So, uh, Athens...

[LegendoftheSkies]

Dig back through your quotes throughout this thread, and start with the ones you were agreeing with. That should give you a pretty good idea of how this topic has nothing to do with the NSO.

But I thought every topic had to do with NSO

[TehChron]

Because I was trying to compare how NpO reacted to two "unjustified" war scenarios. Although I believe tech raiding is fair game, apparently most people don't when Athens does it.

No, you tried saying that war was a tech raid...Didn't you just admit to that a half hour ago?

[Jason8]

Dig back through your quotes throughout this thread, and start with the ones you were agreeing with. That should give you a pretty good idea of how this topic has nothing to do with the NSO.

I don't see why it was even brought up.

Better?

[Choader]

i offer support to take down any ghosts

Seeing how we don't allow raiding, pretty much anyone on our war screen is a ghost. I appreciate the offer to help.

[Ephemeral]

I am posting an utterly redundant post in an utterly redundant thread.

Am I in the drama yet?

[Neo Uruk]

No, you tried saying that war was a tech raid...Didn't you just admit to that a half hour ago?

Or, I said that NSO's war on RAD was basically a huge tech raid. Try using actual words that I've said?

[AlmightyGrub]

I am posting an utterly redundant post in an utterly redundant thread.

Am I in the drama yet?

Nope, you are still irrelevant

[TrotskysRevenge]

Go suck on a cow.

While I appreciate your consideration, I think I have to respectfully decline Chron doing anything of the kind.

And Mathias, 39 nations attacking a 44-man alliance in a "tech raid" is just a euphemism for a war. If it isn't then the Cyberverse truly changed. There seems to be an attitude that it is not sufficient to be in an alliance for protection from tech raids, but said alliance must be strong enough and/or allied with strong enough allies to provide such protection.

Maybe I'm just too old, having started playing in January of 2006, but I don't know when it changed that it was sufficient to just belong to an alliance to be safe from tech raids.

And yes, before you start spouting that the NPO has no right to be speaking, that it's just so much irony, etc etc...the NPO was the first and only alliance to protect unaligneds on our sphere; Revenge Doctrine.

Edited November 14, 2009 by TrotskysRevenge

[TehChron]

I don't see why it was even brought up.

Better?

I'm...sorry? If I had known I was supposed to be proofreading your posts rather than just reading them I would have added little notes on what could be improved, well, no reason I can't start now:

I don't see why it was even brought up.

Better?(Something relevant to the actual topic)

But I thought every topic had to do with NSO

It is a heavy cross we bear.

[Jason8]

While I appreciate your consideration, I think I have to respectfully decline Chron doing anything of the kind.

Hahahaha. Sorry Moo, that got pointed out to me and I edited it out. Not quick enough for you, I see.

[Essenia]

While I appreciate your consideration, I think I have to respectfully decline Chron doing anything of the kind.

And Mathias, 39 nations attacking a 44-man alliance in a "tech raid" is just a euphemism for a war. If it isn't then the Cyberverse truly changed. There seems to be an attitude that it is not sufficient to be in an alliance for protection from tech raids, but said alliance must be strong enough and/or allied with strong enough allies to provide such protection.

Maybe I'm just too old, having started playing in January of 2006, but I don't know when it changed that it was sufficient to just belong to an alliance to be safe from tech raids.

And yes, before you start spouting that the NPO has no right to be speaking, that it's just so much irony, etc etc...the NPO was the first and only alliance to protect unaligneds on our sphere; Revenge Doctrine.

I know NPO dislikes FAN, but do they not even exist now?

[Rebel Virginia]

Because it's Athens' fault that Knights of Ni don't know how to defend their alliance.

If you don't want to be tech raided, you either get strong enough to defend yourself, or find another alliance who will do it for you. Knights of Ni are no exception.

I have never seen "they have no protectorate" or "they are too small" as a justification for tech raiding. When has it become a grievous crime to not have many treaties or be overly large? What I do see, however, is an explanation for why an alliance was chosen to be raided. Because its easy.

[Cyphon88]

So let me clarify a few things (I seem to be doing this a lot of late)

The Athen's charter/tech raiding rules were changed some time last week.

The OWF was not informed because it doesn't concern them (I'm quoting from a post somewhere in the thread of an Athens member). Them being any other player of cybernations. Which is questionable due to the number of small alliances, or non aligned nations who use these forums. In fact it would affect anyone, as it would create the potential to authorize a tech raid against any alliance whatsoever. So not informing the OWF is an interesting decision in that respect.

If a tech raid isn't a declaration of war, and thus 'you can't call your allies to help'. Would I be legitimate in extorting money from NPO at this time, because if I didn't post a DoW it would be a tech raid, and I would have more power than they would (legitimately as they can't act aggressively against another alliance due to terms)?

i just wanna know what the friends of the Knights of Ni will do?

Friends with BAG, BPS, FOK!, German Empire, GRAN, SOLDIER, SPAAA, TAA and TeLF

to be honest, Soldier is not around. not sure on SPAAA, TAA, TeLF, BAG, BPS or GRAN but i know TGE and FOK! are around.

Next we have the idea that the knights of Ni were targeted for their lack of allies. I believe another post in here lists some allies of the Knights of Ni, one of whom was FOK. So will we being see a response from them? Also if they did have allies, the assumption would be that Athens checked this out before the raid to check. So I'll assume despite that post that this is not the case. So in this case, a stronger alliance chose this because of the weakness of this target, and up-scaling of the effective principles of any tech raider.

The next issue would be, is the Moldavi Doctrine going to be activated here? The doctrine gives NSO the supposed legitmacy to intervene, "The New Sith Order shall retain the option, though not the obligation, to declare war in the defense of any alliance that finds itself the victim of foreign aggression." and, "invoke the Doctrine if the determined point of interjection has been attacked unjustly". So the question here becomes, does the NSO think that extortion is acceptable, and will it intervene? I ask this, because while the doctrine gives the NSO the option of doing whatever it wants, there seems to be little indication as to what social or moral boundaries would drive the NSO to act. I don't expect or demand the NSO to act, again I want to clarify this.

Also, due to Athen's rules, any tech raid done just before update, allows 4 Ground attacks and 2 spy attacks. Because a peace was not accepted that day, yes? So a co-ordinated bli-tech raid would allow double profits? This hasn't been the case here, but I'd just looking for clarification.

Tech raiding is not bullying, because they should be able to defend themselves and its not getting pleasure out of the event. If people don't think that this is bullying, I would wonder whether people would consider this mass extortion instead of bullying? Taking money from an alliance or individual because they don't have the power to resist.

There also seems to be a schism as to whether tech raiding/extortion is acceptable, dependent on the strength of the victim. It seems from these actions, that there is some sliding boundary of acceptability of this action within CN. Rather than logical absolutes (if its wrong at one size, why is it wrong at another?)

Beyond that clarification of the issues arising here really questions what the moral basis of people's views are here. I disagree with tech raiding (I'm sure that's apparent), I consider it bullying and extortion, as the initial attack will ONLY occur when it's in the favor of the aggressor, and I see it as a case of might makes right. That said, I don't expect anything to be done here, I don't see NSO coming in here through the MD, because this action is coherent with their motto/ideology. I don't see anyone doing anything here, except a stern talking to of Athens. This includes me, I don't have the might to make my right universal, and so those with the 'lesser' rights among us, will continue to suffer this extortion.

This brave new post hegemony world that Athens subscribes to seems more Hobbesian than Stoicism in it's philosophy.

[Jason8]

I'm...sorry? If I had known I was supposed to be proofreading your posts rather than just reading them I would have added little notes on what could be improved, well, no reason I can't start now:

I can see you're a professional at missing the point.

Dig back through your quotes throughout this thread, and start with the ones you were agreeing with. That should give you a pretty good idea of how this topic has nothing to do with the NSO.

Once again, I saw where it was brought up, but I still don't see a reason why. The two situations are more than just a tad bit different.

[D34th]

Because I was trying to compare how NpO reacted to two "unjustified" war scenarios. Although I believe tech raiding is fair game, apparently most people don't when Athens does it.

NSO was justified in their war against RAD. I will admit that. But instead of swinging their massive ego around and trying to look tough, they could have actually told me that they didn't see the joke as a joke?

Also, think about it. A person that enjoys raiding will OBVIOUSLY join an alliance that enjoys raiding. People left PC and joined Athens. Makes sense, no?

Unavailable Contact, can you find a better argument now to bait NpO please?

And while I always was against tech raid, I agree with you that tech raiding would be a fair game against inactive, unaligned and alliances with less than 5 members. Not against a 40 men alliance.

Edited November 14, 2009 by D34th

[He Who Has No Name]

And yes, before you start spouting that the NPO has no right to be speaking, that it's just so much irony, etc etc...the NPO was the first and only alliance to protect unaligneds on our sphere; Revenge Doctrine.

Ahem.

:: taps foot patiently ::

[relyt92]

Guys if you're going to be angry about people breaking their charter, which Athens may or may not have done, go talk to FoB.

--Prey upon unaligned nations. Don’t attack alliances.

[TehChron]

The next issue would be, is the Moldavi Doctrine going to be activated here? The doctrine gives NSO the supposed legitmacy to intervene, "The New Sith Order shall retain the option, though not the obligation, to declare war in the defense of any alliance that finds itself the victim of foreign aggression." and, "invoke the Doctrine if the determined point of interjection has been attacked unjustly". So the question here becomes, does the NSO think that extortion is acceptable, and will it intervene? I ask this, because while the doctrine gives the NSO the option of doing whatever it wants, there seems to be little indication as to what social or moral boundaries would drive the NSO to act. I don't expect or demand the NSO to act, again I want to clarify this.

Wow, for an irrelevant alliance, we sure are relevant to be brought up in disputes which have nothing to do with us with literally no prior prompting, huh?

Not that you were saying so, Cyphon, it's just that it's a line often used by the same folks that somehow are trying to make the NSO a part of this mess.

[Ephemeral]

Nope, you are still irrelevant

Guess I'm fitting in just fine with both the contents of this thread, its participants and the alliance in question being discussed. \o/

Edited November 14, 2009 by Ephemeral

[Mathias]

While I appreciate your consideration, I think I have to respectfully decline Chron doing anything of the kind.

And Mathias, 39 nations attacking a 44-man alliance in a "tech raid" is just a euphemism for a war. If it isn't then the Cyberverse truly changed. There seems to be an attitude that it is not sufficient to be in an alliance for protection from tech raids, but said alliance must be strong enough and/or allied with strong enough allies to provide such protection.

Maybe I'm just too old, having started playing in January of 2006, but I don't know when it changed that it was sufficient to just belong to an alliance to be safe from tech raids.

And yes, before you start spouting that the NPO has no right to be speaking, that it's just so much irony, etc etc...the NPO was the first and only alliance to protect unaligneds on our sphere; Revenge Doctrine.

Because you forgot that.

This isn't about NPO, and just because you guys have a past doesn't mean you can't weigh in on current events. It may be hilariously ironic, but say whatever you want.

In this case, however, it is a tech raid.

[Neo Uruk]

Unavailable Contact, can you find a better argument now to bait NpO please?

Modesty isn't in everyone's heart I'm calling the war how I see it, Jason's calling it how he sees it. From NSO's viewpoint, yes, it is a good idea to defend your members. The thing is, there wasn't any diplomatic procedure (other than Jason asking Anthony if he wanted a way out)

[TehChron]

I can see you're a professional at missing the point.

Once again, I saw where it was brought up, but I still don't see a reason why. The two situations are more than just a tad bit different.

You can't miss a point when there isn't one to begin with. The one who was off his mark was not I, but yourself.

[Lord Levistus]

...the NPO was the first and only alliance to protect unaligneds on our sphere; Revenge Doctrine.

I thought the Revenge doctrine was some evil machination of the NPO that infringed on the sovereignty of other AA's? I swear i read that somewhere.

[Kim Jaym Il]

but said alliance must be strong enough and/or allied with strong enough allies to provide such protection.

But you can't do that, it's evil! Treaty webs are the spawn of the devil, remember?

[mushi]

Wow, for an irrelevant alliance, we sure are relevant to be brought up in disputes which have nothing to do with us with literally no prior prompting, huh?

Not that you were saying so, Cyphon, it's just that it's a line often used by the same folks that somehow are trying to make the NSO a part of this mess.

you guys put your doctrine out for the world to see, but the have yet to use it. CN hopes your are not all talk but i know NSO is all talk.