Acca Dacca Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Sardonic' date='23 June 2010 - 02:29 PM' timestamp='1277321322' post='2347900'] I am deeply disappointed that we were not involved in this. [/quote] Honestly, so am I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Drugnut' date='23 June 2010 - 01:30 PM' timestamp='1277314217' post='2347792'] My alliance is [url="http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=United%20Foundation"]United Foundation[/url] we have been attacked without provocation by [url="http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=Nutty%20North%20Koreans"]nutty north koreans[/url]. And my nation [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=390052"]Cocaine[/url] was nuked today. If there is anything anyone can do to help, it would be most appreciated. [/quote] I hope they nuke you again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1277324470' post='2347970'] If The Moralist Front had announced a one way protectorate to every microalliance in the world, then you have an arguable point. However, what was announced involved one micro-alliance after that alliance requested . [/quote] Doesn't matter, if we recognize one, logically we have to let any N number be valid. They did however sign it (allegedly) making it valid. So there is no issue. [quote] Also, originally it wasn't even GOONS that were mentioned in the original OP. One of your members just saw it and attacked as a result. [/quote] Of course he did, he was well within his rights to do so. They had no protectorate until the second it was signed by both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktarthan Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 (edited) [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 01:21 PM' timestamp='1277324470' post='2347970'] If The Moralist Front had announced a one way protectorate to every microalliance in the world, then you have an arguable point. However, what was announced involved one micro-alliance after that alliance requested help. This isn't going to hamper the raiding efforts of GOONS. Also, originally it wasn't even GOONS that were mentioned in the original OP. One of your members just saw it and attacked as a result. Thus, no GOON was involved until after the OWF post. [/quote] Of course no GOON was involved before the OWF post... I've never even heard of that alliance. Seriously though, it's all about precedent. When we make a policy decision like this, we have to consider possible future outcomes. Edited June 23, 2010 by ktarthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 08:10 PM' timestamp='1277320210' post='2347878'] I suggest that you follow up on Vilien's offer via private PM, if you haven't already done so already. He's a great person to work with and experienced alliance leader. (I'm not getting paid to say that either - it's my opinion from experience). Also, people will probably continue to tell you "get a protectorate" as if you can walk up to any alliance and say "hey, my name is Drugnut and my alliance is being attacked right now, could you please help me out by being or protectors?" which has never been the case from my experience. When you ask for a protector, you're asking the alliance to agree to defend you against ANY other alliance that attacks, often for whatever reason. Most alliances (rightfully) will not do that unless they know you and your group well AND there is some sort of at least token exchange. In many cases, the "price" for protection is far from token. Thus, expect to give up a portion of your alliance's freedom in exchange. Just generally to new small alliance leaders who may be reading this thread. If you haven't started visiting other alliance forums and getting to know people, do so. The best way to start relations is to start tech trading with them. You can PM me if you have questions. I have two years experience in leading a (then new) micro alliance prior to "retiring" into my current group. I know these issues well [/quote] There are however people out there, like FoS, who will gladly help new raided alliances get protectorates without question usually. Has Vilien already solved this or is the raid still on going? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agafaba Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 I would like to see if GOONS would change their "ignore your one way treaty" policy if it was an alliance like MHA or NPO that did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='lmcfalcon12' date='23 June 2010 - 01:35 PM' timestamp='1277314539' post='2347795'] I gotta read the rules again, because right now I have no idea how names like "Drugnut" and "Cocaine" were allowed. Apparently I'm missing something. [/quote] Or "Methrage" right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='agafaba' date='23 June 2010 - 02:37 PM' timestamp='1277325412' post='2347989'] I would like to see if GOONS would change their "ignore your one way treaty" policy if it was an alliance like MHA or NPO that did it. [/quote] I thought I read that NPO had a oneway treaty with Red nations? Well I just got out of a tech-raid on a red nation if that counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agafaba Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='General Scipio' date='23 June 2010 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1277325744' post='2347993'] I thought I read that NPO had a oneway treaty with Red nations? Well I just got out of a tech-raid on a red nation if that counts. [/quote] Welcome to 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 We recognize the Revenge Doctrine by peacing out with nations that they come to us about. However, we have not banned the sphere from raiding, and from my understanding, nor have our allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='agafaba' date='23 June 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1277325898' post='2347996'] Welcome to 2010 [/quote] Sorry guy, I've only been here like a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='ktarthan' date='23 June 2010 - 03:04 PM' timestamp='1277323468' post='2347949'] GOONS would never think of dictating the terms contained in a treaty that did not belong to us. However, there is nothing in the terms of any treaty that says "GOONS may not raid the signatories". (Even if there were, we aren't exactly bound by such terms as we did not sign them.) [/quote] Would GOONS dictate to other alliances (micro or otherwise) when they can and can not post on OWF and what they can say? I bring that question up because (as I noted previous - do correct me if I'm wrong) the GOONS member who attacked did so after a public request for help was made due to an attack by nation(s) in A DIFFERENT ALLIANCE. So - we're not talking about an announcement regarding GOONS in particular here. If someone makes a post complaining about an attack by GOONS, I can see why they would become involved. In this case, GOONS weren't involved until a GOONS member decided to take advantage of the fact that someone was asking for help in public by attacking the alliance that made the request at that time. Personally (i.e. speaking for myself and not BN in particular) I see this difference as significant. The request had NOTHING to do with GOONS. If you're going to get directly involved in requests for help that do not involve you to begin with, it will HIGHLY discourage the freedom of any other alliance to request help or perhaps even post (because the members don't want to attract your attention if they happen to be smaller and without significant military ties) in public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='agafaba' date='23 June 2010 - 04:37 PM' timestamp='1277325412' post='2347989'] I would like to see if GOONS would change their "ignore your one way treaty" policy if it was an alliance like MHA or NPO that did it. [/quote] I think they'd revise their policy if MHA did it; if NPO did it though, they'd be among the first on the roll NPO bandwagon again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 (edited) [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 02:49 PM' timestamp='1277326128' post='2348003'] Would GOONS dictate to other alliances (micro or otherwise) when they can and can not post on OWF and what they can say? I bring that question up because (as I noted previous - do correct me if I'm wrong) the GOONS member who attacked did so after a public request for help was made due to an attack by nation(s) in A DIFFERENT ALLIANCE. So - we're not talking about an announcement regarding GOONS in particular here. If someone makes a post complaining about an attack by GOONS, I can see why they would become involved. In this case, GOONS weren't involved until a GOONS member decided to take advantage of the fact that someone was asking for help in public by attacking the alliance that made the request at that time. Personally (i.e. speaking for myself and not BN in particular) I see this difference as significant. The request had NOTHING to do with GOONS. If you're going to get directly involved in requests for help that do not involve you to begin with, it will HIGHLY discourage the freedom of any other alliance to request help or perhaps even post (because the members don't want to attract your attention if they happen to be smaller and without significant military ties) in public. [/quote] I didn't attack because they asked for help, I attacked because I say a micro-alliance without a protectorate. If they had posted an announcement about their creation and they didn't have a protector I would have done the same thing. Raiding targets are hard to find, you gotta take what you can get. Edited June 23, 2010 by General Scipio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='General Scipio' date='23 June 2010 - 03:52 PM' timestamp='1277326310' post='2348006'] I didn't attack because they asked for help, I attacked because I say a micro-alliance without a protectorate. If they had posted an announcement about their creation and they didn't have a protector I would have done the same thing. Raiding targets are hard to find, you gotta take what you can get. [/quote] You could have done that easy enough and not made a point to post about it in the thread. So why bother posting about it here? Also, it makes my point stronger, basically confirms that these groups don't have the right to post anything on OWF without risking a "tech raid" by GOONS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 04:59 PM' timestamp='1277326757' post='2348012'] So why bother posting about it here? [/quote] One can ask you the same question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nippy Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Haflinger' date='23 June 2010 - 09:56 PM' timestamp='1277322971' post='2347937'] Vilien, I think I'm in love. [/quote] Oh good, Vilien...you've attracted Haflinger. I hope you're happy with yourself. White Chocolate, you're only delicious combined with other forms of chocolate. By yourself, you're detestable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix von Agnu Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Vilien' date='23 June 2010 - 03:43 PM' timestamp='1277322196' post='2347927'] Perhaps you should have actually read the treaty, it clearly includes the relevant signatures of the second party. My dear Sardonic, I believe you are losing your touch. Irrelevant. What kind of protector would I be if I allowed violence to be done to my protectees based on a triviality like timing? [/quote] In moralism land, when someone commits an act and it is later made illegal, do you arrest them? [quote name='Haflinger' date='23 June 2010 - 04:49 PM' timestamp='1277326137' post='2348004'] I think they'd revise their policy if MHA did it; if NPO did it though, they'd be among the first on the roll NPO bandwagon again. [/quote] If they are the first ones on, is it really a bandwagon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktarthan Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1277326757' post='2348012'] You could have done that easy enough and not made a point to post about it in the thread. So why bother posting about it here? [/quote] Why do you feel you should be able to dictate what the members of GOONS are able to post? Actually I do think you have a point, though. We should keep our tech raiding as secret as possible, so that small alliances feel safer in posting on the OWF, which is where we will find them and raid them without prejudice! [quote name='White Chocolate' date='23 June 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1277326757' post='2348012'] Also, it makes my point stronger, basically confirms that these groups don't have the right to post anything on OWF without risking a "tech raid" by GOONS. [/quote] The only groups that would feel that they risk being raided by GOONS (or any number of other raiding alliances) for posting on these forums are ones who already know the risks of being a small alliance without protection, and have made a conscious decision to take those risks. All others are simply unaware, and will post without worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Thorrington Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Felix von Agnu' date='23 June 2010 - 04:12 PM' timestamp='1277327513' post='2348025'] In moralism land, when someone commits an act and it is later made illegal, do you arrest them? If they are the first ones on, is it really a bandwagon? [/quote] That's deep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktarthan Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Felix von Agnu' date='23 June 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1277327513' post='2348025'] If they are the first ones on, is it really a bandwagon? [/quote] It's a pre-emptive triple break-off flanking bandwagon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 [quote name='Felix von Agnu' date='23 June 2010 - 05:12 PM' timestamp='1277327513' post='2348025'] In moralism land, when someone commits an act and it is later made illegal, do you arrest them? [/quote] If a tree falls in a forest and alerts a raiding nation to the existence of a microalliance, does he say please before he destroys that alliance needlessly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 Well, looks like WorldConqueror isnt doing his job well enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 (edited) [quote name='nippy' date='23 June 2010 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1277327231' post='2348020'] Oh good, Vilien...you've attracted Haflinger. I hope you're happy with yourself. White Chocolate, you're only delicious combined with other forms of chocolate. By yourself, you're detestable. [/quote] Perhaps, but combined with other forms of chocolate I am soooo bright, I gotta wear . Edited June 23, 2010 by White Chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix von Agnu Posted June 23, 2010 Report Share Posted June 23, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Vilien' date='23 June 2010 - 05:16 PM' timestamp='1277327748' post='2348034'] If a tree falls in a forest and alerts a raiding nation to the existence of a microalliance, does he say please before he destroys that alliance needlessly? [/quote] I'll answer yours if you answer mine. EDIT: Is the alliance only 1-3 nations big? If so, I fail to see how he can destroy the entire alliance. Edited June 23, 2010 by Felix von Agnu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.