Announcement From The Echelon

[TypoNinja]

Terms and reps should fall in line with what happend in the conflict, using an alliance's past to inflate reps is just profiteering and greed on the victor's side

Oh yes, because 2 months of nuclear war is a GREAT way to profit.

I love idiots like you who think reps are about profiting, An alliance would have to ask for trillions to turn a profit after a nuclear war.

[Emperor Brutus]

Every alliance, even those that suffered at the hands of the "hegemony" also at one point profited from them. Every alliance sought out their protection, and took part in atleast one or two beatdowns by them, even legion (maybe not gato.. they may be the only ones), so no, they can't claim the moral high ground, to do so would be disengenuous.

The war from the outset was about punishment, or atleast should have been. During the early days of the war there was the whole hippie nonsense going about, about trying to change the world (which was complete and utter !@#$%^&* of the highest order) and there were people who shamelessly tried to cash in on PR (I won't name those alliances), and that resulted in others who felt they had to follow suit. There are even stories of alliances being pressured and threatened by other "karma" alliances into giving light/lenient terms or even white peace. So be it, what's done is done.

But that shifted focus away from punishment. You can change the world AND punish people for their crimes at the same time. It's not as though, just because these terms are harsh, they're going to continue once this war is done. There is no way for people to predict the future.

So, yeah, what moral high ground?

By punishing do you mean forcing alliance into despair and perhaps having many of their members leave, the alliance left to disband and left in utter wreck? Great logic ... From the Echelon terms and the terms offered to NPO one can see that punishment isn't the first priority, the first priority is indeed revenge, something that I can see you really want as stated.

Now tell me how did Athens specifically and other alliances brutally beat down by the NPO profit? Please take into account the ones that disband also ...

You stated there was "hippie nonesense" please elaborate, as I didn't see hippie nonsense but instead people who wished to change CN for the better once again i'll qoute myself "in order to create a new era".

Name the alliances which tried to cash on PR, and pressure Karma forces into giving light terms.

You stated;

"You can change the world AND punish people for their crimes at the same time. It's not as though, just because these terms are harsh, they're going to continue once this war is done. "

Don't you feel lengthening the war for months is punishment enough? If you havent been keeping track of stats you would notice the heavy losses which fought on the opposing side of Karma. Looking at NPO, IRON, Echelon and TPF you can see what a beating they took, so when you reflect on the harsh terms you realize they are given for another purpose a purpose which is meant to cripple the alliance for a long time if not permanently and force them to be removed from the game.

[Neo Uruk]

Wait, is the argument here that Echelon thought they were safe when they entered the war?

No, the argument is that Echelon was happy when they could destroy everyone else's homes with no worry, but found out they couldn't move their alliance out of the way quick enough and resorted to crying.

And to anyone who thinks I'm a hypocrite because of my AA, I've never argued against harsh reps, especially when used with the right motives. I've argued against crippling reps for alliances that had not wronged the world. Get your heads out of the clouds, Echelon needs to be punished for what they've done in the past.

[astronaut jones]

nonsense words.

I think you missed the part where I said I wasn't going to name those alliances. Chances are you're allied to a few of them, though.

Just because alliances were eventually on the receiving end of a beatdown, does not mean they were not a part of those beatdowns before or even after their own occured. I mean, hey.. simple logic, I know it's hard to grasp sometimes.

And no, I don't think it's punishment enough. As I said earlier, alliances have to be disuaded from ever attempting such things again, and giving them a slap on the wrist, even after a few months of war (or a few weeks of war for some alliances) just sin't going to accomplish a damned thing.

The only thing I am certain of, is that there were many definitions of what people thought karma is, or was, or what it should have been. They are all right, because it was whatever people wanted it to be. You wanted it to usher in a new world with hippie !@#$%^&*, I wanted it to punish the crimes of the past.. in the end, neither of us got what we wanted.

Karma failed.

[Nizzle]

No, the argument is that Echelon was happy when they could destroy everyone else's homes with no worry, but found out they couldn't move their alliance out of the way quick enough and resorted to crying.

And to anyone who thinks I'm a hypocrite because of my AA, I've never argued against harsh reps, especially when used with the right motives. I've argued against crippling reps for alliances that had not wronged the world. Get your heads out of the clouds, Echelon needs to be punished for what they've done in the past.

That sounds like a very familiar argument. Hi Rey!

[Sylar]

Every alliance, even those that suffered at the hands of the "hegemony" also at one point profited from them. Every alliance sought out their protection, and took part in atleast one or two beatdowns by them, even legion (maybe not gato.. they may be the only ones), so no, they can't claim the moral high ground, to do so would be disengenuous.

The war from the outset was about punishment, or atleast should have been. During the early days of the war there was the whole hippie nonsense going about, about trying to change the world (which was complete and utter !@#$%^&* of the highest order) and there were people who shamelessly tried to cash in on PR (I won't name those alliances), and that resulted in others who felt they had to follow suit. There are even stories of alliances being pressured and threatened by other "karma" alliances into giving light/lenient terms or even white peace. So be it, what's done is done.

But that shifted focus away from punishment. You can change the world AND punish people for their crimes at the same time. It's not as though, just because these terms are harsh, they're going to continue once this war is done. There is no way for people to predict the future.

So, yeah, what moral high ground?

i dont recall us ever curb stomping someone in fact we probably have been on the wrong side of one the most times lol.

(i wouldnt consider Universalis-Poseidon War to be a curb stomp really)

Edited July 6, 2009 by Sylar

[enderland]

Karma failed.

Karma actually won this battle.

Perhaps they "lost" the "war on oppressive terms" but they most definitely accomplished what they intended to do.

[astronaut jones]

i dont recall us ever curb stomping someone in fact we probably have been on the wrong side of one the most times lol.

oh okay, that settles that then.

[the rebel]

Oh yes, because 2 months of nuclear war is a GREAT way to profit.

I love idiots like you who think reps are about profiting, An alliance would have to ask for trillions to turn a profit after a nuclear war.

Yes because a 62 strong alliance with 26MPs can cause trillions of damage, damn i wish my maths was as good as yours.

Let me clarify for you, every increase in tech reps compensates the total NS loss which in turn keeps your enemy down longer, so your suggesting the victor's are not profiting from keeping a beaten enemy down for longer isn't profiting from it while they have continued growth over them. Because most NS growth is from tech so the defeated allaince growth becomes a close to a stand still while paying tech reps over the months.

Like I said the past shouldn't be used as an excuse to keep an alliance down for longer.

[Aurion]

Just keep on posting GOD, I'm really enjoying seeing the real you.

Hmm... that, oddly, appears to imply we pretend to be something other than what we are. Would you mind clarifying?

Especially, Aurion. Hate that guy.

Hate you too, Fish !@#$%*.

I mean that in the best possible way, of course.

HEY GUYS DID YOU KNOW I USED TO BE IN VOX BECAUSE I THINK ALTEREGO WANTS YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT!!!!

I promise I won't let this horrific revelation come between us, Srgt.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Aurion

[astronaut jones]

Karma actually won this battle.

Perhaps they "lost" the "war on oppressive terms" but they most definitely accomplished what they intended to do.

Your version of karma may have lost that war. My version of karma failed because they did not seek to punish those alliances that most deserved it. Torn, valhalla, iron, gga, alliances that most deserved to be punished, were not, because your version of karma felt good PR was more important than punishing past crimes.

Which is why your version of karma is up in arms right now at these terms. Karma was the means to an end, for everyone, so it was whatever they wanted it to be, and thus the disagreements at this point, thus the mock outrage (which I find hilarious.. mostly because I have no respect for most people, and think they're a joke).. both version of karma were right in the reasons for the war, but in the end, both failed, because people never could agree and come to a common ground.

Karma failed. Karma will tear each other apart sooner or later.

[TypoNinja]

GGA just announced their passing 2 million NS, I would submit they have paid.

[kobiashiy]

Karma failed. Karma will tear each other apart sooner or later.

I agree with that statement.

[astronaut jones]

GGA just announced their passing 2 million NS, I would submit they have paid.

And you would be right in your own mind, but you are completely and utterly wrong in mine. That's karma for ya, baby.

Edited July 6, 2009 by astronaut jones

[Emperor Brutus]

I think you missed the part where I said I wasn't going to name those alliances. Chances are you're allied to a few of them, though.

Just because alliances were eventually on the receiving end of a beatdown, does not mean they were not a part of those beatdowns before or even after their own occured. I mean, hey.. simple logic, I know it's hard to grasp sometimes.

And no, I don't think it's punishment enough. As I said earlier, alliances have to be disuaded from ever attempting such things again, and giving them a slap on the wrist, even after a few months of war (or a few weeks of war for some alliances) just sin't going to accomplish a damned thing.

The only thing I am certain of, is that there were many definitions of what people thought karma is, or was, or what it should have been. They are all right, because it was whatever people wanted it to be. You wanted it to usher in a new world with hippie !@#$%^&*, I wanted it to punish the crimes of the past.. in the end, neither of us got what we wanted.

Karma failed.

Well in that case I believe you are referring to Citadel, as they are not known for giving harsh terms and believe in the possibility that alliances will change. Hippie bs is also out of the question because perhaps you are not informed by the amount of damage token by both sides during the war, seems to me you don't respect the efforts put into this war. Hippies don't fight, and the alliances i believe you are thinking of put in a lot of !@#$@#$ effort to help the forces of Karma even though they may have not been directly related to Karma.

As a side note, I will not accept personal attacks on my account, let it be here or on IRC, please refrain from using them in our argument. Thanks

-----------

Also Karma was put together for the sole purpose of this war, they have won this war on all fronts... please inform me of their failure.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Emperor Brutus

[astronaut jones]

Well in that case I believe you are referring to Citadel, as they are not known for giving harsh terms and believe in the possibility that alliances will change. Hippie bs is also out of the question because perhaps you are not informed by the amount of damage token by both sides during the war, seems to me you don't respect the efforts put into this war. Hippies don't fight, and the alliances i believe you are thinking of put in a lot of !@#$@#$ effort to help the forces of Karma even though they may have not been directly related to Karma.

As a side note, I will not accept personal attacks on my account, let it be here or on IRC, please refrain from using them in our argument. Thanks

If you take anything I say seriously on irc, you're even crazier than I am.

And I do believe citadel has profited greatly from past beatdowns, so... uhh, what's your argument again? Oh right, you have none.

[enderland]

And you would be right in your own mind, but you are completely and utterly wrong in mine. That's karma for ya, baby.

Fortunately no one cares what you think.

[Neo Uruk]

Fortunately no one cares what you think.

I care about what jones thinks. He actually makes valid points when you get past the edge he puts on.

[CptGodzilla]

Echelon, you better not take these merciful terms and do something stupid with them and disband.

Well, actually you probably should, but none the less calmer heads were at this table. Congrats on peace

[astronaut jones]

Fortunately no one cares what you think.

Oh well. Just because you don't care what I think, doesn't mean I'm not right about my assessment of karma.

And for the record, what does this have to do with my argument at all, anyway? you're a bad, bad boy.

[youwish959]

Fortunately no one cares what you think.

Jones is right many times out of the day. I care.

[enderland]

Oh well. Just because you don't care what I think, doesn't mean I'm not right about my assessment of karma.

And for the record, what does this have to do with my argument at all, anyway? you're a bad, bad boy.

Your entire 'argument' is based on what YOU view Karma to be and how YOU think that they should have handled the things YOU would have wanted them to.

I disagree that imposing terms to punitively prohibit rebuilding are necessary to change an alliance's way of thinking. You clearly do not.

I disagree that losing something like 70% their NS (IRON in particular, GGA/Valhalla too) is "nothing" and a "slap on the wrists."

Karma failed. Karma will tear each other apart sooner or later.

Karma only exists so long as people keep saying it exists. Most of the alliances once part of it probably have no relations with their prior wartime "bloc mates" (since everyone seems to call it a bloc).

[Aurion]

Fortunately no one cares what you think.

Actually, he makes pretty good points more oft than not.

But then, I doubt too many people care what I think either

Edited July 6, 2009 by Aurion

[Emperor Brutus]

I care about what jones thinks. He actually makes valid points when you get past the edge he puts on.

What points are they

A) Karma Failed?

B. Citadel is a group of hippies?

C) RnR and Athens dont deserve to be respected?

D) Most of the Karma forces are bad too, for their past and how they stood with NPO (even though he failed to present proof, who these alliances are and when they actually ganged up on a smaller groups of alliances presenting them with really harsh terms)....

Yeah >_> Great valid points

EDIT: Forgot one, Karma & Co pretty much gave a slap on the wrist and didn't have many casualties

Edited July 6, 2009 by Emperor Brutus

[Neo Uruk]

What points are they

A) Karma Failed?

B) Citadel is a group of hippies?

C) RnR and Athens dont deserve to be respected?

D) Most of the Karma forces are bad too, for their past and how they stood with NPO (even though he failed to present proof, who these alliances are and when they actually ganged up on a smaller groups of alliances presenting them with really harsh terms)....

Yeah >_> Great valid points

I'm certain that A) is correct. The moral obligations and PR moves of some alliances made them fall short of what they had the potential to do (that being actually make the Hegemony regret their wrongdoings)