Official IRON Announcement

[Bakunin's Dream]

I say go ahead. A good war is nice once in a while. I've been nuked 7 times, and I have no ill will for those that nuked me.

That's nice. I'm somebody who cares about my alliance's security, so I don't think we're going to be leaving that loophole open.

What if someone keeps rerolling with the intent of spying on our forums? Do you think that after the fifth time she's been caught in the act we should completely ignore her history the sixth time because "it's a completely new character" and such?

[ModusOperandi]

Wow, it only took a few months for you guys to figure this out; gee, how honorable.

[Earogema]

How the sweet Jesus is it a "past life" if all I'm doing with my new nation is using it as a means to the same end, for the same reasons, that I was pursuing before I rerolled? This is the principal contradiction in the anti-perma ZI argument: an almost religious refusal to conceive of what other reasons someone might have for rerolling besides "starting a new nation/character/whatever" that bears no relation to the old one.

OOC: Ask the Hindus.

IC: Simply because it is the same end means nothing. A father teaches his son to despise Pacifica, so the son does. He teaches his son the same. And so on and so forth. They all have the same ends, but they are not the same people.

I could easily create a nation called "NAAC" and call myself "Baron von NAC," a man who lost his parents in the second Polar war. As an NAAC reroll, I vow vengeance for my father (my previous ruler). Death to NPO!

[o ya baby]

That's nice. I'm somebody who cares about my alliance's security, so I don't think we're going to be leaving that loophole open.

What if someone keeps rerolling with the intent of spying on our forums? Do you think that after the fifth time she's been caught in the act we should completely ignore her history the sixth time because "it's a completely new character" and such?

I sure do. If they roll with a different ruler name, then they are different.

[Paradigm]

Not much left to say other than congrats for getting off the BS lists JB. Sorry to see the neck bomb was kept in place.

[Rebel Virginia]

I'm going to nuke you, reroll, build up to the point where I can do as much damage as possible, nuke you again, reroll, nuke you again, and continue ad infinitum for the rest of my existence. How many times would I have to do this before you might consider doing something about it?

You're making the assumption that all whom are EZI listed are going to be doing that. That is where your logic is flawed.

[Sal Paradise]

I'm going to nuke you, reroll, build up to the point where I can do as much damage as possible, nuke you again, reroll, nuke you again, and continue ad infinitum for the rest of my existence. How many times would I have to do this before you might consider doing something about it?

Nuke, reroll, nuke, reroll? LOL Jesus H. Christ, Bak. This isn't 2006.

[Ragashingo]

What if someone keeps rerolling with the intent of spying on our forums? Do you think that after the fifth time she's been caught in the act we should completely ignore her history the sixth time because "it's a completely new character" and such?

No, you shouldn't completely ignore their history. You should try and keep them out of your boards. But you should limit your actions in game to a single ZI then freedom no matter how many times you get nuked, spied, or anything else non-ban worthy.

[Bakunin's Dream]

See that thing called a "ruler name"? If it's different, it's a different character. That's where your argument loses weight. It's a different ruler and should be treated as such.

Except it isn't if the only purpose of rerolling is because I believe it to be the most expedient way to continue inflicting harm on you (a motivation that belongs entirely with the original character).

[Doitzel]

You're making the assumption that all whom are EZI listed are going to be doing that. That is where your logic is flawed.

OOC: Exactly. Most who are EZI'd have no desire to go rogue over and over and over. Honestly, it's not like they're a threat to anyone by doing that anyway. I'd love to get back into the thick of political intrigue and yes, probably even oppose NPO. But I'm not 'allowed' to do that, on this character or any other.

[Earogema]

That's nice. I'm somebody who cares about my alliance's security, so I don't think we're going to be leaving that loophole open.

What if someone keeps rerolling with the intent of spying on our forums? Do you think that after the fifth time she's been caught in the act we should completely ignore her history the sixth time because "it's a completely new character" and such?

Yes.

You cannot punish somebody until they have committed the crime. Even if you have prior knowledge of an individual, you cannot convict on history alone.

I'd like to see you turn in a former robber as a robber under the premise "WELL HE ROBBED BEFORE!" You must actually prove their intent to spy, or that they did in fact spy first. This is something you cannot do based on an IP alone.

[o ya baby]

Except it isn't if the only purpose of rerolling is because I believe it to be the most expedient way to continue inflicting harm on you (a motivation that belongs entirely with the original character).

They should be given the benefit of the doubt in all cases. Until they show acts of aggression towards you or your alliance, you should let them be no matter how many times they've tried to inflict harm to you.

[Bakunin's Dream]

No, you shouldn't completely ignore their history. You should try and keep them out of your boards. But you should limit your actions in game to a single ZI then freedom no matter how many times you get nuked, spied, or anything else non-ban worthy.

Oh oh, but if I recognize that this person is a reroll and make a decision based on what their previous character has done, I'm not respecting their status as a new person which is an OOC attack. What you seem to be arguing here isn't that taking action based on someone's previous nations isn't wrong as such, but rather that you think punishments across the board should be more lenient, which is quite a different argument.

[WarriorConcept]

Except it isn't if the only purpose of rerolling is because I believe it to be the most expedient way to continue inflicting harm on you (a motivation that belongs entirely with the original character).

How would you find out it's the original character?

[Doitzel]

You cannot punish somebody until they have committed the crime. Even if you have prior knowledge of an individual, you cannot convict on history alone.

Sure they can! They're the world police, keeping our streets safe and clean for you to walk on -- or else!

[Bakunin's Dream]

They should be given the benefit of the doubt in all cases. Until they show acts of aggression towards you or your alliance, you should let them be no matter how many times they've tried to inflict harm to you.

How many times do they need to demonstrate that they have nothing but hostile intent no matter how many times they reroll before it is no longer prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt?

[Sarkin]

Congratulations, Jonathan.

[Ogaden]

Why would I complain about the existence of a presumably now like minded alliance?

Because those controlling your opinions will tell you to.

[o ya baby]

How many times do they need to demonstrate that they have nothing but hostile intent no matter how many times they reroll before it is no longer prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt?

There is no limit. Forcing people out of the game is never called for unless admin wills it. You shouldn't chase people across rerolls for any reason. They're a new character. /ooc

Edited April 15, 2009 by o ya baby

[Ragashingo]

Except it isn't if the only purpose of rerolling is because I believe it to be the most expedient way to continue inflicting harm on you (a motivation that belongs entirely with the original character).

If all of us outlawed P/E ZI and supported 1 ZI then freedom then wouldn't the quicker way be to keep your same nation and use its improvements and wonders to rebuild and inflict harm much faster?

In the end this is a war game, and people like you need to learn to deal with having harm inflicted upon you without overreacting and holding single players and entire alliances down.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Yes.

You cannot punish somebody until they have committed the crime. Even if you have prior knowledge of an individual, you cannot convict on history alone.

I'd like to see you turn in a former robber as a robber under the premise "WELL HE ROBBED BEFORE!" You must actually prove their intent to spy, or that they did in fact spy first. This is something you cannot do based on an IP alone.

That's a great idea. We'll let anyone who's been caught spying on us, no matter how many times, reapply and we won't take their history into account in any way in their application. I wonder what the results of this will be!

[ModusOperandi]

How many times do they need to demonstrate that they have nothing but hostile intent no matter how many times they reroll before it is no longer prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt?

Um, this is a planet of war and peace; every alliance has hostile intent toward one another in some shape or form (the struggle to be #1, for example).

[Rebel Virginia]

How many times do they need to demonstrate that they have nothing but hostile intent no matter how many times they reroll before it is no longer prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt?

Actually, and if you don't mind I will use myself as an example, this is not true in all cases (or even most of the matter). I left Vox after I fought for Polar in that war as I promised Sponge I would. If I were allowed I would have either joined MK or STA, or quite possibly start my own alliance. However, due to this kind of assuming that I wanted to be your enemy and held some sort of grudge I was not allowed. Took me months to get off your list. Honestly I was more interested in wanting to build something than fight you. And as I said, the same is true for most.

[Doitzel]

How many times do they need to demonstrate that they have nothing but hostile intent no matter how many times they reroll before it is no longer prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt?

That's rich. You say that as if you only add people after they've repeatedly re-rolled and shown their "intent". Your argument is entirely theoretical and contrary to the reality of your practices. I haven't re-rolled. JB never re-rolled. Sponge never re-rolled.

[Bakunin's Dream]

If all of us outlawed P/E ZI and supported 1 ZI then freedom then wouldn't the quicker way be to keep your same nation and use its improvements and wonders to rebuild and inflict harm much faster?

In the end this is a war game, and people like you need to learn to deal with having harm inflicted upon you without overreacting and holding single players and entire alliances down.

Exactly. This is a war game, and just because an enemy has zero infrastructure at this moment in time does not mean they are not still my enemy or they are not still a threat. I take my alliance's security seriously.