see, as they should be. The sense of entitlement from DH and company is astounding.

[quote name='TBRaiders' timestamp='1330021481' post='2926825']
Not really. I had no problem with you taking that AA away. I just wonder how easy it is to turn on and off that moral compass of yours.
[/quote]
For the record, you are arguing that MK is attempting a hostile takeover of the Gremlins' AA. Just want to point that out.

[quote name='Tick1' timestamp='1330022469' post='2926850']
What does one do to illegal immigrants buying merchandise they should not have? You deport them while striping them of their goods. You forget the important part in your theory.
[/quote]Good idea! I should go write up a new policy!

[quote name='RePePe' timestamp='1330038180' post='2927038']
There's no way around the very clear language. If I use my presidential credit card to order some digital music from my nation's Itoons store, the owner of Itoons, Orange, can't take my money [b]AND[/b] not give me what I bought.
[/quote]
Which is why we aren't taking the money. We're giving a refund. God you people are thick.

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1330033950' post='2926992']
If any other alliance would have made this mistake there's no way it would be scrutinized this much.

But it was a DH alliance so it's clearly just another atrocity to add to the list and they should be strung up by their heels and dragged through the streets for this.
[/quote]Correct, any other alliance would have been rolled on the spot with minimal scrutiny.

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1330033665' post='2926990']
Because I quite literally did not think people cared [i]that much[/i] about who is flying their AA, it seems like such a non-issue. If someone jumped on my AA and started attacking other alliances, it's not like I suddenly have to protect them. Likewise, if someone jumped to my AA and started aid bombing, the simple answer is to not accept the aid. Furthermore, TPF acted fully in their right and attacked someone who jumped on their AA, which is obviously a risk taken when one leaves the safe zone of their own AA. I hardly expected such a brash blowback, although really given the amount of mountains made out of molehills here I guess I should have been prepared. This isn't going to be a persistent or reoccurring issue, as it was clearly a mistake, which has now been addressed.
[/quote]I hope "not a recurring" issue refers to the entire concept of aggressively ghosting alliances, and not just that you're giving a shorter list of acceptable alliances to $%&@ with. Knowing your motivations, it constitutes an act of war from a rogue state, and I will see to it that these are the terms on which violations from MK on our AA are handled from this point forward. Unlike many alliances who claim to be our greater, we do not bend over and take this level of nonsense lightly. This is your one and only warning to not ghost our AA. Because this is apparently necessary to say.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1330040870' post='2927067']
Correct, any other alliance would have been rolled on the spot with minimal scrutiny.
[/quote]

......

For ghosting someone elses AA to get tech deals? That's sort of harsh, no?

[Tromp]

Yes, that's clearly an exaggeration Trotsky, but to be fair we've seen [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=94470&st=0]other things[/url] about as stupid as that what you mention.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1330046049' post='2927140']
......

For ghosting someone elses AA to get tech deals? That's sort of harsh, no?
[/quote]


This wasn't ghosting an AA to get tech deals, it was organized ghosting of multiple AA's to screw with another alliance.

[Biff Webster]

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1330033665' post='2926990']
Because I quite literally did not think people cared [i]that much[/i] about who is flying their AA, it seems like such a non-issue. If someone jumped on my AA and started attacking other alliances, it's not like I suddenly have to protect them. Likewise, if someone jumped to my AA and started aid bombing, the simple answer is to not accept the aid. Furthermore, TPF acted fully in their right and attacked someone who jumped on their AA, which is obviously a risk taken when one leaves the safe zone of their own AA. I hardly expected such a brash blowback, although really given the amount of mountains made out of molehills here I guess I should have been prepared. This isn't going to be a persistent or reoccurring issue, as it was clearly a mistake, which has now been addressed.
[/quote]

I bet Ardus would have been able to pull it off. How sad. Instead of UE showing you it's ass and backing off of it's policy, you end up apologizing to Grämlins of all people. You've come a long way from being able to extract reps over a log dump.

[Kryievla]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1330040870' post='2927067']



Which is why we aren't taking the money. We're giving a refund. God you people are thick.


[/quote]

If you are now refunding money, that's great, but you didn't make that clear in the op; calling people thick on account of YOUR lack of communication is some serious nerve. Why are you insulting people who are only going by what your guy posted in the OP (and has not corrected as of this time)?

from the op:

[b]Such outside deals are viewed as "under the table" and therefore no compensation for failure to complete the deal is guaranteed by UE[/b]

~ No ~ mention of refund. Only comments on how your alliance doesn't feel the need to follow through on what your members agree to, & a rather long-winded attempt at justifying the theft. (assuming your members have access to this whitelist, accepting money they have no intention of paying back in kind or tech IS theft, no matter how you try to dress it up)

[AmbroseIV]

Eh... this seems to be a bit of an overreaction, especially for something that I'm not sure is a widespread problem - you've had lots of issues where other people haven't?

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1330025310' post='2926882']
In addition to being completely classless in this public logdump, you also come off as ridiculously arrogant. I would have hoped the arrogant days of GRE died with the old incarnation. Guess I was wrong.
[/quote]

... but they still look quite modest compared to the alliance that has a history (hello Nice Boat Alliance?) of letting, and now it seems encouraging, members to roam freely across other AA's in an attempt to create issues 'n drama between other alliances.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1330046485' post='2927149']
This wasn't ghosting an AA to get tech deals, it was organized ghosting of multiple AA's to screw with another alliance.
[/quote]

Is there any proof of intent?

I've sort of skimmed through here so I could have missed something. So this is a legitimate question.

Is there any proof that MK did this with the intent of hurting anyone rather than just trying to score some tech?

Edit: grammar fail.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Ayatollah Bromeini

[Biff Webster]

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1330049145' post='2927194']
Is there any proof of intent?

I've sort of skimmed through here so I could have missed something. So this is a legitimate question.

Is there any proof that MK did this is the intent of hurting anyone rather than just trying to score some tech?
[/quote]

Hello mini-janax, are you working on a future MK application? Stooge.

[deth2munkies]

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1330033665' post='2926990']
Because I quite literally did not think people cared [i]that much[/i] about who is flying their AA, it seems like such a non-issue. If someone jumped on my AA and started attacking other alliances, it's not like I suddenly have to protect them. Likewise, if someone jumped to my AA and started aid bombing, the simple answer is to not accept the aid. Furthermore, TPF acted fully in their right and attacked someone who jumped on their AA, which is obviously a risk taken when one leaves the safe zone of their own AA. I hardly expected such a brash blowback, although really given the amount of mountains made out of molehills here I guess I should have been prepared. This isn't going to be a persistent or reoccurring issue, as it was clearly a mistake, which has now been addressed.
[/quote]
Posts like this just show you are ignorant of how politics works and are willing to sacrifice your own nations for fun. It's way too late for "it won't happen again". You've managed to damage yourself and your alliance's reputation more than anything Roq's done over the past few days with this.

I knew you were never much of a leader, but if you honestly didn't see any of this coming, the best thing you can do for MK is step down and let someone who knows what they're doing take over. This is a career ender, and if it isn't, expect the fallout to go a lot farther than the simple tongue lashings that are going on today.

[Monster]

What damage did I do? Who respected me to begin with that doesn't now? I don't really need the respect of people whose opinions of me are contingent on my relations with MK or Umbrella.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Roquentin

[Omniscient1]

You guys should have gone full NG and threaten to roll people who send them unsolicited tech deals.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='Biff Webster' timestamp='1330049379' post='2927199']
Hello mini-janax, are you working on a future MK application? Stooge.
[/quote]

I'll take the personal attack as a "no" to my question and I'll take the fact that you completely overlooked how I elaborated that I wasn't trying to make a point and was merely asking a question as a severe lack of reading comprehension.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Ayatollah Bromeini

[Baldr]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1329939236' post='2925652']
We have no intention of screwing innocent parties of their money.[/quote]

When you say "If you are not on our whitelist and send us money, we will accept the money and treat it as a donation", it sure sounds like your entire goal is to screw innocent parties out of their money. Your "Maybe we'll decide to refund the money if you raise a stink on our forums" policy only goes farther to make it sound like your goal is to screw people out of their money.

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1329940845' post='2925659']
This policy explicitly nullifies the "contract" when said contract is unsolicited and the money is shipped off to the nation before they even have a chance to agree to any such offer. [/quote]

You always have a chance to agree or disagree, because the aid isn't sent until the receiver accepts the aid.

[quote]If a PM exchange takes place and a contract is ironed out and agreed upon by both parties BEFORE any money offers are actually sent, it is a different than what this policy covers.[/quote]


Your original post (the official policy) states "[i]This alliance policy overrides any unsolicited contracts offered by donor states, regardless of the agreement, explicit or otherwise, of United Equestria member states.[/i]" That means I could msg a UE nation and ask them if they want to sell tech, they could say yes, we could discuss price, and then after I send money and they accept, they could say "Hey, you sent an unsolicited msg that started this deal, and that means this is a donation!".

In fact, it sounds like you are encouraging them to do that. You explicitly state taht even if they *agree* to the deal prior to the aid being sent. You specifically say that even an explicit agreement doesn't negate this policy, and that they can simply take the money and scream "DONATION!"

[quote]What some parties are doing here, is the equivalent of walking out on the street, placing $20 dollars into the hands of a stranger, and then claiming they agreed to a contract to hand over their watch when no such contract was ever ironed out ahead of time.
[/quote]

You're delusional.

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1329942868' post='2925681']
Malicious attempts to abuse this and lock up our aid slots will not be entertained.[/quote]

I've never heard of "malicious tech buying" or "abusive tech buying". Perhaps you could explain. More likely, you're just a nutcase.

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1329944455' post='2925700']
I acknowledge a personal flaw here: I am extraordinarily obsessed with making the language as precise as possible; [/quote]

Oh, I think you are quite precise. You're saying that anyone who tries to do a tech deal with a UE nation better be from an alliance on your white list, else you plan to steal their money and call it a donation.

What would be the definition of "coordinated" here? We could get fifty offers from an alliance and the gov could claim them as individual acts. I would rather not make assertions in an endless cycle of "no u" debates.

I don't know your alliance. I do set up tech deals from time to time. I did make a note that your alliance plans to steal any tech money it receives. I don't expect your alliance to be around long unless you come to your senses.

[quote]If you want your alliance to be able to purchase our tech, you are free to contact us with an application for our white list.[/quote]

Send you an unsolicited message to set up tech deals? No, that would apparently give you the right to scream "donation". I'll pass.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Baldr

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1330049145' post='2927194']
Is there any proof of intent?

I've sort of skimmed through here so I could have missed something. So this is a legitimate question.

Is there any proof that MK did this with the intent of hurting anyone rather than just trying to score some tech?

Edit: grammar fail.
[/quote]


Well outside of the threatening posts about UE getting rolled over a deal gone bad by quite a few DH members, their general whiny disagreement with this entire policy, you have this from high MK GOV who ordered the ghosting.

[quote][16:06] <Teh1337Guy> Given I'm trying to protect the rights of tech buyers.[/quote]

This suggests to anyone with a brain that they weren't trying to just score a few slots of tech (which would probably be the dumbest way to go about trying to get a tech deal in Bob history). They were trying to screw with UE and this newly announced policy. You know this even if you are trying to play coy about it. All of Bob knows.

[Monster]

Yeah, sounds like him to me. Not sure what you were expecting. If it does escalate, you'll actually have something to save your upper tiers for this time. Hm, maybe I could join TPF. The irony would be hilarious.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Roquentin

[Timberland]

With this kind of policy its surprising 64 digits/UE wasn't rolled for it in the past.

I'm glad I give tech away instead of buying it, this thread continues to deliver please keep it going.

[Monster]

So like I said, TPF, or anyone who is willing to embrace it, unlimited splendor is yours for taking. The arrangement can be permanent and mutually beneficial. You just have to be willing to accept it.

[IYIyTh]

HellsAngel, this is nothing new to them. They also sent members to other alliances before declaring war in order to militarily assist without a casus belli in hopes of provoking others under the guise of "helping their allies." That they would attempt to ghost UE, Gramlins, or any alliance to get a rise is really not surprising.