Imperial Decree - New Polar Order

[BraveNewWorld]

Perhaps, then, it is a matter of how offended one can be. I find no harm from words, thereby finding no offensive meaning in them when directed at me. I usually take them as a joke when directed as me, though I do not make it usual policy to purposely go out and offend people. This is a different debate for a different time, but that is just giving those slurs more and more power.

Alliances have been destroyed for less. And by all means, I'm not against the idea of packing a punch to those who say "bring it". I laughed at Athens when they did it, and I laugh at \m/ for doing it now. However, with that said, you are setting a dangerous precedence that you will be expected to uphold, or be seen as hypocritical. I air the question again: why just \m/? Is it just because the manner in which they presented themselves? Or is it based largely on the tech raiding?

It is the cumulative behaviour and disrespect they gave our emperor when he tried to talk to them.

[neneko]

It's very amusing to see the moralist front from the karma war and the new year conflict (do we have a name for that yet?) do a 180 when they don't like the alliance being rolled. Screw needing a reason to roll alliances it's cool when we don't like them. In any other case it's a moral outrage though.

Hi nizzle!

Edited January 21, 2010 by neneko

[TheEraser]

N

Perhaps, then, it is a matter of how offended one can be. I find no harm from words, thereby finding no offensive meaning in them when directed at me. I usually take them as a joke when directed as me, though I do not make it usual policy to purposely go out and offend people. This is a different debate for a different time, but that is just giving those slurs more and more power.

Alliances have been destroyed for less. And by all means, I'm not against the idea of packing a punch to those who say "bring it". I laughed at Athens when they did it, and I laugh at \m/ for doing it now. However, with that said, you are setting a dangerous precedence that you will be expected to uphold, or be seen as hypocritical. I air the question again: why just \m/? Is it just because the manner in which they presented themselves? Or is it based largely on the tech raiding?

Did you read. The dow at all? Grub specifically said that their behavior played a major Part in this.

They are the ones that told us to f off. They are the ones that have done nothing to try and make the situation better. They are the ones that don't deserve to exist.

Of you would stop ranting for 10 minutes and look at the facts you would see this.

[BraveNewWorld]

Grub had no buisness getting involved into a mess that was resolved before he even appeared in the channel.

Then he started laying down threats and an ultimatum. As Result he got told to bring it (with the addition of inappropriate slurs which i will not defend in any way).

Would you have behaved differently? If any uninvolved party came to me and behaved like that, i would probably do the same (if i was in a position to make such decisions).

I would certainly have behaved differently! I would not insult and berate someone who is only looking out for a community that they love to be a part of. When an alliances behaviour affects the entire community, and my ability to enjoy the game, I will be concerned. And when that alliance treats my concern with such disrespect, I will certainly want to do something about it.

[SpacingOutMan]

1) I'm probably the most consistent ruler here, outside of a few old standby's. My values and opinions are the same, regardless of what side of the treaty web I happen to be on. You could ever actually say the same.

If you read my posts, you will notice that I am quite consistent, not to tout my own horn. And it's funny, because consistency wasn't your thing, or maybe you have resorted back to your pre-"dove" ways.

2) You're asking for specific information in a roundabout way that has either already been presented to you in the OP or by Grub in a later post, or it's information that I can't give you. You're never going to be satisfied with any answer I do provide you, so you wanna know why \m/ is the only alliance being attacked? Read the OP again, or go talk to Grub. I'm sure he'll deal with you in a more diplomatic fashion than I ever would. I don't like you enough to be diplomatic with you. And liking someone and tolerating someone are two vastly different things, and I can tolerate just about anyone. Remember that before you comment about what I just said.

It has been asked by others by me. What was the response? It was simply danced around. Such an affirmative answer.

3) You are allies to \m/ by proxy (through SF via RoK). You have also cheered on their behaviour since day one.

This is hilarious, because that logic suggests that NpO are allies to \m/ by proxy as well (treaty with MK to CnG to Corp to \m/). The treaty web is a messy place, and everyone attacks, more or less, proxy allies. Your logic utterly fails in that regard. And cheered on their behavior since day one? What drug are you seriously on?

4) It is about \m/'s attitude and your attitude, and just about everyone else's attitude who claimed that they wanted something to be done about it if "you all" didn't like it.

In all honesty, I couldn't give two !@#$s about \m/ or their war. What I give two !@#$s about is now NpO is setting up a dangerous precedence for itself.

You can tell WickedJ that this is better than any aid package any day. Of course, you're all still !@#$%*ing about this, even though you were all begging for someone to do something about it.

We're still !@#$%*ing about this? We were all begging for someone to do something about it? Get the $%&@ out of your hole and see the bright sunshine. I have no qualm with Polaris overall, and I respect much of its membership, but this I have a fundamental problem with, of which was lightly addressed in my previous post toward BraveNewWorld. That fundamental problem is, however, pandering around the fact that either \m/ was guilty of being absolutely rude, and that being the reason for war (which I can understand) or tech raiding an alliance (which I can understand as well). I don't have an inherent right to know the reasons of another alliance, but when they come up with wishy washy reasoning, it only hurts their image. To say this is only for tech raiding or the opposite I cannot speculate because I am not Grub, therefore I do not think what he thinks.

EDIT:

My point is this: this is a dangerous road and should we expect NpO to continue defending tech raided alliances down the road?

Edited January 21, 2010 by SpacingOutMan

[scottimus prime]

I would certainly have behaved differently! I would not insult and berate someone who is only looking out for a community that they love to be a part of. When an alliances behaviour affects the entire community, and my ability to enjoy the game, I will be concerned. And when that alliance treats my concern with such disrespect, I will certainly want to do something about it.

Not many can say that they have ever seen BNW handle herself in a crude manner...

[HeinousOne]

Just because RoK wasn't willing to fight you over this, doesn't mean that it absolves you of having gone after the ally of a friend twice in just over a month now. One has to wonder, since in neither situation you had any involvement, just how high you value those friends.

So you tend to sit back when a friend's friend insults you and respond only with "You are lucky you are a friend of a friend or else I would...."?

Seriously?

So now when an alliance signs a treaty with another alliance they have to abide by that alliances treaties as well? Sounding a bit Imperial now aren't you?

[MikeTheFirst]

Invicta wishes Polaris success in her \m/arch to war. Let the \m/iscreants receive their comeuppance. Let the \m/ight of Polaris bring a swift and decisive victory.

How are we liking these \m/ puns?

o/ Polaris!

Hey psst, you're supposed to suck up to NPO, this is NpO.

[SpacingOutMan]

N

Did you read. The dow at all? Grub specifically said that their behavior played a major Part in this.

They are the ones that told us to f off. They are the ones that have done nothing to try and make the situation better. They are the ones that don't deserve to exist.

Of you would stop ranting for 10 minutes and look at the facts you would see this.

Did you read what I said at all? I'm not denying that behavior was an issue. Did you read the DoW at all, because it contains a lot about tech raiding as well. And I didn't know that Polaris gets to decide who does and doesn't exist. Thankfully I know that not all of Polaris, including Grub, shares this God-Complex you seem to be implying.

[Nizzle]

It's very amusing to see the moralist front from the karma war do a 180 when they don't like the alliance being rolled. Screw needing a reason to roll alliances it's cool when we don't like them. In any other case it's a moral outrage though.

Hi nizzle!

hi neneko!

I think a few parties have done a 180 here, but sometimes politics dictates such a thing.

I think the bit about "needing a reason" to roll an alliance is disingenuous. It starts the whole "They attacked this alliance for no reason and now they are getting attacked." It's also fun to notice various posts from Grub in this thread outlining his reasons. As well as the talks well in advance of said wars. As well as everything else that has happened.

I should think \m/ would be the first to tell you they aren't crying over the war, just that they think NpO is being the morality police or whatever. In essence, NpO is merely doing the same thing \m/ did...attacking whom they want. Granted, NpO did it more professionally.

[ChimpMasterFlash]

He already covered the GOONS bit in one of his earlier posts.......NpO had a diplomatic chat with GOONs and settled the issue in private channels...

They attempted to do the same with \m/....didn't go too well...!@#$ hit the fan...and here we are

the only right answer to the quote in raasaa's post

"Outlawed" by Polaris and others?

But you just raised an interesting point...why not even a treaty cancellation or downgrade with GOONS? Oh that's right, GOONS talked their way out of it. So now it's about how "defiant" they were in the interrogation room? Does being contrite make you less guilty? Because I see GOONS walking out of the courthouse free to pursue a life of raiding with their MDoAP with Polaris intact and no consequences.

I love your posts and I love them even more when they are flat out wrong; not because of wrong information but because of little or NO factual information. You simply have no facts on which to say if there were consequences or not. The act of diplomacy often consists of two nations willing to compromise and listen to what each other have to say. This is what GOONS and NpO have done.

GOONS (as far as I am aware) raided an alliance before this, slap on the wrists, do it again, and get a slap on the wrists again.

I have lost a great deal of respect for GOONS because of this and the fact that \m/ said "lolno" to NpO is, in my opinion, worth a lot more than infra-hugging. It's sad that defending one's position is a foreign concept to Polaris members, even such as yourself AJ.

I know you mean well but again you are misinformed or under informed on the matter to construct an opinion based on the facts since the facts were disclosed behind closed doors. As for the raid if you read the thread you would have seen the misinformation that was corrected not only by people who knew about the raiding but the raiders from other alliances like Kronos and the former member of GOONS who was raiding.

Thats cos GOONS know what serious diplomacy means...and how to go about doing it....ensuring that all involved parties reach a mutually acceptable solution....

How is it you get it and others do not?

[Trace]

So you tend to sit back when a friend's friend insults you and respond only with "You are lucky you are a friend of a friend or else I would...."?

Seriously?

So now when an alliance signs a treaty with another alliance they have to abide by that alliances treaties as well? Sounding a bit Imperial now aren't you?

There were no insults until a head was stuck where it had no reason to be in the first place.

And secondly no I don't consider it a bit Imperial. I consider it this wonderful little thing called friendship.

[Nedved I]

*Looks into thread.....Leaves.

[King Srqt]

Hi Grub, if this turns into something that is actually interesting I will be forever grateful.

Good luck to both sides and someone please escalate

[HeinousOne]

There were no insults until a head was stuck where it had no reason to be in the first place.

And secondly no I don't consider it a bit Imperial. I consider it this wonderful little thing called friendship.

Friendship goes both ways. If one of your friends feels heavily insulted by another friend of yours, how would you handle the situation?

[janax]

Well, it's what he said. There is enough evidence to believe it. Do I still think it may be slightly motivated by the tech raid? Sure.

Umbrella is planning to attack Argent.

Does that make it Umbrella's policy?

We are ready for you, Umbrailures.

[kpcurley]

If a boxer would hit a 12 year old boy, he would get suspended from boxing and arrested by the police. See you in jail NpO

So you admit that \m/ has the mental maturity of a 12yr old boy? I agree.

This analogy is flawed. I am the leader of a small alliance, does that give me the right to go angering every AA bigger than me? I mean after all i'm small and I can always cry bully on the OWF.

[Nizzle]

So you tend to sit back when a friend's friend insults you and respond only with "You are lucky you are a friend of a friend or else I would...."?

Seriously?

So now when an alliance signs a treaty with another alliance they have to abide by that alliances treaties as well? Sounding a bit Imperial now aren't you?

I know this guy, it's my brother's roommate's uncle's boss...

Well, I guess now we know: When you sign with MK, you sign with all of their friend's friend's.

[Krunk the Great]

So now when an alliance signs a treaty with another alliance they have to abide by that alliances treaties as well?

Yes.

We'll expect your support if ICB goes to war.

NSO -- Changin the World since 2009

[Nizzle]

We are ready for you, Umbrailures.

Oh I don't think you are, good sir! We have friend's friend's! Ware the allies of my allies allies!

OK, this is getting confusing.

[AirMe]

\m/ and Polaris have both proven in this incident that neither of them care what their allies think or the position it puts their allies in. As it was said early in the discussion, it's hard to come to a diplomatic solution when neither side wants to use diplomacy. Even though I despise \m/ and wish they would burn, this is a sad event. To echo Archon, Grub, I hope you know what you are doing.

[SWAT128]

Friendship goes both ways. If one of your friends feels heavily insulted by another friend of yours, how would you handle the situation?

Maybe NpO should have asked ask Rok to intervene if they felt so insulted. \m/ apologized for what occurred, but it wasn't good enough for NpO. I really would like to know what NpO expects \m/ to do help solve this situation.

[HeinousOne]

Yes.

We'll expect your support if ICB goes to war.

NSO -- Changin the World since 2009

That one went way over my head, I havn't been around much Krunk.

[neneko]

hi neneko!

I think a few parties have done a 180 here, but sometimes politics dictates such a thing.

I think the bit about "needing a reason" to roll an alliance is disingenuous. It starts the whole "They attacked this alliance for no reason and now they are getting attacked." It's also fun to notice various posts from Grub in this thread outlining his reasons. As well as the talks well in advance of said wars. As well as everything else that has happened.

I should think \m/ would be the first to tell you they aren't crying over the war, just that they think NpO is being the morality police or whatever. In essence, NpO is merely doing the same thing \m/ did...attacking whom they want. Granted, NpO did it more professionally.

They did the exact same thing so we're cheering for them? This part makes no sense to me.

It's an outrage when \m/ does it. It's heroic when NpO does it?

We'll see soon if the situations can compare at all. \m/ tech raided alliances, they attacked doing minimum damage to the nations. Somehow I don't think that's polars goal here. I'd guess cripple or disband would be much closer to their goals here.

[SpacingOutMan]

I know you mean well but again you are misinformed or under informed on the matter to construct an opinion based on the facts since the facts were disclosed behind closed doors. As for the raid if you read the thread you would have seen the misinformation that was corrected not only by people who knew about the raiding but the raiders from other alliances like Kronos and the former member of GOONS who was raiding.

Asked someone about what you said, they linked me, and I do apologize. I was misinformed (I stopped by page 20 and based what I read into that post). Thanks for clarification.

And with that, I wash myself of this thread because I just realized it is just a ragefest already exploded.