Is White Peace the same as a Surrender?

[Jimmy2e]

I have often wondered what is white peace, it seems as though it is a very Cybernations-esque type of affair.

I have always believed (this was before this war and the Karma war) that white peace was merely the mutual agreement between parties to end hostilities without a winner or loser being declared. A literal return to the status quo.

In my point of view, if it were a actual surrender then it would be called that and it would be under-written without any reparations within the terms.

But that is my stand point, what do you guys think?

I think that Cybernations needs a official clarification. Because either some members are incorrect in their thinking, or our leaders have misinterpreted its meaning.



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

Edited February 19, 2010 by Jimmy2e

[Buds The Man]

I voted for the second if its white peace both sides leave the field with out any terms what so ever. That being said so far we have seen pretty lenient terms so far with the main one being no re-entry to the looser.

[Comrade Korey]

Why can't it be both?

[Jimmy2e]

[quote name='Comrade Korey' date='19 February 2010 - 03:35 PM' timestamp='1266593755' post='2192049']
Why can't it be both?
[/quote]


Thats like asking, would you rather get a divorce an annulment. Although the outcomes are generally the same, there is a huge difference in the stigma attached.

[steodonn]

Yes it is surrender as one side usually isn't allowed return to the conflict

Example CSN just declared white peace with several alliances. We are still in this war the other alliances are not

[Jens of the desert]

It's a surrender with no reps paid.

[Locke]

White peace is another word for "ceasefire." It has nothing to do with victory or defeat; that is determined statistically, politically, and by whatever other terms may be imposed on top of it.

[Logan]

I think what we have been seeing lately is surrendering. White peace is condition-less. Don't get me wrong, I love the single conditioned surrender.

[x Tela x]

White peace is a term that was not invented by CN, but has existed for a long time. It has a definition, and ignorant people voting in a poll will not change that definition.

Maybe create a poll asking if people want to change the definition of white peace as it relates to CN.

[Lackistan]

It can be arguably both. White peace with a superior enemy who chooses to not impose terms would definitely count as condition-less surrender. It is practically, however, a no-loser scenario.

[Qazzian]

As it relates to CN, I think it's a toss up, depending on the wording. If "Both parties agree to white peace", then it's probably not a surrender. If "Alliance A has granted white peace" then it's a surrender with both sides just going home.

[Dochartaigh]

honestly it depends on the circumstances surrounding it. if both sides are stalemated or still rather close to one another, it is the second option. if one side is visibly losing but the winning side offers white peace it is the first.

[leprecon]

To surrender means to admit you lose.
To get white peace means to stop fighting unconditionally.

The two don't share an overlap.
You can surrender without white peace, you can have white peace without surrendering, and you can surrender with white peace.

[D34th]

White peace as it is being used in CN is just a surrender where the losing side isn't paying economic reparations, but is obliged to follow other type of terms. Is amazing how CN community can distorce the things.

[Ashoka the Great]

If you call a tail a leg, then how many legs does a dog have? Five? No, because calling a tail a leg does not make it so.

With that in mind....

Null vote. White peace is a lie.

The vanquished in a war are still the vanquished, regardless of what anyone on either side of a conflict thinks. If it makes the losers feel better about themselves, then bully for them. They've still lost.

[Bob]

[quote name='D34th' date='19 February 2010 - 11:58 AM' timestamp='1266598686' post='2192154']
White peace as it is being used in CN is just a surrender where the losing side isn't paying economic reparations, but is obliged to follow other type of terms. Is amazing how CN community can distorce the things.
[/quote]
Exactly this. It means the second in general, but in the context of CN the first.

[supercoolyellow]

Hai Jimmy2e

In my mind white peace is an elastic term. It could include surrender where you can't help your side any more, or it could mean a stalemate draw like what happened in the TPF war.

[anenu]

if both alliances end the conflict and no terms of any time are given then it is a white peace that is simply an end to hostilities. For example the WWE ended in white peace as no side demanded anything from the other. If one side grants concessions to the other such as a beer review or pledging to not reenter the war then it was a white peace where one side surrendered and simply did not have to pay reps.

In other words it can be both it just depends on the situation.

[Bob Janova]

In CN it's used to mean either, depending on what person is using it and what situation they're in.

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='Jimmy2e' date='19 February 2010 - 03:42 PM' timestamp='1266594120' post='2192058']
Thats like asking, would you rather get a divorce an annulment. Although the outcomes are generally the same, there is a huge difference in the stigma attached.
[/quote]

Maybe it is, but it's still a valid question. White peace could involve one side surrendering, or it could just be a cessation of hostilities. It's quite possible for it to be both seperately or even combined. I can imagine there being a split in any alliance involved in a white peace between those who felt let down as they see it as giving in, while others would be happy to consider it a draw, or even a win.

pip pip

Edited February 19, 2010 by Lord Philip

[Great Lord Moth]

White peace is inherently mutual. A surrender without reparations is a surrender.

[Aloop]

This is me agreeing with Moth. White peace is everyone stops shooting.

When one party has to agree to remain neutral and not return to the conflict, it's (to quote I forget who) more of an "off-white peace."

[Shodemofi-NPO]

[quote name='Great Lord Moth' date='19 February 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1266611527' post='2192376']
White peace is inherently mutual. A surrender without reparations is a surrender.
[/quote]

Surrenders are inherently mutual too. If one party doesn't agree to it, the surrender doesn't happen. I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make.

I voted option 1.

[Yggdrazil]

I like precision, clearly defined words where ambiguity will not be a factor. Therefore "white peace" is peace with no terms applied. If there are any terms then it isn't "white peace". Even if said terms are lenient. Agreeing to no reps but you cannot re-enter the present conflict is a term.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Yggdrazil

[Baldr]

I don't like the way CN changes words/terms around to mean "whatever I want it to mean".

The term white peace didn't develop in CN. The way it's been used recently isn't normally white peace, as terms are usually attached. The terms are usually simple things like "Side A agrees not to re-enter the war".

But once you start adding terms, it isn't white peace. One side lost, and was allowed to surrender with "lenient" terms. The other side is still allowed to fight on, and has no terms at all. That's a surrender, not white peace.