Sargun II Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I only read the first ten or so pages, but from this last page it seems it went from luls to srs over the course of eight hours. What's the problem? Someone sent out recruiting messages. Big woop. If they were going to stay in your alliance anyway, they'd ignore the messages. You're losing someone who might potentially bail out in a tough situation to go join the Sith, who probably has no inclination of attacking you anyway. Why you'd consider poaching an act of war is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptGodzilla Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) To those in favor of "allowing" recruiting from alliances, when does the line get crossed? Does talking to your members on IRC in an attempt to get them to leave their alliance cross it? Or does no such line ever exist? The line gets crossed when a weaker alliance recruits from a stronger alliance (in terms of NS and treaties) You should know that in CN, might makes right. You've been playing long enough. What's the problem? Someone sent out recruiting messages. Big woop. If they were going to stay in your alliance anyway, they'd ignore the messages. You're losing someone who might potentially bail out in a tough situation to go join the Sith, who probably has no inclination of attacking you anyway. Why you'd consider poaching an act of war is beyond me. So you don't mind alliances recruiting from you? Edited July 3, 2009 by CptGodzilla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinite Empire Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I think what we are seeing is an attempt to change what the public perceives as insulting. Ultimately, it's not up to whether the NSO thinks it's an insult to poach members like this. It's up to the alliances in question to stand up for this, and if they fail to do so, well, it's on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 So you don't mind alliances recruiting from you? I feel important when they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMarx Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) I am curious what back channels they are referring to, as well as examples of this hostility and disrespect. I am wondering if the hostility and disrespect actually occurred in the back channels, or if it occurred elsewhere where parties that wouldn't necessarily have been involved were involved? Also, I highly doubt that Doppelganger confirmed that this was an act of war. Knowing the leadership of NSO, if it were to be an act of war they'd actually be shooting. That statement smacks of hyperbole and an overwrought appeal to emotion, to be honest.I've reviewed what I assume are the actual back channel discussions, and I'm having a hard time finding anything other than people sticking to their guns firmly in some instances, and frank discussion throughout. Perhaps I am missing something. Here is a quote from one of the IRC discussions. 02:57 Heft The messages in this instance were authorized 02:57 Roo[GOP] So you're asserting that they were, indeed, authorized acts of aggression? 02:57 shaneprice[GGA] And why would the NSO authorize such a message? 02:58 Heft THey were an attempt to inform nations of some of the choices they may have beyond simple neutrality 02:58 shaneprice[GGA] The recruitment messages were directed towards sovereign alliances... 02:58 RudeBoy well, evidently you're the only ones to perceive it that way 02:58 Heft Neutral alliances 02:59 Roo[GOP] that doesn't address the fact that poaching allied nations is an act of aggression We have logs of all of the discussions held. Hope that helps. RMarx Edited July 3, 2009 by RMarx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Here is a quote from one of the IRC discussions. 02:57 Heft The messages in this instance were authorized 02:57 Roo[GOP] So you're asserting that they were, indeed, authorized acts of aggression? 02:57 shaneprice[GGA] And why would the NSO authorize such a message? 02:58 Heft THey were an attempt to inform nations of some of the choices they may have beyond simple neutrality 02:58 shaneprice[GGA] The recruitment messages were directed towards sovereign alliances... 02:58 RudeBoy well, evidently you're the only ones to perceive it that way 02:58 Heft Neutral alliances 02:59 Roo[GOP] that doesn't address the fact that poaching allied nations is an act of aggression We have logs of all of the discussions held. Hope that helps. RMarx I'm not seeing where there was an admission that this was an act of aggression. I see accusations of it being an act of aggression. It seems that people are putting words into NSO leadership's mouths here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 This is poor form. Poaching, is one thing, but degrading the alliance you're poaching from in the PM's isn't exactly dignified behaviour. And for those spouting the "if they were swayed by this then they shouldn't be members" or "we're doing TDO a favour by removing their members who are interested in war" justification, what gives any alliance the right to decide if another should have a particular type of member? It's up to TDO to decide whether their even bothered by any perceived lack of commitment or interest in war in their ranks, let alone whether they want to do anything about it. As for trying to lure neutrals with the option "to wage war" - who exactly are NSO planning to use all of the former neutrals to wage war on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 So you don't mind alliances recruiting from you? It's the official Sith international pastime to try to turn us to the Dark Side. What kind of question is that? Those susceptible to falling are generally not good candidates to be Jedi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Big deal that NSO did this. If members leave to join their alliance its the failure of your alliance's leadership not theirs. Edited July 3, 2009 by kevin32891 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I'm not seeing where there was an admission that this was an act of aggression. I see accusations of it being an act of aggression. It seems that people are putting words into NSO leadership's mouths here. I am not entirely sure why he posted that but it may have been in reference to this part of your post - as examples of this hostility and disrespect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I am not entirely sure why he posted that but it may have been in reference to this part of your post - It falls flat in that regard as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMarx Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I'm not seeing where there was an admission that this was an act of aggression. I see accusations of it being an act of aggression. It seems that people are putting words into NSO leadership's mouths here. Apologies, I misunderstood what you wanted; I thought you didn't believe the poaching was sanctioned by NSO gov. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) I would like to take this moment to once again applaud the GOP. They handled the situation well considering they are far smaller than TDO. Despite the difference in size (and, therefore, military might) they came to us in private channels and earned an apology, rather than trying to grandstand for political points. Edited July 3, 2009 by New Frontier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Apologies, I misunderstood what you wanted; I thought you didn't believe the poaching was sanctioned by NSO gov. I already know the message sent was sent with the permission of the NSO government. I am speaking to the mischaracterization of the NSO has being hostile and disrespectful - which leads to the greater point of why GOP has gotten an apology from NSO but TDO hasn't. NSO has acknowledged the poor judgement shown in sending out the messages. No one can deny the disrespectful nature of that message. I am disputing that NSO acted as they have been portrayed to act in the back channel discussions after the message was sent out, and I am disputing that they admitted that this was an act of war against anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelrat Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) I will make it short as i care less who pissed of whom, who said this or that and i think some old guy from NPO explained this in detail already: There is only one good reason for war the wellfare of a Sphere. I watched GPA dying and Green becoming a wasteland, it will never happen in Aqua. Edited July 3, 2009 by Steelrat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 It seems from the outset that at the least, TDO tried to go to NSO's government but everyone just put on their funny moustaches and pointed to someone else. Poaching in itself may not be a cause for war but who can honestly say that the messages were not outright slander? It's not just the poaching I would imagine but the very intentional insults dealt against the alliances they were poaching from. TDO is not asking to go to war they are asking for an apology. War would only be considered after diplomacy failed I am sure (if war was considered at all). I do not truly believe that most alliances would be alright with an alliance messaging every single one of their nations ridiculing their current alliance in an attempt to recruit them. I think most alliances would be very angry. I agree that nations that actually switched in response to the messages are better off gone but that does not change the palpable insult that accompanies poaching from another alliance especially en masse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 It seems from the outset that at the least, TDO tried to go to NSO's government but everyone just put on their funny moustaches and pointed to someone else. That's not true. This was discussed privately two nights ago, with TDO included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankdolf Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I would like to take this moment to once again applaud the GOP. They handled the situation well considering they are far smaller than TDO. Despite the difference in size (and, therefore, military might) they came to us in private channels and earned an apology, rather than trying to grandstand for political points. ... And received snarky, sarcastic comments from you guys after sending out the oh-so-sincere apology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Oh, well done NSO, well done. Can I nominate you guys for the "Asshats of the Year award"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 So, TDO has issued an ultimatum, and NSO seems unwilling to aquiesce. While Moldavi has yet to make any form of public address, at least one member of NSO has point-blank stated that there will be no apology forthcoming. I am curious as to the what the implied "or else" in TDO's ultimatum will amount to. Sum of funnys was increased due to irony factor. I don't see this "irony" you speak of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) So I haven't read the entire thread...has the apology demand accepted? If it hasn't till now, I'd be bit surprised if it came at all then. What cards does neutral menace has to play? I'm enjoying the change from the peanut gallery Edited July 3, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Electron Sponge Are you saying that you and tLC condone the active recruitment of aligned nations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Regardless of whether you're "neutral" or not, it doesn't mean you shouldn't stand up for your rights. Don't just sissy out, give the sith what they deserve! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Oh, well done NSO, well done. Can I nominate you guys for the "Asshats of the Year award"? It's too bad we don't qualify B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Electron SpongeAre you saying that you and tLC condone the active recruitment of aligned nations? We don't do it. That should give you a clue about where my alliance stands on the issue. I personally don't see it as a reason to go to war. 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.