The Amazing Immorality Race

[Jack Diorno]

[center][IMG]http://i874.photobucket.com/albums/ab310/CNJDAD3/1248615730514.png[/IMG][/center]

[b]February 23, 2010[/b]

[b]Current leader: [img]http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/7968/sanctionnpo.png[/img] New Pacific Order [img]http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/7968/sanctionnpo.png[/img]

• 16 • [color="#ff0000"][b]New Pacific Order[/b][/color] : 00.00 --> 16.00 [color="green"](+16.00)[/color]
• 7 • [color="#008000"][b]Grand Global Alliance[/b][/color] : 00.00 --> 7.00 [color="green"](+7.00)[/color]
• 7 • [color="#ff8c00"][b]Independent Republic Of Orange Nations[/b][/color] : 00.00 --> 7.00 [color="green"](+7.00)[/color]
• 6 • [color="#0000ff"][b]New Polar Order[/b][/color] : 00.00 --> 06.00 [color="green"](+6.00)[/color]
• 4 • [color="#48D1CC"][b]Mostly Harmless Alliance[/b][/color] : 00.00 --> 4.00 [color="green"](+4.00)[/color]
• 4 • [color="gold"]Federation of Armed Nations[/color] : 00.00 --> 4.00 [color="green"](+4.00)[/color]
• 4 • [color="#c0c0c0"]The Phoenix Federation[/color] : 00.00 --> 4.00 [color="green"](+4.00)[/color]
• 3 • [color="#ff8c00"]The Order Of The Paradox[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]


• 3 • [color="#ff8c00"]Orange Defense Network[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]
• 3 • [color="#800080"]Valhalla[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]
• 3 • [color="#48D1CC"]Ragnarok[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]
• 3 • [color="#008000"]Viridian Entente[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]
• 3 • [color="#c0c0c0"]Siberian Tiger Alliance[/color] : 00.00 --> 3.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]

• 3 • [color="maroon"]Global Order of Darkness[/color] : 00.00 --> 03.00 [color="green"](+3.00)[/color]
• 2 • [color="#800080"]Invicta[/color] : 00.00 --> 2.00 [color="green"](+2.00)[/color]
• 2 • [color="black"]Sparta[/color] : 00.00 --> 2.00 [color="green"](+2.00)[/color]
• 1 • [color="#48D1CC"]The Grämlins[/color] : 00.00 --> 1.00 [color="green"](+1.00)[/color]
• 1 • [color="#48D1CC"]Mushroom Kingdom[/color] : 00.00 --> 1.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color]

• 0 • [color="#48D1CC"]Athens[/color] : 00.00 --> 00.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color]
• 0 • [color="#008000"]Green Protection Agency[/color] : 00.00 --> 00.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color]
• 0 • [color="#0000ff"]Greenland Republic[/color] : 00.00 --> 00.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color]
• 0 • [color="maroon"]Commonwealth Of Sovereign Nations[/color] : 00.00 --> 00.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color][/b]



-----

[b]Commentary[/b]
Welcome to the amazing immorality race!
Today's scores are more or less preliminary scores, I took every immoral action from the conclusion of great war 3 until prior to the 'whatever we call it war' and added them together here. I probably did some maths wrong somewhere or missed an alliance's immorality throughout history so this will be updated fort-daily (every 2 days)

It is my goal to see which alliance has been the most immoral throughout history, so far the NPO has a gigantic lead but I am sure another alliance will be able to overtake them.

Crimes and alliances that committed them are listed below, you may post in this thread and submit more immoral crimes that were performed by alliances as long as you have a link to a reliable source such as the cybernations wiki or a forum thread to prove your case.

I do not want to see mindless spam arguments here, if you did something immoral or joined a war on the side of people being immoral then you supported immorality and you will pay for your hate crimes, no excuses unless you have proof that your alliance left said coalition or whatever in defiance of the immorality.

Also all of this came straight from the CN wiki, read literally, if there is some information like the immorality that I got wrong I apologise.

Gl hf, please note I didn't add any irrelevant alliances with 0.5 score and I don't care what they do, they aren't important.


[b]Links to immorality[/b]

[b]surrender terms with no end date:[/b]
[spoiler]NPO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Alaskan_Folly#Surrender
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum-GPA_War#Terms_of_Peace
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NPO-BDC_War

IRON, TOP, VE -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum-GPA_War#Terms_of_Peace

STA, MK -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Shark_War#Long-Term_Consequences

NPO, IRON, NpO, GGA, TPF, ODN, STA, MHA
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/GATO-1V_War
[/spoiler]

[b]Alliance forcefully causing an alliance to disband as a result of war[/b]
[spoiler]NpO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NpO-CIN_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Unjust_War#Results_of_War

RoK -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Ragnarok-Bushido_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Illuminati_War

NPO, Valhalla -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Golden_Sabres_War

NPO, GGA, IRON -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/CIS-1V_War
[/spoiler]

[b]Using an alliance's unrelated internal affairs as a reason declare war[/b]
[spoiler]GGA, NPO, GOONS, FAN -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Green_Civil_War#Casus_Belli
[/spoiler]

[b]Not stating a CB publicly aka no CB[/b]
[spoiler]GGA, NPO, GOONS, FAN -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Green_Civil_War#Casus_Belli

FAN -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Operation_Overlord
[/spoiler]

[b]Declaring war over a matter previously resolved issue[/b]
[spoiler]GGA, NPO, GOONS, FAN -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Green_Civil_War#Casus_Belli
[/spoiler]

[b]Viceroy[/b]
[spoiler]NPO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NPO-ONOS_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NPO-BDC_War

NPO, IRON, NpO, GGA, TPF, ODN, STA, MHA
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/GATO-1V_War
[/spoiler]

[b]keeping an alliance in a state of war for an extended period[/b]
[spoiler]NPO-
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Second_VietFAN_War
[/spoiler]

[b]Forcing decommission of wonders[/b]
[spoiler]NpO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/BLEU-NADC_War#Terms_for_NADC_peace

NPO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Wolfpack_War#Wolfpack_surrender

IRON -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Wolfpack_War#Wolfpack_surrender

VE -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Wolfpack_War#Wolfpack_surrender

MHA -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Wolfpack_War#Wolfpack_surrender
[/spoiler]

[b]Attacking an alliance for accepting a member on a 'ZI list'[/b]
[spoiler]NPO, TOP, IRON, Invicta, MHA, ODN, GRE, GGA, VE, GOD TPF, RoK, Sparta, Valhalla -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/War_of_the_Coalition
[/spoiler]

[b]Attacking as a result of ex member rogue actions[/b]
[spoiler]Invicta -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Illuminati_War

GOD -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Illuminati_War
[/spoiler]

[b]attacking an alliance 'for being like \m/'[/b]
[spoiler]NpO -
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/CIS-FPI_War
[/spoiler]

[b]OOC CB[/b]
[spoiler]TPF, GRE, Sparta, valhalla
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum-NoV_War
[/spoiler]

[ponken]

Nice list, but you might want to check out the sources you're linking to.

from the wiki on the WoTC.

"The war began when the Grand Global Alliance attacked Hyperion for allegedly aiding a reroll of a member of their Eternal-ZI list. Various alliances and blocs then entered the war for various reasons, some directly relating to the GGA-Hyperion conflict, [b]and some for other reasons, most notably the Coalition's attack of the New Polar Order for various reasons.[/b] "

[Tromp]

Athens at 0?

Jack showing his bias here.

[Captain Oliver]

Didnt Athens just raid Ni! (a 40 man alliance) and declare war on TPF for a 6 month old CB? (alleged spying logs)

/me chocks up 7 immorality points for Athens

[i][Olivar Wuz Here]
(Reason: Adding facts to my case)[/i]

Edited February 22, 2010 by Captain Oliver

[Jack Diorno]

[quote name='Ponken' date='22 February 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1266846184' post='2197185']
Nice list, but you might want to check out the sources you're linking to.

from the wiki on the WoTC.

"The war began when the Grand Global Alliance attacked Hyperion for allegedly aiding a reroll of a member of their Eternal-ZI list. Various alliances and blocs then entered the war for various reasons, some directly relating to the GGA-Hyperion conflict, [b]and some for other reasons, most notably the Coalition's attack of the New Polar Order for various reasons.[/b] "
[/quote]
Actions speak louder then words, if an alliance enters on the side of a coalition enforcing immorality, they are an accomplice.



[quote name='Captain Oliver' date='22 February 2010 - 11:49 PM' timestamp='1266846598' post='2197192']
Didnt Athens just raid Ni! and declare war on TPF for a 6 month old CB?

/me chocks up 7 immorality points for Athens
[/quote]
That would be 2 points, one for each.
Feel free to include links to the wiki to prove your claims and i will add them in the next update.
I also didn't add the legion becoming a viceroy thing now that I look at it.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Jack Diorno

[Corinan]

Who is judging the "morality" of the actions committed by these alliances?

[Jack Diorno]

[quote name='Corinan' date='22 February 2010 - 11:53 PM' timestamp='1266846784' post='2197198']
Who is judging the "morality" of the actions committed by these alliances?
[/quote]
Bob Janova.

Heh, heh, heh...

No, I am judging it, if a large group of people cry about something then it is more then likely immoral by the CN standards. If you have a better idea on how to judge it my ears are open.

[Captain Oliver]

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Knights_of_Ni!_War
Ni! Tech Raid/War Outrage
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/TPF_War
Immoral attack on TPF

There, sir, is your proof.

Also, what about this?
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NpO-LOSS_Joke_MDP
LoSS and NpO need an extra point now, too

[Olivar Wuz Here]
(Reason: Added another immoral action)

Edited February 22, 2010 by Captain Oliver

[supercoolyellow]

Jack your numbers are off, thread is full of fail.

[Bob Janova]

Yeah Athens definitely deserve a high score. You might want to include the NPO front terms from Karma under 'keeping an alliance in a state of war for an extended period' (and the mysteriously missing immorality 'extorting excessive reparations') as well.

I think that immorality points should decline over time – an 'evil' in GW3 is a lot less relevant than one in Karma or post-Karma. For example Valhalla were the epitome of 'immoral alliances' for a while but now they are not.

The trouble is that many things are so subjective. For example, in this current war, do you score points for the NpO side for being an accomplice to 'no CB' (Polar had a CB but some people think it is not 'valid'), or the raiding side for being an accomplice to, well, a different sort of 'no CB' (raiding an alliance is a war with no CB)?

I don't think that 'Attacking an alliance for accepting a member on a 'ZI list'' is an immorality. ZI listing someone for a stupid reason could be, or if you'd put EZI there. But if someone is ZI listed for good reason, and an alliance accepts him and refuses to release him, that is condoning whatever he is on ZI for, and can be justification for war.

[Mixoux]

I predict that this thread will devolve into a debate regarding the philosophy and interpretation of 'immorality'


With that said, interesting concept!

[Letum]

This is extremely subjective. You can come up with pretty much any number you want if you try to quantify something like "immoral actions."

Look, I can cherry pick too:

1) Making an alliance pay out more tech than it has.
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Bi)

2) Turning an alliance into a tech farm for up to a year
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Bii)

3) Permanent terms
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Aiv, Av)

MA, GOD, GR, Athens, RIA, R&R, Ragnarok, TTK, VE
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=62524 (10)

4) War without CB
Athens, FoB
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Knights_of_Ni!_War

5) Using part of a previous conflict as a CB
Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/TPF_War

That's just off the top of my head from the last few months. If you look hard enough, you can come up with an excuse for putting most alliances in the 20's. This kind of thing doesn't work for anything more than propaganda.

[Azhrei]

Interesting, and a nice idea. But the subjectivity of it all results in instant fail. Sorry, Jack... nice try, though.

Oh, and in before the !@#$%*ing.

[magicninja]

I gotta do something immoral or GATO will never be sanctioned.

[MagicalTrevor]

You're literally the worst member of CnG.


[i]literally[/i]

[Castles]

o/ TOOL


I'm showing my bias and its sexy.

[NeCoHo]

[quote name='Jack Diorno' date='22 February 2010 - 08:32 AM' timestamp='1266845544' post='2197176']
...if you did something immoral or joined a war on the side of people being immoral then you supported immorality and you will pay for your hate crimes, no excuses unless you have proof that your alliance left said coalition or whatever in defiance of the immorality.[/quote]

So we can disregard treaties so long as it's immoral to follow them otherwise.

I'd like to see Vilien's take on all of this.

[Trace]

This has to be on my list of stupidest things done in CN.

I'll admit, it's a long list, but this is on it. This isn't even funny or interesting man.

[kpcurley]

[quote name='Jack Diorno' date='22 February 2010 - 08:57 AM' timestamp='1266847071' post='2197202']
Bob Janova.

Heh, heh, heh...

No, I am judging it, if a large group of people cry about something then it is more then likely immoral by the CN standards. If you have a better idea on how to judge it my ears are open.
[/quote]

I have a better Idea Jack, dont make silly lists which mean nothing and are obviously biased. Anyway morals in CN are kind of lulz in my opinion. While I love the game and community it is just browser based text game, can some one really wrong another human being?

[Locke]

[quote name='Jack Diorno' date='22 February 2010 - 08:32 AM' timestamp='1266845544' post='2197176']• 1 • [color="#48D1CC"]Mushroom Kingdom[/color] : 00.00 --> 1.00 [color="green"](+0.00)[/color][/quote]
Should be:
[quote name='Jack Diorno' date='22 February 2010 - 08:32 AM' timestamp='1266845544' post='2197176']• 1 • [color="#48D1CC"]Mushroom Kingdom[/color] : 00.00 --> 1.00 [color="green"](+1.00)[/color][/quote]

[silentkiller]

Meh interesting idea. Doubt it can work though.

[Cobalt]

Oh look, personal opinions on a subjective abstract topic presented as empirical data. Whatever could be wrong with that.

[RePePe]

Whether you are right or not, you should have realized that many people would disagree with this no matter what you say.

It's impossible to please everyone and I am sorry you had to waste time composing that. I respect the effort you put into it, but not the content itself.

[Leigon]

Honestly I like the concept. One of the more interesting ideas you've had over the last years. It will be tough to make it work though. But I think it's worth a shot. Worst thing that can happen is it might evolve into a flamefest and get buried. But if you improve the ranking and manage to stay halfway objective it might be a statistic I'll actually enjoy.

Some ideas for improvement:

* Over time points should diminish. As a totally arbitrary percentage I'd say make them lose 25% of their value per year.
* Some objective criterias would be nice. Maybe length of the forum thread, which is easily manipulated though, and/or a group of neutrals judging it. I could think of several good candidates for that. And no I don't mean Bob Janova.
* Update things as they come until you've worked through history. Later on you can easily go back to updating once a month. Those immoral things usually don't happen everyday.

In any case good luck with this.

[Jack Diorno]

[quote name='Letum' date='23 February 2010 - 01:23 AM' timestamp='1266852230' post='2197282']
This is extremely subjective. You can come up with pretty much any number you want if you try to quantify something like "immoral actions."

Look, I can cherry pick too:

1) Making an alliance pay out more tech than it has.
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Bi)

2) Turning an alliance into a tech farm for up to a year
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Bii)

3) Permanent terms
OV, VE, GOD, Vanguard, GR, Athens, FOK, RoK, Sparta, R&R, MOON, International, =LOST=, DICE, GUN
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=63887 (Aiv, Av)

MA, GOD, GR, Athens, RIA, R&R, Ragnarok, TTK, VE
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=62524 (10)

4) War without CB
Athens, FoB
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Knights_of_Ni!_War

5) Using part of a previous conflict as a CB
Athens, RoK, GOD, \m/
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/TPF_War

That's just off the top of my head from the last few months. If you look hard enough, you can come up with an excuse for putting most alliances in the 20's. This kind of thing doesn't work for anything more than propaganda.
[/quote]

Heh.
If you want to take this seriously I will add what is logical.
To address 1, 2, 3 - While making an alliance pay more tech then it has can be viewed as immoral, 1 and 2 are basically the exact same thing and the terms given to the NPO had a specific end date.
The other terms with no end date literally said in the surrender terms that they were perpetual terms or they ended when the victor decided they could end.

4 and 5 were already submitted by some ODN member.


[quote name='Bob Janova' date='23 February 2010 - 12:27 AM' timestamp='1266848823' post='2197228']
Yeah Athens definitely deserve a high score. You might want to include the NPO front terms from Karma under 'keeping an alliance in a state of war for an extended period' (and the mysteriously missing immorality 'extorting excessive reparations') as well.

I think that immorality points should decline over time – an 'evil' in GW3 is a lot less relevant than one in Karma or post-Karma. For example Valhalla were the epitome of 'immoral alliances' for a while but now they are not.

The trouble is that many things are so subjective. For example, in this current war, do you score points for the NpO side for being an accomplice to 'no CB' (Polar had a CB but some people think it is not 'valid'), or the raiding side for being an accomplice to, well, a different sort of 'no CB' (raiding an alliance is a war with no CB)?

I don't think that 'Attacking an alliance for accepting a member on a 'ZI list'' is an immorality. ZI listing someone for a stupid reason could be, or if you'd put EZI there. But if someone is ZI listed for good reason, and an alliance accepts him and refuses to release him, that is condoning whatever he is on ZI for, and can be justification for war.
[/quote]

1st paragraph - The NPO was given surrender terms and an option to remove itself from the war, where as the only other conflict that I list as 'an extended period' was vietFAN and we all know what happened there.
Also the karma war was never listed as a war of occupation on the CN wiki, which I take as law in this scenario and is what I was indicating.

2nd paragraph - yes, the easiest thing to do is to add some math formula that takes a number off for how old the alliance is, someone should think of one

3rd and 4th - I deliberately didn't add the current war in, as I really have no idea what to do with that mess.
ZI list was either PZI or EZI list I should have specified, and I cannot think of any scenario where a PZI or EZI is justifiable.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Jack Diorno