So, uh, Athens...

[enderland]

It means that if they have a sense of community they can get through this, and if they fold they're just a bunch of ghosts sharing an AA.

Athens got through what NPO forced them through. Does that justify it?

[Neo Uruk]

Athens got through what NPO forced them through. Does that justify it?

There was more than minimal damage there. Thanks, though, for comparing extortion and all that to a simple raid.

[enderland]

There was more than minimal damage there. Thanks, though, for comparing extortion and all that to a simple raid.

But they still survived - so based on what you said, it would appear that you should have no qualms about what NPO did to them (since causing pain/suffering is ok if you survive, since your community is healthy enough then).

[Neo Uruk]

But they still survived - so based on what you said, it would appear that you should have no qualms about what NPO did to them (since causing pain/suffering is ok if you survive, since your community is healthy enough then).

Please, show me where I said KoN should have absolutely no qualms over this.

[Shinpah]

Good to see that you have an excellent sense of irony.

Indeed

I still feel that I must assert the fundamental difference between all out war and a tech raid though; we were hardly rolling them

[Brenann]

So now we see the treaty between KofN and M*A*S*H... what is the official M*A*S*H stance now that this treaty has had its dust brushed off?

[enderland]

Please, show me where I said KoN should have absolutely no qualms over this.

I wasn't implying that. You mentioned that it was ok for Athens/FoB to attack KoN, for the reasoning that their community basically should be able to endure it.

What then makes that different from NPO imposing ridiculous reps on Athens, in principle?

[Neo Uruk]

I wasn't implying that. You mentioned that it was ok for Athens/FoB to attack KoN, for the reasoning that their community basically should be able to endure it.

What then makes that different from NPO imposing ridiculous reps on Athens, in principle?

Absolutely nothing. Athens had disagreements about it, but they got through with their heads held high. NPO didn't stay in the back of Londo's mind. At times, it was the only thing he wasn't thinking about.

[Jack Diorno]

I wasn't implying that. You mentioned that it was ok for Athens/FoB to attack KoN, for the reasoning that their community basically should be able to endure it.

What then makes that different from NPO imposing ridiculous reps on Athens, in principle?

From all the land you have, I would assume you are an avid tech raider, is tech raiding a nation in a 5 man alliance or on 'none', not the same thing as raiding a nation in a 39 nation alliance, in principle?

I assume far more so then attacking an alliance for a week with nuclear weapons and then forcing them to pay you for peace.

[enderland]

Absolutely nothing. Athens had disagreements about it, but they got through with their heads held high. NPO didn't stay in the back of Londo's mind. At times, it was the only thing he wasn't thinking about.

So long as you feel there were no problems in imposing reps beyond the amount of tech Athens had at the time, I guess there is no reason you would ever believe that there should be any sort of common agreed upon morality in this planet.

[enderland]

From all the land you have, I would assume you are an avid tech raider, is tech raiding a nation in a 5 man alliance or on 'none', not the same thing as raiding a nation in a 39 nation alliance, in principle?

I assume far more so then attacking an alliance for a week with nuclear weapons and then forcing them to pay you for peace.

I've addressed the 'in principle' part before - as someone who founded an alliance, I have intimate understandings of "when you get community" and it is not with 5 people.

[Tromp]

I've addressed the 'in principle' part before - as someone who founded an alliance, I have intimate understandings of "when you get community" and it is not with 5 people.

How is "having a community" relevant?

[Jack Diorno]

I've addressed the 'in principle' part before - as someone who founded an alliance, I have intimate understandings of "when you get community" and it is not with 5 people.

I have founded an alliance before, the Abortion disco, and a community was born and active with just 3 people. I fail to see how you can condone and participate in an attack on the 3 man community in this case, and yet once you add a few more nations you are suddenly outraged.

[enderland]

How is "having a community" relevant?

This will be rather OOC

Because I have no qualms about someone 'playing' this game, and having a single nation, and then losing it, because they choose to entirely not participate in the game itself, because as a whole, CN is a rather poor game. The only "gameplay" for the most part takes place in the form of interactions between other nations.

That gameplay is the gameplay I respect the most. So actions which would negatively contribute to that, ie the community or social interactions, are things I choose not to do. Those who have only a "none" nation or a 3 man AA are not partaking in the game of CN, and therefore, I have no qualms about seeing them raided.

However, when you have an alliance of 39, there is very clearly some community in existence that in my opinion should be respected.

[erikz]

No member of Athens may post here until further notice.

Gag orders are so 2008.

[scythegfx]

I have founded an alliance before, the Abortion disco, and a community was born and active with just 3 people. I fail to see how you can condone and participate in an attack on the 3 man community in this case, and yet once you add a few more nations you are suddenly outraged.

Because you're OUTRAGEOUS, Jack. Obviously.

[enderland]

I have founded an alliance before, the Abortion disco, and a community was born and active with just 3 people. I fail to see how you can condone and participate in an attack on the 3 man community in this case, and yet once you add a few more nations you are suddenly outraged.

If you are active enough to form a community of three people, then you will most certainly have found a protector and not even be "eligible" for being raided.

[Jack Diorno]

If you are active enough to form a community of three people, then you will most certainly have found a protector and not even be "eligible" for being raided.

How does that bear any significance? It is still a community, and it may or may not be protected.

You come here throwing your moral outrage around like a sledgehammer, and yet you participate in the very same actions you decry?

As per your previous statement about Athens destroying commnities in the same way as the NPO did, you are either telling me that you are responsible for destroying communities in the same manner as the NPO due to your own tech raiding, or you are a gigantic hypocrite.

Opportunism at its best.

[Tromp]

This will be rather OOC

Because I have no qualms about someone 'playing' this game, and having a single nation, and then losing it, because they choose to entirely not participate in the game itself, because as a whole, CN is a rather poor game. The only "gameplay" for the most part takes place in the form of interactions between other nations.

That gameplay is the gameplay I respect the most. So actions which would negatively contribute to that, ie the community or social interactions, are things I choose not to do. Those who have only a "none" nation or a 3 man AA are not partaking in the game of CN, and therefore, I have no qualms about seeing them raided.

However, when you have an alliance of 39, there is very clearly some community in existence that in my opinion should be respected.

You still haven't proved how "having a community" is relevant to this topic.

I can agree with the OOC reasonings for the most part, but IC I disagree. It's is arbitrary to say the least, and it ignores the fact that the action (raiding) still is the same.

[Gofastleft]

If you are active enough to form a community of three people, then you will most certainly have found a protector and not even be "eligible" for being raided.

Of course last week you could have said "If you are active enough to form a community of 39 people, then you are not even "eligible" for being raided."

[Lord Rune]

Of course last week you could have said "If you are active enough to form a community of 39 people, then you are not even "eligible" for being raided."

Time marches on!

[Co God Ben]

Penkala unless alliances are willing to stand up to them it doesn't matter.

There is no good or evil: only power and those too weak to seek it.

So unless you are willing to do something about this, I suggest you just sit back and enjoy the popcorn.

Just like the Emerald Affairs, right?

Hi John.

[enderland]

How does that bear any significance? It is still a community, and it may or may not be protected.

You come here throwing your moral outrage around like a sledgehammer, and yet you participate in the very same actions you decry?

As per your previous statement about Athens destroying commnities in the same way as the NPO did, you are either telling me that you are responsible for destroying communities in the same manner as the NPO due to your own tech raiding, or you are a gigantic hypocrite.

Opportunism at its best.

As an aside, it's ironic to see someone in Athens making the statement about "participating in actions you decry" given how the whole "Karma" thing worked out, and the number of times Athens people said "Karma is a !@#$%*" to NPO

Regardless, no alliance I've been part of has ever raided essentially an entire alliance at once ('course many of the lower NS nations in KoN were not hit, but I gather that was merely the result of the lower NS members of FoB and Athens not being as active as the top fifteen nations of KoN were all hit in this raid). If one person raiding an alliance is the same as an entire alliance raiding, I fear for your views on a rogue or things of that nature - that seems to imply there is no difference between a single nation action and an entire alliance action.

In addition, when I raid, I almost never bother to check for other people willing to raid with me - the only exceptions come when other people present me with "raidable" people. Never have I posted on forums somewhere "hey this entire alliance is good to hit, join on in, it's going to be a party!" and especially not with respect to an alliance of the size of KoN.

Destroying a community is something that is quite difficult to do as a single nation, or even several - however when the top fifteen nations of your alliance are all raided in the manner of a few hours, that has a much MUCH more drastic effect on your community than a single nation ever could.

If you cannot see the difference between getting hit with an entire alliance tech raid and a single nation (or even handful) and the effects that will have on a community, well, I guess I won't be able to get anywhere in this discussion.

[enderland]

Of course last week you could have said "If you are active enough to form a community of 39 people, then you are not even "eligible" for being raided."

I'm not sure what this is trying to say.

[Mussolandia]

Since the concept of "evil" is discussed far too often for my taste, I pose a conundrum to you. Is there that more closely resembles "evil" as attacking a defenseless foe in overwhelming numbers, confident in the fact that retaliation would only imply even greater damage to the aggrieved party?

I think this is as close as we get.

To be perfectly honest, I have no opinion on the matter, other than my annoyance with individuals who wish to brand the concept of war with funny epithets such as "tech raid", but this has been covered by Athens themselves in another thread.