Imperial Decree - New Polar

[scutterbug]

Here we have Grub and his puppets trying to play world police D: good to see it so far failing massively. Grubs ego needs a good dent in it.

[Starfox101]

We are not supporting you, we are supporting PC.

True, I guess I should have worded it "displaying their displeasure with Polaris" rather than "supporting \m/.

[Baldr]

Without that flowery declaration you posted there would be no war, that is fact.

Without your alliance and several others ganging up on a small alliance and rolling them for absolutely no reason other than "we are bigger, we can", this war would not exist.

Even after that was done, simply saying "We'll stop raiding alliances" would have worked. Instead, your response was "We'll do whatever we want, you can't stop us, if you don't like it do something about it".

I'm not sure how you can consider \m/ an agressor. A belligerant, sure, but not an agressor in this war.

It's because you attacked FoA. Yes, you claim that rolling a small alliance doesn't make you an aggressor, that you have the right to do whatever the heck you want to them because they are small and weak. You're a bunch of bullies who are now crying because someone got tired of your nonsense.

[auto98]

I'm getting real tired of the argument that the attack was right because the New Polar Order felt it was right. That really makes no sense at all.

Really? So you now you know how it feels I guess.

[Vhalen]

So, you're asking us to brown-nose him. Any time someone is annoyed with us, we should try to appease them? When someone openly states multiple times that they'll go to war with us, we should kiss his feet? I know those three members screwed up, and we apologized for that. What else does Grub want, a cake?

Civility and butt-kissing are two different things. If you don't comprehend that, perhaps it's safer for you to avoid such trying things as conversations.

Why do you have such an interest in making sure \m/'s charter is enforced?

Well, it seems to me that if it isn't being adhered to, then it isn't a valid document. Perhaps that means they're unaligned?

Without that flowery declaration you posted there would be no war, that is fact.

I imagine it would just be a raid, instead, in that case, and nobody in \m/ would complain.

Seriously, though? This whole thing seems stupid to me, from basically every angle and side. Someone wake me when it's over?

[Bob Janova]

I don't condone the actions of \m/, I did not support the tech raid, and I can't speak for my alliance or anyone else but I'm pretty sure I'm not alone on my stance here.

If you don't condone it then why are you fighting for their right to do the same thing again in the future? This applies to everyone (except PC) who has joined the war on \m/'s side. You might think that you're doing so for your friends or whatever, but the net effect is that if you cause \m/ to win this war, you have set a precedent that doing whatever you have the muscle to do is okay, and nobody can interfere. If you do not condone the actions of \m/, you should not be fighting for them.

[Godwin]

You're far too intelligent and inspired to be \m/ leadership. Please tell me you're \m/ leadership.

No, I've only been in the alliance for two or three weeks. Nice shot at our leadership, though.

It amazes me so many people are surprised we didn't jump to accept the terms. It's pretty ridiculous if you put yourself in our shoes.

Grub threatened us for days, throwing his weight around at us, opening old wounds, until he finally hit us pretty good. He then offered us terms saying we could end it, if we essentially submit to their will and their goals. Truly, that would have worked out perfect for Grub and he would come out without taking any damage, and would look like a hero. We, as enemies, of course refuse to bow down to a snake hiding under the guise of morality. Grub, you are not the judge, jury, and executioner, you are an equal of \m/ and have no right to dictate us just because you have a few thousand nukes to throw around, and an alliance who eats your every word.

We aren't afraid as we've shown, and with the support thrown to us by alliances such as GOD, Stickmen, PC, and in particular, FOK!, the court of public opinion is showing that your disguise is not such a good one, your true colors are showing, and I should hope we won't back down from your aggressive actions.

You're over exaggerating a bit there Starfox, but Grub did certainly throw his weight around at us in a manner similar to the way we did to the general public. However, some of the personal attacks on him aren't really justified just because of that. Show some class, eh?

Your inability to accept that anyone could conceivably view the world in a different way than you do has caused you to misinterpret Grub's motives. There is a good debate to be had about whether the world would be better off if all alliances could do whatever they pleased or whether some standards must be upheld by the bystanders (if I'm not mistaken, you've landed on both sides of the debate before) but rather than debating that you have chosen to attack our integrity. Just because you do not believe that the standards outlined by Grub exist doesn't mean that he does not believe they do. I would stake what little reputation I have as an honest member of the community on the fact that he does.

If you want to start an argument about whether Grub's beliefs are incorrect or dangerous then do so, but you have no reason to call him a pretender when he believes what he says.

I'm sure Grub does believe what he says. The fact of the matter is, a lot of other people (who aren't really relevant to the case at hand anyway) don't, and that's what all the drama and bawwing are a result of.

If you don't condone it then why are you fighting for their right to do the same thing again in the future? This applies to everyone (except PC) who has joined the war on \m/'s side. You might think that you're doing so for your friends or whatever, but the net effect is that if you cause \m/ to win this war, you have set a precedent that doing whatever you have the muscle to do is okay, and nobody can interfere. If you do not condone the actions of \m/, you should not be fighting for them.

Because that's not what this war is about, Bob. One side winning over the other doesn't mean jack !@#$ in terms of how tech raiding progresses for the majority of the 'verse. Unless you're suggesting that \m/ is so heavily influential, of course.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Godwin

[Smacky]

You don't condone the actions of \m/, yet you're fighting for their vision of the world? A world where they can tech raid neutral and weaker alliances without consequences...

If it was the GPA or Grey Council that \m/ raided would you still think no one should help and would it be alright for \m/ to raid them next if they win their side wins this war? There will be nothing to stop them from raiding alliances if everyone is going to support them military regardless when anyone dares helping out the raid victim.

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

[AlmightyGrub]

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

I was already at the top, I don't crave God status, but thanks for trying. You seem to think everything is about getting something, which is essentially why you can not understand simple concepts that don't involve reward for effort. This mess costs me more than most people understand, but I believe the stance is worth adopting. At whatever cost to Polaris and to me, we will be heard over the dullards shouting 'rights without responsibility'

Dance on.. my ego is right where it always was.

[juslen]

You don't condone the actions of \m/, yet you're fighting for their vision of the world? A world where they can tech raid neutral and weaker alliances without consequences...

If it was the GPA or Grey Council that \m/ raided would you still think no one should help and would it be alright for \m/ to raid them next if they win their side wins this war? There will be nothing to stop them from raiding alliances if everyone is going to support them military regardless when anyone dares helping out the raid victim.

I'm fighting for their vision? No, I was told that Polaris was fighting for the greater good of the community. Yet nowhere in this entire saga do I see any sort of effort to work with the community to resolve this issue. My personal reaction when I heard that \m/ raided a defenseless 30 man alliance was "Wow.. why in the world is anyone allied with these thugs" And sure enough, I looked at their treaties and I saw several of my own alliances allies connected to them. Instead of NpO gathering the community to resolve this issue peacefully and sending a message to \m/ and all other alliances that these type of tech raids are below community standards they instead decided to write the rules of decency and conduct for the entire community without anyone else having a say.

I don't agree that there should be any community standards set in stone or enforced by any group of alliances let alone a single alliance. But I do believe that as a community we have the power to influence other alliances without force. \m/ could tech raid as many 30 member alliances as they wanted, but if they only were allied with other alliances who were willing to accept that conduct they might find it beneficial to drop such tech raids in the interest of keeping their allies.

How many alliances even tech raid? I know R&R ceased tech raiding a while back and when we did tech raid a limit was set on any "alliance" with less than 5 members. Pretty soon we dropped it all together. And many other alliances have had similar guidelines or have ceased to tech raid all together. Many alliance don't even condone raiding someone without an alliance so how would the community as a whole accept the raiding of a 30 member alliance?

They wouldn't. And eventually alliances like \m/ who thought they could tech raid whoever they wanted would either stop or finally raid the wrong alliance and pay the consequences. Instead those consequences came immediately after Polaris stepped in and gave them the ultimatum. But they made a grave mistake.. they pulled out the "for the greater good of the community" card. Even if NpO prevails in this conflict, they have sent a clear message to every single alliance that any one alliance can speak for and act on the behalf of the entire collective as long as its for the greater good of everyone.

This matter could have been resolved by the allies and friends of \m/ trying to persuade them to give FoA peace. If Polaris was truly noble in their intentions they would have spoken to alliances such as Rok to seek a diplomatic solution to the issue. Instead NpO walked into a room filled with people they have a history of clashing with and gave them an ultimatum, to cease and desist and to conform to the standards of the Community that NpO decided to write on our behalf.

I think this was a mess created by both sides and now those who wish to honor treaties are caught in the middle. Equal blame here in my humble opinion.

Edited January 26, 2010 by juslen

[SpoiL]

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

Quality theory right there. Their distaste for thuggish raiding of alliances is already tested and proven though.

[Israfeel]

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

IQ quotient huh? Intelligence quotient quotient.

[auto98]

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

Indeed it is not about raiding, it is about what is essentially an undeclared war - glad you agree.

edit: deleted some of the original because Israfeel got there first

Edited January 26, 2010 by auto98

[Caliph]

... This matter could have been resolved by the allies and friends of \m/ trying to persuade them to give FoA peace. If Polaris was truly noble in their intentions they would have spoken to alliances such as Rok to seek a diplomatic solution to the issue. Instead NpO walked into a room filled with people they have a history of clashing with and gave them an ultimatum, to cease and desist and to conform to the standards of the Community that NpO decided to write on our behalf.

I think this was a mess created by both sides and now those who wish to honor treaties are caught in the middle. Equal blame here in my humble opinion.

FOA, PC, GOONS, and \m/ had already reached an agreement to let FOA go in peace from the tech raid. An agreement was reached, the situation resolved, when Grub came to us and tried to order us around.

That said, I agree with most of the rest of your post.

If you don't condone it then why are you fighting for their right to do the same thing again in the future? This applies to everyone (except PC) who has joined the war on \m/'s side. You might think that you're doing so for your friends or whatever, but the net effect is that if you cause \m/ to win this war, you have set a precedent that doing whatever you have the muscle to do is okay, and nobody can interfere. If you do not condone the actions of \m/, you should not be fighting for them.

These people are not fighting for \m/'s right to raid another 30 man alliance in the future, they are fighting against the world vision that Grub can act as the world police by involving himself and his alliance in other alliances affairs whenever you desires. Grub played the "I am the world police" card, and it is that, not \m's actions, that is causing this backlash.

To be clear, \m/'s actions certainly are carrying a backlash. But the reason so many have joined the war against Polar's side is that they do not agree with Grub's assessment of the situation and don't agree with Polar being world police. TO be honest most of the alliances on "\m/'s" side this war hate \m/, they are only in it for Poison Clan. I would really doubt anyone is coming into this war to defend \m/'s right to tech raid 30 man alliances.

Poison Clan came in to defend us. There is nobody else we are treatied to that is enterring this war for \m/. They publicly say so, so you can just take your "but you're fighting for \m/'s right to tech raid" just right out the window there, because it is just not true.

[Mussolandia]

IQ quotient huh? Intelligence quotient quotient.

Oh yes, by the powers, the interlectuals are against us again!

[Heft]

I think there's a maximum IQ quotient to join the sith and it ain't high. Either that or you're just playing dumb.

This isn't about raiding, this isn't about moral standards, it's about Grub's ego and desire to elevate his position.

Jealousy is unbecoming of you.

[Caliph]

Without your alliance and several others ganging up on a small alliance and rolling them for absolutely no reason other than "we are bigger, we can", this war would not exist.

It was a tech raid, and not just \m/ tech raids. Others do as well. And the tech raid was already completely solved diplomatically before Grub tried to insert himself into that situation.

Even after that was done, simply saying "We'll stop raiding alliances" would have worked. Instead, your response was "We'll do whatever we want, you can't stop us, if you don't like it do something about it".

That is \m/ for you, we don't appreciate others telling us what we can and cannot do. I will say that internally there is a lot more discussions regarding the future of tech raiding "alliances" than you will ever see from us on the OWF. We do not bow to external pressure to post the inner workings of our alliance on the OWF. Our comments in public were more along the lines of "don't tell us what to do".

It's because you attacked FoA. Yes, you claim that rolling a small alliance doesn't make you an aggressor, that you have the right to do whatever the heck you want to them because they are small and weak. You're a bunch of bullies who are now crying because someone got tired of your nonsense.

No, its not because \m/ attacked FoA. It wasn't a roll, 4 GA's and that was it, and it wasn't just \m/ in that raid so just save some of that rage of yours for GOONS and PC. Don't just single \m/ out here, we were the most vocal, sure, but being vocal about doing somehting and being silent about doing the same thing should have no difference in the "guilt" each party has.

And this war is not about FoA. That situation was resolved prior to Grub involving himself. This war is because \m/ didn't bow down to Grub's demands when Grub disrespected us. He knew it wouldn't go over well, and he was essentially told that \m/ is not going to back down to Polar over this. Grub admitted this war is because he doesn't like \m/, rather than the other "reasons" listed. He just doesn't like us, its not because of the FOA raid, or the racey language towards him by non \m/ gov members, but becuase he just doesn't like us.

I would focus on the Grub doesn't like us part rather than try to paint this as Grub standing against all tech raiders. Stop trying to say an apple is an orange.

[Caliph]

I refuse to raid again. Wasn't worth it. I mean, it was fun...but no. Like this war will be fun...but no.

It was very fun, but I've moved on from that point. I don't feel the need to steal my tech when I can get it without much hastle.

The level of respect each party believes it is deserved is going to be different from the level of respect another thinks they deserve. I can generally agree with most of what you said here.

Right, I just feel Grub's level of respect for \m/ was completely detrimental to any diplomatic solution. No foreign alliance is going to appreciate someone coming to them and ordering them around, saying "do this or else, you have 2 days". Just because it worked for Grub in the past doesn't mean its always going to work, and he found that \m/ didn't take his threats very well at all.

Where do you think member limits on tech raiding AAs came from?

The member limits on tech raiding AA's applies only to invidivual tech raids. That situation was not an invidivual tech raid, as you can clearly see by the multiple \m/ members, GOONS members, and PC members, who were at war with FOA nations.

This is \m/'s official intepretation of our charter, I am just baffled as to how you think you can dictate to us how we should intepret our charter.

I made the comment because all three of you threw it out the window. 30 members is a lot of members. Many other tech raiding alliances wouldn't have touched that. That's why I say it.

Fair enough.

And I'll say again, this was not an individual tech raid, it was something else not specified on the \m/ charter at the time. Many other tech raiding alliances wouldn't have touched it, true. But 3 did, and I'm only seeing 1 get any sort of public backlash over it, which tells me your hatred/dislike to \m/ over FOA isn't legit, as you completely ignore the other 2 who were with us.

[Earogema]

The idea is that we all have a responsibility to protect "the silent" or right a wrong in whatever way possible. That's how I see it.

Remember how NpO protected FoA, and tried to get them reps?

Yeah, me neither.

[Chief Savage Man]

Our allies in Corporation taught us the lesson that NpO tried to teach us. We agreed amongst ourselves to avoid these gray area situations and stick strictly to our charter before the New Polar Order ever got involved. Now while New Polar Order and its allies like to preach that \m/ ruined diplomacy, let it be known that \m/, FoA and Corp went down the diplomatic path to begin with. Corp, an alliance we trust and respect, expressed their displeasure. Then they agreed to protect FoA and we agreed to end the raids and declare peace immediately. We made a mistake, we took the high road and fixed it. Then the New Polar Order came down at us with their heavy-headed demand that we "rectify the situation" which had already been "rectified". This arbitrary move angered our members and two of them lashed out in an inappropriate way. We apologized for this behavior. And now all of a sudden, the war isn't about FoA anymore. Yes, you heard right. The threats made by Grub before the incident in #\m/ were justified by something that happened after it. Not even delving deeper into the details of what precisely happened during talks and other places, this blatant logical flaw in NpO's argument speaks for itself.

[Godwin]

Our allies in Corporation taught us the lesson that NpO tried to teach us. We agreed amongst ourselves to avoid these gray area situations and stick strictly to our charter before the New Polar Order ever got involved. Now while New Polar Order and its allies like to preach that \m/ ruined diplomacy, let it be known that \m/, FoA and Corp went down the diplomatic path to begin with. Corp, an alliance we trust and respect, expressed their displeasure. Then they agreed to protect FoA and we agreed to end the raids and declare peace immediately. We made a mistake, we took the high road and fixed it. Then the New Polar Order came down at us with their heavy-headed demand that we "rectify the situation" which had already been "rectified". This arbitrary move angered our members and two of them lashed out in an inappropriate way. We apologized for this behavior. And now all of a sudden, the war isn't about FoA anymore. Yes, you heard right. The threats made by Grub before the incident in #\m/ were justified by something that happened after it. Not even delving deeper into the details of what precisely happened during talks and other places, this blatant logical flaw in NpO's argument speaks for itself.

I'd like to point out that everyone who makes any comment at all about this situation from here on out should probably read this post. It's kind of important.

And thanks for clarifying that, Chief, because I didn't know too much of the diplomatic situation regarding FoA either.

[Dochartaigh]

So even though GOONS and Poison Clan raided FOA along with \m/, and heck it wasn't even our raid in the first place, we were asked to come along by another alliance, it is \m/ singled out and denounced for this. Yet GOONS, who originally called the raid, is still MDoAP with Polar. Poison Clan received no diplomacy with Polar over that incident before the DOW on \m/. So please stop claiming this war is about the FOA tech raid, when it most clearly is not.

Besides, the charter didn't/doesn't cover alliance tech raids. So please stop trying to interpret our own charter for us, because we wrote the darn thing, we know what it says, and we know what we meant.

We don't go to your alliance and tell you how to interpret your charter. We don't come to your alliance and tell you to intepret your charter the way we see it or there will be war, tick tock tick tock. But it seems you have no problem with others doing it.

This war is not about \m/ tech raiding FOA along with GOONS and Poison Clan.

That situation was completely resolved before Polar came to us with threats and demands.

I personally don't tech raid, and haven't in a long time (since the first \m/ was about).

here we go again with the "why didn't Polaris attack GOONS and PC????????" bawwwing. for one, GOONS settled this situation diplomatically. \m/ hurled racial insults and refused to budge. now as for PC, why would Polaris seriously attempt diplomacy with PC knowing that war was imminent with \m/ and knowing that PC would join in? the result of such diplomacy would have been nothing as \m/ refused to "bow down" and Polaris refused to budge.

so, knowing PC would defend \m/, why would they seek diplomacy? also, since from the beginning Polaris attempted to have this war not escalate, they did not hit PC in order to allow for PC's allies to make the choice to come in or stay out. if Polaris had hit PC from the beginning, PC's allies would have been forced in regardless of choice and then Polaris's allies would have been forced in or forced to sit neutral. Not to mention, hitting PC would cause more issues with Polaris's allies since Polaris was already hitting \m/ who is allied to RoK. hitting PC who is allied to Athens/FoB would be a major slap in the face to MK as well.

so seriously, stop and think about this argument as if looked at logically is quite easy to figure out why it would have been retarded for Polaris to hit PC and \m/ instead of just \m/.

so can we end this argument as it is retarded at best.

Our allies in Corporation taught us the lesson that NpO tried to teach us. We agreed amongst ourselves to avoid these gray area situations and stick strictly to our charter before the New Polar Order ever got involved. Now while New Polar Order and its allies like to preach that \m/ ruined diplomacy, let it be known that \m/, FoA and Corp went down the diplomatic path to begin with. Corp, an alliance we trust and respect, expressed their displeasure. Then they agreed to protect FoA and we agreed to end the raids and declare peace immediately. We made a mistake, we took the high road and fixed it. Then the New Polar Order came down at us with their heavy-headed demand that we "rectify the situation" which had already been "rectified". This arbitrary move angered our members and two of them lashed out in an inappropriate way. We apologized for this behavior. And now all of a sudden, the war isn't about FoA anymore. Yes, you heard right. The threats made by Grub before the incident in #\m/ were justified by something that happened after it. Not even delving deeper into the details of what precisely happened during talks and other places, this blatant logical flaw in NpO's argument speaks for itself.

yet the simplest and most peaceful route would have been to tell Polaris and others of this rectification. yet, what most of us saw was a "do something about it, we ain't changing for no one" attitude. thus, regardless of all the back room dealing you did with FoA and Corp, you ruined it by publicly declaring the exact opposite.

this may be something that \m/ also needs to learn. public perception matters more than back room deals unless those back room deals are made public. fact is, at the time Grub entered the scene, how many people outside of \m/, FoA, and Corp knew the ongoings of those diplomatic procedures?

this again is a flaw in your "the situation was rectified" argument.

[juslen]

Our allies in Corporation taught us the lesson that NpO tried to teach us. We agreed amongst ourselves to avoid these gray area situations and stick strictly to our charter before the New Polar Order ever got involved. Now while New Polar Order and its allies like to preach that \m/ ruined diplomacy, let it be known that \m/, FoA and Corp went down the diplomatic path to begin with. Corp, an alliance we trust and respect, expressed their displeasure. Then they agreed to protect FoA and we agreed to end the raids and declare peace immediately. We made a mistake, we took the high road and fixed it. Then the New Polar Order came down at us with their heavy-headed demand that we "rectify the situation" which had already been "rectified". This arbitrary move angered our members and two of them lashed out in an inappropriate way. We apologized for this behavior. And now all of a sudden, the war isn't about FoA anymore. Yes, you heard right. The threats made by Grub before the incident in #\m/ were justified by something that happened after it. Not even delving deeper into the details of what precisely happened during talks and other places, this blatant logical flaw in NpO's argument speaks for itself.

I would like someone to read this response and point out which parts are untrue. I'm not saying its not the 100% truth. Matter of fact I simply want to hear the opposing side speak up because I thought this was all about the greater good of the community. Because that is what the we were led to believe. The truth shall set you free.

edit: ok.. I see someone responded already. more more!

Edited January 26, 2010 by juslen

[Bob Janova]

We agreed amongst ourselves to avoid these gray area situations and stick strictly to our charter before the New Polar Order ever got involved

So why didn't you say that to Grub? That was all he was ever asking for, and you can ask GOONS about that by the sound of it.

Poison Clan came in to defend us. There is nobody else we are treatied to that is enterring this war for \m/. They publicly say so, so you can just take your "but you're fighting for \m/'s right to tech raid" just right out the window there, because it is just not true.

I think you are missing my point. No, that is not the reason why they are entering the war, but it is the effect, just as the effect of alliances like GOD or NSO fighting for Karma was to help to defeat NPO and the Hegemony, whether that was their intention (or even whether they claimed to be in Karma at all). It is now a coalition war and everyone needs to see the big picture, and whether they really support what is at the core of 'their side'.

[Earogema]

yet the simplest and most peaceful route would have been to tell Polaris and others of this rectification. yet, what most of us saw was a "do something about it, we ain't changing for no one" attitude. thus, regardless of all the back room dealing you did with FoA and Corp, you ruined it by publicly declaring the exact opposite.

this may be something that \m/ also needs to learn. public perception matters more than back room deals unless those back room deals are made public. fact is, at the time Grub entered the scene, how many people outside of \m/, FoA, and Corp knew the ongoings of those diplomatic procedures?

this again is a flaw in your "the situation was rectified" argument.

We said on these forums repeatedly that the situation was rectified. In fact, FoA did. The Corp did too. Kevin McDonald's posts were either just skimmed over, or ignored, take your pick.

Oh, and I guess I should bring up the whole: Well you probably should have talked to The Corp then. Maybe even FoA. Both would have been glad to explain the situation. Granted, \m/ should have been as well- we just thought it was ridiculous that Corp had been out here saying the situation was totally clean, while Grub was still holding us by some odd/arbitrary "time limit" that had been "ticking away."

Regardless of our "attitudes" on the matter, it is still idiotic, moronic, and just plain stupid, to attack for a situation that has been handled, and that was handled way before. On top of that, he offers us light peace terms so that the very same people asking for war would just surrender in a day or two. I mean, come on. We might be a terrible alliance, but we aren't that terrible.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Earogema