Starcraftmazter Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 This is really a terrible apology. It boils down to 'sorry you got offended but that's how we roll'. You aren't at all sorry about the fact that your members were using racist epithets to a foreign ambassador. Considering what Nordreich got rolled for (the suggestion that some of them might be racist), one would expect better control from a modern alliance, particularly one which is already treated with a great deal of suspicion. A lot of people disagree with the circumstances under which Nordreich was attacked in the war you refer to, me included. It still happened in the Hegemony era when alliances were attacked for all sorts of immoral reasons. I agree with you on the apology part, but in my opinion it is not the message of the apology but what was apologized for that is incorrect. I believe the conduct of the government officials of \m/ in regards to what happened is what needs to be apologized for - not the irrelevant things said by random members of \m/. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jackson Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Like it or not, a very large portion of alliance business these days does occur on IRC. That fact alone makes it an IC venue. I wasn't aware that diplomacy was carried out in the public channels of alliances. If Grub were to have been harassed like that inside of a conference channel or through a query he sent to government, then I'd agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Indeed. I was a vocal opponent of the Nordreich war myself. But \m/ have taken the step that Nordreich never did – bringing racist comments into CN. [OOC: IRC channels are a weird mix of IC and OOC. But when the conversation is about CN issues and a CN alliance, to me it is IC. You see IRC log dumps all over the IC forums.] I believe the conduct of the government officials of \m/ in regards to what happened is what needs to be apologized for - not the irrelevant things said by random members of \m/. All members represent their alliance to some extent. /b/ are still on many people's hate list because of the actions of non-government members, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 So if Grub rolls you for them, you won't call in your allies? Wouldn't count on it...which last time I checked the treaty net, means this might just get a little larger than perhaps some people have in mind. I think the basic problem is that \m/ thinks that they are coming off like (warning: explicit lyrics).When to some they are coming off like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 But \m/ have taken the step that Nordreich never did – bringing racist comments into CN. [OOC: IRC channels are a weird mix of IC and OOC. But when the conversation is about CN issues and a CN alliance, to me it is IC. You see IRC log dumps all over the IC forums.] I hold views to the contrary, so I think that's where us and others will need to agree to disagree. In the end, since this is a gray area to say the least, I don't think such actions should have formal IC repercussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) I normally agree with Bob Janova, but lately... I don't really understand your point. You say that outrage and even conflict is justified as Nordreich got rolled for less (which isn't really true when you consider the aesthetic of the alliance but that's a debate for somewhere else) and then say it was an illegitimate CB in the first place. The real mistake \m/ made was thinking that Planet Bob was ready to hear this apology. You should have kept it in private because you should know by now that peace brings out the moralist attack dogs in everyone. [ooc]If we were going to crucify every alliance whose members made off-colour jokes on irc, then we'd have one hell of a job ahead of us[/ooc]. If this announcement was being made by MK, you'd all be kissing their butts for how honourable it was. Anyway, obviously people are actively trying to dislike you, and as such you have to decide to accept being hated... or wear a mask for the rest of the world while doing your own thing internally. I don't know the nature of these comments, but some pretty distasteful jokes get thrown around in most alliance channels. Should have just swept it under the rug like most people would. Good luck with the sensitivity counselling I know you're putting your members through. Edited January 20, 2010 by Drostan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I think you pretty much grasped my point, actually. It's akin to advising someone not to walk through a dodgy part of town carrying a gold bar – it's still not right when they get it stolen, but it was stupid of them to put themselves in that position. Similarly, it might not be right to roll \m/ for these comments (and their failure to really apologise for them; the OP is far more 'this is what we do, live with it' than actual contrition), but considering how many 'moralist attack dogs' are out to get them at the moment, it was stupid of them to put themselves in the position where they could get rolled for it. [OOC: The illegitimacy of the Nordreich CB was largely that the material was obtained by borderline stalking and OOC, off-site material on members that was nothing to do with CN. That wouldn't be true of a war started over comments on CN IRC. GW1 would be a better comparison, with seriously off-colour comments being made in CN-related channels.] If this announcement was being made by MK, you'd all be kissing their butts for how honourable it was. MK would not have made this announcement, for two reasons. Firstly, most of their off-colour humour is in private channels; they have worked hard to counter the accusation of being 'LUE 2.0', and restricting the lulz culture in public areas is part of that. And secondly, if they apologise for something, they actually apologise, and make sure it doesn't happen again – as opposed to this thread which does no such thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I think you pretty much grasped my point, actually. It's akin to advising someone not to walk through a dodgy part of town carrying a gold bar – it's still not right when they get it stolen, but it was stupid of them to put themselves in that position. Similarly, it might not be right to roll \m/ for these comments (and their failure to really apologise for them; the OP is far more 'this is what we do, live with it' than actual contrition), but considering how many 'moralist attack dogs' are out to get them at the moment, it was stupid of them to put themselves in the position where they could get rolled for it.[OOC: The illegitimacy of the Nordreich CB was largely that the material was obtained by borderline stalking and OOC, off-site material on members that was nothing to do with CN. That wouldn't be true of a war started over comments on CN IRC. GW1 would be a better comparison, with seriously off-colour comments being made in CN-related channels.] MK would not have made this announcement, for two reasons. Firstly, most of their off-colour humour is in private channels; they have worked hard to counter the accusation of being 'LUE 2.0', and restricting the lulz culture in public areas is part of that. And secondly, if they apologise for something, they actually apologise, and make sure it doesn't happen again – as opposed to this thread which does no such thing. Yeah, MK's public channel never has offensive material in it. My point is not to tear MK down, but rather to suggest that people approach \m/ differently (whether rightly or wrongly heh). It's difficult because I don't quite understand how this situation occured and what was said. It's obviously worse when people are publicly mouthing off to the leader of another alliance, but even still. The way I see it, \m/ is being who \m/ is and apparently that includes off-colour humour. They may not be the best at apologizing, but I still think that they are trying to make the effort at all deserves some credit given their usual attitude. I still think you have to read this in pretty bad faith to come down on them so hard. I don't promote censoring my internal community for the betterment of foreign visitors usually. Obviously there are limits to that and those may have been exceeded here, but that's what this apology is all about, no? \m/ doesn't tell its members how to act, and as such, those partaking in the community may expect some distasteful stuff. I actually prefer this approach to alliances that gag their own members. I still feel alliance leadership's foremost responsibility is to the liberty and rights of their own members and only secondarily to others. Obviously it's different if leadership was making racist remarks towards Grub. I doubt any apology would be enough there. Ultimately it's up to Grub whether he wants to take this apology seriously or not, but I don't see it as a back-handed apology so much as trying to explain how it happened. And here I always thought I was the pessimist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Some context might have helped clarify things. The things we \m/emebers say and do to each other and our close friends is not and should not be the things we say and do to vistors, especially visitors who come for diplomatic reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 \m/: more than a little rough around the edges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 This definitely isn't \m/ that I remember. At least the last one was ran with some dignity. We didn't go around saying the n-word like there was no tomorrow. In your failed attempts to be these people jumping around a school bus, the reality of it all is yall are about as hardcore as e-avril lavigne flcking off planet bob. It's cute. it's /b/ all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I was actually wondering how long it'll take until #mushroom is brought up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 This definitely isn't \m/ that I remember. At least the last one was ran with some dignity. We didn't go around saying the n-word like there was no tomorrow. In your failed attempts to be these people jumping around a school bus, the reality of it all is yall are about as hardcore as e-avril lavigne flcking off planet bob. It's cute.it's /b/ all over again. That is pretty harsh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suryanto tan Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Do not apologize when you do not even feel sorry. If you do apologize, mean it. [OOC] That an IC action gets OOC responses is unacceptable. That I agree. For example: If you attack other nation in game, nuke him 1000 times, and that ruler come to your house and beat you up, that is NOT OK. But the other way round, when the OOC action get IC responses, I think that should be OK. For example: Some member of an alliance act racist and start calling people with the N words. If people decide to attack their nation over that, I fully support them. May be that can make them do not act stupid next time. It is a virtual nation, even when you ZI him 100 times, it is not the end of the world. [/OOC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loodoyaye II Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Any minute now, banned member (filtered? starts with an M, and loved Boxxxy) is going to show up with screenies that prove that \m/ is a stormfront operation and is in league with NoR.Wait for it... Wait for it... NoR is NOT a Stormfront operation. If you have any issues with us, feel free to contact us in private or open a new topic, keep my alliance out of this mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 NoR is NOT a Stormfront operation. If you have any issues with us, feel free to contact us in private or open a new topic, keep my alliance out of this mess. You have thoroughly missed the point of my post. Check your inbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 NoR is NOT a Stormfront operation. If you have any issues with us, feel free to contact us in private or open a new topic, keep my alliance out of this mess. I always thought it was NoV that was attacked back in the day anyways, not sure why NoR is being brought up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Well, I was gonna try to get my alliance to defend \m/ because we go back so far, but with an OOC attack that might be tough sell given what happened the last time Polar had \m/ in its sights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Clearly you have no idea what this whole thing relates to. You and every other mindless twit who has rolled his eye and ''boys will be boys'''d the situation have no concept of what this is about. ODN are irrelevant to this discussion, I suggest strongly that you make yourself scarce before embarrassing yourself even further.SCM, seriously, since when do I subject myself to the rantings of racist thugs for casual entertainment. I thought you knew me a lot better than that, and I honestly thought I knew you a whole lot better as well. Your posts disappoint me in ways you will never comprehend. so since none of us know wabout the situation, i guess we can guess. Here's mine: you went to negotiate something with \m/, failed, saw a racial slur and found a psuedo-victory by being an $@! about things that you really could just brush off. right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 lol, synirc Why would anyone take the time to jump on another server just to visit some dumb alliances dumb public channel? I can't even be bothered to visit most of the channels on Coldfront. In any case, has any actual action been taken yet or did \m/ just piss off the wrong people and try to get out of it by throwing two or three "oops" sentences up in public? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketther Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 so since none of us know wabout the situation, i guess we can guess. Here's mine: you went to negotiate something with \m/, failed, saw a racial slur and found a psuedo-victory by being an $@! about things that you really could just brush off. right? I would have thought that posting in an \m/ apology thread would at least point your guessing in a more unbiased direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayzell Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 \m/ has pretty clearly admitted to the IC nature of this situation by posting this in an IC forum. It has always been the case that IRC conversations can be IC whenever the context pertained to Digiterra (i.e. many CB's have included IRC logs). I think the point that Grub wasn't just idling in #\m/, but came on a specific diplomatic mission, is an important one, as it establishes the foundation of the situation being IC, not OOC. I just do not see how you can argue that insulting a foreign alliance leader on a diplomatic mission in one of the most common mediums can be construed as OOC. This also is not even much of an apology, as it contradicts itself by saying "it is not the \m/ way" yet in the next paragraph stating " these sort of comments are said all the time" which would indicate such comments are in fact the \m/ way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordAkanata Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 so since none of us know wabout the situation, i guess we can guess. Here's mine: you went to negotiate something with \m/, failed, saw a racial slur and found a psuedo-victory by being an $@! about things that you really could just brush off. right? No, based on what I hear a more likely timeline is like this: Grub goes to \m/ about their tech-raiding policy \m/embers make off-color remarks about Grub Grub is offended, and thus sees \m/ negotiating in bad faith Grub leaves and gets Polaris ready for war The entire discussion about what's offensive and what's not is pretty moot. It's just a stupid idea to do anything possibly offensive around someone who isn't a friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 \m/ has pretty clearly admitted to the IC nature of this situation by posting this in an IC forum. It has always been the case that IRC conversations can be IC whenever the context pertained to Digiterra (i.e. many CB's have included IRC logs). I think the point that Grub wasn't just idling in #\m/, but came on a specific diplomatic mission, is an important one, as it establishes the foundation of the situation being IC, not OOC. I just do not see how you can argue that insulting a foreign alliance leader on a diplomatic mission in one of the most common mediums can be construed as OOC. This also is not even much of an apology, as it contradicts itself by saying "it is not the \m/ way" yet in the next paragraph stating " these sort of comments are said all the time" which would indicate such comments are in fact the \m/ way. I believe if you read Merrie Melodies clarification, it's more that it's their own humor against each other and should not be used against foreign entities. As well the fact that they say it's made normally further serves as a warning to future parties who might be interested in visiting the channel to know what they're getting into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valtamdraugr Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Rude is rude and "humor" or not... being on friendly terms or not, that type of behavior should not be tolerated. It's a shame to think that, in this day and age, we still have things like this to deal with. 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.