The Moldavi Doctrine

[Taishaku]

Thank you for your input. It will be properly reviewed and filed with the rest of the rubbish.

I kindly thank the bureaucracy for their tireless efforts at making sure we rubbish-speakers are properly ignored.

[Griff]

I kindly thank the bureaucracy for their tireless efforts at making sure we rubbish-speakers are properly ignored.

I think you just pointed out why that is a good thing.

[kingzog]

I kindly thank the bureaucracy for their tireless efforts at making sure we rubbish-speakers are properly ignored.

You aren't the only one thanking them, I assure you.

Edited August 15, 2009 by kingzog

[Keve69]

I love this doctrine!

[fahlenfor]

So you think you might be exaggerating a little?

Nope. Its just terrible.

fahlenfor, it doesn't have any impact on treaties at all. If they attack someone with an MDP using this doctrine, they can expect to get attacked. If they attack someone they have a treaty with, they can still expect the rest of their treaty partners to drop them.

This doctrine changes absolutely nothing with respect to treaties. It's a thinly veiled threat against no one in particular, which isn't even credible until they act on it. Unless NSO just posted this for attention, it would probably have been better to just attach it to their first DoW that uses it.

True, it has no direct impact on treaties, and at crucial times, it provides NSO with ease maneuverability to support and defend her friends in need. A plausible attempt, I might add. However, that also proves this treaty can be misused for bandwagonning. Threat or no threat, its wrong.

You must be new....not that there's anything wrong with that....

Treaties are trampled upon daily in this game. Some alliances stand on pillars of salt and proclaim their steadfast adherence to treaties, while abandoning them when it gets too hot, and/or they stand to lose infrastructure for their flimsy convictions. Convictions they don't have the sack to defend. This is Cybernations.

The same people lambasting this announcement are the same hypocrites who would stand (2 years ago) in a 40-page thread and tell Ivan (my 1st Emperor) how insignificant he was while staring in the face of the fact that his OP ignited a 40 page discussion.

Delusion is the name of the game, welcome to the machine.

Well, that is exactly what differentiates between honorable alliance and a total disgrace. Of course, with so many alliances not scraping treaties nowadays, it became clear that treaties are mere papers, rubbish, expendable once it turns out to be a liability. I will never condone bandwagonning and never will, how can cybernations return as being a game that upholds a specific rule and integrity..

/me exhales a deep breath

[Pearce Darryl]

The Revenge Doctrine asserts that the Order will extend its sphere of protection over any unaligned red team nation being tech raided by a foreign or domestic military. Any violation of this policy will be regarded and dealt with as a violation of Pacifican sovereignty. This does not give nations on the Red Team the ability to hide behind our shield if they are the first aggressors in a conflict.

[Locke]

The Revenge Doctrine asserts that the Order will extend its sphere of protection over any unaligned red team nation being tech raided by a foreign or domestic military. Any violation of this policy will be regarded and dealt with as a violation of Pacifican sovereignty. This does not give nations on the Red Team the ability to hide behind our shield if they are the first aggressors in a conflict.

Wrong doctrine, bud.

Also, I could have sworn this topic was ten pages longer when I last looked at it.

[TehChron]

Well, that is exactly what differentiates between honorable alliance and a total disgrace. Of course, with so many alliances not scraping treaties nowadays, it became clear that treaties are mere papers, rubbish, expendable once it turns out to be a liability. I will never condone bandwagonning and never will, how can cybernations return as being a game that upholds a specific rule and integrity..

/me exhales a deep breath

...

Why do people go on and on about "back to those days" when the person who originated them is the one responsible for this doctrine? The ignorance is staggering.

[Krunk the Great]

The Revenge Doctrine asserts that the Order will extend its sphere of protection over any unaligned red team nation being tech raided by a foreign or domestic military. Any violation of this policy will be regarded and dealt with as a violation of Pacifican sovereignty. This does not give nations on the Red Team the ability to hide behind our shield if they are the first aggressors in a conflict.

Umm NSO =/= NPO in any way, shape, form, or ideal. Also wasn't RD different from MD 1.0 anyway?

[Locke]

Umm NSO =/= NPO in any way, shape, form, or ideal. Also wasn't RD different from MD 1.0 anyway?

The Revenge Doctrine was an extension of the original Moldavi doctrine, which you can see here:

Any violation of this policy will be regarded and dealt with as a violation of Pacifican sovereignty.

Regardless though, this topic has nothing to do with either doctrine.

[King Srqt]

Wait, you think we are trying to provoke you? How is that even possible in this context? Have members of the NSO come into Jedi threads repeatedly with extraneous commentary that doesn't concern them? No. I believe the provocateur in this instance is very clear.

No you wouldn't come into our threads, you are too busy coming into our forums and sending spam recruitment messages to all the registered members.

[Lord Brendan]

Umm NSO =/= NPO in any way, shape, form, or ideal.

Obviously you're two very different alliances. But to suggest that you have no relation whatsoever is absurd. You have the same founder, the same flag and several of the same key members.

[Gondor]

Umm NSO =/= NPO in any way, shape, form, or ideal. Also wasn't RD different from MD 1.0 anyway?

No offense, but Ivan did create NSO and NPO. Both have the same basic governmental system albeit different names. And you guys just adopted a doctrine that started with the NPO.

Not a slam against you guys, but I wouldn't claim that you guys aren't like them at all.

[TehChron]

No offense, but Ivan did create NSO and NPO. Both have the same basic governmental system albeit different names. And you guys just adopted a doctrine that started with the NPO.

Not a slam against you guys, but I wouldn't claim that you guys aren't like them at all.

The NPO of 2006 is an entirely different alliance from the NPO of 07 up to the present. The reason many of those ex-Pacificans are now in NSO is due to the fact that NPO is not the alliance we helped create.

Rather than association, use critical thinking when coming to conclusions.

[Ophion]

The NPO of 2006 is an entirely different alliance from the NPO of 07 up to the present. The reason many of those ex-Pacificans are now in NSO is due to the fact that NPO is not the alliance we helped create.

Rather than association, use critical thinking when coming to conclusions.

No one is saying that you're the same alliance. The only 'conclusion' that anyone here came to was that there are similarities between the NSO and NPO, which is a fact that can be proven.

Lord Brenden said it best...

Obviously you're two very different alliances. But to suggest that you have no relation whatsoever is absurd.

[TehChron]

No one is saying that you're the same alliance. The only 'conclusion' that anyone here came to was that there are similarities between the NSO and NPO, which is a fact that can be proven.

Lord Brenden said it best...

Let me repeat myself:

We have no relation to the NPO.

By our choice.

Its why we ex-members are ex-members. There's no best way to put it, and frankly, its long since gotten old that folks have decided to perpetuate such nonsense. And there's a pretty big difference in meaning between "relation" and "similarity"...Come to think of it, any alliance with a head of state with commanding authority is similar to the NPO. All red alliances have some similarity to the NPO. It's nonsensical to say that as if not only the quoted person said it already (a blatant falsehood), but also as if your phrase wasn't vague enough to apply to nearly every alliance on the planet.

I won't say you're a noob or anything, but your alliance has dealt with us long enough to know by now that such opinions are baseless and wrong on their head.

[Ophion]

Let me repeat myself:

We have no relation to the NPO.

By our choice.

Its why we ex-members are ex-members. There's no best way to put it, and frankly, its long since gotten old that folks have decided to perpetuate such nonsense. And there's a pretty big difference in meaning between "relation" and "similarity"...Come to think of it, any alliance with a head of state with commanding authority is similar to the NPO. All red alliances have some similarity to the NPO. It's nonsensical to say that as if not only the quoted person said it already (a blatant falsehood), but also as if your phrase wasn't vague enough to apply to nearly every alliance on the planet.

I won't say you're a noob or anything, but your alliance has dealt with us long enough to know by now that such opinions are baseless and wrong on their head.

Heh, I'm not saying anything about relation, I'm saying you two have strong similarities. The specific similarites between the NSO and NPO have already been mentioned, so I figured I didn't have to state them again. The difference between the examples you've given and what we're discussing is that there are far more similarities between the NSO and NPO than the NPO and all red nations or the NPO and alliances with heads of state.

I only recently started playing the game again, only been in the 57th for a day, so I honestly know nothing of how my alliance and your's have dealt with each other.

[TehChron]

Heh, I'm not saying anything about relation, I'm saying you two have strong similarities. The specific similarites between the NSO and NPO have already been mentioned, so I figured I didn't have to state them again. The difference between the examples you've given and what we're discussing is that there are far more similarities between the NSO and NPO than the NPO and all red nations or the NPO and alliances with heads of state.

I only recently started playing the game again, only been in the 57th for a day, so I honestly know nothing of how my alliance and your's have dealt with each other.

You sure presume a lot for someone who is so inexperienced.

If the similarities are so numerous, and have already been said, why not enlighten us as to what they are?

[Ophion]

Alright...

You have the same founder, the same flag and several of the same key members.

Now tell me, which other alliance on Bob has those similarities, since they're so vague and generalized?

And I'm offended, I consider myself a fair bit more experienced than your average bloke.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Ophion

[Corinan]

I didn't realize this thread was still going.

Heh, I'm not saying anything about relation, I'm saying you two have strong similarities. The specific similarites between the NSO and NPO have already been mentioned, so I figured I didn't have to state them again. The difference between the examples you've given and what we're discussing is that there are far more similarities between the NSO and NPO than the NPO and all red nations or the NPO and alliances with heads of state.

I only recently started playing the game again, only been in the 57th for a day, so I honestly know nothing of how my alliance and your's have dealt with each other.

The similaritys between NPO and NSO are mostly aesthetic . Similar flag, acronym, that kinda thing.

[Ophion]

I didn't realize this thread was still going.

The similaritys between NPO and NSO are mostly aesthetic . Similar flag, acronym, that kinda thing.

That's what I'm saying, nothing else. I'm not comparing ideologies, just naming similarites, since there are similarites. You can't claim you are not at all similar to the NPO is all I'm saying, alright?

[Corinan]

That's what I'm saying, nothing else. I'm not comparing ideologies, just naming similarites, since there are similarites. You can't claim you are not at all similar to the NPO is all I'm saying, alright?

Yeah, I was agreeing. There are similarities. There's also significant differences too. You have to get to know both alliances and the history behind them to really see it though.

[TehChron]

That's what I'm saying, nothing else. I'm not comparing ideologies, just naming similarites, since there are similarites. You can't claim you are not at all similar to the NPO is all I'm saying, alright?

Thats what you dont seem to be getting...Aesthetic similarities arent similarities at all. I mean, would you say the Polars are "similar" to the NPO with a straight face? By your standards, theyre far more similar, and in that example, the idea that the two are alike is arguably even more absurd than ours.

Moreover, What brendan said is that we were related, and you are, after all, agreeing with him. So forgive me if I take offense to your mischaracterization as backtracking.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Chron

[Ophion]

We arent similar.

At all. Thats what you dont seem to be getting...Aesthetic similarities arent similarities at all. I mean, would you say the Polars are "similar" to the NPO with a straight face? By your standards, theyre far more similar, and in that example, the idea that the two are alike is arguably even more absurd than ours.

Moreover, What brendan said is that we were related, and you are, after all, agreeing with him. So forgive me if I take offense to your mischaracterization as backtracking.

Well, they used to be similar.

Seriously though, I can see what your point is now. And don't worry about it, mate, you are forgiven.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Ophion

[Elendil old]

No offense, but Ivan did create NSO and NPO. Both have the same basic governmental system albeit different names. And you guys just adopted a doctrine that started with the NPO.

Not a slam against you guys, but I wouldn't claim that you guys aren't like them at all.

History lesson: I believe Karpathos founded NPO in 2006, however Ivan shaped the image of NPO before he resigned if that was what you were refering to.