SWAT128 Posted December 13, 2010 Report Share Posted December 13, 2010 [quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1292267203' post='2538597'] My issue with this is that the 2 man alliance (and a lot of people arguing against the OP here would bring up the issue that it isn't really even an "alliance" IF this happened with someone less popular who attacked one of their friends) AA of Cat Land specifically said they didn't have any treaties on OWF. Here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=95092&st=0&p=2523744&hl=catland&fromsearch=1&#entry2523744 Either have a treaty or don't, but don't go making public announcements claiming there are no treaties involved when there are. Oh, and of course there is the public declaration of war from the 2 man "alliance" later. Again - to each his own but then let the leader making the decision deal with the consequences of that decision. About your comment below: Seriously, if anyone is being an "attention whore" (your words) in the whole situation, it's the person whose actions you're defending. [/quote] The treaty didn't happen until after I announced my alliance. The line I said in my original DoE was referring to my alliance not having any treaties at that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted December 16, 2010 Report Share Posted December 16, 2010 [quote name='Believland' timestamp='1292217709' post='2538161'] Seriously. Even the treaty with NoR and TSO don't change nor would I ask for their assistance as it would be selfish. Not to mention, most of AzN's allies are our OTPs and by our treaty with NoR we can't attack them. [/quote] BEazy, I'm curious, why did you decide to protect BoS in the first place anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted December 16, 2010 Report Share Posted December 16, 2010 I don't know about rights. Rights are something protected by a supreme authority. And there isn't any on Digiterra. However, allowing all nations to continue their existence is in the interest of us all. That said, tech raiding, when it doesn't involve extortion, ZI of the target etc, is actually a means to allow more nations to continue their existence. We at LSF for instance, after careful consideration, have allowed raiding again, as we were losing nations out of boredom without it. So, no, raiding as such is not an atrocity. Still, secret treaties are not treaties. Accepting secret treaties as legit comes to nullifying the value of the treaties' web and could bring Digiterra to a state of barbaric chaos with people just bangwagoning, whenever they find it fit, in the name of a secret "treaty". So, no, Digiterra should not recognise secret treaties as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted December 16, 2010 Report Share Posted December 16, 2010 [quote name='kulomascovia' timestamp='1292480923' post='2540741'] BEazy, I'm curious, why did you decide to protect BoS in the first place anyway? [/quote] Damsky is a good friend. Friends don't let friends be food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted December 16, 2010 Report Share Posted December 16, 2010 [quote name='Trikoupis' timestamp='1292490417' post='2540812'] I don't know about rights. Rights are something protected by a supreme authority. And there isn't any on Digiterra. However, allowing all nations to continue their existence is in the interest of us all. That said, tech raiding, when it doesn't involve extortion, ZI of the target etc, is actually a means to allow more nations to continue their existence. We at LSF for instance, after careful consideration, have allowed raiding again, as we were losing nations out of boredom without it. So, no, raiding as such is not an atrocity. Still, secret treaties are not treaties. Accepting secret treaties as legit comes to nullifying the value of the treaties' web and could bring Digiterra to a state of barbaric chaos with people just bangwagoning, whenever they find it fit, in the name of a secret "treaty". So, no, Digiterra should not recognise secret treaties as such. [/quote] And what authority does CN have to not recognize them? Is this not up to the individual alliance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted December 17, 2010 Report Share Posted December 17, 2010 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1292503458' post='2540875'] And what authority does CN have to not recognize them? Is this not up to the individual alliance? [/quote] Not a question of authority. It should simply be frowned upon and considered a valid CB, like recruiting from other alliances to bring you an exemple . 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.