Official IRON Announcement

[Bakunin's Dream]

I'm curious, what other alliances have imposed Viceroys?

Are you saying a viceroy is the only possible surrender term that can impose on an alliance's sovereignty? By definition all surrender terms do.

[ModusOperandi]

never liked JB, but it's nice to see him free

also, it's funny how the only people aregueing are the ones who were once on said ZI lists (edit for clarification WC + RV arguing bakunin)

Wow; many people, including myself, have never been on any ZI list. You're incorrect.

Furthermore, I believe that you'll find that many CN players who have been around for years are disproportionately against EZI/PZI because of the harmful impact that it has had on our community and its blatant OOC intent.

[Nobama]

You're talking about a single nation in a vacuum. What I ask myself is, what outcomes will result if we have a general policy that says such-and-such? You can always make the problem look small by focusing on isolated instances but that isn't the end of the story.

Or we can make the problem look big by saying certain alliances in the game feel they can effectively ban players from ever returning.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Or we can make the problem look big by saying certain alliances in the game feel they can effectively ban players from ever returning.

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Did you really just say that EZI'ing someone who means you no harm hurts you more than it hurts them?

No, it probably hurts them more. All I'm saying is that it's no good for us either.

[Ejayrazz]

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

Yea, not forever, only months......at a time.

[ModusOperandi]

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

In the case of Johnathan Brookbank it nearly was.

Now, how many circumstances have arisen that were similar to this but weren't ever communicated publicly? In nearly three years of existence, I've witnessed many people PZI'd for questionable reasons and very few released from it; I'm sure that I'm not alone in having witnessed these matters.

[Denial]

Note to Raga: this is what I was talking about earlier.

When IRON and Pacifica have a pervasive shift in attitude, rather than a token and reactionary 'change' in policy regarding one player, your alliances will be worthy of praise. At the moment you remain at the stage of attempting to avoid blame by acting ignorant of commonly-accepted definitions. You are not fooling anyone.

You see, there are these things called "wars" and they often end with things called "surrender terms." We're not the only alliance to ever use them, you know. (In fact I seem to remember you or someone in a similar position calling for the disbandment of a certain blue alliance as a condition of surrender a long time ago.)

Justifying your despicable and underhanded actions by labelling them as "surrender terms" does not help your cause in the slightest. The only fact it highlights is that not only does Pacifica have an antiquated and detestable stance on EZI/PZI, but also on surrender terms. And if GATO was not example enough, look no further than Mushroom Kingdom, who likely would have been faced with a permanent, Pacifican-imposed restriction on their nuclear policy, had they not signed the PIAT.

Also, I have never called for the disbandment of any alliance. You may want to get your facts straight before making accusations. I will not hold my breath there, though, considering going on the "offensive" with ludicrous accusations entirely devoid of any foundation in reality is the familiar last-resort of a Pacifican in his last throes.

[Reachwind]

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Viceroyalty

Probably not all inclusive.

Echelon made Tela the viceroy of CMEA.

[Delta1212]

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

You act like the fact that some people have gotten off means it's not impossible for others.

[WarriorConcept]

Bakunin, I hope you realize all you've been preaching thus far in regards to chasing characters across re-rolls is something which is completely opposite to what your Emperor has made clear in the past, right?

[Pocho]

If it's no good to you, wouldn't it be counter intuitive to do so? And here I was thinking that the NPO always did what they thought was best for them since day one.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Yea, not forever, only months......at a time.

Well that's not "effectively banning someone from ever returning," is it? If you show no indication of changing or refuse to be respectful, it's possible to remain for months, but if you have a basic sense of what to do you really shouldn't find yourself in that situation.

[Rebel Virginia]

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

It took me six months to get off, even after I had been fighting since April of that year (I first approached Moo for peace in October). I was continually told to wait longer, as if there was a minimum period that had to be waited for release.

OOC: A month is a long time in this game. Six months is an eternity. EZI makes the game considerably less enjoyable, and having to wait almost half a year......most would just quit. I mean, what is the point of continuing to play if you're not having any fun?

[Delta1212]

Well that's not "effectively banning someone from ever returning," is it? If you show no indication of changing or refuse to be respectful, it's possible to remain for months, but if you have a basic sense of what to do you really shouldn't find yourself in that situation.

That's odd. It seems I've never know anyone on a ZI list that fits with what "should" happen. You should really check up on that. Your system seems to be defective.

[Bakunin's Dream]

When IRON and Pacifica have a pervasive shift in attitude, rather than a token and reactionary 'change' in policy regarding one player, your alliances will be worthy of praise. At the moment you remain at the stage of attempting to avoid blame by acting ignorant of commonly-accepted definitions. You are not fooling anyone.

Was talking about the "bowing to public pressure" comment. Or would you not make that same argument if we stopped perma-ZI'ing people tomorrow?

Justifying your despicable and underhanded actions by labelling them as "surrender terms" does not help your cause in the slightest. The only fact it highlights is that not only does Pacifica have an antiquated and detestable stance on EZI/PZI, but also on surrender terms.

I guess anyone who ever uses surrender terms is despicable and underhanded then. If you're arguing that the victorious alliance in a war should never require the defeated party to do anything you're not going to find much support.

And if GATO was not example enough, look no further than Mushroom Kingdom, who likely would have been faced with a permanent, Pacifican-imposed restriction on their nuclear policy, had they not signed the PIAT.

hahahaha

Also, I have never called for the disbandment of any alliance. You may want to get your facts straight before making accusations. I will not hold my breath there, though, considering going on the "offensive" with ludicrous accusations entirely devoid of any foundation in reality is the familiar last-resort of a Pacifican in his last throes.

GPW

Bakunin, I hope you realize all you've been preaching thus far in regards to chasing characters across re-rolls is something which is completely opposite to what your Emperor has made clear in the past, right?

How so?

If it's no good to you, wouldn't it be counter intuitive to do so? And here I was thinking that the NPO always did what they thought was best for them since day one.

It's no good to us if we get it wrong. If we are able to use good judgment (and I believe we are) it is both prudent and justified.

[Virillus]

Are you saying a viceroy is the only possible surrender term that can impose on an alliance's sovereignty? By definition all surrender terms do.

99% of the time I'm actually just being honest and genuine, I promise:P

I really was just curious.

[Ragashingo]

You see, there are these things called "wars" and they often end with things called "surrender terms." We're not the only alliance to ever use them, you know. (In fact I seem to remember you or someone in a similar position calling for the disbandment of a certain blue alliance as a condition of surrender a long time ago.)

Oh I like this example, mainly because I'll get to have a lot of fun with it. If you don't mind I'll stick to me personally as involving all the CoaLUEtion viewpoints will likely get unnecessarily messy.

1. It is true, I would have liked to see the NpO be disbanded at the end of the Great War. Going a step farther I was one of the ones who called for it to disband from the moment it was created since it was, at that time, merely a puppet alliance meant to more or less destroy my allies in the NAAC.

However I never once supported anything harsher than a single ZI of the NPO during the negotiations that took place after your side lost that war. That means no holding the NPO down for over a year, or usurping its sovereignty with a Viceroy or any of the other detestable actions your alliance has done to others.

2. I've never really supported surrender terms either. A trip to ZI followed by white peace is good enough for me. It was the NPO who ratcheted up the severity of surrender terms over the years, and while I can't recall any specific instances right now I'm sure I spoke out against the increasing harsh terms you levied on those you defeated.

So yeah, trying to compare me or most anyone else to the atrocities committed by your alliance just isn't going to fly.

[Sal Paradise]

Well that's not "effectively banning someone from ever returning," is it? If you show no indication of changing or refuse to be respectful, it's possible to remain for months, but if you have a basic sense of what to do you really shouldn't find yourself in that situation.

OOC: Well that's the point isn't it? "You will behave as we want you to or you can't play the game," "you have offended us, you can't play until we've decided you can." It's not permanent, so long as you've had your pound of flesh.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Sal Paradise

[Sunstar]

Mature move from mature allies.

[Minilla Island]

Hail IRON! Hail to Common Sense!

[WarriorConcept]

How so?

What you have described as PZI is what your emperor has described as EZI.

Your emperor has said EZI has never been and will never be used by NPO.

[Nobama]

How so?

Is this the part where you pretend you've been working off of a different definition of EZI than the rest of the known universe?

[Delta1212]

Was talking about the "bowing to public pressure" comment. Or would you not make that same argument if we stopped perma-ZI'ing people tomorrow?

How about today?

[Denial]

Was talking about the "bowing to public pressure" comment. Or would you not make that same argument if we stopped perma-ZI'ing people tomorrow?

Pacifica has caved to public pressure. There is no doubt in my mind that Pacifica would have continued using its traditional methods of hegemonic maintenance had there not been a pervasive and mass movement against such methods over the past months. Pacifica's recent policies changes are nothing but reactionary; your arguments in this thread alone provide enough evidence that the upper-echelons of Pacifica have not changed their attitude. If the Cyberverse ever returns to a political climate similar to that of post-Third Great War, where Pacifica has a clear stranglehold on Cyberverse politics, I would expect the return of those aforementioned tools and methods.

I guess anyone who ever uses surrender terms is despicable and underhanded then. If you're arguing that the victorious alliance in a war should never require the defeated party to do anything you're not going to find much support.

Way to create a strawman there, Bakunin. In case you need a reminder, I stated "not only does Pacifica have an antiquated and detestable stance on EZI/PZI, but also on surrender terms." It is not surrender terms themselves, but the nature and duration of the terms Pacificans enforce. For example, Viceroys, restrictions on aid transactions, extortion of ludicrous amounts of technology, lengthy restrictions on the signing of treaties, destructions of Wonders and Improvements (even Factories), and so on.

hahahaha

You know what makes me laugh like that? The fact that Pacifica sought an MDOAP and was consoled with a PIAT. I do wonder if the same happened with TOOL.

GPW

I was never present in either the interalliance peace discussions, or any internal peace discussions. Again, get your facts straight

OOC: Real life obligations kept me busy during most of the First Great War. I only had time to offer some assistance on our home forums and participate in the in-game battles.