Ivan Moldavi Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 What?Don't be stupid, poaching from an alliance=/=campaigning for your senator. Poaching is a myth, a made up condition to serve as a fabricated casus belli in the event another alliance is more appealing than a nations current one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warbuck Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Okay, so NSO can recruit from SLCB and vice versa. Excellent.Perhaps I should start my own "neutrality list" but have it be a "national sovereignty list" instead, dictating that the undersigned alliances recognize the inherent right of each nation to select its own alliance and that no alliance should impose upon another in regards to seeking out said nations, etc. etc. Wow, I agreed with him twice I need to get my head checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaone Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Your attempt to feed my ego notwithstanding, I'm Haflinger, not Invicta. You came to them as a government official of Invicta, so he was completly right calling Invicta out on it. You don't always have to declare war; there should be some purpose to a war. Here is your claim that you see this as an act of war: [07:56:08] <Haflinger> Impersonating alliance government is an act of war, however. Normally alliances won't sit and wait around when another alliance does something that they see as an act of war. Sovereign alliances are not protectorates. This is your treaty with them: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=44421Heck you guys even posted their charter. 1. Since when are protectorates not sovereign alliances? 2. NPO also created NpO, so I guess things change over time. To let you in on a little secret: iFOK probably has more influence in FOK then FOK has at iFOK. Like other alliances, when people attempt to interfere with their principles they respond. We are all curious to see the response of your alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Wow, I agreed with him twice I need to get my head checked. You should join NSO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Descendent Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 It looks like innocent advertising to me. Nothing to whine about thus; and when you're bored of getting these messages; you can simply block the sender imho. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krull Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Poaching is a myth, a made up condition to serve as a fabricated casus belli in the event another alliance is more appealing than a nations current one. You're comparing a member leaving an alliance with an incorrect cast vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warbuck Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 You should join NSO. Nah, I don't think ADI's founder will be leaving anytime soon for another alliance.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 You're comparing a member leaving an alliance with an incorrect cast vote. No, I was stating that I disagree with the concept of "poaching". I don't give a damn about the Purple Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 You just need to spam faster if your members are that inherently stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Ozujsko Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 [07:57] <Haflinger> You've even got the "please vote for." Seriously, Haflinger, that's weak sauce. I'm sure most Senate voting, trade circle, and recruitment messages look pretty similar. Anyway, I thought I reached max lulz last week with Carthage and the Huns...Avalon, you've proven me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SyndicatedINC Posted October 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 so you're saying you're not neutral in senate matters as long as Stickmen continue to exercise their sovereignty by using the provided in-game messaging system in a legal and normal way?i think we DO agree. you're not neutral I know not what this 'in-game' that you speak of is, however if you wish to look at things from that perspective then in a manner of speaking yes, so long as there is an attempt to involve Avalon citizens in the Senate voting process, then Avalon shall temporarily suspend her normal neutrality and support opposition candidates to those who attempted to coax Avalon away from neutrality. The issue at hand is that you seem to either misunderstand the order of events, or do not consider them relevant, to us however they are the pinnacle of relevance. 1st- Avalon is Politically Neutral in Purple Senate Matters 2nd- Stickmen mass spam Avalon sequestering votes for their candidate to win a seat 3rd- Avalon posts this announcement and supports opposition candidates to the Stickmen candidate Now for us we would like to see the next steps be: 4th- Next election cycle no one attempts to garner Avalon votes 5th- Avalon returns to stance of not voting/voting for non-competitive candidates 6th- Everyone lives happily every after with perfect trade circles and tech deals galore. Once again, what exactly is wrong with that situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Nah, I don't think ADI's founder will be leaving anytime soon for another alliance.... You guys could just merge into us. Would you like for me to have my people send you guys a recruitment message as they are now being instructed to do to SLCB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scutterbug Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 You're comparing a member leaving an alliance with an incorrect cast vote. Actually they are poaching a vote, not an incorrect cast vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingoist Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) Avalon shall temporarily suspend her normal neutrality and support opposition candidates to those who attempted to coax Avalon away from neutrality. so you're not neutral. cool. i'm fine with that. what's so wrong with just saying "hey brah we're not neutral lol" edit: 3rd- Avalon posts this announcement and supports opposition candidates to the Stickmen candidate to be fair you never would have said this publically if we hadn't outed this fact for you, so don't trouble to pretend to be on some high road or other as if you came out stating as much from the get-go. Edited October 7, 2009 by Jingoist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Sending Senate voting messages to another alliances isn't as bad as trying to recruit their members, but I still don't like it. Back when we were on Green, there was an incident when someone (an unaligned trying to cause trouble, in fact) sent 'vote for Grämlins senators' messages to everyone on Green, and GGA were very unhappy about it – I think rightly. The attempts to equate this with NSO's recruitment messages are exaggerations, but this isn't the right way to go about getting senate votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Sending Senate voting messages to another alliances isn't as bad as trying to recruit their members, but I still don't like it. Back when we were on Green, there was an incident when someone (an unaligned trying to cause trouble, in fact) sent 'vote for Grämlins senators' messages to everyone on Green, and GGA were very unhappy about it – I think rightly. The attempts to equate this with NSO's recruitment messages are exaggerations, but this isn't the right way to go about getting senate votes. What? I never exaggerate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krull Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Actually they are poaching a vote, not an incorrect cast vote. My point was that the damage done to the "victim" alliance varies greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molleh Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 You guys could just merge into us. Would you like for me to have my people send you guys a recruitment message as they are now being instructed to do to SLCB? If I receive one message from you I'm lodging a formal complaint via public forum post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 i didnt want to clog the thread with issues i've previously raised upthread such as the arrogance with which purple "extended" relations to us by saying "y'all know where to find us, now do all the work" and other such issues. Well, to be fair, trying to get reps from all of PEACE on IRC for one big meeting, especially considering the times of availablity for our respective alliances (OOC: i.e. a lot of Stickmen are in Europe) as has been suggested by your side, was somewhat unfeasible. You're partially right it seems. It was Haflinger on personal account. Oh well. Also, hi Azu. Yes, I see that now. Still, Haf doesn't speak for Invicta policy in this matter, he's our senator and thus not in the chain of command. Also, hai Tromp. :3 Haflinger is an Invicta official. I'll let the community decide if Invicta threatened Stickmen. Well, the day you get me access to every word Haf says in query will be a fun day indeed. Regardless, Haf does not speak for Invicta in this matter, nor is he in the military chain of command. You can come talk to me at your convenience and I'd be glad to clear up any issues you may have with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 If I receive one message from you I'm lodging a formal complaint via public forum post. Good. I look forward to reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Here is your claim that you see this as an act of war: I do indeed still see it this way. Impersonating alliance government is an act of war. I'm becoming inclined to accept Stickmen's claims that they didn't mean to do so, however. Normally alliances won't sit and wait around when another alliance does something that they see as an act of war. Actually, you'd be surprised what gets ignored and what actually makes it to light. That I recognize this fact openly (as did Archon) just makes me honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael von Prussia Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I feel guerrila campaigns are what makes life interesting. Nice senate seat, arexes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diogenes Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 The Stickmen have obviously failed to realize that anyone on the purple team, outside of their bloc, is incapable of thinking independently; a grievous error on their part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 My point was that the damage done to the "victim" alliance varies greatly. Actually, I'd rather lose a member openly as compared to having a "member" still in my alliance who wasn't following alliance directives. Guess I don't rate traitors highly though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madine Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 To let you in on a little secret: iFOK probably has more influence in FOK then FOK has at iFOK. Huh?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts