The "I Don't Know Anymore" War

[WarriorConcept]

No.

The ODN/International incident was notable because I went out of my way to help those two alliances, who I was not allied to, as they were being bullied by OV and VE, two alliances I *was* allied to, simply because it seemed like the right thing to do.

Without knowing the specifics, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say good job.

Otherwise there was some other bullying done by some of your allies, but I guess when you participate in it it's the right thing to do, right?

[HeinousOne]

So two wrongs do make a right? What about three wrongs? Does the Karmic theme stop at one round of punishment or is it a continuous cycle; will those who deliver punishment in the name of Karma and who adopt the same behaviour as those that they punish and use Karma as an excuse to do so be open to "what comes around" in the future?

Pretty heavy duty statements to make without any examples to back up. Pretty easy to say there are some and then act like it would be wrong of you to point them out.

How about I point out that MHA still has ties to that other side of the fence and that you wish to just further aid them in receiving soft terms? I don't have any proof of you actually saying such but I have your statement and I could spin it in a way to make my statement a possibility right?

[Kowalski]

Pretty heavy duty statements to make without any examples to back up. Pretty easy to say there are some and then act like it would be wrong of you to point them out.

How about I point out that MHA still has ties to that other side of the fence and that you wish to just further aid them in receiving soft terms? I don't have any proof of you actually saying such but I have your statement and I could spin it in a way to make my statement a possibility right?

Examples aren't necessary, they're all around us. If you haven't noticed them and need them pointing out then it's unlikely that any examples will change your mind. You've probably already read them and deemed them acceptable.

And you'd be well within your rights to point that out about MHA. I know it isn't true but you don't, so it's a fair point. I base my opinions on things I know and what I take from the behaviour of people here. You see the same behaviour but view it differently.

[Tygaland]

Examples aren't necessary, they're all around us. If you haven't noticed them and need them pointing out then it's unlikely that any examples will change your mind. You've probably already read them and deemed them acceptable.

And you'd be well within your rights to point that out about MHA. I know it isn't true but you don't, so it's a fair point. I base my opinions on things I know and what I take from the behaviour of people here. You see the same behaviour but view it differently.

If they are all around us, point a few out to the less perceptive among us. Otherwise, you are just making accusations without proof.

So, lets see examples of Karma terms containing EZI, viceroys, 100K tech reps or expulsions of members from government and/or alliances. Come on, they are "all around us". Enlighten me.

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

No thanks.

But, any of those nations in Karma POW that can not or will not return to their surrendered from alliance affiliation are welcome to join the New Sith Order, once they are released from the pow AA.

...

Well played.

[Sooner]

No.

The ODN/International incident was notable because I went out of my way to help those two alliances, who I was not allied to, as they were being bullied by OV and VE, two alliances I *was* allied to, simply because it seemed like the right thing to do.

There was bullying going all around but it is behind most of us. Ironically because of that event, we have become good comrades with those who we had verbal disagreements with.

[Jack Diorno]

If they are all around us, point a few out to the less perceptive among us. Otherwise, you are just making accusations without proof.

So, lets see examples of Karma terms containing EZI, viceroys, 100K tech reps or expulsions of members from government and/or alliances. Come on, they are "all around us". Enlighten me.

This man is speaks sanity in a room filled with paranoia. I await Kowalski's response with interest.

[Kowalski]

If they are all around us, point a few out to the less perceptive among us. Otherwise, you are just making accusations without proof.

So, lets see examples of Karma terms containing EZI, viceroys, 100K tech reps or expulsions of members from government and/or alliances. Come on, they are "all around us". Enlighten me.

Nice try. Unfortunately I don't remember saying anything about EZI, viceroys, expulsions, excessive reps, secret terms, forced disbandment, etc. In fact what I said was:

But generally I find the mocking, trolling and calling out by people to be classless and in bad taste, nearly as classless as the "they did it first so it's OK" excuse. Just because it isn't quite as bad doesn't make it OK.

Not only does this explain clearly what I find disappointing about the behaviour of some people that are are claiming to take the moral high ground (you can add putting words into people's mouths in order to win arguments to that list), but in the last sentence I also acknowledge that the behaviour isn't as bad as the past transgressors.

[Tygaland]

Nice try. Unfortunately I don't remember saying anything about EZI, viceroys, expulsions, excessive reps, secret terms, forced disbandment, etc. In fact what I said was:

Not only does this explain clearly what I find disappointing about the behaviour of some people that are are claiming to take the moral high ground (you can add putting words into people's mouths in order to win arguments to that list), but in the last sentence I also acknowledge that the behaviour isn't as bad as the past transgressors.

Except your first post was with regards to punishment and alliances in Karma acting the same as the Hegemony with regards to such punishment. This is what people are asking you to provide evidence of.

When you could not provide evidence of that you changed your complaint to be about trolling. Now, I'm not sure how long you have been around the Cyberverse, but banter and calling out your opponent is very much part of war in the Cyberverse and an enjoyable part. Karma is about fair punishment proportional to the crime which has nothing to do with war-time banter.

So, if you have evidence of your initial claim about Karma punishment being the same as the punishments the Hegemony alliances handed out, I look forward to seeing it.

[agafaba]

The PR generated by the Hegemony side over Karma members comments are hilarious to read but depressing to see people agree with.

Karma is no better then the worst alliances because they mocked anti-peace mode policies and talked about reparations.

I can see the resemblance to imposing viceroys and demanding months of full aid slots of free tech, or simply declaring never ending ZI on alliances.

[Kowalski]

Except your first post was with regards to punishment and alliances in Karma acting the same as the Hegemony with regards to such punishment. This is what people are asking you to provide evidence of.

When you could not provide evidence of that you changed your complaint to be about trolling. Now, I'm not sure how long you have been around the Cyberverse, but banter and calling out your opponent is very much part of war in the Cyberverse and an enjoyable part. Karma is about fair punishment proportional to the crime which has nothing to do with war-time banter.

So, if you have evidence of your initial claim about Karma punishment being the same as the punishments the Hegemony alliances handed out, I look forward to seeing it.

Here's my original post:

So two wrongs do make a right? What about three wrongs? Does the Karmic theme stop at one round of punishment or is it a continuous cycle; will those who deliver punishment in the name of Karma and who adopt the same behaviour as those that they punish and use Karma as an excuse to do so be open to "what comes around" in the future?

Firstly, I did not "change" my complaint to be about trolling, my remark about the behaviour of certain Karma members from the above post includes everything, including this. Secondly, the above post does not claim that Karma punishments are the same as Hegemony punishments, merely that the Karma alliances currently dishing out punishment (by which I mean the wars in general, not just the specific terms) are behaving in a similar manner to the Hegemony alliances. You seemed to read "behaving the same as" as "giving the same terms".

I've fought in enough wars on the side of the "bad guys" to know what people on the losing side whinge and moan about and I've seen enough threads and posts during this war that show the same happening but by the "other side". Am I against Karma? Of course not. Do I think those who craved for and carried through this war have just cause to? Sure, why not. But I've seen stuff go on during this war that NPO/tC would have been widely derided for but that has been deemed acceptable on this occasion as it's for the greater good and the only alliances who would have a real issue with it aren't in a position to question it anyway. PC's cancellation/DoW on TPF may technically have been legal (I'm sure there's a better word but you get my point) and was accepted and generally found amusing by most of CN as it was against TPF, but if a Hegemony/tC alliance had used that exact same situation to start a war there would have been absolute uproar. Now I'm not saying that they don't deserve it, just that expected better from a collection of alliances who claim to be changing CN for the better. Maybe I expected too much.

[Tygaland]

Here's my original post:

Firstly, I did not "change" my complaint to be about trolling, my remark about the behaviour of certain Karma members from the above post includes everything, including this. Secondly, the above post does not claim that Karma punishments are the same as Hegemony punishments, merely that the Karma alliances currently dishing out punishment (by which I mean the wars in general, not just the specific terms) are behaving in a similar manner to the Hegemony alliances. You seemed to read "behaving the same as" as "giving the same terms".

I've fought in enough wars on the side of the "bad guys" to know what people on the losing side whinge and moan about and I've seen enough threads and posts during this war that show the same happening but by the "other side". Am I against Karma? Of course not. Do I think those who craved for and carried through this war have just cause to? Sure, why not. But I've seen stuff go on during this war that NPO/tC would have been widely derided for but that has been deemed acceptable on this occasion as it's for the greater good and the only alliances who would have a real issue with it aren't in a position to question it anyway. PC's cancellation/DoW on TPF may technically have been legal (I'm sure there's a better word but you get my point) and was accepted and generally found amusing by most of CN as it was against TPF, but if a Hegemony/tC alliance had used that exact same situation to start a war there would have been absolute uproar. Now I'm not saying that they don't deserve it, just that expected better from a collection of alliances who claim to be changing CN for the better. Maybe I expected too much.

I read your original post and it mentions cycles of punishment and that Karma are acting exactly the same as Hegemony. With no other reference to anything but punishment, I assume that is what you are talking about.

When asked for proof you evaded the requests and then posted another story about trolling which was not mentioned in your original post at all.

So, you either need to back up your original assertion or you need to be more clear when making assertions. A start would be actually mentioning what you are apparently talking about.

Edited May 17, 2009 by Tygaland

[Haflinger]

There was bullying going all around but it is behind most of us. Ironically because of that event, we have become good comrades with those who we had verbal disagreements with.

"Because of that event"? "Verbal disagreements"?

Wow, that's pretty rich. This whole war might well not have happened if your now ex-allies had let you attack. But, I look forward to the next time you guys have a go. Could wind up being pretty funny.

[Timeline]

If they are all around us, point a few out to the less perceptive among us. Otherwise, you are just making accusations without proof.

So, lets see examples of Karma terms containing EZI, viceroys, 100K tech reps or expulsions of members from government and/or alliances. Come on, they are "all around us". Enlighten me.

IF karma did force such terms, then it would truly be Karma.

One thing I do not understand about all this, WE was given the name Karma, (I do not know of a meeting from all the leaders to pick a name, it was given to us by BoB) so what is Karma, is it good or bad, its both.

you do something good, then with Karma something good will happen to you.

you do something bad, then with karma something bad will happen to you.

[Tygaland]

IF karma did force such terms, then it would truly be Karma.

One thing I do not understand about all this, WE was given the name Karma, (I do not know of a meeting from all the leaders to pick a name, it was given to us by BoB) so what is Karma, is it good or bad, its both.

you do something good, then with Karma something good will happen to you.

you do something bad, then with karma something bad will happen to you.

I'd say them all getting beaten down and some of them paying reps is the bad coming back to them. Albeit nowhere near as bad as what they dealt out.

Whether the good Karma alliances are doing will come back to them remains to be seen.

[shahenshah]

We still dont know what are exactly the terms you're talking about Tyga..draft?

Edited May 17, 2009 by shahenshah

[Tygaland]

We still dont know what are exactly the terms you're talking about Tyga..draft?

What are you talking about?

[Lincongrad]

No matter what any group does other people are going to see that one action as completely representative of their policies overall.

That's what has condemned alliances to war for the mistakes of one or two members of their government in the past. That's what has brought entire blocs down. When a few members of Karma started claiming to be some sort of angel of virtue cleansing the world, many people took them at their word. And, unfortunately, angels of virtue are all-forgiving so that is what people thought that all of Karma was trying to be. I'm sure that there are many within Karma who do see themselves as the bringers of freedom (not that there's anything wrong with that), and unfortunately people tend to view the extremists of any group as representative of the group as a whole.

The trick is to keep everyone's expectations low at the start. That way you can't be caught by ridiculous standards.

EDIT: Better phrasing.

Edited May 18, 2009 by Lincongrad

[Tygaland]

No matter what any group does other people are going to see that one action as completely representative of their policies overall.

That's what has condemned alliances to war for the mistakes of one or two members of their government in the past. That's what has brought entire blocs down. When a few members of Karma started claiming to be some sort of angel of virtue cleansing the world, many people took them at their word. And, unfortunately, angels of virtue are all-forgiving so that is what people thought that all of Karma was trying to be. I'm sure that there are many within Karma who do see themselves as the bringers of freedom (not that there's anything wrong with that), and unfortunately people tend to view the extremists of any group as representative of the group as a whole.

The trick is to keep everyone's expectations low at the start. That way you can't be caught by ridiculous standards.

EDIT: Better phrasing.

Or you could, you know, read the actual Karma statement on its goals. I think the issue here is laziness and convenience. It is far easier to condemn Karma for what it never claimed to be than it is to condemn them for what they actually claimed to be.

[Ejayrazz]

OK, this may be a wall of text or I may lose interest after a paragraph or two, but a few things have been bugging me the past few days and I just want to get it out there. I honestly don't care if you agree with me, disagree with me or have no interest in what I say. I'm doing this for me.

I have been reading and posting in a number of threads throughout this war I have to say my level of confusion is rising by the day.

This current war has been unofficially known as the Karma War according to the CN Wiki and when it began to take shape the side of the war I'm on labelled itself Karma. I wasn't involved in the naming of the coalition but considering the reason we had come together it seemed appropriate. The opposition was arbitrarily named Hegemony and that was that.

The war had started and Karma HQ was assigning alliances to certain fronts taking into account treaty requirements and organising aid flow as needed. Over the ensuing days more alliances joined the war on both sides. Karma announced itself as a fair and merciful group seeking to overthrow the Hegemony and bring about a new Cyberverse that was free of the extortion, bullying and over-the-top reparations that had become the norm under the Hegemony.

Fantastic, I thought, finally a dedicated group has come together to change things for the better. My only reservation was whether or not this new coalition will learn from the past and do what needed to be done to achieve the goal that was set out to be achieved.

After a few days a few smaller alliances started seeking peace and an exit from the war. It was pretty much agreed within Karma that these alliances would be given white peace and an exit from the war whenever they sought it. It was around this time that Karma alliances began thinking about how to deal with what would be considered the core members of the Hegemony, alliances in the Continuum and One Vision blocs. Discussion was sporadic and informal and ranged from medium level terms to some requiring terms akin to those the Hegemony handed out to others in the past. The only consensus I got from the discussions I saw was that these alliances were not to be given white peace and that they had to suffer some pain albeit nothing like that that these alliances had forced others to suffer in the past.

Since that time four Continuum alliances have been given peace and only one of them required to pay any reparations at all. This struck me as odd considering the reason the Karma coalition came together and the goals we were supposedly trying to achieve.

This is where the past few days have confused me. I see alliances that planned and operated under the Karma banner now claim they were not at war under that banner at all but their only reason to go to war was to honour treaties that existed prior to Karma forming. Fair point, most of the alliances in Karma went to war via existing treaties but the war itself was organised under a larger banner than the individual treaties and blocs that came to form Karma.

This has resulted in some disagreements between those in Karma but I think this is due to the fact that there seems to be some point in this war where Karma stopped existing and the individual alliances that initially formed Karma began to move away from Karma as a group to hand out their own peace terms.

Now, I have no issue with those fighting on certain fronts having the final say in the terms they hand out. STA did it with a Karma rep present to oversee it. But I have to wonder what the point is if the terms given do not support the basic goals of the Karma coalition.

So, here is the main source of my confusion. We now have alliances who planned and fought a war under the Karma banner whose goal was stated as one of removing the Hegemony form power and creating a Cyberverse without extortion, bullying and over-the-top peace terms. These alliances are now saying they are not fighting to punish alliances for past transgressions and that they are fighting a completely different war to the Karma War and giving terms reflective of that.

If this is the Karma War and the coalition is known as Karma with the stated goals of disabling the Hegemony, how can it be that this is not about past transgressions? Hegemony refers to what? And Karma?

What is this war all about anymore and when did it change? How is the Hegemony to be broken down if the treaties that bind them are left intact?

Was I in a different universe when I looked over what the Karma War was all about and what Karma as a coalition set out to achieve?

Confused

Tygaborough

Which alliances?

[Tygaland]

Which alliances?

If you can quote a specific reference, that's be much appreciated.

[Haflinger]

Or you could, you know, read the actual Karma statement on its goals. I think the issue here is laziness and convenience. It is far easier to condemn Karma for what it never claimed to be than it is to condemn them for what they actually claimed to be.

I read that as Lincolngrad complaining of the stupidity of the typical OWF dweller, not an actual complaint about Karma.

[Ejayrazz]

(Tyga, I am !@#$@#$ baked on vikes from coming out of the hospital so bear with me dude)

You stated alliances were under Karma banner and now state they are unaffiliated with Karma which disappoints you, know? Which..Is perfectly logical.

Which alliances come into mind?

[Tygaland]

(Tyga, I am !@#$@#$ baked on vikes from coming out of the hospital so bear with me dude)

You stated alliances were under Karma banner and now state they are unaffiliated with Karma which disappoints you, know? Which..Is perfectly logical.

Which alliances come into mind?

I was referring to comments by Umbrella and Kronos members in the Valhalla thread where they said their war had nothing to do with Karma and their terms offered reflected that.

And if you don't have enough Vicodin to share with us all, don't bring them to school the forum.

[Lincongrad]

I read that as Lincolngrad complaining of the stupidity of the typical OWF dweller, not an actual complaint about Karma.

Yup, pretty much. It's inevitable that a few Karma grunts are going to shoot their mouths off about being the Justice League, and a bunch of others who are a bit slow on the uptake are going to view that as Karma policy as a whole. It doesn't help when there are a few anti-NPO (I'm NOT saying Karma here, because it's not the same thing) leaders who seem to be trying to be Masked Avengers.

Edited May 18, 2009 by Lincongrad