Jump to content

From UINE with Love (and harassement allegations)


Keve69

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Captain Flinders' date='08 June 2010 - 07:30 PM' timestamp='1276034418' post='2329207']
Secondly, even if the offender does not leave the AA outright, if/when the offender does indeed breach your guidelines, other alliances can clearly see that the offender is not one of your own and you are taking steps to distance yourself from them. [/quote]


How exactly can you see if someone has been sending them threatening messages or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='New Frontier' date='08 June 2010 - 05:48 PM' timestamp='1276033664' post='2329196']
Right. I'll be sure to remember that next time a Nordreicher ghosts or goes rogue. I can always use more tech.
[/quote]

Two days ago, Nordreich issued orders to attack [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=260603"]a former member[/url] who ghosted 'the International' and launched random attacks on alliances we aren't even tied to.

We deal with our ghosts and our rogues in a timely manner.

Nice try, though.

[quote name='Penkala' date='08 June 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1276030949' post='2329154']
How does a ghost attacking you call for a threat against their alliance? Like I just said, I could easily ghost you and launch an attack. If I choose to do so in the future, will you pay for all the damages I inflict? What if I was a 120k NS nation? Would you pay $5 billion in reps to an alliance since I ghosted you? No? Then lay off this stupid argument. If yes, then I know whose AA I'll ghost next time I go rogue :)

There's a difference between standing up for your treaty partners and dashing in front of them and pointing a gun at a guy because he accidentally bumped into them. It was an over reaction and you made threats when that wasn't necessary. There was no defending of your allies necessary here. [i]It was a ghost.[/i]
[/quote]

Yes, we know that. Now.

I refer you to the earlier, inflammatory, statement made by a UINE Triumvir; a statement acknowledged by Keve to have been inappropriate.

Please continue to be obtuse. It amuses me.

Edited by Ashoka the Great
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sheesh.

[img]http://hilobrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ball-hugo-cabaret1.jpg[/img]

I hope this is a lesson for all on how not to do things (pretty much all the way around). The proud citizens of Iunctus--like the one above--don't normally like to draw attention to themselves. I'm sure many consider us a pretty wishy-washy alliance, but we do pride ourselves in treating others with respect and consideration due to people [playing a game].

I do believe an alliance should be held partially responsible for the actions of its ghosts and rogues, as we ourselves had to speak to our very good friends in Gondor a few weeks ago. I'm sure that we could have settled things with a lot less drama had we come together and communication been better. Part of that is on me and the leadership of Iunctus, and I regret that I haven't been very available lately for such issues. But at the same time personalities and the silly season of CN politics seems to have taken hold here, and a slight matter has turned into this. I hope this little diversion has been a good time for a lot of you, but I also think that the more excitable members of all parties can step back a bit and we can reasonably put this to rest.

[img]http://api.ning.com/files/BWuBY6vPNbzmIpDdiW5rlyHgMIeR-eTIlkjf58qlKgPvNFCYE65WNwe3BRl*u3K1mpC*hHCiiTALz5RO8u8iUHQdef7FrJgc/Train_wreck_at_Montparnasse_1895.jpg[/img]

Edited by sammykhalifa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='09 June 2010 - 02:19 AM' timestamp='1276013942' post='2328900']
People are welcome to criticize NOIR signatories for over-reacting. However, the facts of the case presented -- until this thread started -- called for [i]precisely[/i] that response.
[/quote]

If you thought coreyrolfe's OP was the factual truth in its entirety of this situation then you're a moron. The 'official' response (pasted below) you jumped on wasn't presented with a modicum of context and was clearly missing vital information.


Hitsugaya: Yeah good luck with that one.
Hitsugaya: Get lost.
Hitsugaya: It is resolved
Hitsugaya: Take it or leave it on those terms.


What terms? By the very limited 'facts' revealed at the stage you started chest beating, no-one could've known what those terms were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='08 June 2010 - 04:43 PM' timestamp='1276036971' post='2329246']
How exactly can you see if someone has been sending them threatening messages or not?
[/quote]
Do not question NOIR's fact finding capablities. Do you not know they are the greatest of allies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm at GATO when a ghost under our AA attacks someone usually they come in a friendly manner and we check the situation and once it is found the offending nation is a ghost we tell them it's cool to whoop is $@! if they like. Not once has anyone ever said "You need to get rid of your own ghost or we'll have our allies beat you up." They are usually pretty happy to be able to beat up a rogue ghost. So from my view I have no idea where this notion of it's the alliance's responsibility to beat up their own ghosts comes from. I've never seen it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='08 June 2010 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1276038336' post='2329266']

Yes, we know that. Now.

I refer you to the earlier, inflammatory, statement made by a UINE Triumvir; a statement acknowledged by Keve to have been inappropriate.

Please continue to be obtuse. It amuses me.
[/quote]


The only one being obtuse here is you, with your "WELL WE WERE JUST DEFENDING OUR ALLIES" line. As I stated before, any reasonably competent person who has been here more than a few months would know that these threads are typically way off base, and would withhold judgment until hearing what really happened. You didn't do that. So either I'm an incredibly brilliant guy, and you not-so-much, or you knew what was likely going on and wanted to make some noise anyways.

Also, what Grumpdogg said. No reasonable person would have jumped to "make threats" mode at that point [i]unless they wanted a conflict rather than a resolution[/i]. It just doesn't make any sense.

Edited by Penkala
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='09 June 2010 - 05:02 AM' timestamp='1276030949' post='2329154']
Since the beginning of time? You can't force someone to leave your AA, so it's incorrect to punish an alliance because of that. Alliances are responsible for their members and those they protect. If I were to join your AA and then start going rogue on alliances would you pay for all of my damages? I think not.

[/quote]

If you tried to actually move him off, using either diplomacy or military action, I would leave it at that. But if you did nothing and just left him to be on your AA. Then I would hold you accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 04:13 AM' timestamp='1276071168' post='2329947']
If you tried to actually move him off, using either diplomacy or military action, I would leave it at that. But if you did nothing and just left him to be on your AA. Then I would hold you accountable.
[/quote]

Why? Why does it matter if you took actions to remove him from your AA or not? Give me a good reason that changes the situation to make it the alliance's fault. What is your basis for faulting an alliance ghosted, other than a stupid knee-jerk reaction of "BUT HE'S ON YOUR AA! KILL YOU!"? How is the ghosted AA at fault at all for creating the war or enabling greater destruction?

I await your [i]rational[/i] argument that an AA is at fault for a war because they didn't kick someone off their AA. (And before you try, not "I think that" or "I feel that", you need to prove this without using your very opinion I'm questioning as proof to back your opinion)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='09 June 2010 - 04:37 PM' timestamp='1276072654' post='2329952']
Why? Why does it matter if you took actions to remove him from your AA or not? Give me a good reason that changes the situation to make it the alliance's fault. What is your basis for faulting an alliance ghosted, other than a stupid knee-jerk reaction of "BUT HE'S ON YOUR AA! KILL YOU!"? How is the ghosted AA at fault at all for creating the war or enabling greater destruction?

I await your [i]rational[/i] argument that an AA is at fault for a war because they didn't kick someone off their AA. (And before you try, not "I think that" or "I feel that", you need to prove this without using your very opinion I'm questioning as proof to back your opinion)
[/quote]

AA is you identity, which splits you from the rest of CN. Shows that you belong to a certain group and that group can be seen as one entity.

Now if you allow for ghosts to just sit their without as least confronting them if can be seen in peoples eyes as acceptance of them onto your AA, also allowing them to sit idle can cause future situations like what has now occurred here. Most alliances prefer to try and actually remove them in order to avoid such issues.

Some alliances currently conducting such as this is NPO, Legion and ODN and the number of alliances I have been in the policy has been the same.

What nations do under your AA reflects on your AA, why in gods name would you want a bunch of ghosts under your AA attacking everyone, tell me that. Unless your some kind of NS lover trying to boost your nation and NS count.


(Also when I say "you" I don't mean Penkala, I mean people in general)

Edited by nutkase
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='09 June 2010 - 09:37 AM' timestamp='1276072654' post='2329952']
Why? Why does it matter if you took actions to remove him from your AA or not? Give me a good reason that changes the situation to make it the alliance's fault. What is your basis for faulting an alliance ghosted, other than a stupid knee-jerk reaction of "BUT HE'S ON YOUR AA! KILL YOU!"? How is the ghosted AA at fault at all for creating the war or enabling greater destruction? [/quote]

Nice use of capital letters to completely exaggerate the situation.

No-one said anything like that and you and UINE's allies making NOIR out to be some over agressive menace is really getting boring now.

UINE, deal with your ghosts better. Corey, speak to your allies in NOIR or perhaps a more experienced member of your gov for advice if you don't know what you're doing in a situation like this, which you clearly don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='New Frontier' date='08 June 2010 - 10:08 PM' timestamp='1276049294' post='2329514']
Do you not know they are the greatest of allies?
[/quote]

As much as you want that to be an insult, it isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 06:33 AM' timestamp='1276074169' post='2329962']
AA is you identity, which splits you from the rest of CN. Shows that you belong to a certain group and that group can be seen as one entity.

Now if you allow for ghosts to just sit their without as least confronting them if can be seen in peoples eyes as acceptance of them onto your AA, also allowing them to sit idle can cause future situations like what has now occurred here. Most alliances prefer to try and actually remove them in order to avoid such issues.

Some alliances currently conducting such as this is NPO, Legion and ODN and the number of alliances I have been in the policy has been the same.

What nations do under your AA reflects on your AA, why in gods name would you want a bunch of ghosts under your AA attacking everyone, tell me that. Unless your some kind of NS lover trying to boost your nation and NS count.


(Also when I say "you" I don't mean Penkala, I mean people in general)
[/quote]


Why would any of that matter to someone outside of the alliance that's being ghosted?

If you're dealing with a stubborn ghost who won't leave, the end result is going to be the same no matter if you attack them for a year or outright ignore them; they're still going to cause trouble. Why then is it that something that is entirely an internal policy is the difference between sabre-rattling about reps and being fine with what's happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a ghost goes rogue there are two primary options available: deem as a ghost with no protection, or take responsibility and make amends. Where do you people get the idea that you must do both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='09 June 2010 - 03:26 PM' timestamp='1276093578' post='2330115']
Why would any of that matter to someone outside of the alliance that's being ghosted?

If you're dealing with a stubborn ghost who won't leave, the end result is going to be the same no matter if you attack them for a year or outright ignore them; they're still going to cause trouble. Why then is it that something that is entirely an internal policy is the difference between sabre-rattling about reps and being fine with what's happening?
[/quote]

Maybe because people don't like being attacked by someone, ran around in circles and made a mockery of by their allies, basically told to $%&@ off by their government to be later told that the person is a ghost who has been sat on the alliance affiliation attacking people for the best part of three months, pretending to be a member and receiving money through tech deals to fund the attacks.

When you clearly state that you don't give a !@#$ about ghosts on your AA, you're going to start a contraversial argument with those who believe that you should handle ghosts so that these situation don't arise. Nutkase isn't rattling his sabre (that sounds wrong :lol1: ) at anyone, he's totally unrelated to this whole UINE & Allies vs NOIR joke of an argument, he's just putting across his viewpoint, as am I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 10:51 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
Maybe because people don't like being attacked by someone, ran around in circles and made a mockery of by their allies, basically told to $%&@ off by their government to be later told that the person is a ghost who has been sat on the alliance affiliation attacking people for the best part of three months, pretending to be a member and receiving money through tech deals to fund the attacks.

When you clearly state that you don't give a !@#$ about ghosts on your AA, you're going to start a contraversial argument with those who believe that you should handle ghosts so that these situation don't arise. Nutkase isn't rattling his sabre (that sounds wrong :lol1: ) at anyone, he's totally unrelated to this whole UINE & Allies vs NOIR joke of an argument, he's just putting across his viewpoint, as am I.
[/quote]

I love you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='08 June 2010 - 04:43 PM' timestamp='1276036971' post='2329246']
How exactly can you see if someone has been sending them threatening messages or not?
[/quote]


[quote name='New Frontier' date='08 June 2010 - 08:08 PM' timestamp='1276049294' post='2329514']
Do not question NOIR's fact finding capablities. Do you not know they are the greatest of allies?
[/quote]
Come on guys, now you're just being difficult to the point of willful ignorance of what I posted. I was obviously referring to attacking the ghost and not sending messages. The entire post up to that point was referring to the reasons and to why you would want to attack a ghost and that was one of the reasons.

As for whether NOIR members overreacted or not. I don't see how it could possibly be seen as an overreaction. You attack our allies and you're going to hear form us. Overreaction would be launching attacks without further information. But simply backing your allies vocally until a resolution can be figured out is standard operating procedure for most alliances and is something good allies do for each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
Maybe because people don't like being attacked by someone[/quote]

Nobody likes having someone in their alliance get attacked, but !@#$ happens. Find out that they're a ghost, kick their $@!, and move on.

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
ran around in circles and made a mockery of by their allies[/quote]

When did this happen? Nobody allied to UINE said anything close to inflammatory until some people decided they wanted to show everyone how big and tough they are.

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
basically told to $%&@ off by their government[/quote]

Ah yes, the brief snippet of logs which alluded to an earlier portion of the conversation(which was left out by corey :o )

Surely not something to be looked into for the full context, no, they're clearly sending a message that they support the ghost.

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
to be later told that the person is a ghost who has been sat on the alliance affiliation attacking people for the best part of three months, pretending to be a member and receiving money through tech deals to fund the attacks.
[/quote]

An injustice, to be sure. The most devious of deeds being that he somehow specifically targeted alliances whose members were unable to click the "Declare War" button in defense of their comrades. Psychopathic behavior at its worst.

[quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1276095072' post='2330140']
When you clearly state that you don't give a !@#$ about ghosts on your AA, you're going to start a contraversial argument with those who believe that you should handle ghosts so that these situation don't arise. Nutkase isn't rattling his sabre (that sounds wrong :lol1: ) at anyone, he's totally unrelated to this whole UINE & Allies vs NOIR joke of an argument, he's just putting across his viewpoint, as am I.
[/quote]

And when you try to argue that people should have any responsibility for a nation that's beyond their ability to control, and who is not protected or endorsed by them, you're going to start a "controversial argument" with those who believe that you should do your own dirty work.

Also, my apologies to yourself and Nutkase, my comment was more or less referencing Myworld's initial comments which sparked this debate.

[quote name='Captain Flinders' date='09 June 2010 - 01:05 PM' timestamp='1276097729' post='2330179']
Come on guys, now you're just being difficult to the point of willful ignorance of what I posted. I was obviously referring to attacking the ghost and not sending messages. The entire post up to that point was referring to the reasons and to why you would want to attack a ghost and that was one of the reasons.
[/quote]

And what if an alliance has nobody in range to attack the ghost? Are they at fault too for not displaying enough effort to the alliances who are too important to go ask if the nation is a ghost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='10 June 2010 - 12:22 AM' timestamp='1276100554' post='2330253']

Ah yes, the brief snippet of logs which alluded to an earlier portion of the conversation(which was left out by corey :o )

Surely not something to be looked into for the full context, no, they're clearly sending a message that they support the ghost.
[/quote]

No matter the context of the logs, what was said was not the best thing to say, which has already been acknowledged.

[quote]
An injustice, to be sure. The most devious of deeds being that he somehow specifically targeted alliances whose members were unable to click the "Declare War" button in defense of their comrades. Psychopathic behavior at its worst.
[/quote]

Just how the alliance he was ghosting was unable to click the "declare War" button in order to police their AA.


[quote]
And when you try to argue that people should have any responsibility for a nation that's beyond their ability to control, and who is not protected or endorsed by them, you're going to start a "controversial argument" with those who believe that you should do your own dirty work.

Also, my apologies to yourself and Nutkase, my comment was more or less referencing Myworld's initial comments which sparked this debate.
[/quote]

Not arguing that they have control over the nation, but the fact of their laziness to at least police their AA, if you cannot even do that then their is some serious issues.

[quote]
And what if an alliance has nobody in range to attack the ghost? Are they at fault too for not displaying enough effort to the alliances who are too important to go ask if the nation is a ghost?
[/quote]

I have already stated that if their was no nations within range, fair enough. But in this case they have numerous nations within range of this ghost. Thus no real reason to sit back and do nothing. Also what you talking about too important to ask if they are a ghost, that is not a issue we are talking about unless brought up by someone else.

I believe though when Cory first spoke to their government. It was not stated it was a ghost, but later on in a thread. So they assumed it was a actual member at first talks.

I assume that was the timeline from memory.

Edited by nutkase
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 05:03 AM' timestamp='1276074169' post='2329962']
AA is you identity, which splits you from the rest of CN. Shows that you belong to a certain group and that group can be seen as one entity.

Now if you allow for ghosts to just sit their without as least confronting them if can be seen in peoples eyes as acceptance of them onto your AA, also allowing them to sit idle can cause future situations like what has now occurred here. Most alliances prefer to try and actually remove them in order to avoid such issues.

Some alliances currently conducting such as this is NPO, Legion and ODN and the number of alliances I have been in the policy has been the same.

What nations do under your AA reflects on your AA, why in gods name would you want a bunch of ghosts under your AA attacking everyone, tell me that. Unless your some kind of NS lover trying to boost your nation and NS count.


(Also when I say "you" I don't mean Penkala, I mean people in general)
[/quote]

You didn't explain how allowing a ghost to be on an AA starts a particular war.. which was what I asked you to do. :P Alliances should only be responsible if a fault of their own causes damage to a nation. That's not the case with ghosting.

[quote]No-one said anything like that and you and UINE's allies making NOIR out to be some over agressive menace is really getting boring now.[/quote]

There's really not debating it. It's written in stone in the other thread. Threats of war against UINE because UINE didn't remove a ghost before it attacked. How is that [i]not[/i] overly aggressive?

[quote]If a ghost goes rogue there are two primary options available: deem as a ghost with no protection, or take responsibility and make amends. Where do you people get the idea that you must do both? [/quote]

They actually don't, and maybe in the future we'll see a case where NOIR is using the same arguments... "it's not my responsibility to take care of ghosts." But they have to have [i]some reason[/i] to back up their earlier threats (else look like complete idiots), so they chose "you didn't ghost bust; it's your problem".

[quote]When you clearly state that you don't give a !@#$ about ghosts on your AA, you're going to start a contraversial argument with those who believe that you should handle ghosts so that these situation don't arise[/quote]

So you truly believe if the ghost were to leave the AA and go to another AA all these wars would start. And therefore, it is UINE's fault for allowing him to stay on the AA. Oh, OK.

[quote]As for whether NOIR members overreacted or not. I don't see how it could possibly be seen as an overreaction. You attack our allies and you're going to hear form us[/quote]

The problem there is that you're not telling the truth. A ghost attacked you, not UINE. And if you hadn't [u]overreacted[/u] you would have [i]known[/i] that.

[quote]But simply backing your allies vocally until a resolution can be figured out is standard operating procedure for most alliances and is something good allies do for each other. [/quote]

No, you made threats, and in fact hurt your ally's cause. If they were going to be paid reps before by UINE, they sure weren't after your threats. Threatening an attack is not the way to resolve a conflict peacefully and you know that. But you guys didn't really care if it ended peacefully or in war ;)

[quote]No matter the context of the logs, what was said was not the best thing to say, which has already been acknowledged[/quote]

OK, maybe not the best wording, but once again you're missing the point: An out-of-context snippet (especially one alluding to something earlier on the conversation (especially THESE which already indicated a resolution)) should not be taken as a full official government response.

[quote]Not arguing that they have control over the nation, but the fact of their laziness to at least police their AA, if you cannot even do that then their is some serious issues. [/quote]

Except they can do whatever they want with their AA. Members are members, bound by the rules of their alliance and representatives of their alliance. Ghosts are not. Now typically, a reasonably intelligent person would go to the attacking alliance and ask if the person is a member or not (SHOCKING!). Then, if they were a ghost, the defending alliance could attack him/her, maybe with the attacking alliance's help (but not likely after you're a jerk to them like Corey apparently has been). If they're a member, you work out reps. This is done dozens of times per day without a hitch, and the only people who seem to have a problem with it are you.

Edited by Penkala
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1276101776' post='2330279']
No matter the context of the logs, what was said was not the best thing to say, which has already been acknowledged.
[/quote]

I won't argue that the tone was inappropriate, Keve has addressed this and will deal with it, however Hitsugaya was not speaking in reference to the ghost attack, and was basically given a canned response to corey after he had been querying them for some time.


[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1276101776' post='2330279']
Just how the alliance he was ghosting was unable to click the "declare War" button in order to police their AA.
[/quote]

Yes, exactly. Except for the part where they aren't complaining that someone else isn't doing it for them.



[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1276101776' post='2330279']
Not arguing that they have control over the nation, but the fact of their laziness to at least police their AA, if you cannot even do that then their is some serious issues.
[/quote]

None of which concern anyone outside of the alliance.


[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1276101776' post='2330279']
I have already stated that if their was no nations within range, fair enough. But in this case they have numerous nations within range of this ghost. Thus no real reason to sit back and do nothing. Also what you talking about too important to ask if they are a ghost, that is not a issue we are talking about unless brought up by someone else.
[/quote]

Why is it fair enough? The end result is exactly the same whatever way you slice it. The ghost nation is sitting on the AA unharmed and free to attack whoever they wish.

[quote name='nutkase' date='09 June 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1276101776' post='2330279']
I believe though when Cory first spoke to their government. It was not stated it was a ghost, but later on in a thread. So they assumed it was a actual member at first talks.

I assume that was the timeline from memory.
[/quote]

Did corey ask if they were a ghost? Judging by the logs that he quoted, the response given sounds like something else was being discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting. I get the feeling that this isn't really an argument about ghosts though.

In my experience, sometimes ghosts cause problems. Then the problem solver pummels them, and they crawl into a hole and/or become unaligned.

Also fairly common is the "If I say my problem member is a ghost then I won't have to take responsibility for him" approach to alliance leadership. This leads alliance leaders to say that their members are actually ghosts in hope that the injured party will not hurt them too badly. UINE gave some signs of this approach in their initial communications; the fact that the possible ghost attacked an alliance leader that has historically been at odds with UINE would make me suspicious as well.

The thing is, either way the thing to do is the same. Once the nation is declared a ghost, you send your military to pummel it into submission. If you've got the second case, then usually the alliance leader squawks at some point, at which point you've got evidence that the claim of the nation being a ghost was false, and you can take further action as it becomes desirable.

This is pretty much what we did to Illuminati, incidentally. Terry Howard bought into a number of really terrible ideas about alliance leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='09 June 2010 - 10:22 AM' timestamp='1276100554' post='2330253']
And what if an alliance has nobody in range to attack the ghost? Are they at fault too for not displaying enough effort to the alliances who are too important to go ask if the nation is a ghost?
[/quote]
I'm not sure where this indignant attitude is coming from but it's getting old real fast. No one said they were too important to contact UINE. I'm sure a few alliances who were genuinely interested did contact them. What I was saying is that ignoring ghosts can lead to this situation and a string of misunderstandings. That's all. And there is no point in dealing with hypothetical situations. We're dealing with this situation here and now. And in this situation, UINE had plenty of nations that could have protected their AA and in turn, their sovereignty. Whether they choose to do so is their call of course, but I've explained already why it is a good idea to at least make the effort.

Edited by Captain Flinders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...