The idea of Bandwagnors?

[Banksy]

People who are bandwagoners are your enemies. Those who honour their treaties are, naturally, your friends.

~

[Pomiel]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' date='11 July 2010 - 06:47 PM' timestamp='1278888402' post='2367323']
You rely far too much on text to dictate what you can and cannot do.
[/quote]

As if taken directly from the Moldavi Doctrine... And completely skirts what the OP is talking about. The OP is more talking about the question how important valid CB's are once a war has gone global, (or semi-global as the case may be [UJW, etc]). The OP disagrees with people using !@#$%^&* declarations to get in on the monetary benefits of war, whether it be from the actual GA's or reparations, or simply the inter(/inner?)- alliance benefits of war, such as increased activity and interest in the game.
After all, while MDPs serve solely as deterrents of war, MADPs and MDoAPs allow other alliances to use the CB of the same alliance. The point is when bandwagoning, you're just using the CB of another alliance for your war, without reason. There's obviously no law against it, it's just frowned upon in the committee when brought up. Yet often goes ignored because it's rarely perpetuated by the defeated, only the aggressors, who after victory, don't care about what could be considered war crimes, were there a Geneva Convention of CN.



[quote name='Pomiel' date='12 July 2010 - 05:28 AM'"]
a Geneva Convention of CN.
[/quote]

Now there's a good idea

(QUOTING YOURSELF POPULARIZED BY TOWLYN NOW DONE BY COOL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE)

[nippy]

I prefer Richard Wagners over Band Wagnors, any day.

[xoindotnler]

[quote name='Pomiel' date='12 July 2010 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1278926912' post='2367948']
Now there's a good idea

(QUOTING YOURSELF POPULARIZED BY TOWLYN NOW DONE BY COOL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE)
[/quote]
Now there's a bad idea, even less wars.

[Axolotlia]

[quote name='Banksy' date='12 July 2010 - 03:40 AM' timestamp='1278924025' post='2367930']
People who are bandwagoners are your enemies. Those who honour their treaties are, naturally, your friends.

~
[/quote]

Exactly. Your not going to call people who came to help you band wagoners, only enemies who come to help their allies.

[Hyperbad]

[quote name='The Reccesion' date='11 July 2010 - 05:26 PM' timestamp='1278883545' post='2367238']
Those are some meanings of the term "bandwagon". So you hear a lot about bandwaggoners, my question is [b]What makes a bandwagon during a war?[/b]
[/quote]
From my perspective it's a mentality, not an act and applies to anything in politics. The mentality is one of "meh, why not" and you possess no other reason for participating which is actually related to the conflict itself or its consequences. Those holding treaties and those without can both ride the bandwagon. Those who bandwagon can be the closest of allies or most unpredictable of entities. The only thing which is actually bad about holding such a mentality is how the actions taken and result thereof could be counter productive to what goals they possess.

[Lusitan]

Someone wrote a year or so ago a cool guide on "How to Jump the Bandwaggon". Sadly can't find it anymore

[Monster]

Since when is nuclear war profitable on any level? Reps never pay back damages, so I can't really imagine someone joining a war for pure profit, while that may sound like a good ol' sinister motive in the eyes of some.

[Daikos]

[quote name='Banksy' date='12 July 2010 - 04:40 AM' timestamp='1278924025' post='2367930']
People who are bandwagoners are your enemies. Those who honour their treaties are, naturally, your friends.

~
[/quote]

I think this is the most accurate response we'll be getting out of this thread. I don't think I've been in a single war (maybe UJW but thats far too long ago for me to remember) where my alliance hasn't been called bandwagoners by at least one dunce who thought they knew our motives. Tossing around the bandwagoner card seems to be the new cool thing to do when you're on the losing side of a conflict.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' date='13 July 2010 - 06:22 AM' timestamp='1279016545' post='2369191']
Since when is nuclear war profitable on any level? Reps never pay back damages, so I can't really imagine someone joining a war for pure profit, while that may sound like a good ol' sinister motive in the eyes of some.
[/quote]

This. Unless you are my some tremendous miaracle fighting an alliance with no nuclear nations, it becomes implausible to attempt to get reperations that pay for damages that you've taken.