Branimir Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 And what of your conduct leading up to the noCB War? What about it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbrownso Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So persecuting someone who holds no ill will towards you is the best way to eliminate a threat? I would assume good-will and friendship would be the best way to go about ensuring that someone like that doesn't become one. So bending over backwards and hoping to appease a potential threat is better than setting clear lines that delineate what isn't cool? If you let people know where they stand, it can help keep things cordial since both parties have a point of reference for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 It has something to do with our culture. You see, when one leaves in a state of open warfare, the highest state of conflict intensity, in a military Order such is ours, some people will call that desertion. It is how we roll. So, are all the nations who have left in the last year traitors for leaving during the FAN war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyria Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So persecuting someone who holds no ill will towards you is the best way to eliminate a threat? I would assume good-will and friendship would be the best way to go about ensuring that someone like that doesn't become one. I've said nothing as to my personal views on the matter at this point. Kindly take your words out of my mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Its a sad state of the world when an alliance forgets the life one of its founders brought to them. Good read this week. And I agree with the Pacifican, at least its more important than the problem with the NPO tech corp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So bending over backwards and hoping to appease a potential threat is better than setting clear lines that delineate what isn't cool? If you let people know where they stand, it can help keep things cordial since both parties have a point of reference for their actions. I dont believe he was speaking of appeasement, only Comrade Moldavi has shown his loyalty to Pacifica and The Order, I think questioning that and assuming he plans on ever harming any Order is naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookavich Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 It has something to do with our culture. You see, when one leaves in a state of open warfare, the highest state of conflict intensity, in a military Order such is ours, some people will call that desertion. It is how we roll. Thus some of those claims. funnily everybody that know anything about the Order, knows this folklore. And yet, people who should know this well, get their pan ties in a twist over it. Fascinating, but whatever. Come on, Branimir. Doppelganger wasn't exactly to going to be engaging any Jarheads targets. Desertion is what people did to Polaris during the Second Great Patriotic War. That... wasn't desertion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So, are all the nations who have left in the last year traitors for leaving during the FAN war? Note the words, state of open warfare-- highest conflict intensity state. FAN "war" has no such state attached to it. We are still at war with NAAC, etc. We are in perpetual warfare, but those little clean ups are not of value here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Sorry I missed your revisions. I think I will stick with the original version thanks. Oh, where were you when it happened? You can say anything you like about what occurred over a year and a half ago. For the past full year Moo and I have been on good terms and have been working together in The Pacific in that other realm for just as long. So even if what you claim is true, which is isn't, just because you think it is so doesn't make it so, how does that effect the current situation at all? It doesn't. You aren't in the Order, did they reject you for being a moron? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 It has something to do with our culture. You see, when one leaves in a state of open warfare, the highest state of conflict intensity, in a military Order such is ours, some people will call that desertion. It is how we roll. So basically nobody can ever leave NPO since your always at war with FAN and Vox? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I am not Moo nor is anyone in those screen shots. I thought we were all free to have our own opinions. Is that not what wonderful Vox is about? No, I never bought that either. And as for your magical fairy world, the rest of us call it reality. Why are you attempting to refute hizzy by mentioning Vox, exactly? It couldn't be because you are incapable of countering his arguments without associating him with something entirely unrelated but controversial, could it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willaim Kreiger Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So bending over backwards and hoping to appease a potential threat is better than setting clear lines that delineate what isn't cool? If you let people know where they stand, it can help keep things cordial since both parties have a point of reference for their actions. Do you even know what's going on? I would hardly classify allowing an alliance to accept former members of your AA and leaving them well enough alone bending over backwards, but maybe that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Come on, Branimir. Doppelganger wasn't exactly to going to be engaging any Jarheads targets. Desertion is what people did to Polaris during the Second Great Patriotic War. That... wasn't desertion. As Dopp knows from that thread, and Vox spies, I did not make a claim of those who left being traitors anywhere in that thread, irc, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaGneT Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 It has something to do with our culture. You see, when one leaves in a state of open warfare, the highest state of conflict intensity, in a military Order such is ours, some people will call that desertion. It is how we roll. Thus some of those claims. funnily everybody that know anything about the Order, knows this folklore. And yet, people who should know this well, get their pan ties in a twist over it. Fascinating, but whatever. So, if by some bizarre occurrence Moo actually listens to the dunces in your alliance who are calling Doppelganger and the others traitors, it would lead me to believe that everyone who has left Pacifica in the past 525 days are also traitors? That's going to take a toll on the war slots. What about it? I'm simply asking if you were as pro-Polaris then, when your brethren needed you the most, as you claim to be now? I'm sure it was inconvenient at the time. I am not Moo nor is anyone in those screen shots. I thought we were all free to have our own opinions. Is that not what wonderful Vox is about? No, I never bought that either. And as for your magical fairy world, the rest of us call it reality. The above is a quality course on how not to effectively deflect being caught (failing at) spinning the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrotskysRevenge Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 You need to make up your mind guys. One week you are appalled and aghast that we close and move threads at times. This week a thread that allows our members to speak their minds demonstrates that the alliance as a whole hates the NSO and considers Ivan a threat. I would have thought that it indicates that we do allow people to freely express their opinions. I notice you didn't use the screenshot where I stated that given this is a unique situation and most of those who left are not in range of the war and have said they will aid our low nations at war. The other two are returning to fulfill their war obligations and will be able to leave when the war is over. I am well aware that Ivan did not plan this alliance out days or weeks in advance as I was speaking with him online when he thought of it and created it on the forums. I am also well aware that he did not "poach" or in any way recruit NPO members, nor does he have any intention to do so. In fact, for the duration of the Jarheads war, the NSO will explicitly NOT be accepting any NPO members. We have a very firm policy on deserters, i.e. those members who leave the alliance during a war. Essentially they are given an opportunity to finish the war and then leave or to be branded a traitor and made a target; I think that is fairly consistent with most other alliances. However, as I stated in my post to our members, this is a unique situation and therefore requires a more thoughtful response. Ivan Moldavi is a former Emperor with whom we are on amicable terms. And we will act accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ftwman Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 It is a pity that so few remember the past. It is a pity that the first post drones on and on about what made the Order great and what made the ideals and principles strong and yet hypocritically decries me as some sort of lesser Pacifican or traitor. Mr. Moldavi has it right on. Maybe some people should take off their blinders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbrownso Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I dont believe he was speaking of appeasement, only Comrade Moldavi has shown his loyalty to Pacifica and The Order, I think questioning that and assuming he plans on ever harming any Order is naive. I'm not saying he wants to harm the Order but, give his history and relationship to the Order, his presence leading another alliance does pose a threat to NPO in the form of drawing members away from NPO. That much should be blatantly obvious considering how much everyone is harping on how he gave life to the Order and whatnot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homura Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Come on, Branimir. Doppelganger wasn't exactly to going to be engaging any Jarheads targets. Desertion is what people did to Polaris during the Second Great Patriotic War. That... wasn't desertion. Doppelganger and Esukaresu were also let go and not marked as deserters/outcasts/whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbulaM1 Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Well there is a reason the Order cannot be a Democracy, a successfuly democracy requires at least a bit of an intelectual and informed electorate... apparently the Order lacks this fundamental principle of western tradition. Though oddly I feel the same about leaving during warfare or during times of severe duress, I cannot say that the extreme duress is of the same level experienced by former allies and comrades, thus NPO saying they are traitors is a bit harsh given the war is most obviously controlled. o/ TWiP (I look forward to it every Monday after a long first day of the wee). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileRelleno Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So, are all the nations who have left in the last year traitors for leaving during the FAN war?No, if they left in something other than State or Alert or Open Warfare, then I personally give'em a pass, care less really.But even something this small has the possibility, however small, to escalate, and hence, no one should be deserting their post. Simply wait a few days/week, whatever and then leave with a semblance of respect to your comrades and the alliance to which you swore your allegiance. Common sense, respect and integrity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 6. Ivan Moldavi has the ability to pose a threat. Just because something has the ability to pose a threat doesn't mean it will. TOP or Gremlins, say, for example, could pose threats to the Pacifican hegemony should they want to, but that doesn't mean they will. The same is true with Ivan. I think it is quite clear that he wishes to be neither with your nor against you. He's neutral. If you view him as, and treat him, like a threat, you may end up forcing him into a position where he may have no choice but to be a threat. A self-fulfilling prophecy to an extent. I see no reason for you to have to go down that road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I am not Moo nor is anyone in those screen shots. I thought we were all free to have our own opinions. Is that not what wonderful Vox is about? No, I never bought that either. And as for your magical fairy world, the rest of us call it reality. How nice to be automatically associated with Vox on the basis that I think you're wrong. Bravo. So, in your reality, were you there during the "coup", or was the story handed down to you from a friend? It's almost like I don't know the answer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 You need to make up your mind guys. One week you are appalled and aghast that we close and move threads at times. This week a thread that allows our members to speak their minds demonstrates that the alliance as a whole hates the NSO and considers Ivan a threat. I would have thought that it indicates that we do allow people to freely express their opinions. I notice you didn't use the screenshot where I stated that given this is a unique situation and most of those who left are not in range of the war and have said they will aid our low nations at war. The other two are returning to fulfill their war obligations and will be able to leave when the war is over. I am well aware that Ivan did not plan this alliance out days or weeks in advance as I was speaking with him online when he thought of it and created it on the forums. I am also well aware that he did not "poach" or in any way recruit NPO members, nor does he have any intention to do so. In fact, for the duration of the Jarheads war, the NSO will explicitly NOT be accepting any NPO members. We have a very firm policy on deserters, i.e. those members who leave the alliance during a war. Essentially they are given an opportunity to finish the war and then leave or to be branded a traitor and made a target; I think that is fairly consistent with most other alliances. However, as I stated in my post to our members, this is a unique situation and therefore requires a more thoughtful response. Ivan Moldavi is a former Emperor with whom we are on amicable terms. And we will act accordingly. This post sounds more factual than the original opinion piece. Now watch how this post will be twisted, ignored and confused with other posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 In fact, for the duration of the Jarheads war, the NSO will explicitly NOT be accepting any NPO members. Is there an approximate timeline specifying when the war with Jarheads will end, if ever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaGneT Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Note the words, state of open warfare-- highest conflict intensity state.FAN "war" has no such state attached to it. We are still at war with NAAC, etc. We are in perpetual warfare, but those little clean ups are not of value here. So, hold on. Let's refer to what I bolded. You're telling me that the two strongest alliances (and some others) on CyberNations cannot handle 400 tiny nations with very little experience? You aren't even fighting a good portion of them. Excuse me, but I find that hard to believe. Most of your nations are currently at peace. This "war" with the Jarheads is little more than a cleanup, too. I'd say that you consider logic before you start puking up the latest utterings of the party line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.