Groucho Marx Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 its not about gaining a senate seat, it's about the means in which you obtain a seat, spamming in annoying and quite dishonourable and Stickmen is dragging its own name through the mud by doing this.Also, why did you join purple if you didn't want to join PEACE unless there were exterior motives. So basically it comes down to you believing they don't have a right to campaign on your sphere for a senator? If you don't like the campaign message, just tune it out. Really, what is so difficult about that? There is no harm in asking someone to vote a certain way unless you run your alliance in a Totalitarian manner in which you strive to completely control your members and their thought processes. In which case, I believe a free voice in Purple is a good thing and should be embraced. Though of course I do not expect the current ruling powers on Purple to be so embracing, which is to be expected. Keep fighting the good fight, Stickmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shovel Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) It's a different degree, correct, but it's the general concept I'm getting at. Would you agree that when someone asks someone to do something they wouldn't ordinarily do, at least a small part of the blame rests in the one who asks? Would you not ask the asker to stop? Eh, not really, maybe slightly, but it is like you telling someone and teaching them how to use a gun and them then going out to kill someone with it. It's the person who killed who wanted and decided to do it, not the teacher. They can try to blame others all they want, but they did it. (That was a bit crap, but you get my point.) Edited October 23, 2009 by Shovel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 It's a different degree, correct, but it's the general concept I'm getting at. Would you agree that when someone asks someone to do something they wouldn't ordinarily do, at least a small part of the blame rests in the one who asks? Would you not ask the asker to stop? I'd let the active, dedicated (or not) members decide what to do on their own. Since, you know, they could check the sender's AA and all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 i voted Michiel De Ruyter when he ran for green senate even thought it meant forsberg came to my house and broke my legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assarax Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) I'd let the active, dedicated (or not) members decide what to do on their own. Since, you know, they could check the sender's AA and all. Or you could you know, not send messages to alliance affiliated nations... I think a lot of the irritation stems from that. Common courtesy and all that. Edited October 23, 2009 by assarax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 It's a different degree, correct, but it's the general concept I'm getting at. Would you agree that when someone asks someone to do something they wouldn't ordinarily do, at least a small part of the blame rests in the one who asks? Would you not ask the asker to stop? You simply can't compare the two, imho. How does telling someone to DoW a nation equal asking a person to vote for a senate candidate? The former is giving out an alliance order to attack someone, the latter is a request on individual basis to vote for a senate candidate. It doesn't make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Or you could you know, not send messages to alliance affiliated nations... I think a lot of the irritation stems from that. Common courtesy and all that. Or they could just click the delete button. One click isn't a lot to ask right? If it makes you feel better, I've received over 40 replies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Or you could you know, not send messages to alliance affiliated nations... I think a lot of the irritation stems from that. Common courtesy and all that. So, when recruiting, do you expect each and every nation you message to be unaligned? I may consider accidentally sending a message to an aligned nation an act of war, since messages mean so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaeta Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 You making it sound that joining PEACE is a requirement to move to the purple sphere. We have our own motives. Thanks for your concern. You brought a second color based bloc to a color sphere which already had a uniting bloc with no apparent desire to work with them or coexist in a friendly manner. It really seems like things would be different if you had said, "Hey PEACE, we want to come to purple and we kinda want one of the senate seats..." Instead we see this crap floating around. By not considering those present before you, you create problems over the simplest and unimportant issues. I had hoped that the windbag that was the previous discussion on this topic would have been the last of this, but instead the other party comes back with this topic. Why? Your "own motives" ? The only purpose this serves is to cause problems. You want a senate seat? Great. Go talk to PEACE, work out a deal where everyone is happy, but don't come out here and campaign for senate... especially not as an "Alliance Announcement". If getting your entire bloc to vote for 1 candidate isn't enough to get you one of three seats, then you probably don't deserve it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buds The Man Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 did we not just have a 30 page thread over this already. Are you so wanting to make sure people dont forget you that you have to run the same arguments over again and again. Really I wish you the best of luck in your bid for senate may the best man/women win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shovel Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) You brought a second color based bloc to a color sphere which already had a uniting bloc with no apparent desire to work with them or coexist in a friendly manner. It really seems like things would be different if you had said, "Hey PEACE, we want to come to purple and we kinda want one of the senate seats..." Instead we see this crap floating around. By not considering those present before you, you create problems over the simplest and unimportant issues.I had hoped that the windbag that was the previous discussion on this topic would have been the last of this, but instead the other party comes back with this topic. Why? Your "own motives" ? The only purpose this serves is to cause problems. You want a senate seat? Great. Go talk to PEACE, work out a deal where everyone is happy, but don't come out here and campaign for senate... especially not as an "Alliance Announcement". If getting your entire bloc to vote for 1 candidate isn't enough to get you one of three seats, then you probably don't deserve it anyway. You need to actually know about the situation before making statements like these. We did ask PEACE nicely, they told us we couldn't have our own senate seat. And we don't deserve the senate seat because we have only 195 member total which wouldn't be enough to get a seat? I think we deserve it more because we put some work in to get the seat. Oh, and yeah, Stickmen aren't a colour bloc. Edited October 23, 2009 by Shovel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 You brought a second color based bloc Found a hole in your argument in the first sentence. Even then, your argument is about PEACE being the only bloc that can exist without straining the sphere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killer04 Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 drool your so funny To: killer04   From: Drool   Date: 10/23/2009 4:08:41 PMSubject: Hai Message: O hai How are you tonight? I heard you like people messaging you, so I decided to write a quick one for you. Oh, and welcome to the Cyber Nations, I hope you enjoy your stay!  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biain Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 So, when recruiting, do you expect each and every nation you message to be unaligned? I may consider accidentally sending a message to an aligned nation an act of war, since messages mean so much. That's bull, there's a difference between coincidently trying to recruit a allied nation and msging 90% of purple(allied and unallied) nations. Stop acting innocent and admit the reason you joined purple and msged most of PU's nation's into voting for stickmen was to try and intimidate PU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaeta Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Found a hole in your argument in the first sentence.Even then, your argument is about PEACE being the only bloc that can exist without straining the sphere. While the second bloc may not have been color based to start, what I've read leads me to believe that everyone moved to purple to be on the same color... bloc of people + all on the same color... might as well be a damn color based bloc My argument is not that only PEACE may exist, multiple blocs can coexist, but they must not operate separate from each other, especially when both groups work toward goals in a similar arena. Either you work together to coexist peacefully or you create conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreddieMercury Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 So basically it comes down to you believing they don't have a right to campaign on your sphere for a senator? If you don't like the campaign message, just tune it out. Really, what is so difficult about that? There is no harm in asking someone to vote a certain way unless you run your alliance in a Totalitarian manner in which you strive to completely control your members and their thought processes. In which case, I believe a free voice in Purple is a good thing and should be embraced. Though of course I do not expect the current ruling powers on Purple to be so embracing, which is to be expected. Keep fighting the good fight, Stickmen. Or the senders can simply stop when the alliances in question ask them to. Or better yet, ask the alliance beforehand if they can send their members messages. It's a matter of respect. And why should the receivers be the ones tasked with "tuning it out"? It doesn't even make sense to send people messages filled with objectionable material and place it as their responsibility to "deal with it" and "tune it out". And there's nothing Totalitarian about trying to prevent confusion within the ranks of the newer players. So, when recruiting, do you expect each and every nation you message to be unaligned? I may consider accidentally sending a message to an aligned nation an act of war, since messages mean so much. I expect them to be unaligned, I don't intentionally send recruitment message to aligned nations. If it happens, it's an accident and not out of malicious intent and thus I go and apologize. What happened here is not an accidental message or two, it's an organized campaign to message various purple alliances. It's a poor analogy you're using there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 You brought a second color based bloc to a color sphere which already had a uniting bloc with no apparent desire to work with them or coexist in a friendly manner. It really seems like things would be different if you had said, "Hey PEACE, we want to come to purple and we kinda want one of the senate seats..." Instead we see this crap floating around. By not considering those present before you, you create problems over the simplest and unimportant issues.I had hoped that the windbag that was the previous discussion on this topic would have been the last of this, but instead the other party comes back with this topic. Why? Your "own motives" ? The only purpose this serves is to cause problems. You want a senate seat? Great. Go talk to PEACE, work out a deal where everyone is happy, but don't come out here and campaign for senate... especially not as an "Alliance Announcement". If getting your entire bloc to vote for 1 candidate isn't enough to get you one of three seats, then you probably don't deserve it anyway. Just because there was already a bloc in place that decided amoungst themselves how they were going to run things on their colour sphere, does not mean they own that sphere, and does not mean everyone has to play by their rules. They didn't have to talk to PEACE, get their permission, this that and a third to do whatever they pleased on the purple sphere, a sphere in which they now call home and have just as much right to stake a claim to as any other alliance residing on that sphere. They are aware, obviously, that people are none too happy with the way they chose to go about doing things, but at the same time, they are none too happy with the way the rest of purple has treated them. So, since no one owns any colour sphere, and there are no outright acts of aggression (take a senate seat is far from an aggressive act. It's a democratically elected seat, people don't have to vote for their candidate), the drama here is just fun to witness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 It's a poor analogy you're using there. Comparing a request to vote for a senate seat candidate and an order to attack nations is a pretty bad analogy, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 no we dont but alot of purple alliances are in peace and the only people getting mad are in peace so by joining our alliances will make sure you always get a senate seat and people will no longer be mad its not about gaining a senate seat, it's about the means in which you obtain a seat, spamming in annoying and quite dishonourable and Stickmen is dragging its own name through the mud by doing this.Also, why did you join purple if you didn't want to join PEACE unless there were exterior motives. I would like to hear more from these most learned members of PEACE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I guess this just serves as a warning, don't go to purple if you're not going to play by PEACE's rules. Or else. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buds The Man Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I guess this just serves as a warning, don't go to purple if you're going to be asshats Or else. -Bama Fixed it for ya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Philip Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I vote Michiel de Ruyters because he's fighting the prejudice of the governing mass, those in other purple alliances who use their alliance power to manipulate and rig the senate to maintain their positions. Despite claims of team friendship, unity and love, they remain unfriendly to those who they don't control, those who are FREE. They're happy to create conflict, typically via prejudice where there should be none. PEACE, if they could they'd start assassinating our leaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Fixed it for ya I don't get it. I thought big bad PEACE had been on Purple for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I vote Michiel de Ruyters because he's fighting the prejudice of the governing mass, those in other purple alliances who use their alliance power to manipulate and rig the senate to maintain their positions. Despite claims of team friendship, unity and love, they remain unfriendly to those who they don't control, those who are FREE. They're happy to create conflict, typically via prejudice where there should be none. PEACE, if they could they'd start assassinating our leaders. Still sore that you can't get a seat again, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biain Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Still sore that you can't get a seat again, eh? PEACE dont want to control Stickmen, they just dont want a Senate seat because there untrust worthy. why did stickemn join purple again....XD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.