GOONS Policy Change

[WorldConqueror]

Looks good to me, GOONSes.

[Lord Fingolfin]

I was under the impression that said rules and regulations were already in place. Apparently I was mistaken, can anyone from GOONS clarify as to exactly what has changed? Or is this simply a codified rulebook. In any case, looks ok to me

[HeroofTime55]

I approve of this. If followed, I suspect this will greatly reduce raiding incidents, and GOONS definitely is taking active steps to rectify the past issues they have had when it comes to raiding. It is encouraging to see progress in a world where most of the ruling class is content to move in the opposite direction.

I assume this was in the pipes long before I announced my policy, but the nations my policy protects are not explicitly addressed by the issue. In reality, that meshes better with my policy than outright rejecting those targets, so I'm not complaining, but I do assume that proper judgment would be used in the approval process, and that you wouldn't approve a raid on those targets without talking to me first, right?

Which, of course, you are more than welcome to reach us if you want in on a rogue, I'd be happy to work something out.



...Oh, I'm sorry, you probably wanted blind hating on GOONS. Sorry =(

[greenacres]

Policy didn't require changing to begin with.

[greenacres]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1289276342' post='2507237']
I approve of this. If followed, I suspect this will greatly reduce raiding incidents, and GOONS definitely is taking active steps to rectify the past issues they have had when it comes to raiding. It is encouraging to see progress in a world where most of the ruling class is content to move in the opposite direction.

I assume this was in the pipes long before I announced my policy, but the nations my policy protects are not explicitly addressed by the issue. In reality, that meshes better with my policy than outright rejecting those targets, so I'm not complaining, but I do assume that proper judgment would be used in the approval process, and that you wouldn't approve a raid on those targets without talking to me first, right?

Which, of course, you are more than welcome to reach us if you want in on a rogue, I'd be happy to work something out.



...Oh, I'm sorry, you probably wanted blind hating on GOONS. Sorry =(
[/quote]

I like how you tried to make this announcement about you and your own policy, as if it matters.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1289276342' post='2507237']
I assume this was in the pipes long before I announced my policy, but the nations my policy protects are not explicitly addressed by the issue. In reality, that meshes better with my policy than outright rejecting those targets, so I'm not complaining, but I do assume that proper judgment would be used in the approval process, and that you wouldn't approve a raid on those targets without talking to me first, right?
[/quote]
This policy is about tech raiding. We really have no interest in fighting someone else's rogue for them.

[SirWilliam]

[quote name='Bavaricar' timestamp='1289273686' post='2507153']
As for the policy change, I think it has been this policy for quite some time in practice.
[/quote]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1289275948' post='2507221']
I was under the impression that said rules and regulations were already in place. Apparently I was mistaken, can anyone from GOONS clarify as to exactly what has changed?
[/quote]

Up until recently permission was not required. Even when that changed it was only partially (it was required only in the lowest of ranks).

[AvengingAngel256]

This looks good.
Cheers.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1289276857' post='2507259']
This policy is about tech raiding. We really have no interest in fighting someone else's rogue for them.
[/quote]
Unless they pay us to fight the rogue, of course.

[Bob Ilyani]

This is a nice improvement. Good move GOONS, I'm sure this will end up helping you out.

[hizzy]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1289269212' post='2506977']
Glad to see this, I foresee the days of "raiding incidents" are at an end.
[/quote]

hardly... as long as tech raiding is allowed on some level, there will always be incidents related to human error. even alliances with strict "no raid" policies get them.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1289279137' post='2507322']
hardly... as long as tech raiding is allowed on some level, there will always be incidents related to human error. even alliances with strict "no raid" policies get them.
[/quote]

Sure, I didn't mean literally, you know what I meant :x

[Stefano Palmieri]

GOONS

This is awful. Your policy didn't need changing in the first place.

[Schattenmann]

[center][img]http://sae.tweek.us/static/images/emoticons/negativeman-55f.png[/img]
I'm unemployed![/center]

I'm glad that GOONS has given thoughtful consideration to cleaning-/tightening-up its front-end policies, which will hopefully reduce after-the-fact messes that have defined GOONS's reputation. Hopefully, enforcement will be present, evenly applied, and followed-through to reinforce compliance.

[CEverettKoop]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1289281184' post='2507364']
[center][img]http://sae.tweek.us/static/images/emoticons/negativeman-55f.png[/img]
I'm unemployed![/center]

I'm glad that GOONS has given thoughtful consideration to cleaning-/tightening-up its front-end policies, which will hopefully reduce after-the-fact messes that have defined GOONS's reputation. Hopefully, enforcement will be present, evenly applied, and followed-through to reinforce compliance.
[/quote]

Eh, probably not. The raid approver's kinda a jerk, to be honest.

[Valerius]

Mildly better, I suppose.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Valerius' timestamp='1289288058' post='2507666']
Mildly better, I suppose.
[/quote]
I love the sound of begrudging acceptance.

[Merrie Melodies]

Exceptionally tight raiding policy!
Wish we had something like this ourselves.

[Sephiroth]

I still don't think allowing raids on AAs under 15 members is excused because its internal policy and consider them attacks upon alliances. 15 members is to high of a number as well, it opens a lot of alliances up for attack and saying you don't consider them an alliance isn't a reasonable CB. Overall this seem like a step in the it right direction even if I think it needs more work.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Methrage

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1289291849' post='2507767']
I still don't think allowing raids on AAs under 15 members is excused because its internal policy and consider them attacks upon alliances. 15 members is to high of a number as well, it opens a lot of alliances up for attack and saying you don't consider them an alliance isn't a reasonable CB. Overall this seem like a step in the it right direction even if I think it needs more work.
[/quote]
Says the guy who last went to war when a member of his own AA decided to tech raid a 280-man alliance.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1289292037' post='2507771']
Says the guy who last went to war when a member of his own AA decided to tech raid a 280-man alliance.
[/quote]
I considered his attack justified because you allow your members to do the same to other alliance around our size, you guys should treat others how you expect to be treated and there is a reason a lot of people dislike you guys but don't care about other alliances which allow tech raiding. The main one is you guys raiding micro alliances and making it part of policy.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Methrage

[Sal Paradise]

So what exactly was the old policy again?

[RustyNail]

This is terrible. Pathetic GOONS ruining the game for everyone else, you should be ashamed.


There...this thread was missing hate...It just felt wrong without some.


In other news. Seems legitimate. If you're going to raid, this appears to be a reasonable way to go about it.

Edited November 9, 2010 by RustyNail

[nippy]

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1289292197' post='2507775']
I considered his attack justified because you allow your members to do the same to other alliance around our size, you guys should treat others how you expect to be treated and there is a reason a lot of people dislike you guys but don't care about other alliances which allow tech raiding. The main one is you guys raiding micro alliances and making it part of policy.
[/quote]

Just shut up and sell us our tech. We allowed you to live, so be grateful.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1289292197' post='2507775']
I considered his attack justified because you allow your members to do the same to other alliance around our size, you guys should treat others how you expect to be treated and there is a reason a lot of people dislike you guys but don't care about other alliances which allow tech raiding. The main one is you guys raiding micro alliances and making it part of policy.
[/quote]
"Justified" hypocrisy, I love it. You think it's wrong to raid alliances of around 10 members, but yeah it's totally okay for you to raid 280-man alliances because you say so.