GOONS Accepts UCN's Surrender

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1266735189' post='2194729']
My words have a lot of meaning you just don't want to see past them.

The world of bob has many norms some have been around since the start of it, some have only been around for a small amount of time. One norm that has emerged over the last year or two especially during Karma War is that of White peace and especially White peace for those coming to the aid of a fellow ally. Now history tells us if you go against the norms of Bob, you start being seen as a outcast, general public starts to turn against you at every corner, you start to lose allies and then before you know it, your at the bottom end of a dog pile.
[/quote]
So your answer to the points made above is... your version of what the norm is on Planet Bob? And you're also essentially hinting that we're going to be isolated and dogpiled because we don't adhere to what you think is the community norm?



Edit: I really don't see what you're trying to claim about the Karma war setting some precedent for the way war is waged and peace is settled. Sure, there was plenty of white peace in that war but on the other hand, there were also some pretty damn savage reparations levied upon the losers too.

Edit #2:
[quote name='Ernesto Che Guevara' date='21 February 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1266738622' post='2194797']
I would have loved to stay in and help you, but sadly my opponents were just making fun of my bloody stumps, much less respecting them anymore.

As to all those who say that the reps are unreasonable....Sure, nobody likes to pay money for nothing, but considering that's really not a horrific amount to pay. That's why we kept banker nations, to act as banks. Crazy, I know, but we at UCN love making up random names for things.
[/quote]
You blokes fought like champs, I'll give you that. Great coordination, nice warchests, keep it up - you guys are on the right track. Except with regard to the bunny rabbit stuff. You might want to give that a miss, tbh

Edited February 21, 2010 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='19 February 2010 - 07:53 PM' timestamp='1266638002' post='2192891']
Is that a joke?

MK: 600 million
GOD: 195 million

Worth at least 5 times as much then as it is now.
[/quote]

Actually around 250m, all totaled, and we'd been absolutely pounded. I think 12 separate alliances jumped on us, no ghost DoWs.

[nutkase]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='21 February 2010 - 03:54 PM' timestamp='1266738894' post='2194800']
So your answer to the points made above is... your version of what the norm is on Planet Bob? And you're also essentially hinting that we're going to be isolated and dogpiled because we don't adhere to what you think is the community norm?



Edit: I really don't see what you're trying to claim about the Karma war setting some precedent for the way war is waged and peace is settled. Sure, there was plenty of white peace in that war but on the other hand, there were also some pretty damn savage reparations levied upon the losers too.

[/quote]

I am not hinting, I am telling you what has happened in the past when it comes to when alliances have not done what is considered the norm within Bob, yes there was savage reps handed out to the losers during Karma, but if you actually knew they came from the Aggressor like NPO not the alliances coming to the aid of allies which were even praised by the Karma side, the difference I'm trying to show you, which you seem to be peddling around is that these alliances came to the aid of a ally they did not aggressively plan this nor set out to destroy you.

If these reps were coming from TOP/IRON/DAWN or TORN you would not see me in here debating the issue of reps, its the issue of taking reps from alliances that did not partake in the aggressive action to set off this war.

[erikz]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='20 February 2010 - 07:58 PM' timestamp='1266692329' post='2193937']
It's OK, Sardonic. FOK have been kidding themselves about a lot of things for years now.
[/quote]
Luckily Invicta is well known for taking the moral high ground for years now.

+ did you see us taking reps from a party we aggressively engaged in this war? No? I can imagine some one demanding reps if they'd be the ones being engaged and then forcing the other party to surrender.

Edited February 21, 2010 by erikz

[Tromp]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='20 February 2010 - 07:58 PM' timestamp='1266692329' post='2193937']
It's OK, Sardonic. FOK have been kidding themselves about a lot of things for years now.
[/quote]
You know, you shouldn't take erikz seriously.

[jonnygozy]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='21 February 2010 - 01:54 AM' timestamp='1266738894' post='2194800']
You blokes fought like champs, I'll give you that. Great coordination, nice warchests, keep it up - you guys are on the right track. Except with regard to the bunny rabbit stuff. You might want to give that a miss, tbh
[/quote]

I'm kind of getting tired of the bunny stuff myself. We'll have a new theme by the next war, I hope.

[lamuella]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 12:15 AM' timestamp='1266729313' post='2194599']
Your alliance jumped into this war willing and knowing the repercussions of war
[/quote]

as did the people we were fighting.

[lamuella]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 03:19 AM' timestamp='1266740350' post='2194815']
If these reps were coming from TOP/IRON/DAWN or TORN you would not see me in here debating the issue of reps
[/quote]

largely because the alliances fighting TOP, IRON, DAWN, and TORN are ones you don't want to lose face with, rather than those horrible disreputable GOONS

[nutkase]

[quote name='Lamuella' date='22 February 2010 - 12:36 AM' timestamp='1266770207' post='2195092']
largely because the alliances fighting TOP, IRON, DAWN, and TORN are ones you don't want to lose face with, rather than those horrible disreputable GOONS
[/quote]


What logic are you using? seriously

I have disagreed with a many of things C&G have done in the past and will in the future. Also before this war, I had no feelings of any nature towards GOONS but now your portraying a selfish theme. I would not dispute the reps given to those alliance because they where the ones that attacked a number of alliances not involved in the /m\ war, and thus putting us in this scenario which I have had said numerous times earlier in this thread. Obviously you have a reading dysfunction and rather post "NO U" posts all through it .

[nippy]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1266771014' post='2195106']
What logic are you using? seriously

I have disagreed with a many of things C&G have done in the past and will in the future. Also before this war, I had no feelings of any nature towards GOONS but now your portraying a selfish theme. I would not dispute the reps given to those alliance because they where the ones that attacked a number of alliances not involved in the /m\ war, and thus putting us in this scenario which I have had said numerous times earlier in this thread. Obviously you have a reading dysfunction and rather post "NO U" posts all through it .
[/quote]

Yes, insult Lamuella's reading comprehension and posting quality. [i]That'll[/i] win an argument.

[lamuella]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 11:50 AM' timestamp='1266771014' post='2195106']
What logic are you using? seriously

I have disagreed with a many of things C&G have done in the past and will in the future. Also before this war, I had no feelings of any nature towards GOONS but now your portraying a selfish theme. I would not dispute the reps given to those alliance because they where the ones that attacked a number of alliances not involved in the /m\ war, and thus putting us in this scenario which I have had said numerous times earlier in this thread. Obviously you have a reading dysfunction and rather post "NO U" posts all through it .
[/quote]

What I'm saying is that there are few negative consequences to sitting in the gallery and throwing peanut shells at GOONS. We're an easy target for any number of reasons, certainly a far easier target than many others. The political consequences of calling us names or decrying our behavior are minimal, whereas the political consequences of decrying others are greater.

While I'm sure you've disagreed with C&G in the past, you haven't treated them like something you scraped off your boot, whether they deserved such treatment or not, because to do so would not have been politic. You don't care all that much whether your insults to us are politic or not because we lack the clout to do much about it. Hence, it's easy to decry us as monsters and forget that your own alliance leveraged reparations out of Nueva Vida in the WotC, out of Wolfpack in the Wolfpack war, and - oh yes - you were one of the alliances who helped force the disbandment of the original GOONS in the Unjust War.

I'm not saying any of the above things I listed are bad, just that this newly moralistic tone of yours is a veil, and if the political status quo was that reparations were acceptable you'd be asking for them just like everyone else.

[nutkase]

[quote name='Lamuella' date='22 February 2010 - 01:30 AM' timestamp='1266773452' post='2195145']
What I'm saying is that there are few negative consequences to sitting in the gallery and throwing peanut shells at GOONS. We're an easy target for any number of reasons, certainly a far easier target than many others. The political consequences of calling us names or decrying our behavior are minimal, whereas the political consequences of decrying others are greater.

While I'm sure you've disagreed with C&G in the past, you haven't treated them like something you scraped off your boot, whether they deserved such treatment or not, because to do so would not have been politic. You don't care all that much whether your insults to us are politic or not because we lack the clout to do much about it. Hence, it's easy to decry us as monsters and forget that your own alliance leveraged reparations out of Nueva Vida in the WotC, out of Wolfpack in the Wolfpack war, and - oh yes - you were one of the alliances who helped force the disbandment of the original GOONS in the Unjust War.

I'm not saying any of the above things I listed are bad, just that this newly moralistic tone of yours is a veil, and if the political status quo was that reparations were acceptable you'd be asking for them just like everyone else.
[/quote]

I was not a member of MHA during any of those incidents. I have only cried out for white peace and have never had asked for reps of any sort, nor been a member of any alliance at a time that has asked for reps during a conflict. I have strongly advocated for White peace within MHA and most members agree with my personnel views. This is no veil, I am not here advocating based on that this is GOONS, I would of been here no matter which alliance is doing it. To say I speak out when only I seem to be untouchable by political clout is wrong and untrue, I have always been outspoken and will continue to do so no matter the alliance or persons against so.

I see reps as leaving a bad taste in the defeated alliances mouth, a reason to build hatred and find a way of getting revenge. Giving White peace shows that you respect them and there is no hard feelings. That is just one of the many reasons I advocate for white peace.

[lamuella]

the problem is that this isn't how you were phrasing your objections before now. You said things like "The world of bob has many norms some have been around since the start of it, some have only been around for a small amount of time. One norm that has emerged over the last year or two especially during Karma War is that of White peace and especially White peace for those coming to the aid of a fellow ally."

you were talking in terms of cultural norms, essentially about things being right or wrong based on how the status quo feels about them. My response to that is "to hell with cultural norms". Something is proper or improper based on its merits, not the time and place.

I can absolutely accept if you think demanding reparations in this sort of circumstance is out and out wrong. I disagree, but I can accept it. If you've protested previous demands of reparations, I can accept that as well, and it speaks towards your consistency and sincerity. Have you done so?

[o-dog]

[quote name='jonnygozy' date='21 February 2010 - 04:16 PM' timestamp='1266768982' post='2195079']
I'm kind of getting tired of the bunny stuff myself. We'll have a new theme by the next war, I hope.
[/quote]

God yes, the bunny thing (and the huggles nonsense) has had its day.

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='O-Dog' date='21 February 2010 - 02:07 PM' timestamp='1266779247' post='2195273']
God yes, the bunny thing (and the huggles nonsense) has had its day.
[/quote]

Maybe this war wasn't so useless after all.

[Ernesto Che Guevara]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='21 February 2010 - 11:10 AM' timestamp='1266779411' post='2195286']
Maybe this war wasn't so useless after all.
[/quote]

While it was simply annoying at first, it's just gotten ridiculous. Don't worry, people of CN, we're working on something to replace the bunny. I think the sloth is a great mascot; slow moving and when we get there, you have nothing to fear.

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Ernesto Che Guevara' date='21 February 2010 - 02:04 PM' timestamp='1266782682' post='2195362']
While it was simply annoying at first, it's just gotten ridiculous. Don't worry, people of CN, we're working on something to replace the bunny. I think the sloth is a great mascot; slow moving and when we get there, you have nothing to fear.
[/quote]
Guess we can't call you furries anymore eh?

I will confess there was something rather unsettling seeing all those war dec reasons of "Bunnie snuggle".

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 06:19 PM' timestamp='1266740350' post='2194815']
I am not hinting, I am telling you what has happened in the past when it comes to when alliances have not done what is considered the norm within Bob[/quote]
Ah, I see. You are saying to us "conform to our cultural mores or die". Nice one.

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 06:19 PM' timestamp='1266740350' post='2194815']yes there was savage reps handed out to the losers during Karma, but if you actually knew they came from the Aggressor like NPO not the alliances coming to the aid of allies which were even praised by the Karma side, the difference I'm trying to show you, which you seem to be peddling around is that these alliances came to the aid of a ally they did not aggressively plan this nor set out to destroy you.[/quote]
So what? They jumped in on an opportunistic and aggressive war against our friends. They were aggressors or were defending the aggressors in this war. Your argument simply doesn't hold water when viewed in terms of your stated perspective on reparations.

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 06:19 PM' timestamp='1266740350' post='2194815']If these reps were coming from TOP/IRON/DAWN or TORN you would not see me in here debating the issue of reps, its the issue of taking reps from alliances that did not partake in the aggressive action to set off this war.
[/quote]
You still haven't really explained your philosophical underpinning for why reparations taken from aggressors is better than taking reparations from defenders. What makes one acceptable and the other not? All I've seen from people saying in this and the other thread is that it's wrong, without providing much in the way of reasoning for why it is wrong.

[Ernesto Che Guevara]

[quote name='Sardonic' date='21 February 2010 - 12:07 PM' timestamp='1266782848' post='2195367']
Guess we can't call you furries anymore eh?

I will confess there was something rather unsettling seeing all those war dec reasons of "Bunnie snuggle".
[/quote]



You can call us that if you'd like. It'll just be confusing months down the road when everybody has forgotten the bunnies.

Plus, with Easter coming up in a month and a half, we'd best put the bunnies in the past or else be expected to bring delicious, vibrant colored candies to the whole of CN.

[ChimpMasterFlash]

[quote name='Nathan Grant' date='20 February 2010 - 05:55 AM' timestamp='1266666953' post='2193505']
First of all o/ UCN! I have only heard good things about you all.

Second, my GOONS opponent here was a sport through the whole conflict while I laid the smack down, even though I didn't see any retaliatory ground attacks.

Finally, I hope in future conflicts that alliances actually earn the reps they get.
[/quote]


You had two days while I was out of town to get me into anarchy and couldn't then the war ended before I could spring my trap. I was trying to bait you and your friends into attacking my 3 v 1. You had one nation with an 86 million warchest sitting out my ns and another with 25 million. I would have had fun with you and your 6 mil war chest and 40 spies.

If I had inflated, because you hit so far down, then I would have been out of the range of those two nations I wanted to hit me. You don't think that all my opponents where with in 50 infra of ZI or flat out ZI's for any reason do you?
Yeah, I know we are low NS nations but you should be happy you got out when you did. I know Bloodjewel was itching to nuke you too.

edit* not a good-sport GOONS

Edited February 22, 2010 by ChimpMasterFlash

[nutkase]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='22 February 2010 - 05:41 AM' timestamp='1266788462' post='2195485']
Ah, I see. You are saying to us "conform to our cultural mores or die". Nice one.


So what? They jumped in on an opportunistic and aggressive war against our friends. They were aggressors or were defending the aggressors in this war. Your argument simply doesn't hold water when viewed in terms of your stated perspective on reparations.


You still haven't really explained your philosophical underpinning for why reparations taken from aggressors is better than taking reparations from defenders. What makes one acceptable and the other not? All I've seen from people saying in this and the other thread is that it's wrong, without providing much in the way of reasoning for why it is wrong.
[/quote]


I don't see how it could be opportunistic when they knew when joining the war that was definitely going to be the losing side, also they did not join the war in regards to TOP/IRON CB on C&G but to help out a ally, something that become well separated when it came to reps or white peace during Karma and I thought this war. Reps been taking from aggressors is better because they are the guilty ones that started the war for its own gains or better status and thus receive a punishment. In my eyes, alliances that hold no connection to a war other then aiding a ally when in desperate times, should be thanked and sent on there own way, not dragged through the mud afterwards. Thats how you find yourself becoming enemies with a lot of alliances is by kicking them when they are down. While if you had a good fight shakes hands after, you might find they come to respect you. Example is TTK vs CCC during WoTC, great fight and at the end walked away with no reps given and actually very friendly towards each other, while NPO received large amount of reps and look where that got them.


Reps breeds hostility and contempt.

Edit: my spelling fails

Edited February 22, 2010 by nutkase

[ktarthan]

[quote name='nutkase' date='21 February 2010 - 09:43 PM' timestamp='1266817386' post='2196469']
I don't see how it could be opportunistic when they knew when joining the war that was definitely going to be the losing side, also they did not join the war in regards to TOP/IRON CB on C&G but to help out a ally, something that become well separated when it came to reps or white peace during Karma and I thought this war. Reps been taking from aggressors is better because they are the guilty ones that started the war for its own gains or better status and thus receive a punishment. In my eyes, alliances that hold no connection to a war other then aiding a ally when in desperate times, should be thanked and sent on there own way, not dragged through the mud afterwards. Thats how you find yourself becoming enemies with a lot of alliances is by kicking them when they are down. While if you had a good fight shakes hands after, you might find they come to respect you. Example is TTK vs CCC during WoTC, great fight and at the end walked away with no reps given and actually very friendly towards each other, while NPO received large amount of reps and look where that got them.


Reps breeds hostility and contempt.

Edit: my spelling fails
[/quote]

Reps also breeds stronger GOONSlings, so it sounds like a win-win.

Honestly I wasn't around for and I don't care about what happened during Karma. GOONS wanted reps, GOONS asked for reps, GOONS got reps (trivial ones, at that). Our allies consented, so I don't think anyone in GOONS is going to lose sleep worrying if our enemies in war that we defeated (or helped to defeat) think less of us.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Tromp' date='21 February 2010 - 08:13 AM' timestamp='1266757991' post='2194950']
You know, you shouldn't take erikz seriously.
[/quote]
Yeah I didn't.

To be clear, though - it looks like FOK has decided to not support reps demands as a matter-of-course thing after winning wars. This is good, I pretty much agree.

But considering that decision, FOK's made some pretty strange decisions in FA...

[lamuella]

[quote name='nutkase' date='22 February 2010 - 12:43 AM' timestamp='1266817386' post='2196469']
I don't see how it could be opportunistic when they knew when joining the war that was definitely going to be the losing side, also they did not join the war in regards to TOP/IRON CB on C&G but to help out a ally, something that become well separated when it came to reps or white peace during Karma and I thought this war. Reps been taking from aggressors is better because they are the guilty ones that started the war for its own gains or better status and thus receive a punishment. In my eyes, alliances that hold no connection to a war other then aiding a ally when in desperate times, should be thanked and sent on there own way, not dragged through the mud afterwards. Thats how you find yourself becoming enemies with a lot of alliances is by kicking them when they are down. While if you had a good fight shakes hands after, you might find they come to respect you. Example is TTK vs CCC during WoTC, great fight and at the end walked away with no reps given and actually very friendly towards each other, while NPO received large amount of reps and look where that got them.


Reps breeds hostility and contempt.

Edit: my spelling fails
[/quote]

I'd say more that unreasonable and oppressive reps breed hostility and contempt. I don't think that the reparations asked for in this case are either unreasonable or oppressive.

I'd also say that the reps asked for during WoTC are a very very long way from being the only reason NPO ended up being rolled. There were dozens of alliances with them in WoTC, many of whom received reps and then went on to be part of the rolling of them in the Karma war.

[King Louis the II]

Very reasonable. Congrats all alliances involved.