Caliph Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Voted all where possible. Voted nothing on the last 2. Not really but... a stern talking to is all the world needs. Same. Voted all cuz I could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrik Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) Voted all for 1 and the first option for both 2 and 3. Knowing anything other than what this page ( http://www.cybernations.net/allAlliances_display.asp ) tells you is cheating and should result in the harshest punishments for the accused and all affiliated nations. Edited April 21, 2009 by Syrik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 There were some areas I voted which I kinda see as grey areas. Now active seeking via plants and informants, there's no question about it. That is spying, plain and simple. Black and white stuff there. Knowingly accepting classified info without actually seeking it - grey area. This would hang on intent and the sensitivity of the information. If someone were to leak screenshots of, say, a ghost list of whatever alliance I was in that the time, I'd be like, "pfft! Who cares! It's just a feckin ghost list! I dunno why such-and-such is treating this like some Holy Grail of Espionage Win!" If it were, however, something from within the deepest bowels of classified information, I'd be like, "if this person shows any intent of using this against us, we'll have to do something about it." Now obviously if you didn't know the info was classified, that is more the source's fault than the recipient, and the recipient should get off with no punishment. Punishment. Here's another grey area. For active seeking via plants and informants, I, like some people, put "Alliance Wide War." However, this would only be if it were an alliance-wide (or alliance-gov-wide) espionage effort in the first place, or if one person acted with the foreknowledge of his comrades and nothing was done about it. Consider, however, a situation where someone was doing some of their own digging without the foreknowledge of his or her gov-mates/alliance-mates. If this person wasn't the alliance's leader or a triumvir/quadrumvir/decumvir/whatever, then why should the entire alliance be subject to punishment for the foolhardy actions of one person? (Just for the record, abetting or ignoring known espionage from one of your members is just as foolhardy as the actual espionage itself IMO.) Knowingly receiving 3rd party info without seeking it? Also foolhardy, also a grey area in terms of punishment, because of the intent factor. Some people may simply be curious. Yes, curiosity killed the cat, but it's not worth ZIing someone or going to war with the whole alliance over. The most common scenario would simply be giving the offending part(y/ies) one round of war. But it's something I personally would handle on a case-to-case basis. And of course, all this punishment is assuming the part(y/ies) involved get caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 By clicking the following link, GR will gain a CB on your alliance. It is from a government only GR forum. You have been warned. http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww287/s...se34/grcoup.png Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 This is obviously not related to a recent event concerning my alliance and its ally. Why would you think that? I mean, it's not like wars have been fought over spying, and it's just now that we as the community finally sit down and try to find out what it actually means. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatplacetolive Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) (edit - this smiley is intended to convey the idea that FAN is watching this debate with great interest, for a variety of reasons) Edited April 21, 2009 by greatplacetolive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffron X Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Spies are bad. Don't spy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 only purposefully seeking classified info is "spying" . Agreed. also the alliance shouldnt cause war over its members spying,just give them a very stern talk in any spying situation. Depends. I see no problem with war over spying. But real spying, not just 'receiving information' whether on tattler or in a query window, and the civilised thing to do of course is to attempt to negotiate a reasonable settlement and only go to war if that fails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruthenia Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 All that time in Misr's alliance seems to have rubbed off on you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baseballer790 Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 We must remember that the NPO and Co.'s definition of spying means they must have, under their definition, have spied too to catch OV 'spying.' It's not spying to get information from a source you didn't plant, knowingly or unknowingly. That or hypocrisy, you pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted April 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Looks like more than a third think The second option constitutes spying. And most seem to think that Single ZI or A set amount of attacks would be the set solution to it. Yet a majority goes to Nothing as the punishment. Pretty good stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 1, 1 and stern talking to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostlin Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) 1, 4, and nothing because everyone does this directly or indirectly anyway. Maybe not screen shots, but gossip between members and the like. This is the first time I think I've ever seen a CB that went 'you received information from someone that spied on us, and you didn't care whether or not you wanted to see it! That means you're a bad alliance!' and yet, went and got IRC logs and did the exact same thing. Edited April 21, 2009 by Ghostlin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Salovsky Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Actively seeking information through plants and informant. Knowingly accepting "classified" information about a 3rd party without seeking it. ^Spying^ PZI Single ZI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 My nation is missing "A stern talking to" button, could someone point in the direction of this tab in game? The PM button let's you give nation rulers "a stern talking to." As far as the poll... actively seeking info = spying. Receiving info... depends on whether this happens repeatedly or whether someone was just, like, spewing the info all over the place. Most of the time, I would say that is Not spying. Repercussions: Active can be alliance war, ZI, or war for a certain time length (longer or shorter than the time to ZI, depending on perpetrator's attitude). Non-active, from stern talking to, to apology, to removal from governmental office, depending on the nature of the crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banned Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 I demand the right to vote for EZI for an entire alliance punishment for reading TWiP and The Tattler! 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.