Announcing The Bus Doctrine

[Newhotness]

Also those other tech raiding alliances must be very happy for you being so willing to draw all the negative attention related to this immoral practice.

If you are going to tech raid, dont be a little girl about it and be affraid that someone will find out. You know what you are doing so theres no reason to be affraid of negative attention if you are doing something that people see as negative. If thats a fear of yours then dont tech raid. Simple. Not "you" as in you or your alliance but "you" directed to tech raiders

[Caliph]

So if Continuum and One Vision alliances do it is a cool thing?

Not at all, however when you are complaining to us about our tech raids, it only makes sense for you to complain to every other alliance who tech raids as well. You have yet to speak out against the Continuum and One Vision tech raiding alliance. So you are picking and choosing which alliances to criticize for tech raiding. You criticize some of the alliances who tech raid, but do not raise the issue with those who do have the military power to really do something about it, the Continuum and One Vision.

Start criticizing all tech raiding alliance for their "evil tech raiding ways", or stop criticizing PC and RAD because you truly don't see tech raiding as bad, but as merely something you can criticize us over.

But the huge difference is that those alliances don't brag about it, they don't try to claim what they do is moral or anything like that. They basically shut up about it. What you guys do is trying to argue that your way of raiding is decent just because you don't destroy that much infra while you do it. That argument is so weak, please try something different.

Also those other tech raiding alliances must be very happy for you being so willing to draw all the negative attention related to this immoral practice.

This is the viewpoint that I simply just don't understand.

What difference does it make if you talk about your actions or not?

Two people tech raid. Person A talks about it, Person B doesn't. Who is more "right"?

That answer is simple, neither. They both perform the same action, do the same deed, with the same destruction caused to the innocent.

Not talking about it is simply trying not to bring it up, trying not to advertise that it was indeed a tech raid. Not talking about it seems you are ashamed of your own actions, whereas if you talk about it you are not ashamed at all.

If you truly are too ashamed to speak out for the actions you perform, why do you do them? Why would you perform shameful acts, willingly?

That viewpoint just simply doesn't make sense. Tech raiding is not going away because people refuse to talk about it. Tech raiding isn't going away in the Continuum era for the same reason it didn't go away in the Initiative era, and that is the hegemony either does it themselves, or has treaties they refuse to break with alliances who tech raid. In the Continuums case, it is a mixture of both.

So, given that not talking about it has not changed the practice at all, how can you say that talking about tech raiding is more harmful?

Edited April 7, 2009 by Caliph

[Caliph]

Double post: please delete.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Caliph

[TwistedRebelDB47]

I know why my words are annoying to you, I'm stating my point of view, and you don't agree with me, but as you haven't good arguments you prefer troll me but the substance is there if you read deeply.

You keep arguing over and over again that tech raiding is immoral. This thread isn't about whether raiding is right or wrong. It's about what you do in the raid. So I assume you believe it wouldn't matter if an alliance first strike nuked every raid they got into?

Here's the thing...like it or not. Tech raiding is basically a mugging. Mugging in ANY capacity is wrong. Tech raiding, and then saying there are boundaries to tech raid/mug within is wrong on a specific sphere is simply hypocritical. Sorry, you lose. Drop your tech raiding then try again. The last part of this pact makes most sense. Dissolve it, before someone pushes it.

Again, you think that the whole scenario should be black and white. Raiding and no raiding. So if there is raiding, you don't believe there should be any limits? It doesn't matter if people abuse the practice beyond its reasonable benefits? You think we should just stand by and allow for whatever to happen just because raiding is allowed? Your argument is absolutely ridiculous. Yes, we raid. Yes, you think its immoral. But wouldn't you think its worse if we used cruise missiles, aircraft and nukes? Apparently, you think that's completely the same as two ground attacks. Genius.

If you want a real life example, go with assault and aggravated assault. In your quote, you are calling both the same. And no, PWN isn't going to be arguing about the morality of raiding or pretending there is some moral high ground by our Doctrine. We just know that there is no reason to use excessive force or extort our sphere, and we will not stand for it.

[TwistedRebelDB47]

It's obvious to me you're not doing this 100% out of love for the pink sphere--otherwise you'd be cancelling all your tech raiding and making it a blanket "no raiding" policy. It seems to me that you made this doctrine weaker in order to avoid conflict. You can't decide to take half the PR for none of the risk. This is an all or nothing thing. The only influence that comes from doctrines like these is that they acknowledge the risk that there may well BE conflict--and that you aren't afraid to put it in motion anyway.

We are being met with mockery and insults. Trust me when I say PWN doesn't give a damn. You think that if RAD, TCB and Poison Clan disallowed tech raiding and made the Pink sphere untouchable to raids we would all of a sudden be freed from the barrage of negativity? Not at all. I could bet within 24 hours someone would raid Pink with a declaration of "What now?" and force our hand. Does it look like we have the power to enforce what the NPO does on the Red sphere? Instead, we do the next best thing. We ask people to stick to the same standards we enforce with our members. The best decency possible for a practice that has no "right" to it but only a "better" for most in Cybernations. If we were afraid of conflict, we wouldn't have done a lot of things in our history. Read up on us. We are not afraid.

[Jens of the desert]

A nice move forward for pink here.

Well done PC and RAD.

[Kiss Goodbye]

We are being met with mockery and insults. Trust me when I say PWN doesn't give a damn. You think that if RAD, TCB and Poison Clan disallowed tech raiding and made the Pink sphere untouchable to raids we would all of a sudden be freed from the barrage of negativity? Not at all. I could bet within 24 hours someone would raid Pink with a declaration of "What now?" and force our hand. Does it look like we have the power to enforce what the NPO does on the Red sphere? Instead, we do the next best thing. We ask people to stick to the same standards we enforce with our members. The best decency possible for a practice that has no "right" to it but only a "better" for most in Cybernations. If we were afraid of conflict, we wouldn't have done a lot of things in our history. Read up on us. We are not afraid.

Don't get me wrong.

I respect what you're doing, just as I did when RIA leadership first unveiled the attempt on maroon to protect unaligneds on some level.

You'll get a "What now" no matter what with this sort of thing. As I noted in the reaction to what has been attempted in the past. Any edict to the world is hard to back up, but doubly so when you're already giving the opposition an inch. They'll just take a mile, because they'll see it as a show of weakness. And it is--you yourself recognize that weakness. Anyone who doesn't like your alliances will see it as a chance to discredit you, because now you have your global prestige tied to something.

It's better to do nothing than to do something with the potential to make matters worse. If nothing else, I suggest you look into getting a stronger coalition of alliances behind your doctrine.

All that said, good luck to you. I'm looking at this purely from the standpoint of how it'll affect your alliances, not how it'll affect the pink sphere as a whole. I do hope that you guys have success in making it a more stable place.

[General Specific]

I don't think this will work well for you.

When I was in the RIA a couple years ago, we attempted to do something similar with the maroon sphere (alongside several other alliances), with a 'protected list' that non-aligneds could apply for. It wasn't a blanket coverage from all raids, just as yours isn't. It was a PR move that was supposed to appear friendly to non-aligneds and non-threatening to the big guys.

It was met with mockery and insults. Electron Sponge personally stated that he would declare war on the first nation who was put on our 'protected list'. There were similar statements from some others. I don't know if Delta continued this policy or not, but I never heard anything about it again. Regardless we looked really weak there.

The reason for this is because the way to get respect in the cyberverse is to show strength. Not this weak 'they can apply to us and we MIGHT decide to assist them' junk.

It's obvious to me you're not doing this 100% out of love for the pink sphere--otherwise you'd be cancelling all your tech raiding and making it a blanket "no raiding" policy. It seems to me that you made this doctrine weaker in order to avoid conflict. You can't decide to take half the PR for none of the risk. This is an all or nothing thing. The only influence that comes from doctrines like these is that they acknowledge the risk that there may well BE conflict--and that you aren't afraid to put it in motion anyway.

By putting yourselves forward in this way, you look weak.

I wonder if that that is still Electron Sponge's position, even now that he is in a position of relative weakness? I would bet it is, and probably for the same reason some alliances like RAD and PC will always defend the activity of raiding. And with this I will answer Sponge, PC, TCB, RAD and others by venturing OOC:

Raiding will always be a sensitive issue on Bob but not because it is evil IC. I think raiding goes to the heart of so much of our confusion between what is IC and what is OOC. While IC I applaud any actions such as this to make raiding more "civil," Planet Bob has an uneasy relationship with separating IC and OOC. Some learn to defend their raiding in-character and others refuse to engage in any such exercise and parrot the naked OOC excuse that "this is a game" and raiding is needed to make the game "fun." Obviously not everyone finds fun in the same ways, but that is an entirely different debate.

As I wrote to Ejay a few weeks ago while I was still aligned, this IC/OOC confusion surrounding raiding for "fun" or "game training" has been one of my central reasons for opposing raiding. It also is why I am a little uneasy with some who beg for treaties to be canceled and for someone to start wars to cure "boredom." The very heart of these debates is the bare fact that most people and alliances that raid do so solely for gameplay fun just as many "strength" oriented alliances maneuver and salivate for wars to avoid "boredom", things that certainly are okay IC, but they are fundamentally OOC, unless these parties can continue to learn to improve the IC presentation and packaging of their raiding and warring motivations.

With that, I see this announcement as a welcome step in this direction.

Edited April 7, 2009 by General Specific

[Virillus]

That's retarded. That's like the little kid yelling PUNCH ME YOU CHICKEN against another kid his age when his big brother and all of his mates are standing in front of him.

So you think it's okay for a kid to go around punching other kids for no reason... Provided he won't face any consequences?

I think we have a differing definition of "retarded."

[Vilien]

Lol. Are you done yet? you didnt really prove anything with this post so it was quite useless.

Also, not my fault they choose to be alone and defend themselves. If u go it alone, dont complain when someone comes knocking on your door

It's not my fault that your alliance is smaller than mine. Really, it's your fault that we/I decide to roll/raid you.

Got any more ridiculous statements up those sleeves?

[Newhotness]

It's not my fault that your alliance is smaller than mine. Really, it's your fault that we/I decide to roll/raid you.

Got any more ridiculous statements up those sleeves?

1st. Last i checked RAD was stronger than Avalanche, so that argument doesnt work coming from you.

2nd. What, am i supposed to feel sorry for an unaligned nation because he chose not to seek protection that an alliance gives? Its a game, you choose to play it how you want, and if you choose to stay unaligned, then im not gonna pity you or take it easy because you made that choice. You chose to stand alone, you can suffer the consiquences that come from standing alone

[Vilien]

1st. Last i checked RAD was stronger than Avalanche, so that argument doesnt work coming from you.

2nd. What, am i supposed to feel sorry for an unaligned nation because he chose not to seek protection that an alliance gives? Its a game, you choose to play it how you want, and if you choose to stay unaligned, then im not gonna pity you or take it easy because you made that choice. You chose to stand alone, you can suffer the consiquences that come from standing alone

1. That wasn't the point, which you managed to completely miss anyway.

2. Who's supposed to pity you for being smaller than anyone else? I guess it is the right of those who are stronger to do what they will, unchecked. I doubt you would be in favor of applying the principles you're putting forth in the realm of alliance politics. That was the point. Other nations, and other alliances, don't have the right to attack you and steal from you simply because you are weaker. It's a pretty easy concept to grasp.

[Yubyubsan]

Will someone please conduct a massive raid of pink so I can enjoy your tears when PWN backs up their word? Thanks in advance, it's much appreciated.

[Newhotness]

I guess it is the right of those who are stronger to do what they will, unchecked. I doubt you would be in favor of applying the principles you're putting forth in the realm of alliance politics. That was the point. Other nations, and other alliances, don't have the right to attack you and steal from you simply because you are weaker. It's a pretty easy concept to grasp.

Sure you may not like it, but if you havent noticed, thats the way things work in CN. If RAD got attacked by an alliance triple our size sure id be mad, cuz we were attacked, but im not gonna !@#$%* and complain about it forever because that how things work in CN. Thats how things work in any game and its never gonna change. And people can always fight back, so please dont make it sound like they are helpless. But either way, all of this is beside the point. We are helping our own, end of story

[General Specific]

Sure you may not like it, but if you havent noticed, thats the way things work in CN. If RAD got attacked by an alliance triple our size sure id be mad, cuz we were attacked, but im not gonna !@#$%* and complain about it forever because that how things work in CN. Thats how things work in any game and its never gonna change. And people can always fight back, so please dont make it sound like they are helpless. But either way, all of this is beside the point. We are helping our own, end of story

OOC: Can you at least try to be IC in your own AP announcement?

As for your sense of futility, why bother trying anything?

[Newhotness]

Just tryna put it in perspective by saying that its not just CN that people are so evil in that the powerful rule by force

[Elric]

You know, there have been a couple people who have made a claim like this. Why in the world has this never been brought up with some kind of screenshot proof? That Government member would be booted with the alliance, and hell, I'd send you aid as an apology. When a claim like this is made without any proof, I maintain the trust that my Government would never, ever do such a thing. Half of them don't raid, and I've known 'em all for as long as I've been in CN. And I sure as hell know it weren't me.

TwistedRebelDB47- My word is my honor. If I said that it happened, then it did. I did not report it for two reasons: (1) I was happy to invite such attacks, as I mentioned before. I took pleasure out of pummeling the aggressor into accepting peace, despite his tough talk. I believe that it taught a lesson- some people will knock your teeth down your throat if you kick them in the shin. Because going around kicking people in the shin is just...rude. (2) Do you think it reasonable that anyone would report a raider to an alliance that supposrts raiding and expect some sort of negotiations? I understand that you do not condone certain practices (although I did not know that at the time)-but in my mind, an attack is an attack. Maybe it was philosophical differences that made me not even consider reporting it... Besides, a screenshot is not proof of anything. People claim they are doctored. If one wants to stick their head in the sand, they will. Although based on what I have seen of your posts, etc. I now believe now that you probably would have taken action. It is water under the bridge for me, but was mentioned due to the high irony factor. Perhaps I should have continued to keep the incident to myself.

Although I am against "raiding", I do respect a country's individual (and collective) right to declare war. Since I don't condone raiding, I cannot applaud your doctrine as is. I would fully support it if you protected unaligned nations in your sphere completely. I understand that you may not be in a position to do that. And even though I completely disagree with you on the topic of raiding in general, I can understand your position that you are trying to limit damages inflicted. I will give you credit for that. And if I shared your opinion about raiding, I would even call it honorable. I see your logic, and in terms of your logical position, it is both practical and non-hypocritical. I simply disagree with your alliance's policy of condoning raiding. As such we will never agree. Maybe we can agree to disagree. Just remember- this is a topic of passion for many people, and any topic involving anything to do with the practice of raiding will inevitably be used as a platform to argue against it.

I wish you, your alliance and the pink sphere much luck.

[General Specific]

Just tryna put it in perspective by saying that its not just CN that people are so evil in that the powerful rule by force

I don't think leaders on Bob are so evil.

I also don't think the most powerful nations and alliances gained their positions of strength because of the use of force. But that is yet another debate.

Of course your policy is controversial and has some problems, but you have to start somewhere and I respect that you want to be better, even if some greater points are missed as you get the ball rolling.

[astronaut jones]

Here's the thing...like it or not. Tech raiding is basically a mugging. Mugging in ANY capacity is wrong. Tech raiding, and then saying there are boundaries to tech raid/mug within is wrong on a specific sphere is simply hypocritical. Sorry, you lose. Drop your tech raiding then try again. The last part of this pact makes most sense. Dissolve it, before someone pushes it.

Raiding may keep many people in this game, but it also chases many out. I have witnessed it a million times. If IRON proposed this for orange, I would completely support it, and urge my government to back them. But a well known raiding alliance proposing it? I find it laughable.

I'm pretty certain that the poison clan raid rules say the first two sentences of your post, but replace mugging with theft. And, I'm also pretty certain, whether anyone wants to admit it or not (this isn't directed towards you in particular) but there is honour amoungst thieves and there is an unwritten code of things you just don't do while you're going around thieving.

And good for you for finding humour in it, but you honestly know not of what you speak here. I don't think you grasp just what the doctrine is.

[Elric]

Will someone please conduct a massive raid of pink so I can enjoy your tears when PWN backs up their word? Thanks in advance, it's much appreciated.

Yubyubsan- this kind of post is not in the best interest of PWN. I think it is in poor taste. Inviting people to declare war upon you is a bad idea, because (spelling edit) some larger and more powerful group might just take you up on the idea. And if you have never been hit with a properly conducted blitz, you never want to experience it. Besides, it just sounds somewhat juvenile.

Edited April 7, 2009 by BigKat

[extraduty]

Yubyubsan- this kind of post is not in the best interest of PWN. I think it is in poor taste. Inviting people to declare war upon you is a bad idea, because (spelling edit) some larger and more powerful group might just take you up on the idea. And if you have never been hit with a properly conducted blitz, you never want to experience it. Besides, it just sounds somewhat juvenile.

Yubyubsan, is not a member of pink team nor a member of any PWN or pink alliance. So he is not inviting an attack on himself. But I can assure you that this document is and will be enforced as a matter of point. None of the alliances that signed this document known for signing documents for the "lulz" This is something that is believed in and will be adhered. I will not go as far to invite someone to test the Doctrine but I will guarantee that if there is a violation that it will be followed to a T.

[D34th]

OMG lots of posts while I was sleeping.

No, its that you feel the need to post in every thread with your "opinion" when you are obviously clueless to the situation... and that definitely reminds me of HoT.

I'm clueless about what here? Can you clarify? Because what I saw here is that PC is going to protect pink nations of dishonorable tech raids while I think all tech raiders are dishonorable.

Also read my response to Newhotness.

That's retarded. That's like the little kid yelling PUNCH ME YOU CHICKEN against another kid his age when his big brother and all of his mates are standing in front of him.

I'm happy you got my point.

Lol. Are you done yet? you didnt really prove anything with this post so it was quite useless.

Also, not my fault they choose to be alone and defend themselves. If u go it alone, dont complain when someone comes knocking on your door

I'm not trying prove anything, I don't agree with tech raid and don't care if you like my posts or not, but I'll state my opinion regardless you think it's cool or not.

Not at all, however when you are complaining to us about our tech raids, it only makes sense for you to complain to every other alliance who tech raids as well. You have yet to speak out against the Continuum and One Vision tech raiding alliance. So you are picking and choosing which alliances to criticize for tech raiding. You criticize some of the alliances who tech raid, but do not raise the issue with those who do have the military power to really do something about it, the Continuum and One Vision.

Start criticizing all tech raiding alliance for their "evil tech raiding ways", or stop criticizing PC and RAD because you truly don't see tech raiding as bad, but as merely something you can criticize us over.

If you knew me I always was against tech raid, but this topic is about PC defending pink nations of dishonorable tech raiders not about Continuum and One Vision doing it.

You keep arguing over and over again that tech raiding is immoral. This thread isn't about whether raiding is right or wrong.[1]

It's about what you do in the raid. So I assume you believe it wouldn't matter if an alliance first strike nuked every raid they got into?[2]

[1]Read my response for Trigger.

[2]I agree that's a difference between steal someone and steal someone and shot him down, that's make you a less dishonorable thief, congrats.

[Yubyubsan]

Yubyubsan- this kind of post is not in the best interest of PWN. I think it is in poor taste. Inviting people to declare war upon you is a bad idea, because (spelling edit) some larger and more powerful group might just take you up on the idea. And if you have never been hit with a properly conducted blitz, you never want to experience it. Besides, it just sounds somewhat juvenile.

Most of this has already been covered, but I am neither a PWN member or a Pink Team member. I'm simply someone who respects PC and their PWN allies, and I'm interested in seeing someone back up their tough talk for once. Unfortunately, that's unlikely to happen when most people can't even provide proof to support their accusations against PC, such as yourself.

I have been hit with a coordinated blitz, and also a not so well coordinated blitz. The difference is of little importance when you're fighting three nations twice your size, so I'm not sure why you're mentioning blitzes. If someone were to take me up on my suggestion, they would raid Pink and wait for PWN to attack so the aggressor's allies could counter -PWN would therefore launch the first blitz, and a gloriously radioactive blitz it would be. And while blitzing PWN right off the bat would make more sense, I'm not sure that many of PWN's detractors in this thread could support that with even the most blatantly manufactured CB. This means they might lose the PR war, and most of them can't really afford any blows to their image (although there are a few of you who can).

I do however appreciate your observation of the juvenile demeanor of my post, and I would like to thank you for countering with an appropriately uninformed and condescending post.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Yubyubsan

[Trigger]

It seems like the main issue everyone has is that we are a group of raiding alliances. Someone stated that if a non raiding alliance made this doctrine then they'd be supportive of it. WTH? Either you approve of the doctrine or you don't. That's like telling me I have no right to complain about animal cruelty in a slaughter house because I eat red meat but a vegetarian can. I love a good steak, but don't think the animals should be treated inhumanely. Why is it so hard to believe that we can back this doctrine? If we banned raiding on Pink then I could understand the calls of hypocrasy and the laughter at our ability to enforce it. PB is probably split evenly on raiding. Half support it and half are against it, but even the majority of those against it know that it is part of the game. However, I would say that a very strong majority are against abusing raid targets, even those who are the biggest supporters of raiding. Everyone assumes we can't militarily enforce this. What makes you think we have to? I wasn't aware of any government of any large alliance that supports the behavior we are trying to stop.

[Caliph]

It seems like the main issue everyone has is that we are a group of raiding alliances. Someone stated that if a non raiding alliance made this doctrine then they'd be supportive of it. WTH? Either you approve of the doctrine or you don't. That's like telling me I have no right to complain about animal cruelty in a slaughter house because I eat red meat but a vegetarian can. I love a good steak, but don't think the animals should be treated inhumanely. Why is it so hard to believe that we can back this doctrine? If we banned raiding on Pink then I could understand the calls of hypocrasy and the laughter at our ability to enforce it. PB is probably split evenly on raiding. Half support it and half are against it, but even the majority of those against it know that it is part of the game. However, I would say that a very strong majority are against abusing raid targets, even those who are the biggest supporters of raiding. Everyone assumes we can't militarily enforce this. What makes you think we have to? I wasn't aware of any government of any large alliance that supports the behavior we are trying to stop.

IRON and GGA, both One Vision members, and IRON is a Continuum member, both tech raid.

Both support tech raiding the same way RAD does. For someone to criticize us for tech raiding, they must also criticize IRON and GGA and every other tech raiding alliance in existence. If they do not, they are displaying the behavior of a hypocrite, and will be treated accordingly, by us ignoring such "arguments" until one takes a non hypocritical stance.