Proportionality: reps and the new NPO myth that we are "as bad as them."

[Archon]

HINT: NPO hasn't surrendered yet, and Athens is on the frontlines.

I feel a lot of whiners who are no longer fighting have forgotten that detail that some of us are still fighting.

[Nizzle]

HINT: NPO hasn't surrendered yet, and Athens is on the frontlines.

HINT: NPO is a completely different ballgame.

[potato]

I don't know if you noticed, but I thought we agreed to disagree and that I understand your frustration so long as it's expressed with some civility.

No, you didn't. Well, you did but then threw in a cheap shot in the end.

Edited May 26, 2009 by potato

[Hermes]

So you stay by your claim that guilt in this case is completely subjective. If I got umbrella to attack you because I didn't agree with you I assume you would have no complaints since you'd be guilty in my eyes, right?

No alliance deserve to pay off reps for months because they honored a treaty.

What this boils down to is that you think might makes right. Because a alliance have the power to do something it is justified. That's not true though. The fact that they claim someone is guilty does not make it true no matter if they can back it up or not.

If you got Umbrella to attack me i would laugh then fight. Sorry that my numbers aren't so dear to my heart

Are you saying that i would rather see an alliance say im bored, i want to attack you rather than making up a completely BS cb...you would be right.

You are also right that Might doesn't make it right to use that might, but people use it anyway, i guess we can blame human nature for that.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Hermes

[Neo Uruk]

HINT: NPO is a completely different ballgame.

Not at all. You said aggressive alliances shouldn't get reps and all that, I took your post wrong, then we arrived here.

[Teriethien]

If you got Umbrella to attack me i would laugh then fight. Sorry that my numbers aren't so dear in my heart

Are you saying that i would rather see an alliance say im bored, i want to attack you rather than making up a completely BS cb...you would be right.

I do believe you've missed the point

You are also right that Might doesn't make it right to use that might, but people use it anyway, i guess we can blame human nature for that.

'Might makes right' isn't about using the might but about how you use it.

[neneko]

If you got Umbrella to attack me i would laugh then fight. Sorry that my numbers aren't so dear in my heart

I somehow doubt it but sure lets go with that. We won't find out anyway.

Are you saying that i would rather see an alliance say im bored, i want to attack you rather than making up a completely BS cb...you would be right.

How does that relate to what I was saying? You claim that any attack is justified because the agressor think he have a reason to do it. In other words might makes right. If you have the power and will to attack someone your attack is justified.

You are also right that Might doesn't make it right to use that might

Here you completely contradict your original post.

but people use it anyway, i guess we can blame human nature for that.

Yes people like NPO used it anyway and sure we can blame human nature if you want. That doesn't take away the fact that they're still guilty for their crimes. Blaming human nature for a crime you commited doesn't remove any guilt.

[Hermes]

I do believe you've missed the point

i didn't miss the point, i just don't like hypothetical scenarios.

[Roadie]

I get funny looks every time I bust out the phrase "boy howdy," so I'm pleased to see it in use.

With any luck, you'll see a TPF DoPA in the future featuring the words boy howdy.

[bzelger]

With any luck, you'll see a TPF DoPA in the future featuring the words boy howdy.

What's a DoPA?

[Roadie]

What's a DoPA?

Declaration of Police Action

[Haflinger]

NPO would be wise to take the proposal. They still have a few days before the punishment kicks in.

According to the logs, the punishment started 4 days ago.

Is this also not the case?

(Hopefully I don't get trashed for asking a simple question this time.)

[bzelger]

According to the logs, the punishment started 4 days ago.

Is this also not the case?

(Hopefully I don't get trashed for asking a simple question this time.)

There's a 5-day grace period.

[Hermes]

[9:30pm] Gen_Lee: -NPO has five days to move all their nations out peace mode with zero penalty.

[9:36pm] Gen_Lee: oh for record sake, clock starts now 5/21 11:38 server time

Clock starts for the 5 days until all the nations have to be out of PM.

[Heracles the Great]

Not at all. You said aggressive alliances shouldn't get reps and all that, I took your post wrong, then we arrived here.

I don't pretend to be in Napoleon's head or to always know what he's trying to say, but I believe in this scenario that Athens was not the aggressor as NPO clearly started the war and was the aggressor. Athens was also not the aggressor in the GGA war as they were attacked. Then again, it's late and I've enjoyed a few crown & coke's, so perhaps I am completely off here.

[Ganjazistan]

Dear Nizzle,

Apparently you suffered some sort of head trauma at some point in your life

or it would be very, very easy for you to realize that as long as NPO nations

can accept individual surrender terms there is no rational basis for any

comparison for this use of reps, whether they be "fair" or not.

[NoFish]

Dear Nizzle,

Apparently you suffered some sort of head trauma at some point in your life

or it would be very, very easy for you to realize that as long as NPO nations

can accept individual surrender terms there is no rational basis for any

comparison for this use of reps, whether they be "fair" or not.

No, no, that's wrong. Threatening meager reps is exactly the same as threatening PZI. Exactly the same.

[youwish959]

No, no, that's wrong. Threatening meager reps is exactly the same as threatening PZI. Exactly the same.

Those reps aren't meager.

[Nizzle]

Not at all. You said aggressive alliances shouldn't get reps and all that, I took your post wrong, then we arrived here.

Right, and I stand by that. However, NPO is an exception to the rule due to their behavior and the initiation of the war with OV which led to this mess.

Dear Nizzle,

Apparently you suffered some sort of head trauma at some point in your life

or it would be very, very easy for you to realize that as long as NPO nations

can accept individual surrender terms there is no rational basis for any

comparison for this use of reps, whether they be "fair" or not.

Head trauma, eh? That totally convinces me to agree with whatever point you seem to be attempting to make.

My two arguments, and only two arguments in this thread, is that I don't agree with Karma penalizing nations in PM or allowing alliances who were not attacked to be taking reparations.

That. Is. It.

Try to keep up, I'm trying to slow down...but my head trauma makes me go soooo fast.

[Gen Lee]

Good read Az.

For those of you wondering/clueless to the first line in the logs "I got the job of messenger".

I don't solely make decisions for the NPO front, nor does Ragnarok.

[Ganjazistan]

So Karma used to complain about punishment for nations in PM...and now RoK is going after nations in peace mode?

Some people in Karma complained about P/EZI for nations in PM

Who cares about their nations in peace mode? Let them all rot in PM.

In which case, exactly why were you !@#$%*in about it in the first place?

Right, and NPO actually PZI'd GATO nations...right?

Oh, it was just a threat.

I don't know about where you live in RL, but in an awful lot of places,

threatening someone's life is punished nearly severely as actually

taking it.

I'm glad I'm not part of Karma, especially with penalties for nations in PM and aggressive nations getting reps.

Apparently your head trauma has left you unable to remember things in a linear manner.

NPO tried curbstomping a much smaller alliance. The allies of that alliance honored their

treaties, and then the blocs kicked in. Now just because yer buddies over at Pacifica actually

got called out for once, doesn't mean that they weren't the aggressors.

My two arguments, and only two arguments in this thread, is that I don't agree with Karma penalizing nations in PM or allowing alliances who were not attacked to be taking reparations.

Okay mods, hit me up again, but the meter has been reached.....

B U L L S H I T

somehow I find this both intriguing and full of LOL

About Midgets: Moo?

I didn't realize Midgets mooed, well, maybe the trained ones do, I guess

Edited May 26, 2009 by Blanstonia

[magicninja]

Sorry Karma but going after PM nations in any punitive way makes you hypocrites, regardless of how bad it is compared to PZI.

You guys are really starting to show your true colors now. Very disappointing.

[Tulafaras]

Sorry Karma but going after PM nations in any punitive way makes you hypocrites, regardless of how bad it is compared to PZI.

You guys are really starting to show your true colors now. Very disappointing.

sorry magicninja just repeating a myth does not transform it into truth.

[Raphael Beau Pre]

Sorry Karma but going after PM nations in any punitive way makes you hypocrites, regardless of how bad it is compared to PZI.

You guys are really starting to show your true colors now. Very disappointing.

Maybe it's just me taking the name too literally, but surely if Karma is a persons actions having results, then NPO going after PM nations should mean that they get the same treatment in return?

[magicninja]

sorry magicninja just repeating a myth does not transform it into truth.

Oh really? What myth? It's blatantly obvious.

Karma leaders and alliance members loved to say that NPO was evil and bad and shouldn't have done all of those things but they can do it in return? They should've just said we got the upper hand now and are gonna do everything you did to us to you. That would be fine. I wouldn't even argue the point. However, they made what NPO did out to be sooooo bad that those practices should never be allowed to happen on CN ever again yet here they are making a mockery of themselves.