Mixoux Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I have a real-world scenario. Would it be wrong for South Koreans to ask North Koreans citizens that they have an invitation to their country? What if the US invited people from Canada to live here and become citizens? Should Canada or North Korea attack other countries who intend to recruit their citizens to emigrate to their countries? Except that's never been parallel to CN. Alliances have historically always shunned against recruitment of other alliances. RL may work one way but until member recruitment is no longer taboo, it's a moot point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 There is nothing wrong at all with succumbing to your passions. Learn to embrace your anger. Only then will you truly be free. Fear. Fear attracts the fearful. The strong. The weak. The innocent. The corrupt. Fear. Fear is my ally These cute little sayings are just adorable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I have a real-world scenario. Would it be wrong for South Koreans to ask North Koreans citizens that they have an invitation to their country? What if the US invited people from Canada to live here and become citizens? Should Canada or North Korea attack other countries who intend to recruit their citizens to emigrate to their countries? [ooc] We will never know since that's purely hypothetical... then again the real world is almost nothing like this game[/ooc] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I believe that there were a few ZIs for people who did, but never an official CB. NPO's doctrine is all about "sovereignty", and any argument in favor of recruiting as a CB would almost solely be based on those grounds.I have a real-world scenario. Would it be wrong for South Koreans to ask North Koreans citizens that they have an invitation to their country? What if the US invited people from Canada to live here and become citizens? Should Canada or North Korea attack other countries who intend to recruit their citizens to emigrate to their countries? You know, that is a good point, NPO until recently declared sovereignty over all of Red, the present powers at hand said they had no right to do this. That being the case, what gives any alliance sovereignty of individual nations on the same AA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Serbitar Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Funny because you seem to consider neutrals to be weak yet you wanted to add them to your ranks... You're going to keep posting aren't you, regardless of how little you understand. The neutral ones will stay. And if any leave, it will be because neutrality is not their cup of tea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 As was NSO's original move of recruiting from Neutral Alliances. The pot shouldn't make a habit out of calling the kettle black. Things will be a lot smother once the world understand we only use stainless at NSO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 You're going to keep posting aren't you, regardless of how little you understand. The neutral ones will stay. And if any leave, it will be because neutrality is not their cup of tea. They are already free to make that choice. They aren't the GGA, they don't attack people for leaving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Guess you might as well get recruiting then. D: Oh yeah, high quality elections going on in ODN these days. DIPLOMATIC GENIUS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Things will be a lot smother once the world understand we only use stainless at NSO. Looks more like the elcheapo Kmart brand from where I am sitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 You're going to keep posting aren't you, regardless of how little you understand. The neutral ones will stay. And if any leave, it will be because neutrality is not their cup of tea. His post did not comment on how neutral those nations were. Your comrade said you purge the weak from your ranks. I've seen other comrades of yours say that those who get poached from a simple recruitment message are weak. This presents a problem because those two statements seem to contradict each other and begs the questions of why you are recruiting those you consider to be weak yet say you purge the weak from your ranks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Yes I believe they have. NpO rolled CIN for recruiting from their ranks, Elysium was notorious for going to war over stray recruitment PM's. No, I meant specifically Pacifica. Certainly some Hegemony alliances used it as a CB, no questions there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Looks more like the elcheapo Kmart brand from where I am sitting. Well if you would pony up and buy better tickets to the show you wouldn't have that vision problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Hasn't really been answered yet so I figured I'd weigh in a bit. Our messages were targeted at neutrals, so sending it to GOP was an obvious mistake. They have shown strong conservative convictions and passions, and also have VE, GGA, etc. as protectors. So, how can we assault a passionately conservative alliance with a number of treatied protectors for being some wishy washy neutral alliance that stands for nothing? They clearly stand for something and clearly stand with many others, as evidenced by GGA and so on being in all the logs that were dumped. The error was clearly ours in that we simply didn't understand the details of their alliance. I have a question for you heggo. Why is it so bad that TDO does not want to be involved in any international conflict? There are no rules, laws, or even public sentiments that obligate an alliance to participate in world events. Also, if you considered TDO to be "wishy washy" then why did you try to recruit their members? Is there even any point to bullying a "wishy washy" alliance in the first place? What's the point? Edited July 3, 2009 by kulomascovia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Well if you would pony up and buy better tickets to the show you wouldn't have that vision problem. We have universal health care in Maedonia. We have the best optometrists on the planet and all we can see from here is a bunch of bull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Classy. Very classy. Classier then NSO... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heggo Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Lets seem if more can play this game.Gre trades with TDO heavily and rely on TDO for a lot of our tech so you poaching their members undermines our ability to project our power which I so happen to view as a hostile act. Oh look it comes back to bite you in the $@!. Silly boy, I suppose next you'll try to say that my breathing is a CB because it probably hurt you through the butterfly effect. If you want to invent long drawn out lines of causality, you ought to be careful. Maybe your statements will make one of my trade partners drop me, which will hurt my economy since I can't replace that trade, because apparently I run my trades through the same inflexible guys who run your tech deals. Or perhaps we'd actually be helping you, because then those members that join us would continue tech dealing with you and a great and fruitful partnership will form between NSO and Gre as a result. Do you understand through these examples why your objections simply don't hold up to snuff? Edited July 3, 2009 by heggo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 They were spying on us for the Blackstone Collusion. We had no issue with them leaving rather than their government containing a spy. They were caught spying and subjected to a round of war for their transgression. DoW with CB Ah, thanks Gents. I just thought I recalled part of the problem being them stealing members, but I stand corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 You're going to keep posting aren't you, regardless of how little you understand. The neutral ones will stay. And if any leave, it will be because neutrality is not their cup of tea. His post did not comment on how neutral those nations were. Your comrade said you purge the weak from your ranks. I've seen other comrades of yours say that those who get poached from a simple recruitment message are weak. This presents a problem because those two statements seem to contradict each other and begs the questions of why you are recruiting those you consider to be weak yet say you purge the weak from your ranks. Basically Matthew understood my comment and they went right over your head Serbitar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KainIIIC Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Except that's never been parallel to CN. Alliances have historically always shunned against recruitment of other alliances. RL may work one way but until member recruitment is no longer taboo, it's a moot point. [ooc] We will never know since that's purely hypothetical... then again the real world is almost nothing like this game[/ooc] Well I think that the complete history of CN has shown that at one period it was once acceptable to recruit from other alliances, but became shunned once the NPO-led hegemony set the norms for international standards. What are now the international standards once NPO is no longer the hegemony, or are they the same? And I completely disagree with the notion that the real world has no parallels to Cyber nations; its participants are both human, and thus any action will be the result of human logic and actions. The main difference is, in my opinion, is that the grounds under which you are participating is different (Cybernations pixels versus the world and society), as well as a different set of history to shape the kind of actions that we now practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Serbitar Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 This presents a problem because those two statements seem to contradict each other and begs the questions of why you are recruiting those you consider to be weak yet say you purge the weak from your ranks. What you have to take into account is, some of these players may not be politically active and may not be aware of their options. And out of 700 or so, there are sure to be a few. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Oh yeah, high quality elections going on in ODN these days. DIPLOMATIC GENIUS. I don't even know what you're trying for here. If it's sarcasm, then you're more than a little off the mark. If not, thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 This is just another argument for us. We will only be able to successfully recruit the outcasts and malcontents of your fine community. Thus, we increase the integrity of your community by removing those people who degrade it. I'm only 10 pages in, but it's my fondest wish that someone will have taken this argument seriously in the subsequent 36 pages. It's an attack on the fundamental idea that poaching is wrong. A strong attack at that. Why *does* poaching infringe on alliance sovereignty? All it does it possibly remove those members who aren't committed to the alliance. Do alliance leaders think their members aren't smart/informed enough to decide to stay on their own? Should alliance members not be free to leave if they please? Information about their choices limited? Smells like GOONS in here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Silly boy, I suppose next you'll try to say that my breathing is a CB because it probably hurt you through the butterfly effect. If you want to invent long drawn out lines of causality, you ought to be careful. Maybe your statements will make one of my trade partners drop me, which will hurt my economy since I can't replace that trade because apparently I run my trades with the same inflexible guys who run your tech deals. Or perhaps we'd actually be helping you, because then the members that join us would continue tech dealing with you and a great and fruitful partnership will form between NSO and Gre as a result.Do you understand through these examples why your objections simply don't hold up to snuff? So it's not much fun when people turn your comical logic around and use it against you is it? I still can't believe that you actually typed and then clicked "Add Reply" when you posted your train of thought that justified these actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I don't even know what you're trying for here. If it's sarcasm, then you're more than a little off the mark. If not, thank you. Some of your members have been making great efforts to mend the Network's reputation around this community. You're not doing them any favours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) What you have to take into account is, some of these players may not be politically active and may not be aware of their options. And out of 700 or so, there are sure to be a few. So you're inferring that NPO, NpO, Sparta, etc have rulers in their membership that are not aware that they have other options? Surely anyone who joined the game and experienced the barrage of recruitment messages is aware they have other options and that their alliance is not the only one out there... EDIT: Spelling Edited July 3, 2009 by Heracles the Great 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.