Jump to content

Crimson Guard Edict #5: Ultimatum to Internet Superheroes


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 760
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Not to goad you, since I'm on your side on this, but you probably should be posting a DoW soon before people stop taking you seriously.

I'm going to have to agree with this. Isn't a Protector supposed to Protect their Protectorate. You can sit in this thread all day and say that We're going to do something about it. Well that's all fine and dandy, but it's meaningless until you prove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you realize how many people are on planet bob? Calling some replies in a forum as the majority is rediculous. Nations will raid how they desire to.

Seeing as quite a few of the (ooc)OWF active(/ooc) population have posted here I can safely say that MANY people share my stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He spokes for the majority of us who actually know how to raid.

Whereas you and company rewrite the definition of raiding to defend yourselves.

Anyway you spin it, What IS is doing is underhanded.

I was raiding before your nation was even around. There is no code of raiding only tips (I'd post my raiding guide held up on the old cn forums, but I don't have the link).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16:44 %Londo • did you raid NOAH ReytheRAD

16:44 %Londo • lol

16:45 %ReytheRAD • I hit the leader I think

16:45 %Londo • NOAH didn't take it to the OWF though

16:45 %ReytheRAD • That's irrelevant

16:46 %Londo • also that raid wasn't politically motivated

16:46 %ReytheRAD • someone had to notice

16:46 %Londo • well yeah

16:46 %ReytheRAD • all raids are tl;dr "you're smaller, I want money"

16:46 %Londo • I wanted land

lolsupwiththat

I hope people remembered that NOAH is a NpO protectorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll remember that if you ever make an alliance and don't want anyone infringing on YOUR sovereignty.

I was not aware that telling someone they're wrong equated to infringing on their sovereignty. We all have the "sovereign right" to do whatever the hell we want as long as we don't break the Covenant of Our Lord Admin or the (OOC: RL laws). But that doesn't mean other people can't disagree. The attitude that's been going around (and that IS has shown more than anyone in my opinion) has been basically this:

Alliance A: "Wow Alliance B, you suck, and the way you do things sucks."

Alliance B: "Not cool."

Alliance A: "DON'T YOU GO INFRINGING ON OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH! WE CAN SAY WHATEVER WE WANT ABOUT YOUR ALLIANCE!"

Alliance C: "Wow Alliance A, you suck, and the way you do things sucks."

Alliance A: "WTF MAN, DON'T YOU GO INFRINGING ON OUR SOVEREIGN RIGHT TO DO THINGS OUR WAY!"

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't you guys tired of getting rolled ^_^

Pretty sure you got rolled harder, and with a better CB. Go somewhere else to !@#$%* about "ZOMG PINK NEEDS TO GET ROLLED FOR STANDING UP FOR ITSELF!", I'm not getting into that here.

I was not aware that telling someone they're wrong equated to infringing on their sovereignty.

It wouldn't be if he weren't trying to tell them what defines tech raiding, and that their entire policy is wrong.

-Bama

Edited by Rey the Great
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more fun than sitting around and acting like what I say is witty.

I got a nice chuckle out of it.

I was not aware that telling someone they're wrong equated to infringing on their sovereignty. We all have the "sovereign right" to do whatever the hell we want as long as we don't break the Covenant of Our Lord Admin or the (OOC: RL laws). But that doesn't mean other people can't disagree. The attitude that's been going around (and that IS has shown more than anyone in my opinion) has been basically this:

Alliance A: "Wow Alliance B, you suck, and the way you do things sucks."

Alliance B: "Not cool."

Alliance A: "DON'T YOU GO INFRINGING ON OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH! WE CAN SAY WHATEVER WE WANT ABOUT YOUR ALLIANCE!"

Alliance C: "Wow Alliance A, you suck, and the way you do things sucks."

Alliance A: "WTF MAN, DON'T YOU GO INFRINGING ON OUR SOVEREIGN RIGHT TO DO THINGS OUR WAY!"

-Bama

Bama you owe me a soda...

Edited by James Wilson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IS's actions on CG are unacceptable by every standard of the raids and wars. Those want to take the side of IS in this, I thought better of you. There is no reason for IS to go out on a tech raid and go use everything they have on an alliance. All I can hope is that IS gets a taste of it's own medicine and gets rolled. They just might learn something from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well as new King of The Centurion Brotherhood which is a pink AA and member of PWN i had to read this post (couldnt get to the end tho) and i noticed some very sad things here.

Why all that hatred towards PINK nations? We aren't all bad and not all responsible for IS's acts. I myself am strongly in disfavor of what IS did and not support their actions in any way. What i just wanted to say is to please stop the pink hatred! do not judge us all because of the actions of others! I myself am making sure our AA is a peaceful and fair AA where actions like "Raids+CM+BR's" doesn't happen (if it'd happen , just message me and ill get a talk with the member who did it).

And also , this kind of hatred is pure discrimination , which in case you didn't know, is very badly judged in RL , so why not here? I personally think any person putting Pink hatred in his sig should think about what he's doing because you're not acting any better than people stereotyping in RL (all muslims are terrorists , all immigrants are bad, etc...) .

Regards,

Generals3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We view this as an act of war against CG, you can't call it a raid. You clicked the "declare war" button, that's called war. [ooc]There is no "raid" button, only "war" button. You can't change game rules, this is a war.[/ooc]. We did not accept peace. President Kent and deSouza said we did, but we didn't. By the charter, it specifically states that only the Chancellor, Francesca,(Or me, if she is absent, I have her powers)may do that. President Kent and deSouza cannot accept peace, sorry.

Pay reps for your war, or we can continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IS's actions on CG are unacceptable by every standard of the raids and wars. Those want to take the side of IS in this, I thought better of you. There is no reason for IS to go out on a tech raid and go use everything they have on an alliance. All I can hope is that IS gets a taste of it's own medicine and gets rolled. They just might learn something from it.

Your standards for tech raiding are you own. Just because you and others agree to the same style of tech raiding doesn't mean everyone has to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IS's actions on CG are unacceptable by every standard of the raids and wars. Those want to take the side of IS in this, I thought better of you. There is no reason for IS to go out on a tech raid and go use everything they have on an alliance. All I can hope is that IS gets a taste of it's own medicine and gets rolled. They just might learn something from it.

Well mostly its just IS's allies siding with them and people who hate CG/Frannie/Hell Scream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wargarhbl

You know what i find amusing about all this? a month ago NSO recruited from the neutrals and everybody suddenly began to argue if recruiting was bad or not. now those some people who were pro-NSO are now anti-IS when its really the same thing.

Is it bad to recruit from other AA's or is it not, now we're onto is it bad to use CM's and such during a raid or is it not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't be if he weren't trying to tell them what defines tech raiding, and that their entire policy is wrong.

-Bama

How does that infringe on IS's sovereignty in any way? It's just his opinion, even if he believes his opinion to be solid fact (which I disagree, I don't think you can really "define" tech raiding).

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what i find amusing about all this? a month ago NSO recruited from the neutrals and everybody suddenly began to argue if recruiting was bad or not. now those some people who were pro-NSO are now anti-IS when its really the same thing.

Is it bad to recruit from other AA's or is it not, now we're onto is it bad to use CM's and such during a raid or is it not.

The topics may change, but the arguments never do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your standards for tech raiding are you own. Just because you and others agree to the same style of tech raiding doesn't mean everyone has to.

No it is not. We do not sanction or condone the use of nukes, cm's, bombings, or navy's on a raid target. IS has clearly done that here. Which makes it not acceptable in my standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your standards for tech raiding are you own. Just because you and others agree to the same style of tech raiding doesn't mean everyone has to.

Like I have said, most of planet Bob follows the same standards for tech raiding. Your allies on the other hand, do not raid. Spying nukes, using naval blockades and the such isn't a raid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...