Pro-Piracy Act of 2009

[hizzy]

Why are we always expected to apologize for our attitudes, while hoardes of wrath-filled anti-raiders go on a rampage throughout our thread, attempting to demean us at every step? We don't attack people for not liking our policy. Those that respectfully announced their disagreement with it were treated in kind. It's people like RV and this Sykes guy that attempt to steamroll us with their hatred for the GOONS name, and then subjective types like yourself, that keep us on our toes. You have no intention of looking at us without a filter.

Well when you respond to someone's negative opinions with simple "ur opinion doesnt matter" then it only strengthens their standing.

You posted a policy in public. It was obviously a policy that you created to mock another alliance in the first place, so man up and face the criticism. (Your other options, of course, are to either post original and purposeful announcements, or don't post anything at all.)

[lamuella]

the language aside, I think this policy was fairly original. I certainly don't see any other alliances doing it.

[nippy]

Well when you respond to someone's negative opinions with simple "ur opinion doesnt matter" then it only strengthens their standing.

You posted a policy in public. It was obviously a policy that you created to mock another alliance in the first place, so man up and face the criticism. (Your other options, of course, are to either post original and purposeful announcements, or don't post anything at all.)

I see posting original and purposeful announcements isn't one of your options.

I like how you guys all come out of the woodworks at the same time.

[ModusOperandi]

the language aside, I think this policy was fairly original. I certainly don't see any other alliances doing it.

It was original, I can guarantee that and there is a lot of potential for it.

Now, the only problem I have with it is if an unaligned nation applies for membership to alliance x, and is being tech-raided by nations financed by GOONs and GOONs refuses to stop the financing.. that is a declaration of war imo.

I have no problem with unaligned versus unaligned or aligned versus unaligned, that's your sovereignty.

[Bob Janova]

Does anyone take you seriously when you cannot even correctly attribute the quotation you felt a desperate need to put in your signature?

Oops, my mistake ... you were both posting in that part of the thread and obviously I got your names confused. Attribution to the correct GOON incoming. Do you think that bullying the weak (with or without an excuse) is okay though?

As people seem to be split roughtly into those that hate the announcement and those that like it in around equal numbers

I would say it's a significant imbalance, certainly if you discount the GOONS (obviously they're not going to hate GOONS and they are not relevant to the foreign opinion of you. But you are right, it's not universal at this point as it was with old GOONS.

[lamuella]

something people need to understand is that GOONS are a bit like a mirror. Polite posts towards us will generally get polite responses. Rude posts will get rude responses. Crying will get derisory laughter. Generally, you get out of GOONS what you put in, in terms of tone, and in this thread at least what a lot of people have put in is shrill and angry words.

[ModusOperandi]

something people need to understand is that GOONS are a bit like a mirror. Polite posts towards us will generally get polite responses. Rude posts will get rude responses. Crying will get derisory laughter. Generally, you get out of GOONS what you put in, in terms of tone, and in this thread at least what a lot of people have put in is shrill and angry words.

Granted, I certainly concede that; the vitriol was certainly brought by both, including myself.

[salithus]

Well when you respond to someone's negative opinions with simple "ur opinion doesnt matter" then it only strengthens their standing.

You posted a policy in public. It was obviously a policy that you created to mock another alliance in the first place, so man up and face the criticism. (Your other options, of course, are to either post original and purposeful announcements, or don't post anything at all.)

Or, how about I post the announcements we intend to, including this one. Even though we used a theme for the announcement picked specifically because our policy is the antithesis of another alliance's, we are not obligated to care about each and every one of the opinions of all those who feel the need to tell us how to run our alliance as though this were our first dance and we were nervous about touching a girl for the first time. Then again, it always makes me chuckle to read when someone who thinks everyone hates GOONS tell us how to run foreign affairs, since they should obviously spend more time worrying about why they can't accurately gauge public sentiment.

Oops, my mistake ... you were both posting in that part of the thread and obviously I got your names confused. Attribution to the correct GOON incoming. Do you think that bullying the weak (with or without an excuse) is okay though?

I think it is a very accurate statement to say that GOONS needs no excuse to bully the weak. I would tell you to read into that what you like, but you already have.

Edited September 22, 2009 by salithus

[hizzy]

the language aside, I think this policy was fairly original. I certainly don't see any other alliances doing it.

Well in the sense that it hasn't been done before, sure, I'll give you that.

But clearly it was inspired by someone who saw the DOC policy and decided it would be funny to make something opposite that. Thus, the first thing that comes to mind isn't "cool new idea", but instead negativity. And as much as you guys joke around about other people "bawwing" about it, en masse you come distinctly more troubled by the opinions raised against you than those you mock in the first place.

I see posting original and purposeful announcements isn't one of your options.

I like how you guys all come out of the woodworks at the same time.

oh man I'm in stitches. Where do we tip the servers?

[salithus]

Well in the sense that it hasn't been done before, sure, I'll give you that.

But clearly it was inspired by someone who saw the DOC policy and decided it would be funny to make something opposite that. Thus, the first thing that comes to mind isn't "cool new idea", but instead negativity. And as much as you guys joke around about other people "bawwing" about it, en masse you come distinctly more troubled by the opinions raised against you than those you mock in the first place.

At what point have we been troubled? The only concern that was brought up were rumors that GLoF was looking to start a war with us over chaffed feelings from the incident that has been detailed repeatedly in this thread, and by "concern" I mean "we notified our allies so they wouldn't be surprised if anything happened". If we were troubled, we would have recanted, or at least reconsidered, this policy. We have not - instead we just make fun of those, like you, who seem to think they can educate us in politics and diplomacy when they cannot even get a grasp of the current situation.

[hizzy]

At what point have we been troubled?

At about the hundred points in the discussion where you and yours were unable to reply with anything resembling coherence or wit, and then whine about how people have always disliked you anyways yada yada yada.

[salithus]

At about the hundred points in the discussion where you and yours were unable to reply with anything resembling coherence or wit, and then whine about how people have always disliked you anyways yada yada yada.

See, the fact that you have to resort to making up nonsense to "prove" your point is exactly why we do not take foreign affairs advice from you.

[lamuella]

I would say it's a significant imbalance, certainly if you discount the GOONS (obviously they're not going to hate GOONS and they are not relevant to the foreign opinion of you. But you are right, it's not universal at this point as it was with old GOONS.

This is how bored I am: I just spent 20 minutes tabulating how many posters in this thread supported this policy versus how many opposed it. This is not a tally of posts, but rather of individuals expressing an opinion one way or another. Discounting members of GOONS, people who did not express a direct opinion on the policy, and posts by moderators, we get the following results:

Supportive of the pro-piracy act: 76 posters

Opposed to the pro-piracy act or to GOONS in general: 51 posters

The reason why it might not appear this way at first glance - indeed the reason why if I went back and checked there might be more posts opposed to the policy than in favor of it - is that those who like the policy typically said "congratulations" and moved on. It was not their policy to defend or debate (with some exceptions when our friends got into the discussion). Those opposed to the policy were a lot more likely to stick around and argue with us about it.

Now, I don't expect anyone to rely on the numbers above. They were the result of boredom and a pen and paper. I welcome any attempt to check my figures or re-calculate.

[HalfEmpty]

40 pages and no

GOON ARMIES ENGAGE?

[Smithy1]

Oh GOONS, you haven't changed a bit now have you?

[ChimpMasterFlash]

Pages 27- 40 tl;dr

Carry on.

edited for no reason at all.

Edited September 22, 2009 by ChimpMasterFlash

[Eden Taylor]

You would have a 100% valid point, and I would concede the point had it not been for the fact that they themselves, within this thread, made the statement that this policy is intended to reward those who "have a pair." That is their words, not mine. And I find it exceedinly hypocritical, that they want to reward someone for "having a pair" while their "own pair" remains untested despite the fact that they deem "having a pair" as worthy. If all of this "having a pair" is so appreciated by them, then they should unzip and swing their pair in front of the world. Of course, they wont do this, because, much like the poor raided victim in their little "policy", they dont seek a beatdown. The only difference is, the poor raided target will get a beatdown. And this gets hailed. Bob is indeed a sad place.

Once you take their words and use them yourselves to voice your own opinions about a subject they are now yours; that doesn't make them no longer theirs as well, but you cannot escape responsibility for the words that you choose to use, no matter their origin or prior use. If you are to call anyone hypocritical in this thread for their statements of machoism and faux-bravery (I'm sorry GOONS, but that's what I see it as; doesn't matter that I agree with the sentiment, but the statements themselves boil down to that for me.) then you also have to accept that title for yourself at this point since you have also made those same statements. You cannot escape that responsibility for your words, no matter how much responsibility you may be escaping for the fallacy of thinking that voicing an opinion is equal to righting what you see wrong in the world.

Please do not insult the general intelligence of leaders on Planet Bob, by insinuating that dissenting opinions is not what you wanted when this thread was posted. This a policy pertaining to un-aligneds about un-aligneds, as you have said to so many other alliance reps in this thread "this does not effect you." Know what, you are right, it doesnt. Hence there was no need to post it, and make it public. Yet you did. You did so knowing how the thread would play out. Please dont play stupid and pretend like you didnt. That is what this post intended all along, was to stir up controversy. The only thing Im not sure of is, now that it has, is your bawwing about those who dissent real or fake. It doesnt matter to me. Your entire alliance still lacks a pair.

I would just like to say that I think you are the butt of the joke, as is every person in this thread dissenting the OP. Heck, I'd say I'm probably being laughed at by GOONS for supporting them at several points with entirely too much logical application (not even going to think about those laughing at me from among the dissenters). If it truly doesn't matter to you whether the GOONS are really crying or faking it while laughing hysterically then your best bet is to probably just leave it alone and walk away; if you're certain that this announcement was intended solely to stir up controversy and that GOONS knew how this would play out, then you should stop playing right into.

[Gerald Meanĕ]

The notion that this policy exists to reward a small nation who "has a pair", is equally ridiculous. If having a pair is what you feel needs rewarded...then take the lead...HAVE A PAIR...and ....Oh yeah....START A WAR. Stop getting your testicular fortitude vicariously through others. Otherwise, shut up and aid whatever un-aligned nations you wish to aid in whatever circumstances you choose. A policy and subsequent claims of testicular fortitude are not necessary and make you look like the ones lacking in TRUE testicles.

I'd say this policy is a perfect illustration of "having a pair" if you will. GOONS knew that they would get negative reaction from certain groups from this. Instead of bowing to that stepped up and did something they would not only have fun doing, but provide entertainment as well. That takes a lot more balls in the political climate we have in the cyberverse then any of the moral outrage being shown at this.

Hail to rocking on, Hail to GOONS baby.

[hizzy]

At about the hundred points in the discussion where you and yours were unable to reply with anything resembling coherence or wit, and then whine about how people have always disliked you anyways yada yada yada.

See, the fact that you have to resort to making up nonsense to "prove" your point is exactly why we do not take foreign affairs advice from you.

I resort to making up nonsense right? I took a quick look at just the last few pages... mind you this is even a small sample of those, as nippy must have had 20 posts which I'm sure he thinks are genius but that's neither here nor there....

why thank you, that's very...

wait a minute, you were being sarcastic, weren't you?

why you little...

The best thing about GOONS is that people can't pick a topic to cry about and stick with it.

We were disliked before posting this thread, Bob. We would have received the same response no matter how we 'conducted the discussion' (I like how we were the only ones out-of-line in your eyes ).

Wow, you really have TRUE testicles!

I'll tell you what....you change your AA to 'none' and I'll show you who has TRUE testicles, big boy. (because it takes true testicles to attack none, right? - Hizzy)

It only seems like a sad place when you're crying.

Advice for the future....quit crying about policies that neither affect you nor your alliance.

(Hint: Even if you do post it, I won't care.)

But ya, all that stuff I said about whining about responses and lack of wit... ya, I was lying through my teeth. My bad. You got me. Hey maybe if you try the same joke a dozen more times it'll get funnier?

Now, I don't expect anyone to rely on the numbers above. They were the result of boredom and a pen and paper. I welcome any attempt to check my figures or re-calculate.

I for one, admire the lengths a man will go through to kill boredom. Kudos to you, sir.

[salithus]

I resort to making up nonsense right? I took a quick look at just the last few pages... mind you this is even a small sample of those, as nippy must have had 20 posts which I'm sure he thinks are genius but that's neither here nor there....

None of those were whining, most just statements of fact. lamuella's was intentionally obvious as a parody of how obviously sarcastic the post he replied to was. nippy is making fun of all the tears that have flowed about GOONS for various reasons, most of which though posted in this thread had nothing to do with it. The next pointed out the simple fact that most of the people whining in this thread about GOONS would have done so no matter what the topic. Hell, we got countless pages of tears just for declaring existence. We not only accept it, we get a kick out of it - so that's hardly whining. Next up is pointing out the obviousness of "TRUE testicles" needed to put your own nation on the line instead of telling someone to go attack someone else to prove they have balls (note: unaligned who attack GOONS nations and do a good job of it tend to get recruited, so don't bother telling us we need to put our nations on the line). Then nippy points out that Rush is crying about how sad a place Bob is. Then repeats himself. Then I point out I don't care if he thinks we've got enough testicles or not.

None of those were meant to be jokes, so if you're looking to them for comedy value, then your lack of decent humor would explain why you have no idea where we're trying to be witty and where we're just shooting straight. Unless you're implying that every post of ours has to be a masterpiece in wit, in which case I would suggest you manage to do that successfully yourself - or even hit the double digit percentages - before lauding that method's merits.

[ModusOperandi]

I would just like to say that I think you are the butt of the joke, as is every person in this thread dissenting the OP.

As much as GOONs like to say "nah, nah, we don't care about your opinions; our fingers are in our ears," we dissenters don't really care how much you folks make fun of us.

To be blunt, its plainly obvious that many of your lulz-responses are motivated by, A) an attempt to gain attention, B) an attempt to gain acceptance/approval by your like-minded brethren, and C) an attempt to circumvent any rational discussion with childish belittlement.

Keep 'em coming, if you didn't want the attention this announcement about aiding unaligned wouldn't have been made.

Politely, however, I would like to know what would happen if an unaligned raider was financed by GOONs and the targeted nation applied for membership in another alliance; GOONs would cease aiding attacks against that applicant, correct?

Because that is what much of this dissent boils down to.

[salithus]

Politely, however, I would like to know what would happen if an unaligned raider was financed by GOONs and the targeted nation applied for membership in another alliance; GOONs would cease aiding attacks against that applicant, correct?

Because that is what much of this dissent boils down to.

As we have already stated previously - accepting a nation involved in an active war is a no-no around here. Trying to bully an unaligned into just dealing with it is not going to prompt GOONS to stop supporting them.

[Owned-You]

At what point have we been troubled? The only concern that was brought up were rumors that GLoF was looking to start a war with us over chaffed feelings from the incident that has been detailed repeatedly in this thread, and by "concern" I mean "we notified our allies so they wouldn't be surprised if anything happened". If we were troubled, we would have recanted, or at least reconsidered, this policy. We have not - instead we just make fun of those, like you, who seem to think they can educate us in politics and diplomacy when they cannot even get a grasp of the current situation.

Just to add some enlightenment to the situation should this rumor persist. GLOF has been allied to NV for a long-time, they are one of our closest allies, Polaris have been equally allied with us for a long-time and equally close. We also are allied with MK and close...as such the chances of any "Wars" erupting over this dispute are rooted only in fictional dreams of drama. We are all tied together one way or another, and these ties wouldn't be severed over a slight dispute over conduct and decorum.

[salithus]

Just to add some enlightenment to the situation should this rumor persist. GLOF has been allied to NV for a long-time, they are one of our closest allies, Polaris have been equally allied with us for a long-time and equally close. We also are allied with MK and close...as such the chances of any "Wars" erupting over this dispute are rooted only in fictional dreams of drama. We are all tied together one way or another, and these ties wouldn't be severed over a slight dispute over conduct and decorum.

Because it would be the first war started over something meaningless and the first treaties dropped in preparation for war?

E: Keep in mind that those rumors were well before GLoF's government posted their official position and policy clarification and while several GLoF members were threatening to "burn down" GOONS while stating that they spoke for GLoF.

Edited September 22, 2009 by salithus

[Bower3aj]

Just to add some enlightenment to the situation should this rumor persist. GLOF has been allied to NV for a long-time, they are one of our closest allies, Polaris have been equally allied with us for a long-time and equally close. We also are allied with MK and close...as such the chances of any "Wars" erupting over this dispute are rooted only in fictional dreams of drama. We are all tied together one way or another, and these ties wouldn't be severed over a slight dispute over conduct and decorum.

This is true. Any rumors of the Lodge declaring war are absurd. We are, and always have been, a defensive alliance, so whoever whispered that we were on the war path was blatantly lying. But I don't actually believe that anybody was really saying these rumors. We only ride to war to defend ourselves or our allies.

But thanks to Owned-You for pointing this out.

edit: salithus beat me to the response... sigh... you know very little of the Lodge and her allies if you would expect anything like that to occur here.

Edited September 22, 2009 by Bower3aj