Official IRON Announcement

[wickedj]

[quote name='Jgoods45' timestamp='1340212340' post='2990164']
Why? It's another case of pure retardation on LSF's part. $%&@ em. Have fun IRON!
[/quote]
Unfortunatly Mr. Goods the premise of a treaty is that youll stick by their side regardless of what asshattery they pull..otherwise youd put in a "no asshattery" clause

either way the IronDuck image made me laugh

[Gingervites]

[quote name='Crownguard' timestamp='1340222178' post='2990423']
Not that it is all that relevant to people, but a lowly nub has a question:

If Optimistic/Sabcat/random LSF member, as a member of LSF, represents all his government by his actions....

Does Chairman Hal, by his callout on the OWF, represent all of Valhalla by his own?

If a member of an alliance is considered representative of that alliance, how exactly does this faux moral outrage and war cheerleading work exactly? I don't deny LSF did something that was unwise (indeed foolish), but the pots calling the kettle black is a bit strange.
[/quote]It is a little different for LSF because they have no government, so when a more prominent person in LSF(for example say Sabcat or hereno) says something in an apology thread with the opening sentence being "An Apology from the Libertarian Socialist Federation" I think it is fair to say that the OP is representing LSF in that post. Then Hereno goes off, LSF doesn't pay, apology was fake and now they have a war.

Hal is not in Val gov and it is posted that he isn't and his thread was his personal opinion of what should have been done(or still be doing).

[Nemhauser]

Welcome to the mop up, IRON.

[Vinzent Zeppelin]

[quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1340219015' post='2990374']
[2012-06-17 19:11:49] <USMC|AWAY> /mode #blackguards +s
[/quote]

You missed one.

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' timestamp='1340220163' post='2990399']
Now, let's get a few facts straight.

Yes, Opti acted badly. Yes, he should have apologized. He was keen on doing so (I could give logs but who cares, at this point). However, IRON wanted all of LSF to apologize for the actions of a less-than-24-hours member. Fine, we gave them an apology. Was it half-assed? Sure, we took a jab at them when we did it. If war is the new standard for what the enemy perceives to be half-assed apologies, I certainly expect that nobody will be giving any in the future.

You want us to be sorry for what? A guy got high and had a bit of fun on IRC. Several alliances have seen their members do it in the past, some of them being actually in favor of this new war. I hope that you guys stay on top for a while for your members are keen on doing such shenanigans as well. The LSF, as a whole, wasn't sorry. We felt it was business between Opti and IRON. We still presented an apology but decided to include a jab in it.

Now, if that is enough to justify war, then so be it.[/quote]

I'm willing to wager that those other alliances you mentioned did the responsible thing by contacting the alliance on the receiving end of the "bit of fun", letting them know that the member in question was not acting on the alliance's behalf and that the member in question will be held accountable for his or her actions, and generally acting in such a way as to reconcile the diplomatic incident. The LSF did none of that.

[Hereno]

[quote name='Kzoppistan' timestamp='1340222453' post='2990429']
That being the case, why then did Sabcat post an apology (a half-assed one, at that) when nothing was decided? Seems a rather reckless thing to do, if you were truly interested in peace.[/quote]

We were under a deadline that if we didn't have something posted by that time, we would be declared on. Not much time was left for actual democracy to take place. Many of our membership were quite peeved that they didn't even get to have their say in the matter because they aren't OOC:playing cybernations 24/7.

[quote name='Gingervites' timestamp='1340222901' post='2990440']
It is a little different for LSF because they have no government, so when a more prominent person in LSF(for example say Sabcat or hereno) says something in an apology thread with the opening sentence being "An Apology from the Libertarian Socialist Federation" I think it is fair to say that the OP is representing LSF in that post. Then Hereno goes off, LSF doesn't pay, apology was fake and now they have a war.

Hal is not in Val gov and it is posted that he isn't and his thread was his personal opinion of what should have been done(or still be doing).
[/quote]

Dude, are you joking? I wasn't even in LSF at the beginning of their war with Nordreich. I've been here for like 4 or 5 days now.

[kingzog]

[quote name='Crownguard' timestamp='1340222178' post='2990423']
Not that it is all that relevant to people, but a lowly nub has a question:

If Optimistic/Sabcat/random LSF member, as a member of LSF, represents all his government by his actions....

Does Chairman Hal, by his callout on the OWF, represent all of Valhalla by his own?

If a member of an alliance is considered representative of that alliance, how exactly does this faux moral outrage and war cheerleading work exactly? I don't deny LSF did something that was unwise (indeed foolish), but the pots calling the kettle black is a bit strange.
[/quote]

Hal is not a part of the Valhalla government and doesn't speak for the alliance.

The LSF, by its own admission, has no government. So who speaks for the alliance? At the end of the day, no one. And everyone. Individual members are far more accountable as a result, in the sense that the alliance pays for their individual stupidity. What we learn with each incident, though, is that there really is an LSF government; the alliance is run by those who show up. While individuals enter or leave this *gasp* hierarchy from time to time, it doesn't change the fact that a controlling group exists.

The LSF will deny this, of course, but it's obvious to anyone who has dealt with them, including their allies.

Some will say this is unfair, but it's hardly the rest of the world's fault that the LSF has picked a 'non-government model' that quite simply doesn't work on Planet Bob.

[Crownguard]

I have yet to meet a person in reality who ever sincerely apologizes when a club is held over their head, but I won't argue that point.

Your argument may work for Sabcat, but it doesn't work for Optimistic. *He* never claimed to be government...he was a new member. See, he isn't a prominent member of government and yet IRON directed its ire at LSF to pay reps for his actions. Hal's actions were a deliberate action to instigate a particular FA path on an alliance, and Optimistic did the same. Both were excused away by their respective "governments", but one has to have their collective pay the price.

Hell, stupid raiders cause this issue all the time, and yet we somehow avoid going to war over it.

By that argument, I would expect Valhalla to have a tighter rein on members posting inflammatory material than I would a group of anarchists. You know, if we are using logic here.

[Max Power]

[quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1340222034' post='2990421']
Apology:

Looked like an apology to me.
[/quote]
Did you read the link in the OP?

[Emperor Whimsical]

[quote name='Crownguard' timestamp='1340223202' post='2990445']
I have yet to meet a person in reality who ever sincerely apologizes when a club is held over their head, but I won't argue that point.

Your argument may work for Sabcat, but it doesn't work for Optimistic. *He* never claimed to be government...he was a new member. See, he isn't a prominent member of government and yet IRON directed its ire at LSF to pay reps for his actions. Hal's actions were a deliberate action to instigate a particular FA path on an alliance, and Optimistic did the same. Both were excused away by their respective "governments", but one has to have their collective pay the price.

Hell, stupid raiders cause this issue all the time, and yet we somehow avoid going to war over it.

By that argument, I would expect Valhalla to have a tighter rein on members posting inflammatory material than I would a group of anarchists. You know, if we are using logic here.
[/quote]

Optimistic was LSF before he joined, and he returned. Hal's joke was tongue in cheek. The issue here isn't just that that he was a member, LSF also failed to aid or apologize in a way IRON saw fit.

Edited June 20, 2012 by Emperor Whimsical

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

[quote name='Vinzent Zeppelin' timestamp='1340222994' post='2990442']
I'm willing to wager that those other alliances you mentioned did the responsible thing by contacting the alliance on the receiving end of the "bit of fun", letting them know that the member in question was not acting on the alliance's behalf and that the member in question will be held accountable for his or her actions, and generally acting in such a way as to reconcile the diplomatic incident. The LSF did none of that.
[/quote]
We expelled him, promised tech (hey, 18 hours) and offered an apology. Now, granted, the apology also contained a hidden jab. We still expelled him and were intent on delivering the tech.

Which is a LOT more than most alliances would have done in a similar case. Of course, most similar cases would have been solved with a private apology but some opportunities are too good to miss.

@dvdcchn: I was in TOP. We didn't participate in Everything.Must.Die. I don't know why you associate my name to that as if I am in any way tied to that movement. If anything, associate me to the Payback/Avengers coalition and the DoW on Polaris.

@kingzog: We have delegates with certain specific mandates. Voting democratically doesn't mean everyone is a spokeperson. It just means that we vote on the message before someone goes and announces it. I'm pretty sure you know that.

Edited June 20, 2012 by Yevgeni Luchenkov

[Crownguard]

"Way IRON saw fit" <- Those are the key words right that that scream out at me.

I don't deny it can be done, I don't deny that an LSF member did something foolish. Perish the thought. What I object to is the people who cheer this is valid are very much in danger of using some sort of casuistry to imply that "LSF members represent their alliance in all things" but that members of other alliances who are not government (but are "high profile") do not. Blame Optimistic for being foolish, but don't say "LSF did this" when you go right around and say "LSF has no government". There is a bit of a disconnect between the two statements.


This is tongue in cheek:

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=111584&view=findpost&p=2987122"]My link[/url]


[2012-06-17 19:08:01] <Aggressivenutmeg> This could very well come back and bite us in the arse
[2012-06-17 19:08:09] <[REDACTED]> Shhhhhh
[2012-06-17 19:08:10] <MCRABT> nah
[2012-06-17 19:08:22] <MCRABT> I'll let him no eventually
[2012-06-17 19:08:28] <MCRABT> *know


Letting the person know afterwards...that's not tongue in cheek?

As I said, foolish nub, but forgive me if I recognize one of these is far more politically expedient to jump on right now.

[xoindotnler]

[quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1340221172' post='2990409']
[2012-06-17 19:08:01] <Aggressivenutmeg> This could very well come back and bite us in the arse
[2012-06-17 19:08:09] <[REDACTED]> Shhhhhh
[2012-06-17 19:08:10] <MCRABT> nah
[2012-06-17 19:08:22] <MCRABT> I'll let him no eventually
[2012-06-17 19:08:28] <MCRABT> *know

Yup. Totally didn't say that.

Furthermore, as Bob pointed out, Opti also pretended to to be Tulak_Hord (and yet you don't see Sparta getting upset over it). In fact, I think these logs further prove that Opti was not maliciously trying to hide who he was like stated in other threads.

[2012-06-17 18:29:35] <Tulak_Hord> [02:28:42] <xoin> I have no intrest in speaking to someone that has no registered nick or any other way to make sure its the right person
[2012-06-17 18:29:35] <Tulak_Hord> [02:29:00] <xoin> tl;dr try harder Optimistic
[2012-06-17 18:29:43] <Tulak_Hord> [02:29:12] <Tulak_Hord> gheeey
[/quote]
Can I still cashin my apology [img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4237780/sa/emot-colbert.gif[/img].

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' timestamp='1340223610' post='2990453']
Which is a LOT more than most alliances would have done in a similar case. Of course, most similar cases would have been solved with a private apology but some opportunities are too good to miss.
[/quote]

If the opportunity is to make a statement such as "Joke or no joke, don't ever impersonate our gov and attempt to start a war or we'll roll you and what ever alliance you are in", then I'm not sure I would pass that up either.

That said, good luck sorting it out, ect., ect.

[Rhizoctonia]

Let The Fun Begin

[dvdcchn]

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' timestamp='1340223610' post='2990453']

@dvdcchn: I was in TOP. We didn't participate in Everything.Must.Die. I don't know why you associate my name to that as if I am in any way tied to that movement.

[/quote]

Very sorry Yev, we are old friends, I forget which causes we championed. Strike it to old age

[BloodFury]

This is pretty FUBAR if I must say. I thought people realized that LSF was a Democratic alliance and that not everything could be solved in a day. A week should have at least been given to allow for the LSF people to weigh their opinions on the matter and take a vote. I imagine any other democratic alliance would have been given the respect and at least some time to discuss and vote on the matter. Not everyone lives, eats, and breaths their life around paying bills, collecting taxes, and spending every second with this community.

Edited June 20, 2012 by BloodFury

[Gingervites]

[quote name='Crownguard' timestamp='1340223202' post='2990445']
I have yet to meet a person in reality who ever sincerely apologizes when a club is held over their head, but I won't argue that point.

Your argument may work for Sabcat, but it doesn't work for Optimistic. *He* never claimed to be government...he was a new member. See, he isn't a prominent member of government and yet IRON directed its ire at LSF to pay reps for his actions. Hal's actions were a deliberate action to instigate a particular FA path on an alliance, and Optimistic did the same. Both were excused away by their respective "governments", but one has to have their collective pay the price.

Hell, stupid raiders cause this issue all the time, and yet we somehow avoid going to war over it.

By that argument, I would expect Valhalla to have a tighter rein on members posting inflammatory material than I would a group of anarchists. You know, if we are using logic here.
[/quote]Hal posting a thread about how and why Int should declare war on NoR was infammatory but there were no personal attacks in it or anything in general that should piss someone off; all that post did was reiterate the opinion many people shared about what Int should do with LSF.

With this act of stupidity LSF finds itself in another war and the number of people saying that Int should defend LSF has probably dropped because of it.

[WhitEarendur]

MK and Umb should take note of what a CB looks like.

Good luck IRON.
LSF, I hope you can get this sorted out.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

[quote name='Kzoppistan' timestamp='1340224035' post='2990465']
If the opportunity is to make a statement such as "Joke or no joke, don't ever impersonate our gov and attempt to start a war or we'll roll you and what ever alliance you are in", then I'm not sure I would pass that up either.

That said, good luck sorting it out, ect., ect.[/quote]
I would be more in agreement with that than with this pseudo diplomatic !@#$%^&* we were served by IRON and this pathetic public display of hypocrisy.

Roll us for giving a bad apology? Sure. But don't try to say that we took no measures to solve it diplomatically. We offered an individual and private apology. We promised to pay tech. We expelled Optimistic. Saying we didn't send the tech or didn't unmask him after 18 hours as if it was a proof of deceit is pure idiocy.

For example, I'm still masked as a TOP diplomat on IRON's boards after 72 hours. You simply can't expect board admins to always react in less than 24 hours. If it had been a week, they'd have a point.

[jraenar]

[quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1340221172' post='2990409']
[2012-06-17 19:08:01] <Aggressivenutmeg> This could very well come back and bite us in the arse
[2012-06-17 19:08:09] <[REDACTED]> Shhhhhh
[2012-06-17 19:08:10] <MCRABT> nah
[2012-06-17 19:08:22] <MCRABT> I'll let him no eventually
[2012-06-17 19:08:28] <MCRABT> *know

Yup. Totally didn't say that.

Furthermore, as Bob pointed out, Opti also pretended to to be Tulak_Hord (and yet you don't see Sparta getting upset over it). In fact, I think these logs further prove that Opti was not maliciously trying to hide who he was like stated in other threads.

[2012-06-17 18:29:35] <Tulak_Hord> [02:28:42] <xoin> I have no intrest in speaking to someone that has no registered nick or any other way to make sure its the right person
[2012-06-17 18:29:35] <Tulak_Hord> [02:29:00] <xoin> tl;dr try harder Optimistic
[2012-06-17 18:29:43] <Tulak_Hord> [02:29:12] <Tulak_Hord> gheeey
[/quote]

You seem to be missing that Opti never actually told the "prank" targets that it was a "prank". Until well after it was clear that he got caught red-handed. Combined with the other attempts by LSF members to incite war, this looks like just an excuse to justify an incredibly stupid move. Perhaps he meant to tell them after convincing GLoF to declare war under false pretenses.

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='kingzog' timestamp='1340223155' post='2990444']The LSF, by its own admission, has no government. So who speaks for the alliance? At the end of the day, no one.[/quote]

A vote is called and at the end of the time period for the vote, majority rules. Speaking as someone who has been in both alliances who have "government leaders" and those that don't, it really isn't that hard to figure out how it works.

[quote name='kingzog' timestamp='1340223155' post='2990444']Some will say this is unfair, but it's hardly the rest of the world's fault that the LSF has picked a 'non-government model' that quite simply doesn't work on Planet Bob.[/quote]

Some will say it is unfair because it IS unfair.

Regardless, I really don't see IRON's DOW against LSF in under 24 hours after LSF agreed to terms being about organizational structure. Many alliances would have issues with meeting those demands within under 24 hours.

This is what an alliance - formal leadership or not - would have to do to comply:

1. Organize 4 different people who have aid slots available to send 50 tech out.
2. A person has to leave the AA (which did happen) and because apparently THAT wasn't enough someone who has admin ability has to magically infer that the person's mask has to be changed as well because IRON has decided that just leaving the AA wouldn't be enough and also didn't feel the need to tell anyone.
3. Write an apology and post it on OWF. Oh, and it has to be "sincere" enough...whatever that means in the context of an "apology" as a peace term. No humor allowed anyway.
4. All under 24 hours - but IRON isn't saying that so as far as the alliance "leadership" knows, they have more time.

Edited June 20, 2012 by White Chocolate

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

White Chocolate: don't forget trying to query the leader of an alliance to get the proper targets. All under 18 hours. I'm sure it's doable. I'm not sure IRON wanted it done, given the lack of response from them when we queried.

[wes the wise]

Do what you must, but save some nukes to launch at CCC! :3

[Anarquista]

[quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1340222034' post='2990421']
IRON makes a deals for peace and the DAY after they are agreed to (not a lot of time for any alliances to complete peace terms) declares war.

When defeated alliances don't follow through with their reparations, it's considered a good reason for war. What happens when alliances make deals and agree not to declare war as a result of the deal and then do so anyway?

About the agreement:

Apology:

Looked like an apology to me. As I've said elsewhere, OWF "apologies" are NEVER sincere and anyone who demands an apology as part of a term for peace (either before a war or after) knows better. It's about power. It's "see what we made that alliance do" and not about REALLY needing the other person to say "I'm sorry" so that you feel better. "Sincere" apologies are when someone says "I'm sorry" without being asked.

Tech:

Getting 200 tech moved as an alliance already involved in a war within one night is a little much. Also, I don't recall their being any mention of a short time frame.

Person kicked out:

Go check any random alliances forum. I bet there are many many people who are technically still "members" of many other alliances based on forum membership. Sorry, but THIS example of LSF supposedly doing something wrong is way way way beyond what is reasonable.

And of course regardless you give one day for compliance?



One day of not getting something done is NOT proof that they didn't follow through.

IRON, either make a deal or declare war, it's a one or the other situation. Not both.

IRON messed it up.
[/quote]
oh white chocolate, you make too much sense

[Matt Miller]

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1340224487' post='2990475']
You seem to be missing that Opti never actually told the "prank" targets that it was a "prank". Until well after it was clear that he got caught red-handed. Combined with the other attempts by LSF members to incite war, this looks like just an excuse to justify an incredibly stupid move. Perhaps he meant to tell them after convincing GLoF to declare war under false pretenses.
[/quote]

This is a point clearly missed by most folks in here. Just because he told some people he was going to tell GLoF is was a "joke" the fact is he didn't actually do that. So the whole premise of this being a joke just evaporates into a CYA sort of thing in my eyes.