AvengerNL Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Yes, it would truly be a brilliant political move for an alliance that had fought on the side of the UJP to demand the ZI of a member in alliances closely linked to NpO, who at that time probably would've liked to finish off what they had started in the UJW... Jeez.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamavore Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 (edited) GOD's reasons for not pursuing KM are their own. you could just as easily think of it as giving him a reprieve. or is there an official expiration date on reasons to pzi? from what I can tell, KM accepted aid from an OOC stalker, and in return took part, perhaps unwittingly at first, in 'griefing' xi. xi informed him, KM decided not to believe him. that's the catch, he took a risk by assuming xi was lying. the risk was that he was not lying, and would thus be highly motivated to keep KM out of a position to perpetrate such things in the future. he was not lying. politics is a game of judging other's motives, and how your actions will effect their motives. when you insert ethics into it, it becomes leadership, and you become accountable to how you are able to be both politically sensitive and effective, but also just and honest. KM should have investigated further into xi's assertions. if he was not able to do that, then ignoring xi still represented taking a gamble, because if he had known it were true he would have been functionally in collusion with it. so he took a gamble that it was not true, and because it was true, he's a bad gambler, which you can't afford to be in politics or leadership. this is the result. third party qq'ing is generally irrelevant and at best, uninformed. also the notion that only Admin should be able to pzi/ezi? silly. I believe everyone is basically good, but there are still some people that are just too inherently confused to do anything but cause harm in certain contexts. the morality of PZI is equal to the judiciousness and discretion with which it is applied. KM apparently failed to take his position seriously enough. The more power you have the more profound the effects of your thoughtlessness. let the re-education begin. Edited February 15, 2009 by llamavore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormones74 Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 I just think the $60 mil, should buy KM's freedom completely. How is it going to benefit Zenith if he becomes unhappy there or they become unhappy with him? Not everyone is content to be with one alliance the whole time they remain in this game. GOD, you should at least erase his name and give a fresh start. Its true you guys did come come to a diplomatic resolution that avoided alot of hurt feelings. For that Im sure most alliances are happy for. War doesnt only cost the alliances involved. It cost's everyone on Bob once that first nuke is released. Let this be a lesson to everyone. Diplomacy keeps the GRL at the minumum, everyone benefits through this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengerNL Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 GOD, you should at least erase his name and give a fresh start. KM can easily erase his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suvorov Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 Fun-ny... Not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilkenny Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 (edited) Most alliances are pretty damn persistent about people in their PZI lists. I'm pretty sure making a loophole in that policy for zenith showed good will and diplomacy on the part of GOD too. LOL the irony of this...persistant = 18months and then take action Edited February 16, 2009 by Kilkenny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIdiot the Great Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 Congrats to all on working this out, nice to see. And nice job bigwoody. I do have to admit 'Great War (insert whatever number you feel is appropriate here): The Belated Wrath of Xiphosis' did have a nice ring to it (and I mean only the name, not a war over something like this, as diplomatic solutions are always the best ones in my mind). Good luck Zenith, GOD and KM. Regards, EmperorVIcious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 KM can easily erase his own. As could any of us here. Doesn't mean we're going to, now are we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengerNL Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 There are people of whom I wouldnt mind it if they actually would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Verteidiger Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 There are people of whom I wouldnt mind it if they actually would. Beginning to think the same thing Well, I already did once, not going to again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fadeev Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Who would pay $60,000,000 for Kaiser Martens???What a waste of money! You took the words a out of my mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 There are people of whom I wouldnt mind it if they actually would. Oh, I'm quite sure you speak the truth there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Personally, I think rewarding Xiphosis' aggressive behavior with a pay-off was the wrong move. Good thing I can only "advise" people anymore, then, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Personally, I think rewarding Xiphosis' aggressive behavior with a pay-off was the wrong move. Good thing I can only "advise" people anymore, then, I guess. And this is one of many reasons I Heft and IRON. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 You took the words a out of my mouth. It was the going price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Personally, I think rewarding Xiphosis' aggressive behavior with a pay-off was the wrong move. Good thing I can only "advise" people anymore, then, I guess. Because IRON has never objected to a ZI target being given protection before right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Because IRON has never objected to a ZI target being given protection before right? Not very often, considering it hasn't happened much. When it does we've never been aggressive about it, and if it's someone that we weren't really actively pursuing anyway then we tend to let it go. We certainly don't try and reach a "settlement" involving a 60M pay-off. There was no reason here for an issue to exist other than someone wanting an issue to exist. That's not the sort of behavior that I would try to reward, as it would only give the impression that people can get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Not very often, considering it hasn't happened much. When it does we've never been aggressive about it, and if it's someone that we weren't really actively pursuing anyway then we tend to let it go. We certainly don't try and reach a "settlement" involving a 60M pay-off. There was no reason here for an issue to exist other than someone wanting an issue to exist. That's not the sort of behavior that I would try to reward, as it would only give the impression that people can get away with it. So you feel that alliances knowingly accepting PZI targets into their alliance without working out a deal to get them off of said list is acceptable behavior? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 So you feel that alliances knowingly accepting PZI targets into their alliance without working out a deal to get them off of said list is acceptable behavior? He was worked out of every PZI list he was known to be on. Given that apparently GOD hadn't pursued this particular target in a very long time, it's not exactly unreasonable to see how Zenith and ther others were surprised when they turned up wanting his head. That sort of thing happens. Again, it wasn't worth this amount of fuss and the only reason it became a problem is because someone wanted a problem and seized the opportunity. Seeking a peaceful settlement (what Zenith did) isn't wrong. Needlessly instigating a conflict (what GOD did) is wrong, and rewarding that (what the settlement does) is also wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 He was worked out of every PZI list he was known to be on. Given that apparently GOD hadn't pursued this particular target in a very long time, it's not exactly unreasonable to see how Zenith and ther others were surprised when they turned up wanting his head. That sort of thing happens. Again, it wasn't worth this amount of fuss and the only reason it became a problem is because someone wanted a problem and seized the opportunity. Seeking a peaceful settlement (what Zenith did) isn't wrong. Needlessly instigating a conflict (what GOD did) is wrong, and rewarding that (what the settlement does) is also wrong. GOD didn't instigate a conflict. Martens did by trying to push private talks public in order to put pressure on everyone to get him off faster. I'll be the first to admit Xiphosis generally has trouble just letting some stuff go, but nobody was looking for trouble except, ironically, Martens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 He was worked out of every PZI list he was known to be on. Given that apparently GOD hadn't pursued this particular target in a very long time, it's not exactly unreasonable to see how Zenith and ther others were surprised when they turned up wanting his head. That sort of thing happens. Again, it wasn't worth this amount of fuss and the only reason it became a problem is because someone wanted a problem and seized the opportunity. Seeking a peaceful settlement (what Zenith did) isn't wrong. Needlessly instigating a conflict (what GOD did) is wrong, and rewarding that (what the settlement does) is also wrong. But Zenith had not yet accepted KM into their alliance when GOD did make it know. GOD only wanted KM's application to be denied by Zenith, Zenith decided they did not want to deny it and a peaceful solution was reached, you seem to think that something in that equation was wrong but I am having trouble grasping WHAT part you feel is wrong. If Zenith had accepted KM before GOD said anything I would agree with you but he was still an applicant at the time GOD made it publicly clear that their was an issue with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suvorov Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) So you feel that alliances knowingly accepting PZI targets into their alliance without working out a deal to get them off of said list is acceptable behavior? Forget it... Edited February 17, 2009 by Suvorov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Er...A few things. 1. "Knowingly". Well, we didn't. It might come as a surprise to you, but although Zenith has access to vast amounts of data and info, GOD's PZI-list isn't one of the pieces of data we have access to. We went to, and secured permission from, the alliances we knew had a problem with KM. GOD's objections appeared a bit later. 2. "Accepting". Wrong again. We didn't accept him into Zenith until the deal with GOD was signed. That is, when KM wasn't a PZI-target any more. So yes, seeing that we discussed KM's status with all alliances we knew had a problem with him and later, when GOD also appeared to have unfinished business with KM, also with GOD before we accepted KM, I would say Zenith's behaviour was OK. I wasn't saying that Zenith knowingly accepted a ZI target (sorry if it came off that way) Heft seemed to think that you were wrong for reaching an agreement with GOD so I was asking if he would have supported an alliance knowingly accepting a ZI target (as that would have been the alternative to what you did) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 GOD didn't instigate a conflict. Martens did by trying to push private talks public in order to put pressure on everyone to get him off faster. I'll be the first to admit Xiphosis generally has trouble just letting some stuff go, but nobody was looking for trouble except, ironically, Martens. Personally I also wouldn't have let Martens into my alliance no matter what lists he was or wasn't on, just because he has a tendency towards that sort of thing. But regardless, when the result of a "negotiaton" to let someone off a PZI list that hasn't been enforced for the better part of a year and a half, and when negotiations are even necessary for such an issue, someone is pushing where there's no reason to push. Whether that pushing is in private or public, it's still pushing. It seems, from the generous terms here, that Zenith and their side, despite having no practical reason or legal obligation to do so much as issue a "sorry for not telling you, we didn't know," were being very conciliatory, so GOD must have been doing the pushing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suvorov Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 I wasn't saying that Zenith knowingly accepted a ZI target Which is what I noted after writing the reply, which is why I edited my post. I only later understood you were reacting to the post of Heft, not directly to the matter of KM and how Zenith handled that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts