Official IRON Announcement

[o ya baby]

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.

Yeah, it's a war game. It's not track people across IPs and beat their nations up game. So keep it all in the game? Stop using outside sources to find people and attack them for things they haven't done yet on their current nations. /ooc

[Stonewall Jaxon]

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).

That argument would be perfectly legitimate, if rerolling with intent to carry out past grudges were the only reason for which people are EZI'd

[Rebel Virginia]

Because those controlling your opinions will tell you to.

Do you want to tell me how it is possible to control someone's opinion? Wait, propaganda. That's only a handful of alliances though that utilize such methods to discourage free thinking. A good deal of alliances are based on the principle of free thinking. STA is one of them, plus, having known Rag for awhile now, I can safely tell you that he is not the type who will simply sing the party line. He does research and comes up with his own opinions. I suggest you look into that yourself.

[ModusOperandi]

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.

In which case, wouldn't your security be more aptly served by acknowledging a victory over a foe rather than creating a situation which propels an unending war?

If someone is your enemy, ZI him/her and then don't permit that person to join your alliance.

[Doitzel]

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.

OOC: And this is what it comes down to. You lot always have and always will put the status and well-being of your little fictional kingdom above the balance, fairness, and health of the game's community. You care exclusively about protecting what's yours and everyone else can burn. You take your "alliance's security" too seriously.

[Ejayrazz]

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!

You are arguing something even yourself..seem to be questioning. If not, you aren't really adequately defending your position mate.

It is OOC attack, nonetheless. EZI is going after the user behind the computer, their intentions are meaningless, their history is meaningless, IF you are attacking them for prior 'convictions' as another nation, it is by definition, an OOC attack.

O O C

Not IC. If you support it, great, all the power to you, but it is OOC, you're after the person behind the computer, not their nation. Really mate, it isn't hard to grasp.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[Ragashingo]

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.

Not exactly.

I simply argue that we should all limit the in game punishments we give out for the good of the game itself. Your boards are not in game so they don't fall within that limited punishment range. (And please don't go the route of arguing about excessive out of game punishment, we both know that is wrong and it isn't worth even mentioning)

[Ogaden]

Do you want to tell me how it is possible to control someone's opinion? Wait, propaganda. That's only a handful of alliances though that utilize such methods to discourage free thinking. A good deal of alliances are based on the principle of free thinking. STA is one of them, plus, having known Rag for awhile now, I can safely tell you that he is not the type who will simply sing the party line. He does research and comes up with his own opinions. I suggest you look into that yourself.

You're one of them, by the way.

You might as well tell him why to hate us even if we stop PZI, save us all the waiting around for it.

[Earogema]

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!

Even then, for a man who uses Bakunin, there is certainly no scientific or objective claim that, that person will spy.

Only paranoia.

Why not refuse them membership, but not chase the reroll?

[Earogema]

You're one of them, by the way.

You might as well tell him why to hate us even if we stop PZI, save us all the waiting around for it.

I don't think you know who Rebel Virginia is.

[Bakunin's Dream]

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.

Do you think you would consider it a "clean slate," start a new life, and not keep doing what you're doing if you deleted your nation and created Doitzel2? I don't either. If you really, truly want to reroll and cease being our enemy we have no interest in keeping you down, and if we get it wrong it is only to our detriment. It's why we try to get it right, but unfortunately sometimes people lie and the process is not 100% certain. If you want that you should be doing mathematics, not politics.

[Rebel Virginia]

You're one of them, by the way.

You might as well tell him why to hate us even if we stop PZI, save us all the waiting around for it.

Wait, I am controlling people's thoughts and making them hate the NPO? Thank you for acknowledging my relevance.

[Sal Paradise]

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!

OOC: I'm going to have to agree with Bak here. Let's not get too extreme here. An alliance has every right to prevent a player from joining them across rerolls. When it comes to other alliances, that's when the much championed sovereignty comes into play.

[ModusOperandi]

Do you think you would consider it a "clean slate," start a new life, and not keep doing what you're doing if you deleted your nation and created Doitzel2? I don't either. If you really, truly want to reroll and cease being our enemy we have no interest in keeping you down, and if we get it wrong it is only to our detriment. It's why we try to get it right, but unfortunately sometimes people lie and the process is not 100% certain. If you want that you should be doing mathematics, not politics.

So EZI basically boils down to the reason of "just-in-case"?

That's a little overboard, don't you think?

[Ragashingo]

OOC: And this is what it comes down to. You lot always have and always will put the status and well-being of your little fictional kingdom above the balance, fairness, and health of the game's community. You care exclusively about protecting what's yours and everyone else can burn. You take your "alliance's security" too seriously.

Exactly what I would have said, but better written.

[WarriorConcept]

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

Re-posting this since you might have skipped it considering you're replying to a bunch of people.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Even then, for a man who uses Bakunin, there is certainly no scientific or objective claim that, that person will spy.

Only paranoia.

Or a reasonable belief based on factual knowledge and analysis.

Why not refuse them membership, but not chase the reroll?

Because they're a spy?

[Rebel Virginia]

Because they're a spy?

And why are they spying? Perhaps because they're PZI listed and have no choice but to fight you.

[Ragashingo]

OOC: I'm going to have to agree with Bak here. Let's not get too extreme here. An alliance has every right to prevent a player from joining them across rerolls. When it comes to other alliances, that's when the much championed sovereignty comes into play.

Agreed. I fully support the use of counter intelligence to try and attempt people from spying on your alliance. Just as I fully support the people who are trying to do the spying in the first place.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Ragashingo

[ModusOperandi]

Or a reasonable belief based on factual knowledge and analysis A COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL ASSUMPTION.

Because they're a spy I"M PARANOID?

Fixed it for you.

Edited April 15, 2009 by ModusOperandi

[Bakunin's Dream]

So EZI basically boils down to the reason of "just-in-case"?

That's a little overboard, don't you think?

Certainly not. If we perma-ZI'd everyone left, right, and center for reasons of "just in case" we would end up perma-ZI'ing a lot of people unnecessarily, and we have no incentive or desire for that. We use it in limited circumstances when our judgment indicates it is prudent. Just like any alliance decides whether and how to punish wrongdoers.

[Bakunin's Dream]

Fixed it for you.

I can make things up too

[Aurion]

And why are they spying? Perhaps because they're PZI listed and have no choice but to fight you.

I think what Bakunin's Dream is trying to get at is that by attempting to spy on someone's forums, a person is committing a overtly hostile act with OOC: their current character. /OOC. I'm not sure that fits the definition of "trying to live in peace".

Alliances get whacked for stuff like that regularly.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Aurion

[Ragashingo]

I can make things up too

Like nearly unworkable hypothetical situations.

[Ragashingo]

I think what Bakunin's Dream is trying to get at is that by attempting to spy on someone's forums, a person is committing a overtly hostile act with their current character.

Alliances get whacked for stuff like that regularly.

Fair enough, wack the alliance. Take each member to ZI. But then let them up.

I would of course rather see the use of the NSO's and MK's limited war concept though.