Why I just surrendered

[lmcfalcon12]

I was asked by my superiors in New Sith Order why I will not allow Jocko Homo to join. I will post my response here just so my position is clear.

Jocko Homo deserted his alliance during war time, created a thread just to (banned word) them, insisted that his tech deals (at market price) were evidence of his epic contribution to NPO, is flirting with OpSec violations, and had made no attempt to participate in the alliance in a meaningful way.

For the length he was in NPO, he was well aware of the Revenge Doctrine, and prior to the war could have easily resigned, stayed on Red, kept his trades, kept doing tech deals, and been under NPO protection from tech raiding without being honor bound to fight.

In my opinion, there's a certain "hardcore" quality that NSO looks for. Jocko Homo strikes me as a bit of a whiny !@#$%*. Even though his actions are directed against NPO, I can just as easily see him doing the same thing against NSO in the future.

And the moral to the story is don't screw your friends and allies over. And we all lived happily ever after The End. Either way he's going to learn a lesson whether anyone agrees what it is or not.

[neneko]

1) The reason the war started is BS. Oooooo. Stolen screenshot. Big deal.

You do realise of course that it was NPO that declared war with this CB not karma. Wich leads me to

3) If you don't believe the cause of the war, don't fight. Don't get dragged in. Just say no. Go into peace mode. Leave your alliance and come

are you going to take your own advice here?

[Mussolandia]

Ahh yes, the blame game begins. I am really disappointed to see this starting, especially because its being directed at my good friend over in Neo Triyunica.

I have never seen Triyun act "noobish" as a diplomat during my entire run as IRON SoS. I would not have worked with him so closely had he been a poor diplomat. He did what he could with what he had -- and, to be honest, he wasn't always given a whole hell of a lot to work with.

If you want to see where the diplomatic failure is, your best bet is to look higher on the totem pole than where you're looking now.

You are correct. The war, its development and its result are the Emperor's fault and his alone.

So much for imperial infallibility. The NPO was never based on such premises. The leader, whichever title he took, was a primus inter pares. His voice was just one amongst the many elderly Pacificans. It is a sad reflection of the membership that they may worship him as a deity, especially an emperor who has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

[Nobama]

I read much more of this thread than I usually do, and it's because this subject piques my curiosity.

I was a Legion member in GWIII. I fought hard against FAN until I was left with 7 infra and an alliance leadership (namely VL) who was satisfied to ignore my concerns about the war effort. Those of you who are bashing this gentleman for leaving seem to have never been in this position, but I can certainly and clearly see why he is in the right. The membership of an alliance have certain rights, and it certainly does not escape my imagination that NPO leadership would act much the same way Legion's did, only with a more aggressive spin that may discourage a member from even attempting to offer adverse opinions.

That said, I have mixed feelings about this thread being created. While it is good for other NPO members to witness a comrade come to his senses, I would cringe if a member did this in an alliance I was leading. I suppose the difference here is that these threads are usually written by poorly-studied fools who are unable to grasp what is going on in their alliance, while the OP is obviously a man of intelligence.

Good read, and I wish you the best.

[SpacingOutMan]

And the moral to the story is don't screw your friends and allies over. And we all lived happily ever after The End. Either way he's going to learn a lesson whether anyone agrees what it is or not.

Very much this. It applies to all alliances, NPO or Karma. If you desert your alliance in which you suckled on their resources at the brink of dishevelment, I do hope you become blacklisted.

[pd73bassman]

I find it funny we are now on page 10 and this "insignificant" member of nearly 5 months has gotten all these Pacificans fired up

Hmm.. Wonder why that is, maybe he is on to something

Edited April 28, 2009 by pd73bassman

[Lennox]

If you'll check you will find we are still at war with the enemies of the NPO and will be until the Body Republic is granted peace.

This reminds me of a select few alliances who did the same thing!

[Mogar]

I read much more of this thread than I usually do, and it's because this subject piques my curiosity.

I was a Legion member in GWIII. I fought hard against FAN until I was left with 7 infra and an alliance leadership (namely VL) who was satisfied to ignore my concerns about the war effort. Those of you who are bashing this gentleman for leaving seem to have never been in this position, but I can certainly and clearly see why he is in the right. The membership of an alliance have certain rights, and it certainly does not escape my imagination that NPO leadership would act much the same way Legion's did, only with a more aggressive spin that may discourage a member from even attempting to offer adverse opinions.

That said, I have mixed feelings about this thread being created. While it is good for other NPO members to witness a comrade come to his senses, I would cringe if a member did this in an alliance I was leading. I suppose the difference here is that these threads are usually written by poorly-studied fools who are unable to grasp what is going on in their alliance, while the OP is obviously a man of intelligence.

Good read, and I wish you the best.

I've been Zi'd multiple times for my alliance, though I tend to agree with his ideas on NPO, still sucks he's abandoning them during war.

[Jocko Homo]

I was asked by my superiors in New Sith Order why I will not allow Jocko Homo to join. I will post my response here just so my position is clear.

Jocko Homo deserted his alliance during war time, created a thread just to (banned word) them, insisted that his tech deals (at market price) were evidence of his epic contribution to NPO, is flirting with OpSec violations, and had made no attempt to participate in the alliance in a meaningful way.

Sorry, but I never " insisted that his tech deals (at market price) were evidence of his epic contribution to NPO". In fact I said nothing about tech dealing until I was accused of accepting aid from NPO and bailing. I responded that every penny I got from NPO was as part of $3M/50/50 tech deals that I arranged on my own. I didn't do this for the alliance, I did this only for myself. please go back and reread that section for clarification if you don't believe me.

For the length he was in NPO, he was well aware of the Revenge Doctrine, and prior to the war could have easily resigned, stayed on Red, kept his trades, kept doing tech deals, and been under NPO protection from tech raiding without being honor bound to fight.

I was never aware that the Revenge Doctrine was that people who leave will be hunted down to ZI. Believe me or not. It's the truth. The first I learned of it was something like 2 days ago and that initiated all this.

In my opinion, there's a certain "hardcore" quality that NSO looks for. Jocko Homo strikes me as a bit of a whiny !@#$%*. Even though his actions are directed against NPO, I can just as easily see him doing the same thing against NSO in the future.

Could be. :lol:

[Coursca]

You are correct. The war, its development and its result are the Emperor's fault and his alone.

So much for imperial infallibility. The NPO was never based on such premises. The leader, whichever title he took, was a primus inter pares. His voice was just one amongst the many elderly Pacificans. It is a sad reflection of the membership that they may worship him as a deity, especially an emperor who has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

/me nods

Its really unfortunate. I just think there were a lot of things that could have been averted, or at the very least tempered, by serious policy reform in NPO. Unfortunately, in a system such as that, the Emperor has absolute power, including the power to ignore advice. There is no implied duty or right to revolution, akin to what (OOC: John Locke) espouses as part of any feasible civil society/state.

(OOC: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a stipulation in the NSO charter regarding the ability to overthrow? Interesting touch on Locke if that is true. </end being a political theory geek>)

Thanks for picking up on this Mussolandia.

[cowen70]

I have been in an AA where the leadership was getting beaten badly (my first great war experience in bob) and stayed in peace mode, refused to pass down any information or aid and the membership in general felt abandoned and betrayed.

As it happens I stuck with them until the end but only because as far as I was aware they were in the right in general and it was just terrible AA management and cowardice modelled as strategy, I viewed the top nations being ''bankers'' as disingenous. As to whether it truly was a strategy or not, if it was it was a poor one because at the end of the day the moral of your alliance has to be somewhat more important than a strategy which might help pass down aid more efficiently as if you lose your moral your ranks are shot to hell.

Last time I checked the NPO screen, I was highly amused to see so many peace modes. I may be wrong but I can understand frustration to see the top 40 predominantly in peace mode. Now for all I stuck with my AA if I thought they were wrong, both strategically and morally then yes I'd bail on them at the expense of the negative PR it would create and perhaps even expose the percieved fault in this place.

[atrophis]

You know, in a way, I will miss the NPO and that good laugh they provide every now and then as I watch them shoot themselves in the foot.

ETA: Quality members, a quality alliance makes. Its a shame the NPO has none.

Edited April 29, 2009 by atrophis

[Steelrat]

Rumors of their departure are greatly exaggerated.

So what it is now? Dilber admitted yesterday to me, he is not part of the NPO anymore.

[Delta1212]

So what it is now? Dilber admitted yesterday to me, he is not part of the NPO anymore.

He and Triyun switched their AAs back today.

[Steelrat]

He and Triyun switched their AAs back today.

Interesting so this whole stunt was a plot to convince me NPO was set up by others and is innocent?

[Hymenbreach]

Except that the NPO keeps their members completely in the dark about everything. The average OWF reader knows far more about the NPO than the average Pacifican. The OP likely knew nothing about this war or its reasons until after it was declared. So he couldn't possibly have had the time to disagree with it and leave on conscience.

And what ridiculous principles you seem to have. If he doesn't want to fight in the war, he should at least stay in his alliance in peacemode? So apparently this "loyalty" he is supposed to show does not include actually fighting with his comrades, but just sitting in the AA.

Yeah, Pacifica Officials sneak into member homes and disable the BB so that no ordinary member can read them. True Fact!

Yes, you can serve your alliance in a non military way. You can help to rebuild after any conflict, send out spam messages, help newbies with advice, etc.

[General Specific]

Good on the OP.

Alliances are composed of sovereign nations, not grunts or soldiers with bayonets to their backs, no matter what anyone tells you.

We nation leaders of the cyberverse would do well to learn and live this here some day.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a nation disagreeing with an alliance and withdrawing from said alliance during a war.

OOC: Why almost every major alliance thinks and behaves like a Jim Jones death cult is something I'll never appreciate.

IC: You lead a nation, whose interests you are supposed to represent in your alliance. You are not any alliance's grunt soldier who can be shot for "deserting," no matter the unthinking words to the contrary that have filled this thread.

I dream of the day when the leaders of our individually sovereign nations realize that pursuing national interests oftentimes necessitates being in more than one alliance simultaneously. I think only one nation leader has pulled this off in all of my time here, and that was because no one dared oppose his word.

And one more OOC: I understand that this little dream also would require a little game mechanics tweaking of the alliance affiliation feature, but such an expansion of the AA system would make for more interesting political gameplay and, perhaps above all, much more engaging for players individually... not too mention it'd be even more realistic politically and militarily.

Edited April 29, 2009 by General Specific

[Sal Paradise]

Yeah, Pacifica Officials sneak into member homes and disable the BB so that no ordinary member can read them. True Fact!

While you were busy failing at sarcasm, you also managed to fail at reading comprehension.

[lcdt94]

I am sorry that you have no concept of loyalty and supporting your friends. If you have any.

Suppose you worked under an administration that was planning the genocide billions of people, would you blindly follow them or stand up for what you know is right? Also, I changed alliances before the war specifically to fight for a cause I believe in, it's a shame that you do not have the courage to form your own beliefs.

Edited April 29, 2009 by lcdt94

[Hymenbreach]

While you were busy failing at sarcasm, you also managed to fail at reading comprehension.

Er, no. You implied that readers here have more knowledge of the workings of the NPO than members of NPO there, indicating that NPO members there are somehow incapable of being here and reading it for themselves. While you were busy failing at being superior, you also failed at basic thought.

Suppose you worked under an administration that was planning the genocide billions of people, would you blindly follow them or stand up for what you know is right? Also, I changed alliances before the war specifically to fight for a cause I believe in, it's a shame that you do not have the courage to form your own beliefs.

This is a fallacy argument. Nobody is asking me to kill billions of people. My behaviour in that case cannot be used to expect behaviour in this case.

Edited April 29, 2009 by Hymenbreach

[Heracles the Great]

Well said Jocko - I'm glad you realized the truth - I wish you the best in rebuilding

[lcdt94]

This is a fallacy argument. Nobody is asking me to kill billions of people. My behaviour in that case cannot be used to expect behaviour in this case.

Go, on keep ignoring the dozens of alliances that NPO is responsible for destroying, they'll be forgotten soon enough.

[Max Rockatansky]

Any one who surrenders during war time is not clean enough to be spat upon.

Yeah, he's right. Start agreeing to terms before a shot is fired like NPO tried to do(assuming they were sincere and not just trying to run away into peace mode.) He surrendered, lob insults all you want but it's over for him. If he had merely deserted for another alliance or something I could understand the animosity, but if he followed proper channels and surrendered as per our terms then that's that. Moving on...

[hiawatha]

Suppose you worked under an administration that was planning the genocide billions of people, would you blindly follow them or stand up for what you know is right? Also, I changed alliances before the war specifically to fight for a cause I believe in, it's a shame that you do not have the courage to form your own beliefs.

Not that he shouldn't surrender, but if his conscience was really that opposed to NPO policy then during their losing war is suspicious time to act upon it. It's not as if they are doing anything new, but are finally getting retribution for what's been an ongoing act.

[Orkules]

believe what you like. You always did anyway.

You know this made me laugh so hard, the coke I'm drinking shot out my nose. Not a fun experience let me tell you!

It's rather sad that you find it a negative trait that he has his own beliefs about what's going on and how things work. I mean, must really disappoint you to see someone with individual thought.

For those of you crying disloyalty...pointing a machine gun at the back of somebody's head and telling them to charge is not the best way to ensure loyalty. Take a look at how many Russian Commissars died mysterious deaths in World War II and think about it. You might understand what I'm trying to show ya.