Tequila Mockingbird Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 When Stickmen decided to mass message purple, I thought "good for them". Why? Because no alliance should have to join a bloc in order to get a senate seat if that's what they wish. Also, if the 1500 or whatever members of PEACE can't beat out a stickmen candidate, then the problem lies with Purple, not stickmen. If Unity is what Purple strives for and an outside force can come in and disrupt the utopia with a message, then that again, shows poorly on the communication and execution of Purple's own campaign. It's a delete button and it is there for a reason. You pretty much hit the nail on the head with just this paragraph, props. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilyn Caster Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 He deserves higher praise. Savior of the Purple sphere, perhaps. Ah, but is not King Stumpy already the Savior of Purple? I see no point in concerning ourselves with this issue. Like before, King Stumpy shall restore peace and balance to the Purple Sphere. His benevolence knows no bounds, and his sacrifices shall breed your salvation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Could I get a pizza as well? Pineapple as a topping plz. HERESY! Pineapple has no place on pizza! This statement is a travesty and an insult of the highest degree! I cannot let this stand, sir. We duel with pistols at dawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Do you support the methods that noWedge used to hold onto a purple senate seat? I'll just repeat what I said earlier. The entire concept of trying to 'control' senate seats is ridiculous. If you have the support of the people in the sphere, ie; those who make up the trades and whose opinion matters most. Then you deserve the seats. Nobody should threaten others for senate seats. It's such a ridiculous concept, and is completely outdated. I support SLCB in their right to elect whomever they goddamn please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jgoods45 Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 All this because of a senate seat? lawl. o/Stickmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anu Drake Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 (words I agree with) Seems logical. All this because of a senate seat? lawl. So true. Seriously, this is a drama within a drama within a drama. Senate seats are not that important, definitely not as important as the well being of an alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 So the main Purple alliances are saying that the Stickmen can't run a guy for senate? If this is the truth, it is just really sad on Purples behalf. No, I think they're more concerned about Stickmen members messaging the members of PEACE alliances to get them to vote for their candidate. Personally, I agree with this complaint. Stickmen aren't a party to PEACE's Senate treaty, so they can run and vote for anyone they want. However, I believe that they cross the line with their spamming of other alliance's members. I have no issue with Stickmen messaging their own members or unaligned nations because they have authority over the former and the latter have no rights. However, Stickmen's messaging of the members of other alliances violates those alliances' sovereignty, just as sending recruiting messages to the members of other alliances does. There is an unwritten agreement between the governments of alliances that alliance members are off limits for most kinds of pms from outside parties. Among the types of pm that are traditionally off limits are recuiting pm's, pm's asking the other alliance's members to attack someone, and Senate pm's. The reason for this is that these are political messages that mutual respect for the sovereignty of other alliances' governments. These messages are different from trade invitations because trades are usually seen as being completely free. Wars have been fought over messaging of members of outside alliances with recruiting pms and the messaging of aligned nations is generally frowned upon. So what? If Stickmen wants to run a Senate candidate, they have the right to do so. However, they should respect the wishes of their neighbors and refrain from soliciting votes from aligned nations. I'd also reiterate what my Overseer Sulmar said. We'd have no issue with Stickmen coming to white and running a Senate candidate as long as they respected their new neighbors' preference for their members not to be solicited to vote for other alliances' candidates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Soviet Attack Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Your sovereignty just got violated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Your sovereignty just got violated Well, I've been a big fan of yours since you were in CIS, so you, personally, can pm me anytime. As for the rest of Zenith, I'm going to have to respectfully request that you refrain from asking them to vote for your alliance's Senate candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Soviet Attack Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Aww. Well I'll try to restrain myself... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Aww. Well I'll try to restrain myself... Besides, Zenith is on the wrong team and doesn't really actively support a candidate. We don't have the size to get someone elected on our own, so we let the big guys do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 (edited) No, I think they're more concerned about Stickmen members messaging the members of PEACE alliances to get them to vote for their candidate. Personally, I agree with this complaint. Stickmen aren't a party to PEACE's Senate treaty, so they can run and vote for anyone they want. However, I believe that they cross the line with their spamming of other alliance's members. I have no issue with Stickmen messaging their own members or unaligned nations because they have authority over the former and the latter have no rights. However, Stickmen's messaging of the members of other alliances violates those alliances' sovereignty, just as sending recruiting messages to the members of other alliances does. There is an unwritten agreement between the governments of alliances that alliance members are off limits for most kinds of pms from outside parties. Among the types of pm that are traditionally off limits are recuiting pm's, pm's asking the other alliance's members to attack someone, and Senate pm's. The reason for this is that these are political messages that mutual respect for the sovereignty of other alliances' governments. These messages are different from trade invitations because trades are usually seen as being completely free. Wars have been fought over messaging of members of outside alliances with recruiting pms and the messaging of aligned nations is generally frowned upon. So what? If Stickmen wants to run a Senate candidate, they have the right to do so. However, they should respect the wishes of their neighbors and refrain from soliciting votes from aligned nations. I'd also reiterate what my Overseer Sulmar said. We'd have no issue with Stickmen coming to white and running a Senate candidate as long as they respected their new neighbors' preference for their members not to be solicited to vote for other alliances' candidates. Everything you said relies on PEACE's senate treaty being binding by all purple alliances, and being acknowledged and given support by even those alliances not in PEACE. If an alliance comes along and does not wish to play by their rules, they do not have to, and being forced to do so would violate their sovereignty a hell of a lot more than a message saying "vote for this guy for senate!" ever possibly could. PEACE would be better suited making sure their members are informed of who they approve to be senators, and who they want their members to vote for. It's not democratic, it violates the individual sovereign rights of the individual nations that together comprise PEACE alliances, and the greater PEACE bloc, but that is what they should do. If they did that, someone messaging the nations within those alliances would do absolutely no good. But yeah, why should they try to keep their members up to date when it's so much easier to be outraged over a few messages and a senate candidate that they don't happen to like? edit: I only mentioned sovereign rights of the individual because sovereignty is tossed around way too often as an easy way to make others look bad, and make them look like aggressors when people have absolutely nothing to pin on them. Sovereignty and rights extend all the way down to the individual, so it's kind of stupid to go around throwing around accusations that an alliance's rights have been violated because their members were ASKED (not TOLD, but ASKED) to vote for a senate candidate. If I'm in a PEACE alliance and I happen to not like any of the candidates that they TELL me to vote for, my individual sovereign rights are being violated. But then again, I don't have to tell anyone who I voted for, and I can vote for whoever I please, as can the individual nations within PEACE alliances. So, whose rights are being violated again? Edited October 25, 2009 by astronaut jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Soviet Attack Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Can't believe this thread is still going. If there is one more post, and I mean by ANYONE, we will consider it a cassus belli against Invicta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Can't believe this thread is still going. If there is one more post, and I mean by ANYONE, we will consider it a cassus belli against Invicta. Posting for CB against invicta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Yeah this has gone on way too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum T. Gundraw Posted October 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Posting for CB against invicta. Of course you realize, this means war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wu Tang Clan Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Great Purple War? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shovel Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Bye bye Invicta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Posting for CB against invicta. As long as we're having fun, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudekker Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Wow, I can barely breathe for all the smug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhailee Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 (snip)Also, the guise of not infringing on sovereign rights within Purple Unity is ridiculous. Pegasus members get turned down for treaties they wish to sign for reasons such as "no treaties outside of purple". This is probably because it is technically a protectorate bloc but who knows. Went, I love you. I also agree with most of your post. But on the section I quoted, you know better. Olympus signed two off-sphere treaties while we were in Pegasus. One of them was with your alliance at the time. Pegasus is a protectorate bloc. It is true that the Flag Alliance that oversees Pegasus does not rubber stamp all treaties that are proposed to them by Pegasus members. That's their job. But the policy is not "no treaties outside of purple." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I've never really gotten why some protectors insist on approving of their protectorates treaties anyway. Who are any of us to tell the little guys who they can and can't buddy up with. It's pretty lame imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I've never really gotten why some protectors insist on approving of their protectorates treaties anyway. Who are any of us to tell the little guys who they can and can't buddy up with. It's pretty lame imho. If you had a protectorate who, for instance, signed an MADP with NPO the day before the Karma war, I guess you'd be pretty pissed off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingoist Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 There is an unwritten agreement between the governments of alliances that alliance members are off limits for most kinds of pms from outside parties. I would never sign such an agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I would never sign such an agreement. Which is the reason it's unwritten. They can pull it out of thin air if they'd like. 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.