sammykhalifa Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I find it amazing that some people cannot offer a simple "good job" to the NPO as a result of this action. Look at it from their point of view. I wouldn't say "good job" to someone if they finally untied me and let me out of their basement. Anyhow, I don't really care at this point why these practices are changing. I'm just glad they are. It transcends in-game politics, and maybe people can start treating this game like it's a game again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Only begins to describe what I feel. o/ NPO Great policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Hurray for GATO!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freelancer Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) I'm afraid I don't agree. The wording is very vague, and I'm sure it was intentionally so."the Emperor reserves the right to extend those sentences to fit the crime;" What that says is that the Emperor can say "Heck with policy, I feel this crime deserves more than one round of wars... continue the wars until I say stop." IF NPO wanted to put the good foot completely forward, they would have left out that very contradictory statement in their policy changes. Else, why even have that section? While I can applaud the NPO for making these changes, one is left to wonder just WHY they're making the changes. If it was indeed a change of heart, they would have made the moves across the board. To use an extremely irrelevant metaphor: You there, you're a bad man forcing people eat popcorn until they die. You're depleting the world's popcorn supply! Oh, and killing people too." "Meh, what you gonna do about it?" "I'll shake my fist menacingly at you and plot your doom." "Go for it." Months later... "Hmm... seems there's been reports of a resistance forming. I'll give them a few pieces of steak for now, but once they trust me... BACK TO THE POPCORN!" You win the thread Mr. Malone. , What astonishes me or more accurately the brilliance behind NPO's methods. NPO puts a viceroy in place over at The Legion, the Brain washing commences, months later, there released with a treaty in place and The NPO now has a new trained Collie to snuggle with. Wash, Rinse, Repeat with Gato. Conrgats and welcome to The NPO's Kennel of trained K-9's Edited April 15, 2009 by Freelancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Niagara Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Good job NPO, (I have only read the first page btw so that is all I will comment on). Olympus has dealt with NPO on a few occasions and they have been nothing but respectful and fair to us as an alliance. Its nice to see that continue. congrats to all involved, its nice to see things moving forward on all fronts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 There's nothing to complain about here. Sometimes, I think that people see the name "NPO" attached to the post and say "HMM. How can I complain today?" Yah I quite agree with this statement. On occasion, I wonder if the real desire that some people have is to have an extra 1,592 tech raid targets made available. However, as I've said before, I quite like mhawk, and obviously I support this move on Pacifica's part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm glad to see this - but I'm curious where FAN falls in all of this (eternal war, etc) FAN isn't being ZI'd or sentenced to eternal war, as that would be a breach of their policy. FAN is just at war till they get peace. Not eternal. You'd have to be alive for all of eternity to prove it's an eternal war, but right now it's just been like... 2 years? That's far from eternal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm afraid I don't agree. The wording is very vague, and I'm sure it was intentionally so."the Emperor reserves the right to extend those sentences to fit the crime;" What that says is that the Emperor can say "Heck with policy, I feel this crime deserves more than one round of wars... continue the wars until I say stop." IF NPO wanted to put the good foot completely forward, they would have left out that very contradictory statement in their policy changes. Else, why even have that section? Simple. Five people break off from...ODN...fill in the blank alliance doesn't matter. They call themselves the "Anti-Dilber Bloc" and three of them start nuking Dilber, and the other two start nuking random NPO nations in range. What's the punishment for that? One round of war? Hardly. That's like giving a stiff fine for aggravated assault. While I can applaud the NPO for making these changes, one is left to wonder just WHY they're making the changes. If it was indeed a change of heart, they would have made the moves across the board. Maybe it occurred to them that a more moderate policy is in order? Maybe they figured out that PZI and EZI creates Vox whiners? Maybe it's because all the cool kids are doing it? Maybe it's just the right thing to do? (and it is) Or if you insist on being a cynic, maybe it is just politics. Does it really matter? Why not just applaud NPO and move on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freelancer Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Why not just applaud NPO and move on? Little hard to applaud one huge PR campaign, because that's what this is, without all the commercials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micheal Malone Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 ...Why not just applaud NPO and move on? Simple... this is a game of politics. It's in my nature to know, or at least be curious about, why an alliance with as much success makes massive policy changes. Especially after vehemently upholding those policies when there were cries for change countless times beforehand. Instead of just blindly accepting what's put forth, I question it. It doesn't mean I'm against it. I suppose if I'd rather have a little bit of surprise in this game I could pretend to be naive and blindly take what's posted here as the god-spoken truth... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasin Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm going to guess the purpose of the whole anti-EZI OWF campaign was to end EZI or at least make some significant changes. I'd say this right here is change, maybe not as much as you were hoping for, but still change. Now you're all out here saying NPO's just doing this for PR purposes and hasn't actually changed their beliefs. Did you honestly think you were going to be able to change alliances like NPO, IRON, and TPF's beliefs on EZI and their actions? No, but what you have done is pressured them into making these changes, so accept your small victory and move on. You're not going to actually change their minds on what they think is right and wrong. Saying NPO is just doing this for PR purposes is not helping anything other than making yourself feel better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMKeynes Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Sure some may call it scraps, but freedom is freedom and I'm not complaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm going to guess the purpose of the whole anti-EZI OWF campaign was to end EZI or at least make some significant changes. I'd say this right here is change, maybe not as much as you were hoping for, but still change. Now you're all out here saying NPO's just doing this for PR purposes and hasn't actually changed their beliefs. Did you honestly think you were going to be able to change alliances like NPO, IRON, and TPF's beliefs on EZI and their actions? No, but what you have done is pressured them into making these changes, so accept your small victory and move on. You're not going to actually change their minds on what they think is right and wrong. Saying NPO is just doing this for PR purposes is not helping anything other than making yourself feel better. I have to agree with this. Frankly, while it may not be everything that was wanted, change has been made. That is a good thing regardless of whatever the reason is behind the change. The change is what matters, not the reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willirica Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'm going to guess the purpose of the whole anti-EZI OWF campaign was to end EZI or at least make some significant changes. I'd say this right here is change, maybe not as much as you were hoping for, but still change. Now you're all out here saying NPO's just doing this for PR purposes and hasn't actually changed their beliefs. Did you honestly think you were going to be able to change alliances like NPO, IRON, and TPF's beliefs on EZI and their actions? No, but what you have done is pressured them into making these changes, so accept your small victory and move on. You're not going to actually change their minds on what they think is right and wrong. Saying NPO is just doing this for PR purposes is not helping anything other than making yourself feel better. i think they dont want people to fall victim to the same ol' smoke and mirrors trick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Congrats GATO, and you're free Starfox you're free! Hah. Freedom, right. Free like Jonathan Brookbank is, not to join certain alliances or say certain things? Free like Rebel Virginia is, suffering under secret terms restricting his freedom to speak? Do you think any of us is free so long as "...the Emperor reserves the right to extend those sentences to fit the crime..."? Given how GATO's sentence was extended, given how FAN's has been extended, given how very extended everyone's sentence has been I can't help but place absolutely no faith in the Pacifican ability to administer real justice. Okay, sure, push for more change, but celebrate the victories and applaud the positive changes as they occur. What is the victory here? NPO has a new lapdog. Jarheads is still stuck at war with NPO's allies, most of the damage permanent. NPO has a new ZI policy that in its very wording allows them to defecate on it at their own leisure. Indeed, they're defecating on it right now as they continue to hold entire alliances on the ground at gunpoint -- of course, they'll never force or indirectly attempt the destruction of a ruler, unless that ruler is wearing the same AA that another ruler they're attacking is. Then it's justified! Now I don't know what alternative reality you all live in where NPO is as good as their word (hell will freeze over before the OoO is canceled!) or where they play nice out of anything more than malicious intent, but in this world where neither of those is true I think maybe NPO requires some punishment to fit their crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freelancer Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) Did you honestly think you were going to be able to change alliances like NPO, IRON, and TPF's beliefs on EZI and their actions? Were not that naive But what you have done is pressured them into making these changes. The community as a whole did that, not just one alliance or a set of rabble rouser's like myself but the community as a whole, The NPO had no choice but to throw something out here to maintain that stranglehold they currently have. Saying NPO is just doing this for PR purposes is not helping anything other than making yourself feel better. I disagree, NPO is like AIG or any other corporate conglomerate that needs to be reminded that there business practices suck, This is our CNN business channel and I like it. Edited April 15, 2009 by Freelancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Simple. Five people break off from...ODN...fill in the blank alliance doesn't matter. They call themselves the "Anti-Dilber Bloc" and three of them start nuking Dilber, and the other two start nuking random NPO nations in range.What's the punishment for that? One round of war? Hardly. That's like giving a stiff fine for aggravated assault. Maybe it occurred to them that a more moderate policy is in order? Maybe they figured out that PZI and EZI creates Vox whiners? Maybe it's because all the cool kids are doing it? Maybe it's just the right thing to do? (and it is) Or if you insist on being a cynic, maybe it is just politics. Does it really matter? Why not just applaud NPO and move on? For your first scenario, that'd be a full out war. The one week round of wars is usually decided by the aggressors (well, person initiating the attacks) and in your scenario the splinters are the ones starting it. NPO can't choose when they'll stop, so they can't make that statement. Also good job irrelevant peanut gallery whiners! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Also good job irrelevant peanut gallery whiners! You know you're getting somewhere when people start calling you irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Simple... this is a game of politics. It's in my nature to know, or at least be curious about, why an alliance with as much success makes massive policy changes. Especially after vehemently upholding those policies when there were cries for change countless times beforehand. Instead of just blindly accepting what's put forth, I question it. It doesn't mean I'm against it.I suppose if I'd rather have a little bit of surprise in this game I could pretend to be naive and blindly take what's posted here as the god-spoken truth... I will not pretend to speak for Moo. However, some personal opinion here... 1. a great number of people now calling for an end to PZI and EZ 2. some of those calling for change are in positions of power/influence 3. you see people calling for an end to it not just from the safety of Peace Mode or in mostly irrelevant alliances, but from within NPO and from NPO's closet allies It would seem to me that when your friends and family are telling you something, it has far more influence than when strangers and/or people you don't respect are telling you. I think that's where we are on this. It's the right thing to do (indeed it goes further than even I might have gone), and it is being recognized as the right thing to do at last. Was it done strictly on ethical grounds without regard to PR? We wouldn't be talking about here if it were. However, that doesn't invalidate the gesture at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fokker Aeroplanbau Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 There's not anything I can criticize here! For that reason, I do not like this announcement. o/ NPO [Don't do that a lot] o/ GATO o/ Whatnot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 I will not pretend to speak for Moo. However, some personal opinion here...1. a great number of people now calling for an end to PZI and EZ 2. some of those calling for change are in positions of power/influence 3. you see people calling for an end to it not just from the safety of Peace Mode or in mostly irrelevant alliances, but from within NPO and from NPO's closet allies It would seem to me that when your friends and family are telling you something, it has far more influence than when strangers and/or people you don't respect are telling you. I think that's where we are on this. It's the right thing to do (indeed it goes further than even I might have gone), and it is being recognized as the right thing to do at last. Was it done strictly on ethical grounds without regard to PR? We wouldn't be talking about here if it were. However, that doesn't invalidate the gesture at all. Stop contradicting Moo, the NPO has Never Had An EZI List Before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasin Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) i think they dont want people to fall victim to the same ol' smoke and mirrors trick I really don't see that happening. I disagree, NPO is like AIG or any other corporate conglomerate that needs to be reminded that there business practices suck, This is our CNN business channel and I like it. Okay. Their business practices sucked. They just changed some of them because of you (as in everyone), and you still insult them for being petty PR minded people. How is this going to make them want to change more in the future when clearly no matter what they do they will be insulted. There is a time for pushing for things, and there is a time for being gracious for what you (again as in everyone) have gained. By all means mention FAN or whatever in this thread, but also note that what they have done is some of what you wanted. In the next thread about FAN or whatever you can push hard again for their release. Edited April 15, 2009 by Hasin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 You know you're getting somewhere when people start calling you irrelevant. DID YOU KNOW? Irrelevance is a zero-emissions, eco-friendly fuel used to power Vox tanks, power plants, and pacemakers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 This policy is Great show, Pacifica. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 So the New Pacific Order has been forced change it's obsolete and clearly unpopular policies, in order to keep in line with the currently prevailing doctrines - which they for the first time, in a long time, are not responsible for pioneering. But are they too late? 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.