\m/, I just want to help

[Marty McFly]

So before canceling did you talk to them? Or was it a 1 strike and your out deal? Allies deserve more than one strike.

Ask Grub

[Kzoppistan]

Do what you please then, I hope the support you think you have materializes.

Those that take a stand against injustice may often find support from surprising places.

[Tarikmo]

I don't see the big deal here, \m/ , PC, and GOONS raided an established alliance with 32, and people are complaining about alliances wanting to defend others without a treaty? So many say "Do something about it" Now that someone wants to do something, you add on more rules. Well you know what, some alliances don't need a treaty to defend others from the greedy. Do something about it.

Not saying this to anyone in particular.

[D34th]

So before canceling did you talk to them? Or was it a 1 strike and your out deal? Allies deserve more than one strike.

“Smart people learn from their mistakes, while wise people learn from the mistakes of others”

If they were paying attention to Athens-KoN! incident they already knew Polaris instance on mass alliance raiders against defenseless alliances what give me two possibilities:

1- They don't pay attention to OWF what is very unlikely considering they are pretty active here and how much the incident passed

2- They don't care about what we think or that our opinion isn't important enough.

[wickedj]

Man up and send some aid yourself, or shut the $%&@ up about it already.

I dont care who tech raids who, hell i personally support tech raiding but then again i dont get to set the rules in CSN. by the way..hows that world tour coming? You been running on and on about it for months and last i saw you were in peace mode

BTW, you amuse me considering you were in PC

Edited January 19, 2010 by wickedj

[AirMe]

“Smart people learn from their mistakes, while wise people learn from the mistakes of others”

If they were paying attention to Athens-KoN! incident they already knew Polaris instance on mass alliance raiders against defenseless alliances what give me two possibilities:

1- They don't pay attention to OWF what is very unlikely considering they are pretty active here and how much the incident passed

2- They don't care about what we think or that our opinion isn't important enough.

Being treatied to them though, at least IMO, entitles them something other than going from ally to rage mode. Hug it out? Talk it out? Something other than straight to where it has gone.

[Groucho Marx]

If alliances like yours don't need a CB for attack defenseless alliances why we need a treaty to defend them?

What exactly is there to defend when the situation had been resolved long before this was brought to the forums? You're over extending your reach, don't be surprised when you fall short on your bold words.

I don't understand why Polaris feels like they can cite sovereignty as a means to defend an alliance that doesn't need defending; The Corporation is already handling that officially. Sure you can say we encroached on FoA's sovereignty by tech raiding them, but they used their sovereignty to get a protectorate and iron out any issues we had with each other diplomatically within hours of the raid. Sure we may not be the bestest of friends but our grievances are settled, and reparations are being paid for the attacks that came after my order to stand down and Corp's issuance of a protectorate with Forces of Annihilation. The only remaining issue right now is that there are certain people who want their egos stroked as a means to validate one's self. I can recommend various other more constructive manners in which one can do that, however I fear these will fall upon deaf ears. So I am here to inform you gentlemen that you should most likely come to the \m/ Triumvirate and let us know exactly what it is you want because I'm having a difficult time discerning what that is with all this saber rattling. I and the rest of the \m/ Government will be waiting in our usual channels.

[D34th]

Being treatied to them though, at least IMO, entitles them something other than going from ally to rage mode. Hug it out? Talk it out? Something other than straight to where it has gone.

In my opinion there are no need of talk about, but this is just me and remember that I'm no part of Polaris gov, so I don't know how it happened or what will happen. But of course, I respect your opinion.

What exactly is there to defend when the situation had been resolved long before this was brought to the forums? You're over extending your reach, don't be surprised when you fall short on your bold words.

I don't understand why Polaris feels like they can cite sovereignty as a means to defend an alliance that doesn't need defending; The Corporation is already handling that officially. Sure you can say we encroached on FoA's sovereignty by tech raiding them, but they used their sovereignty to get a protectorate and iron out any issues we had with each other diplomatically within hours of the raid. Sure we may not be the bestest of friends but our grievances are settled, and reparations are being paid for the attacks that came after my order to stand down and Corp's issuance of a protectorate with Forces of Annihilation. The only remaining issue right now is that there are certain people who want their egos stroked as a means to validate one's self. I can recommend various other more constructive manners in which one can do that, however I fear these will fall upon deaf ears. So I am here to inform you gentlemen that you should most likely come to the \m/ Triumvirate and let us know exactly what it is you want because I'm having a difficult time discerning what that is with all this saber rattling. I and the rest of the \m/ Government will be waiting in our usual channels.

You use your sovereignty to do whatever you want, we use ours to do whatever we want, seens fair to me. If you are worried to know what Grub/Polaris want I would suggest you to talk with him, if you aren't let us do our saber rattling, it's how we have fun. Better than have fun stealing some defenseless people.

Edited January 19, 2010 by D34th

[LegendoftheSkies]

The matter is not resolved from where I sit. If you seriously believe you or anyone can plunge into something, deliberately and intentionally, knowing that there will be a backlash, then do a quick u-turn when convenient, without anyone noticing, you are mistaken.

I see no u-turn of which you speak. To my knowledge, \m/ and PC still don't believe or even pretend to believe that they've done anything wrong.

My main point, as you apparently missed in your eagerness to play your coveted role of the mighty and righteous hero of Cybernations (no offense intended), is that making angry posts on the OWF accomplishes nothing (in fact, in \m/'s case, as you've surely seen in this thread, it merely drives them to rise to the occasion). While the majority of you (excepting those who actually did send some aid) were here raging and posturing, too busy yelling at \m/ to do anything actually productive, we calmly approached PC, \m/ and GOONS and settled things peaceably and diplomatically. See we actually went and did something. In addition we were smart enough to realize that coming on the OWF and antagonizing the raiding alliances wasn't the best way to reach a settlement with them. We talked like civilized people, (and yeah, believe it or not, the evil raiders are actually rather hospitable if you're willing to sit down and talk to them) reached an agreement and our relations with them are as good as they ever were. And yes, even FoA is content with the agreed upon terms.

Though you may not like the way things went down, as far as everyone involved is concerned (as in, people who took part in the conflict), the matter is indeed resolved.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Legend of the Skies

[AlmightyGrub]

What exactly is there to defend when the situation had been resolved long before this was brought to the forums? You're over extending your reach, don't be surprised when you fall short on your bold words.

I don't understand why Polaris feels like they can cite sovereignty as a means to defend an alliance that doesn't need defending; The Corporation is already handling that officially. Sure you can say we encroached on FoA's sovereignty by tech raiding them, but they used their sovereignty to get a protectorate and iron out any issues we had with each other diplomatically within hours of the raid. Sure we may not be the bestest of friends but our grievances are settled, and reparations are being paid for the attacks that came after my order to stand down and Corp's issuance of a protectorate with Forces of Annihilation. The only remaining issue right now is that there are certain people who want their egos stroked as a means to validate one's self. I can recommend various other more constructive manners in which one can do that, however I fear these will fall upon deaf ears. So I am here to inform you gentlemen that you should most likely come to the \m/ Triumvirate and let us know exactly what it is you want because I'm having a difficult time discerning what that is with all this saber rattling. I and the rest of the \m/ Government will be waiting in our usual channels.

I am not citing anything. My message is extremely simple, relies on nothing, stands alone and has no regard for anything other then itself. It is not a threat, it is a promise, it is no idle or ill-considered. What it costs? Not really relevant to me, I don't hug my pixels at night.

If you want to discuss it, I am more than happy to do so. Always open to discussions.

Xiphosis, you amuse me.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

Generally speaking it's okay to object to somebody beating their wife without suddenly becoming liable for her hospital bill. I'm failing to see the great sweep of logic that somehow makes anybody claiming FOA got the shaft responsible for damages they had no involvement in. It would be an interesting application of justice, the Screwed Samaritan policy as it were.

It's just a shallow rhetorical dodge, nothing more.

I dont think anyone is particularly concerned about FoA, particularly given their choice to lay down and take it without a fight.

What people are concerned about is the precedent. Long standing custom on Planet Bob allows war for no cause against the unaligned, like it or not. But that same long standing custom prohibits this in all other cases. If this act stands without visible rebuke, it will set a new precedent, eliminating that long standing custom and replacing it with a new one, the one that the aggressors have so vehemently argued through this thread - that no one is safe, that war for no reason is now acceptable against everyone, not just the unaligned.

Raiding the unaligned may always be acceptable, simply because the aligned have no self-interest in stopping it and the unaligned have no power to stop it. But "raiding" the aligned is a different matter entirely. If accepted as precedent that could come back in 6 months to bite anyone here, every alliance is similarly threatened so a great many people have a self-interest in rejecting it. And those who do engage in tech-raiding have a double interest in rebuking this as well, to emphasise that *they* at least do honour the age-old customs that \m/ is so loudly rejecting, that *they* at least do aim to act with honour which \m/embers in previous pages have disclaimed outright.

[RandomInterrupt]

Being treatied to them though, at least IMO, entitles them something other than going from ally to rage mode. Hug it out? Talk it out? Something other than straight to where it has gone.

I am not privy to the specifics, not being in government, but if you remember this is the second tech raid by GOONS in which Polar might have taken some issue with. Is it not conceivable that there may have been a discussion at that point, and we could be slightly beyond the hugging it out phase?

How many warnings does one get before they become actions? Again just speculation, and I am no more privy to the discussions than yourself, but there is some food for thought.

[Kevin McDonald]

Speaking as FoA's protector, I consider this matter closed.

If anyone - anyone - would like to discuss it further, feel free to contact me.

[Dread]

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.

[AirMe]

Speaking as FoA's protector, I consider this matter closed.

If anyone - anyone - would like to discuss it further, feel free to contact me.

As much as I dislike iClean, Ronin has your back.

[Kevin McDonald]

As much as I dislike iClean, Ronin has your back.

Thank you.

[WarriorConcept]

I await polar's defense of all alliances being raided on planet bob if this takes a step farther than a treaty cancellation.

[Van Hoo III]

And yes, even FoA is content with the agreed upon terms.

The most important part of this entire thread.

[salithus]

I am not privy to the specifics, not being in government, but if you remember this is the second tech raid by GOONS in which Polar might have taken some issue with. Is it not conceivable that there may have been a discussion at that point, and we could be slightly beyond the hugging it out phase?

How many warnings does one get before they become actions? Again just speculation, and I am no more privy to the discussions than yourself, but there is some food for thought.

That's right, you're not in Polar or GOONS government. In fact, it sounds a lot like you're confusing "Polar" and "some of Polar's membership". Then again, using the word "might" to leave yourself an unobvious qualifier so you can say that your statement is 100% factual means you're probably confusing them intentionally.

You can speculate idly all you want, I mean it's your "right" or whatever, but it's pretty bad form to do so about an ally.

As I said earlier, if anyone has some evidence that Polar has issues with GOONS that haven't been communicated through the proper channels and addressed like adults instead of this useless childish banter some of you seem to live off of, I'd be both amazed and interested to hear it. Until then, everyone please keep in mind that the rantings and ravings are just that.

[Fantastico]

Speaking as FoA's protector, I consider this matter closed.

If anyone - anyone - would like to discuss it further, feel free to contact me.

Sigrun Vapneir explained above why this is still a very open matter.

Secondly, the FoA exchanged their right to condemn their attackers for your protection. They also surrendered their ability to ask for reparations (other than reps the few that occurred following this agreement) to you by accepting the terms of your protection agreement. You chose not to approach the attackers for full reparations.

I understand all of that and empathize with you, as I told you the other day. "Raid-peace & protectorate sent" for the FoA is not what keeps this issue open.

If a group of leaders wants to sweep this under the rug like it never happened, that is their call.

Frankly, it stinks and I think you and your allies know it.

Some here are so worried about any damage being done to their new blocs and treaties that they have forgotten their purpose.

edited for accuracy

Edited January 19, 2010 by Fantastico

[Kevin McDonald]

You approached the attackers for those reparations and they refused you.

Incorrect.

I did not approach their attackers for reps, as I did not believe them to be warranted. I have, however, spoken with the attackers about reps for any attacks after peace. Those will be paid.

I repeat, FOA CONSIDERS THIS MATTER CLOSED.

[Fantastico]

Incorrect.

I did not approach their attackers for reps, as I did not believe them to be warranted. I have, however, spoken with the attackers about reps for any attacks after peace. Those will be paid.

I repeat, FOA CONSIDERS THIS MATTER CLOSED.

I apologize for mixing your note up with that of another ally of yours.

"In regard to your question, The Corporation will not ask our allies in \m/ to pay reps, but will not cut FoA without help. If we are unable to help them there are people who have suggested they will."

I stand corrected here, but again, this is not why this issue is still open.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Fantastico

[Groucho Marx]

I apologize for mixing your note up with that of another ally of yours.

"In regard to your question, The Corporation will not ask our allies in \m/ to pay reps, but will not cut FoA without help. If we are unable to help them there are people who have suggested they will."

I stand corrected here, but again, this is not about why this issue is still open.

See, now that's the problem. The issue has long since been over with. Only a handful of people are attempting to keep it open for their personal reasons.

[Kevin McDonald]

I stand corrected here, but again, this is not about why this issue is still open.

It should be. What happened here is 3 alliances raided another. Those 3 alliances took quite a PR beating, agreed to peace, and the alliance that was attacked has benefited from a protectorate and forthcoming aid.

What else is there to resolve? If it's the entire issue of raiding, dare I say that none of the 3 alliances in question started it, and even if the three alliances in question agreed to stop raiding, it would still exist.

What is left to resolve regarding the matter of \m/, GOONS and PC raiding FoA? Please, tell me.

[AlmightyGrub]

I see no u-turn of which you speak. To my knowledge, \m/ and PC still don't believe or even pretend to believe that they've done anything wrong.

My main point, as you apparently missed in your eagerness to play your coveted role of the mighty and righteous hero of Cybernations (no offense intended), is that making angry posts on the OWF accomplishes nothing (in fact, in \m/'s case, as you've surely seen in this thread, it merely drives them to rise to the occasion). While the majority of you (excepting those who actually did send some aid) were here raging and posturing, too busy yelling at \m/ to do anything actually productive, we calmly approached PC, \m/ and GOONS and settled things peaceably and diplomatically. See we actually went and did something. In addition we were smart enough to realize that coming on the OWF and antagonizing the raiding alliances wasn't the best way to reach a settlement with them. We talked like civilized people, (and yeah, believe it or not, the evil raiders are actually rather hospitable if you're willing to sit down and talk to them) reached an agreement and our relations with them are as good as they ever were. And yes, even FoA is content with the agreed upon terms.

Though you may not like the way things went down, as far as everyone involved is concerned, the matter is indeed resolved.

My friend

Things may well be resolved to your satisfaction, but you have apparently extremely narrow views on what constitutes resolution if your post is correct.

As for me and my house, let me get this straight. The whole world wants to go to war, I actually promise I will and you all whine? I don't follow the logic.