Decree of the Sith

[Coverzin]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' timestamp='1281312292' post='2405314']
You cannot tell me you will be attacking one of my members without proof of the neccessity to do so.
[/quote]

Excuse me, but I am confused by this statement. I don't understand how two offensive wars with a protectorate of RoK isn't enough proof to delay aiding your member. Oh well, have fun throwing yourself under the bus, NSO.

[Heft]

[quote name='Olaf Styke' timestamp='1281313874' post='2405501']
I should point out that it would have been much easier not to risk putting everyone through this war in the first place, and all it would have taken is saving your 6 million dollars in aid for a well-deserving member, rather than a rogue that you KNEW RoK had a big problem with. I'm just saying, assessing the risk involved here, I'm sure any one of your members deserved that 6 mill in aid more than the rogue, and it clearly wasn't worth a war to do so. I'm not even sure why you sent that aid in the first place unless you were actually aiming to piss off Hoo.

Edit: All I really want to know is WHY you sent the aid?
[/quote]
95% of the time, at least, this would not have resulted in war. Just because something is casually called an "act of war" does not mean that the next step is to declare war. This sort of thing only goes to war if a war is desired, and I believed RoK didn't desire it.

It's plainly wrong to say this was the obvious conclusion of the aid being sent. The obvious conclusion was that further discussion and diplomacy would have resulted, because that's what usually happens in these situations.

I sent the aid because I didn't appreciate us essentially being told to get out of the way without any decent reason, but didn't feel like openly provoking a war. Odd, that.

[Eternal Enigma]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' timestamp='1281314172' post='2405535']
No. That is exactly what we ARE doing. The definition of cowardice is asking others to fight YOUR battles.
[/quote]
actually i believe how it went was ROK:" sup guise, we ganna roll NSO " allies: "OMG LET US HELP " RoK:" idk guise, we kinda wanna do this solo" allies:" what the heck kind of friend are you. ever heard of sharing? (peer pressure)" RoK:" ok fine, you can roll them too " Allies:" YAAAAAAY"

[thisperson]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' timestamp='1281311727' post='2405249']

The New Sith Order accepted Sedrick earlier this week unaware of his issues. Soon after he was given membership, we were approached by outside entities which let us know he was on their target lists. Further, they commanded, with no discussion that he would be attacked.

[snip]

[b]While I'm not in the business of offering protection to rogues. I am in the business of protecting my members. I am in the business of providing all aid and assistance to my members until my alliance no longer breathes life. When you wish me to drop that protection, you better have a good reason and be willing to back up your claims. If you are unwilling to discuss the validity of your claim, I am unwilling to halt my protection. It is unreasonable to assume that I will take the word of every individual who makes unsubstantiated claims, and I am a reasonable man.[/b]

The New Sith Order is not your bait. We are not a puppet to be wielded for your nefarious purposes. We will not support these archaic practices which we fought to prevent during Karma. We are not afraid of bloodshed, sweat or missiles. Where diplomacy fails the sword will prevail.
[/quote]

Alright, I suddenly get why everyone tells me that you are full of yourselves. Ignorance and incompetence beget confidence.

That said, no alliance should have to do your homework for you. I am unaware as to how things function for other alliances, but here at GOD we screen our members. Wars, aid, and just a general background check with some allies. We also check for a modicum of intelligence with spelling and grammar, and barring a slight language barrier, we're unforgiving of the basic rules of English.

tl;dr: Either your OPSEC sucks or you deliberately sought conflict with Rok. Either way, the fault lies with you, and you are getting yours. Do not twist and turn this to pander to the masses with your convoluted logic of hogwash.

Edited August 9, 2010 by thisperson

[Robster83]

[quote name='Coverzin' timestamp='1281314310' post='2405544']
Excuse me, but I am confused by this statement. I don't understand how two offensive wars with a protectorate of RoK isn't enough proof to delay aiding your member. Oh well, have fun throwing yourself under the bus, NSO.
[/quote]

I dont understand how something like this is a solid CB? This happened many times in many alliances, and virtually all cases were solved diplomatically. IT was clear RoK had no intention of solving this in a diplomatic way, and they insisted on war. Hoo even "dissapeared" by coincidence when NSO tried to solve this... so yeah, way to go RoK, you started a war over a 4k nation and you refused to solve it diplomatically.

[Heft]

[quote name='Aurion' timestamp='1281314213' post='2405537']
Ah, but the thing is it's against NSO.

We are clearly the bad guys for attacking them, the facts don't matter. They [i]are[/i] the cutting-edge in alliances after all!
[/quote]
I'm glad that you understand.

You can apply here: http://www.newsithorder.info/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=116

[Balder]

Well, there's an awful lot of bawwing in this thread.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Balder

[SpoiL]

[quote name='TheThirdMark' timestamp='1281314169' post='2405533']
Someone, a rogue in this case, is at war.

That someone, in this case a rogue, joins an Alliance (happens to be NSO).
That Alliance, in this case NSO, didnt check that someone's, in this case a rogue, warscreen.
That Alliance, in this case NSO, was contacted about the recent history.
That Alliance, in this case NSO, insisted on letting this escalate.
That Alliance, in this case NSO, committed one of the most clean Acts of War.

And now you start whining about it?

Thank you for showing your roots.
[/quote]

Someone, in this case Spoil, doesn't understand why someone, in this case TheThirdMark, is posting this way.

"Contacted about the recent history" demands a "recent history" having been part of the dialogue.

[Heft]

[quote name='thisperson' timestamp='1281314437' post='2405555']
Alright, I suddenly get why everyone tells me that you are full of yourselves. Ignorance and incompetence beget confidence.

That said, no alliance should have to do your homework for you. I am unaware as to how things function for other alliances, but here at GOD we screen our members. Wars, aid, and just a general background check with some allies. We also check for a modicum of intelligence with spelling and grammar, and barring a slight language barrier, we're unforgiving of the basic rules of English.

tl;dr: Either your OPSEC sucks or you deliberately sought conflict with Rok. Either way, the fault lies with you, and you are getting yours. Do not twist and turn this to pander to the masses with your convoluted logic of hogwash.
[/quote]
If I was seeking conflict then I would, you know, actually defended the guy after saying we would defend him.

The aid was already a step down from our previous position that we had communicated to RoK.

[bigwoody]

I remember back when on the giving end of curbstomps, it was always the greatest disappointment when this happened. I would be among the cries of "cowards!" but mainly because I wanted slots. I knew they were being wise in the long run.

Ergo, NSO is using the most devastating weapon left in their arsenal: Denying a larger curbstomp.

So, haters get your hater on, you know they're doing the smart thing here. Enjoy the blue balls.

Edited August 9, 2010 by bigwoody

[Whitney]

I did a little NSO board trawling.

Sedrick's War Screen
[img]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/OmegaMet/Sedrick1.png[/img]

Sedricks Application to NSO
[img]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/OmegaMet/Sedrick2.png[/img]

Clearly those two offensive wars were defensive. Logically, he's good.

Way to go, NSO.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Whitney

[TheThirdMark]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' timestamp='1281314001' post='2405514']This is something that a 10 minute conversation would sort out if both sides were looking for a reasonable diplomatic solution. Clearly that isn't the case here, so it's not really a surprise that this insignificant incident has been blown way out of proportion.
[/quote]



You mean, something like this?


RoK: Ohaithar! We seem to have a bit of a situation.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: There is a rogue attacking one of our protectorates.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: We are bound by treaty to step in and take care of this little problem.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: The rogue involved can either pay the Reps (yes, a massive and extreme 6M as we all know an amount nobody can afford).
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: Or get a single ZI out of it.
NSO: We dont care... But... We will aid him in all his actions he will make as if he was still a rogue.
RoK: Why would you do so. It will be an act of War, are you REALLY willing to make this escalate?
NSO: YES.
RoK: Well we prefer a normal way of communication so we advise you not to do so. You know about our sentiment in this situation.
NSO: We dont care.


*5 minutes later*

''Aid, Aid, Aid''

*10 minutes later*

''Hell unleashed etc etc''

*50 minutes later*

''NSO hereby officially cries and asks each and every crybaby to come here and cry with us like a pack of incontinent wolves''.



Feel free to correct me if im wrong.

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='Aimee Mann' timestamp='1281314228' post='2405539']
Let me get this straight... you are accusing the STA (of all people) of being self-serving cowards and bad friends because they are listening to and respecting the (clearly stated and perfectly understandable) wishes of their ally? What planet are you on?
[/quote]
I don't believe the STA is allied to the NSO.

I will, however, call NSO's supposed allies self-serving cowards for not defending an alliance they have sworn to defend.

I am on Planet Bob, a magical place where the phrase "We will defend you" means just that. And people who say it and then sit on their hands are not people who can be trusted.

[quote name='Whitney' timestamp='1281314712' post='2405580']Sedricks Application to NSO
[img]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y234/OmegaMet/Sedrick2.png[/img]

Clearly those two offensive wars were defensive. Logically, he's good.[/quote]

Clearly.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Ashoka the Great

[Tiberius]

[quote name='Aimee Mann' timestamp='1281314228' post='2405539']
Let me get this straight... you are accusing the STA (of all people) of being self-serving cowards and bad friends because they are listening to and respecting the (clearly stated and perfectly understandable) wishes of their ally? What planet are you on?
[/quote]
What Ashoka is trying to get at is, if they want to be optional about defending them then sign an ODP. If you sign an MDP you are obliged to defend unless there is a chaining clause.

[Heft]

[quote name='Whitney' timestamp='1281314712' post='2405580']
Clearly those two offensive wars were defensive. Logically, he's good.

Way to go, NSO.
[/quote]
The wars were in response to TENE spying on him. Also, we didn't actually interfere with those wars in anyway, regardless.

[Lenny N Karl]

Nothing of value will resolve this issue here. Disappointing how this all rolled out and I hope that both sides are willing to use back channels to work on a resolution to this fiasco. Every time something like this arises it really reminds me how many children are running around beating their chest here on Bob.

A fifteen minute talk between adults on BOTH sides should have ended this without the OWF getting involved.

I am willing to offer any mediation services requested if asked. I hope that RoK will ask it's allies to sit back while the two work it out. After years of fingerwagging at NPO for bullying and piling on "meatsheild" allies for every little skirmish, these other alliances jumping into this skirmish sure reeks of hypocrisy to me.

[Robster83]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281314758' post='2405585']
I don't believe the STA is allied to the NSO.

I will, however, call NSO's supposed allies self-serving cowards for not defending an alliance they have sworn to defend.

I am on Planet Bob, a magical place where the phrase "We will defend you" means just that. And people who say it and then sit on their hands are not people who can be trusted.
[/quote]

Perhaps our relationship with allies means alot more to us than your intepretation of treaties. If we recieve a request from an alliance to hold back, then we will consider it, just like any honorouble group would.

[Robster83]

[quote]these other alliances jumping into this skirmish sure reeks of hypocrisy to me. [/quote]

Agreed. Especially considering the events of the No CB War and Hyperion.

[Eternal Enigma]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281314758' post='2405585']
I don't believe the STA is allied to the NSO.

I will, however, call NSO's supposed allies self-serving cowards for not defending an alliance they have sworn to defend.

I am on Planet Bob, a magical place where the phrase "We will defend you" means just that. And people who say it and then sit on their hands are not people who can be trusted.
[/quote]
aint it the truth. you sign a treaty, which clearly defines you promise to defend your new ally and friend. then war breaks out, you never inact your treaty, you're silly if you expect someone to defend you later on . heck, why even sign the treaty if you arent going to uphold it? well, i guess if you just like signing things for the heck of it...

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='TheThirdMark' timestamp='1281314753' post='2405583']
You mean, something like this?


RoK: Ohaithar! We seem to have a bit of a situation.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: There is a rogue attacking one of our protectorates.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: We are bound by treaty to step in and take care of this little problem.
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: The rogue involved can either pay the Reps (yes, a massive and extreme 6M as we all know an amount nobody can afford).
NSO: We dont care.
RoK: Or get a single ZI out of it.
NSO: We dont care... But... We will aid him in all his actions he will make as if he was still a rogue.
RoK: Why would you do so. It will be an act of War, are you REALLY willing to make this escalate?
NSO: YES.
RoK: Well we prefer a normal way of communication so we advise you not to do so. You know about our sentiment in this situation.
NSO: We dont care.


*5 minutes later*

''Aid, Aid, Aid''

*10 minutes later*

''Hell unleashed etc etc''

*50 minutes later*

''NSO hereby officially cries and asks each and every crybaby to come here and cry with us like a pack of incontinent wolves''.



Feel free to correct me if im wrong.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]You're leaving out the part where we told RoK to hold on the attacks until we could get this thing investigated. They said they'd get us the logs we requested, and it seemed like they'd wait as well. Imagine my surprise when I log on to see they had sent us no logs, and they also attacked.[/color]

[jer]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281314758' post='2405585']
I don't believe the STA is allied to the NSO.

I will, however, call NSO's supposed allies self-serving cowards for not defending an alliance they have sworn to defend.

I am on Planet Bob, a magical place where the phrase "We will defend you" means just that. And people who say it and then sit on their hands are not people who can be trusted.



Clearly.
[/quote]
You seem pretty obsessed with that one phrase. What about the other phrases that have been said? You know, the most recent and most relevant ones? I can't imagine why you'd be ignoring them in favour of the line that ensures an extended conflict...

Edited August 9, 2010 by Aimee Mann

[Aurion]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281314558' post='2405567']
I'm glad that you understand.

You can apply here: http://www.newsithorder.info/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=116
[/quote]

Thanks for the offer, but I do believe I'll pass.

[Keve69]

I for one, am opposed to this non-escalation.

That is all...

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1281314706' post='2405579']
I remember back when on the giving end of curbstomps, it was always the greatest disappointment when this happened. I would be among the cries of "cowards!" but mainly because I wanted slots. I knew they were being wise in the long run.

Ergo, NSO is using the most devastating weapon left in their arsenal: Denying a larger curbstomp.

So, haters get your hater on, you know they're doing the smart thing here. Enjoy the blue balls.
[/quote]
I, for one, could care less about a larger curbstomp. If NSO feels it is being truely wronged, they can ask for their treaty partners to come in (No, that is not an attempt to goad alliances into declaring in defense). NSO caused this mess, if they want to burn by themselves that is the table they set for themselves.

[Masterof9puppets]

[quote name='Robster83' timestamp='1281314505' post='2405563']
I dont understand how something like this is a solid CB? This happened many times in many alliances, and virtually all cases were solved diplomatically. IT was clear RoK had no intention of solving this in a diplomatic way, and they insisted on war. Hoo even "dissapeared" by coincidence when NSO tried to solve this... so yeah, way to go RoK, you started a war over a 4k nation and you refused to solve it diplomatically.
[/quote]

Why is this not a solid CB? "If you aid the member that went rogue on two of our protectorate's nations, that same member that we are currently attacking for going rogue on our protectorate's nations, that same member that you accepted after knowing (or at least, should have known) was going rogue on our protectorates nations, [b][i]we will declare war on you[/i]." Aid gets sent, war gets declared. One hundred percent valid, I don't even see how it can be argued.

And even if this was just an attempt to spark fire a global war, [i]which I don't even believe it is[/i], there is nothing wrong with that. CyberNations is way too boring without war, and I support anything that gets this game kicking. That used to mean that I supported NSO as well.