Lend me a Hand, Neo-Moralists

[HellAngel]

And to think the OP was once a member of Vox Populi... the defendants of the defenseless, the revolution against oppression and arbitrariness.

You're a joke.

[The FSM]

If I were to give my two cents, which I intend to do following this introductory sentence, I would say all the outrage is a product of Planet Bob's recent history. Digiterra very recently emerged from being controlled by a unchallengeable hegemon and its cohorts. Towards the end of its reign ,when it had largely annihilated its traditional foes, the NPO and its cohorts began to abuse their power in increasingly profane ways (you can look at the reams or reasoning for the Karma War, be it various PZI sentences, forced disbandment of alliances, betraying NpO etc etc). As the NPO-NpO War demonstrated, NPO was still unchallengeable in a conventional sense. Thus those opposed to NPO were forced to resort to unconventional resistance which manifested itself most visibly in the form of Vox Populi.

It was Vox Populi's mission to essentially ruin NPO's public credibility by attacking everything they or their allies did as some kind of gross injustice. (Apologies here to many of you, but I am summarizing to make a point). Thus it became almost a habit for the OWF to cry out in anger and incredulity whenever NPO or its allies did something that could be even possibly be construed as 'evil.'

Now that there is no more global hegemon, the OWF masses that had grown so accustomed to reacting with outrage over every perceived injustice, no matter how small, have no bogeyman to direct their outrage at. So instead outrage is directed in every direction and every week we have a new alliance being tarred and feathered as 'the new NPO.'

It was Athens, now its \m/ and co, in a week or two it will be another alliance.

[JWConner]

I guess I am a Neo-Literalist, but I don't see any issue with \m/ et al raiding or warring as they see fit, but I am challenged when it appears to exceed the parameters of an alliance's governing document. I believe in your word, and agreeing to uphold that means you uphold that to the letter.

I also like war.

You shush your mouth Mr Jump-to-the-Darkside Man. War is bad, mkay?

[Kzoppistan]

I am disappointed in the general lack of understanding of what morality is as a sociological concept and how the association seems to group only certain members. That the word has been transformed and twisted into a PR bashing tool rather than the actual meaning shows a distinct lack of insight.

Here, before this thread descends into the stupidity of trading hollow talking points, do yourself a favor and expand your gray matter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality

[JWConner]

If I were to give my two cents, which I intend to do following this introductory sentence, I would say all the outrage is a product of Planet Bob's recent history. Digiterra very recently emerged from being controlled by a unchallengeable hegemon and its cohorts. Towards the end of its reign ,when it had largely annihilated its traditional foes, the NPO and its cohorts began to abuse their power in increasingly profane ways (you can look at the reams or reasoning for the Karma War, be it various PZI sentences, forced disbandment of alliances, betraying NpO etc etc). As the NPO-NpO War demonstrated, NPO was still unchallengeable in a conventional sense. Thus those opposed to NPO were forced to resort to unconventional resistance which manifested itself most visibly in the form of Vox Populi.

It was Vox Populi's mission to essentially ruin NPO's public credibility by attacking everything they or their allies did as some kind of gross injustice. (Apologies here to many of you, but I am summarizing to make a point). Thus it became almost a habit for the OWF to cry out in anger and incredulity whenever NPO or its allies did something that could be even possibly be construed as 'evil.'

Now that there is no more global hegemon, the OWF masses that had grown so accustomed to reacting with outrage over every perceived injustice, no matter how small, have no bogeyman to direct their outrage at. So instead outrage is directed in every direction and every week we have a new alliance being tarred and feathered as 'the new NPO.'

It was Athens, now its \m/ and co, in a week or two it will be another alliance.

So yeah, nobody wants to hear your 2 cents. All your jibber jabber is pointless and you shall not be acknowledged. How dare you not flame the OP for their misguided interpretations and give rational thought a chance. HOW DARE YOU!!!

Not to say I agree with you, but at least you made an effort.

By the way, you're evil.

[The FSM]

So yeah, nobody wants to hear your 2 cents. All your jibber jabber is pointless and you shall not be acknowledged. How dare you not flame the OP for their misguided interpretations and give rational thought a chance. HOW DARE YOU!!!

Not to say I agree with you, but at least you made an effort.

By the way, you're evil.

JWWWW!!!!!!

*shakes fist

Thanks for quoting my post though, you just proved yourself wrong. You acknowledged my post yourself, now I can retire, content with the fact that I managed to get at least one of my more rational posts quoted in a politically charged and heated thread.

Also yes, I am evil. Thank you for the complement :3

[Yggdrazil]

Only by your standards is it wrong. Once again all things are good and evil. One just happens to be more or less of the two from different view points. To state someone is wrong without embracing their culture from a nutural standpoint shows your ignorance.

In the Universities in nations of Digiterra, they record from the distant past a ugly fact, that man before Admin. practiced cannibalism. I do not care that it was a different culture,a different environment or a completely different set of moral values.Cannibalism was wrong then,wrong now and wrong forever: wrong is wrong. If this makes me ignorant then I embrace the name.

I care not also that your culture doesn't recognize bullying as a wrong.My culture says it is. which also means by your own logic failing to consider my culture makes you what you accused me of.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Yggdrazil

[Earogema]

I know starfox and I fought and lose every single battle that I take part two(GW2, GW3, NoCB war) with the exception of the NoV war when I where in TPF, your point is?

My point was, he'll deal with it, as he always has. Your counter questions were easy to answer.

[Atanatar]

In the Universities in nations of Digiterra, they record from the distant past a ugly fact, that man before Admin. practiced cannibalism. I do not care that it was a different culture,a different environment or. completely different set of moral values.Cannibalism was wrong then,wrong now and wrong forever: wrong is wrong. If this makes me ignorant then I embrace the name.

I care not also that your culture doesn't recognize bulling as a wrong.My culture says it is. which also means by your own logic failing to consider my culture makes you what you accused me of.

We aren't advocating cannabalism, we are advocating the right of alliances to state their intentions truthfully, and guide their alliance as they see fit.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Atanatar

[janax]

Free to do what you want, isn't freedom from the consequences of those decisions.

[astronaut jones]

'sides i already established that over 90% of the folks in the other....discussion..... arent doing anything to help FOA other than moan about how terrible tech raiding is

If you believe that most of those people over there are staunchly anti-tech raid, then you're not very bright. IF you believe that, I'm not sure if you do. I know you, you're pretty smart, so I hope that's not the case.

People have a problem with the way raids like that are conducted and with the attitudes of those doing the raidings have, when they're called out for what is an obviously opportunistic raid, coupled with their angsty teenage rebellious attitudes. No one likes whiny brats, and they especially don't like whiny little brats who think they're cool by flaunting the rules and standards of society, and that's what \m/ and PC and to an extent GOONS (on the attitude, they definitely did the opportunistic thing) did.

Edited January 19, 2010 by astronaut jones

[Yggdrazil]

We aren't advocating cannabalism, we are advocating the right of alliances to state their intentions truthfully, and guide their alliance as they see fit.

Did you read the post I was responding to? In essence the poster means there is no absolutes.I gave him one, concluding with one that seems to be one here on Digiterra.

Your sophistry is noted. And will in no means mitigate a three alliance tech raid, which no one but a sophist would try to rationalize. Your bullies; admit it and move on.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Yggdrazil

[hizzy]

Starfox, you make some interesting points. Hell, you've almost made me change my opinion about it completely.

I see the light! Gangbanging a smaller helpless alliance is fine and dandy.

On that note, since you seem to be such a fan of this stuff... how would \m/ feel if I got a couple friends together and just blitzed you guys for a couple evenings? A short war, no terms. Totally cool, right?

Ahh that's rich.

[cookavich]

I'm reminded of the old NPO sig that had a hand squeezing a snake, and it said something to the effect of "If you crave war then why do you squeal when we bring it to you?" Tell me, Mr Fox, if war is so great how come every time we come knocking at your door blowhards, such as yourself, start squealing? Why do you do everything in your power to prevent the very thing that you claim to love so much? You think we want a world without war? You know so very little about us it's a joke. We're bringing it to your front porch, and you've fled out the back.

[Baden-Württemberg]

So you basically say that raiding small alliances for fun is fine, but attacking \m/ in defense of another alliance is cowardly and unjust.

[Haflinger]

Intention is irrelevant; routine tech raiding does in fact cripple small alliances and make them impossible to operate, thus driving them into the insanity that is the treatyweb. This is bad.

[Tick1]

In the Universities in nations of Digiterra, they record from the distant past a ugly fact, that man before Admin. practiced cannibalism. I do not care that it was a different culture,a different environment or a completely different set of moral values.Cannibalism was wrong then,wrong now and wrong forever: wrong is wrong. If this makes me ignorant then I embrace the name.

I care not also that your culture doesn't recognize bullying as a wrong.My culture says it is. which also means by your own logic failing to consider my culture makes you what you accused me of.

I never once said being a non-raiding nation was wrong. I said enforcing your beliefs upon an alliance because you don't agree with their moral values is wrong.

You say cannalbalism is wrong yet animals eat their falling comrades not because the dislike them, but because it'd be a waste to not endulge in them. From my knowledge animals are far more civil than any human.

[hizzy]

You say cannalbalism is wrong yet animals eat their falling comrades not because the dislike them, but because it'd be a waste to not endulge in them. From my knowledge animals are far more civil than any human.

Monkeys flinging scat. Civil.

Normally I'd ask where you come up with this !@#$, but like I just said; monkeys flinging scat.

Edited January 19, 2010 by hizzy

[Bilrow]

Awww where the did the comeuppance disappear that was in the other thread. Too much crying in this one.

[Vilien]

I've stayed out of these threads for as long as possible, because frankly, they're insanely boring. However, the amount of !@#$%^&* contained in the OP warrants a response.

First things first, there seems to be a common, or rather loudly voiced opinion, that moralists are anti-war. That's nonsense. The only moralist who I've seen with a pacifistic leaning is kulomascovia. Tech raiding isn't a real war. Let's face it, you guys deliberately find weak, uncoordinated enemies who you blitz into oblivion. Tech raiding is the most pathetic excuse for actual conflict that I've ever seen, with the possible exception of the sixty page sophistry and posturing fests that we see in threads about tech raiding. Raiding is bullying with little purpose, you gain extremely little in terms of tech and land, and you stand to lose quite a lot. Some of us see attacking inexperienced, unprotected, or small groups of players as rather unnecessary, especially considering that these attacked parties have shown no hostility to you whatsoever.

You, and I'm not speaking just to Starfox here, constantly spout off about how much you just love war. Fantastic! You've demonstrated your ability to defeat unaligned nations and unaligned alliances quite handily. Why don't you take on someone with more inclination to fight back? I'm sure your allies in RoK and Polaris would be all for a sparring match. Hell, you could even take on your enemies. Set up one on one alliance duels, iron out the reparations issue beforehand, and have at it. We'd love to see your cocksure bleating silenced.

Q: What is the problem with a short battle without any ending terms?

Try someone on for size who isn't two, three, or four times smaller than you, cowards.

Q: What is the problem with alliances starting an aggressive war?

None whatsoever, just as there's no problem with us reacting poorly to your aggressive wars.

Q: Why do you wish for a world of peace, a world without war?

I believe I've already spoken about this.

Q: Why don't you just join the GPA, you hippies. Also, please take a shower now and then, and invest some of that hard earned warchest on a comb, a haircut, and a nice suit.

\m/>_<\m/ METALLLLLL \m/>_<\m/

It is quite simple to understand the psyche of a moralist. Lacking the power, the political ability or the determination to do something themselves, they loudly and as often as possible bombard everyone around them with their own moralist viewpoint, in an attempt to sway public opinion away from their adversaries. They aim to demonize the non-moralists to the point where even those that do not share their moralist views still see the non-moralists as a cancer that must be removed, as something that is ruining the environment and denying others enjoyment and opportunity. In this way it allows others to play the role of white knight, thus achieving the moralist's aims without exposing the moralist to any real danger, and costing them nothing but time. Moralism is the ideology of the weak.

I suppose AlmightyGrub, someone who opposed Athens' actions and \m/'s in this case if I'm not mistaken, is politically incapable. Do you ever think before you speak? Where were you when the moralists took action to destroy your hegemony? A large portion of Vox Populi's "moralistic cowards" spent months on your EZI lists, exposed, according to you, to no real danger. I will rue the day when fools like you who so bravely participated in the curbstomps and glorified tech raids of yesteryear are back in power. Weakness is giving in to your most base and bloodthirsty instincts. Weakness is taking from others who you can get away with taking from. Those who act according to their principles, who act with decency, and treat others with respect are stronger than you and your ilk will ever be.

[Tick1]

Vilien my only question too you is where would you stand had this been an alliance that allows tech raiding themselves? I've come to a conclusion on this matter they may help settle future disagreements.

It's immoral to raid an alliance that does not raid in their time of weakness, such as this current situation.

It should how ever not be considered immoral to raid an alliance that does endulge in raiding during that alliances time of weakness.

Would any moralist be willing to accept this statement?

[Vilien]

Vilien my only question too you is where would you stand had this been an alliance that allows tech raiding themselves? I've come to a conclusion on this matter they may help settle future disagreements.

It's immoral to raid an alliance that does not raid in their time of weakness, such as this current situation.

It should how ever not be considered immoral to raid an alliance that does endulge in raiding during that alliances time of weakness.

Would any moralist be willing to accept this statement?

That's an interesting question. It would seem like a bit of poetic justice, and the raiders would probably be getting what they wanted on both sides (i.e. having someone to fight). It's hard to say.

[Tick1]

That's an interesting question. It would seem like a bit of poetic justice, and the raiders would probably be getting what they wanted on both sides (i.e. having someone to fight). It's hard to say.

Well I believe we should take this into consideration and have a world agreement on this because I'm tired of arguing my side.

[hizzy]

Vilien my only question too you is where would you stand had this been an alliance that allows tech raiding themselves? I've come to a conclusion on this matter they may help settle future disagreements.

It's immoral to raid an alliance that does not raid in their time of weakness, such as this current situation.

It should how ever not be considered immoral to raid an alliance that does endulge in raiding during that alliances time of weakness.

Would any moralist be willing to accept this statement?

You're lumping all tech raiders into the same barrel. I think it's been stated multiple times that raiding an completely unaligned nation is not the same as raiding an alliance.

Most alliances who allow raiding, do not allow raiding other alliances. Thus, to claim that it is not immoral to raid an alliance which allows raiding is a rather weak conclusion to come to based on your first statement.

Edit: if you changed your conclusion to "It should how ever not be considered immoral to raid an alliance that does endulge in raiding other alliances during that alliances time of weakness" then I would support it. It would of course lead to a never-ending argument of "how many nations do you need to be considered an alliance" (in which case anyone who says a number greater than 2 is wrong), but whatever.

Edited January 19, 2010 by hizzy

[Tick1]

You're lumping all tech raiders into the same barrel. I think it's been stated multiple times that raiding an completely unaligned nation is not the same as raiding an alliance.

Most alliances who allow raiding, do not allow raiding other alliances. Thus, to claim that it is not immoral to raid an alliance which allows raiding is a rather weak conclusion to come to based on your first statement.

Yes, I am lumping all tech raiders together because any true moralist would consider the raiding of one nation just as sinfull as the raiding of thirty. Also any true raiding alliance knows the importance of having allies. Therefore you shouldn't be worried. My objective is to remove this topic from ever reappearing because Bob can't come to an agreement as to what should and should not be considered immoral.

Edit: Your mad that I'm now looking for a solution rather than a war? Yes, personal agendas do change.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Tick1