| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 06:22 am 
There is alot of hostility going on in the forums lately. War declarations on multiple worlds have been because of things said on these forums. Alot of which has been misunderstandings, or purposely provoked.
People should be allowed to give their opinion, in a respectful, thoughtful way, without having to worry about someone declaring on them. People should be allowed to disagree with someone, without having war declared on them.
I am now the victim of such aggression, and there are certainly others as well. There are many accused of being someone else, who now find themselves at war or being attacked.
Those who are familiar with me, and have talked to me, know that I'm a peaceful player, and I only wish to develop my empire economically. However, do to unwarranted aggression, I have had to waste massive resources on an equally massive defense buildup. There are probably others in a similar situation.
There is no reason why someone like me, should not be allowed to post in whatever forum desired. I try personally to keep abreast of what's going on in all worlds. I plan on eventually being on all worlds. Knowledge is a good thing. And in these forums, I do offer advice and knowledge to players asking for help in them as well. There is no rule that says I can't, and I shouldn't be a target of aggression for it, or threatened for it. Neither should anyone else.
I'm hoping people will respond in a constructive manner to this thread, and keep things civil, so we can have a discussion about these issues, and maybe others which I've forgotten to post. This is not meant specifically about me, though I'm using mostly me as examples. Its only a game, and I think there are certain people who take things said here way too far.
Q |
| Princess FluffyBritches | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 06:41 am
I'll give you forum hostility!
/me attacks Q with a fire-hardened banana. |
| FarmerBob | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 07:27 am
There is a war component to this game, Q. You may defer from participating in that aspect by:
1. limiting yourself to secured mains and CEO's.
2. using your economic success to purchase WP boosters to secure your assets without investing in military capability.
3. investing in military capability and learning its game uses without exercising it.
4. seeking the the charity of others to use their asets to fight for you.
Claiming that one should not be attacked is not on the list.
You have your reasons for playing, others have theirs.
Best of luck to you. |
| jason (White Giant) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 08:28 am
"fire-hardened banana." omg lmao!!!! |
| FarmerBob | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 09:02 am
Some more Kipling for you to ponder, Q.
COLD IRON
Quote:Gold is for the mistress -- silver for the maid --
Copper for the craftsman cunning at his trade."
"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,
"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all."
So he made rebellion 'gainst the King his liege,
Camped before his citadel and summoned it to siege.
"Nay!" said the cannoneer on the castle wall,
"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- shall be master of you all!"
Woe for the Baron and his knights so strong,
When the cruel cannon-balls laid 'em all along;
He was taken prisoner, he was cast in thrall,
And Iron -- Cold Iron -- was master of it all!
Yet his King spake kindly (ah, how kind a Lord!)
"What if I release thee now and give thee back thy sword?"
"Nay!" said the Baron, "mock not at my fall,
For Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of men all."
"Tears are for the craven, prayers are for the clown --
Halters for the silly neck that cannot keep a crown."
"As my loss is grievous, so my hope is small,
For Iron -- Cold Iron -- must be master of men all!"
Yet his King made answer (few such Kings there be!)
"Here is Bread and here is Wine -- sit and sup with me.
Eat and drink in Mary's Name, the whiles I do recall
How Iron -- Cold Iron -- can be master of men all!"
He took the Wine and blessed it. He blessed and brake the Bread.
With His own Hands He served Them, and presently He said:
"See! These Hands they pierced with nails, outside My city wall,
Show Iron -- Cold Iron -- to be master of men all."
"Wounds are for the desperate, blows are for the strong.
Balm and oil for weary hearts all cut and bruised with wrong.
I forgive thy treason -- I redeem thy fall --
For Iron -- Cold Iron -- must be master of men all!"
"Crowns are for the valiant -- sceptres for the bold!
Thrones and powers for mighty men who dare to take and hold!"
"Nay!" said the Baron, kneeling in his hall,
"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of men all!
Iron out of Calvary is master of men all!"
|
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 09:11 am
I feel there should be justification for attacking someone, Farmerbob. Most people feel the same way. I wasn't referring to just war declarations though. There is alot of stuff in these forums in general (other situations not involving me), which has gone a bit far.
Q |
| Princess FluffyBritches (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 09:37 am
Q does have a point. Personal attacks on the forum are unacceptable, yet commonplace.
Whilst war is a part of the game, it should be engaged in fairly.
Peace should be a viable option. |
| Maxwell | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 02:00 pm
I agree wholeheartedly with Farmer Bob.
Have ye not heard that "All is Fair in Love and War".
As far as being attacked for words you utter in the forums why should it be any different than real life where this happens quite frequently.
If you post you open yourself up to others scrutiny who may or may not like you personally or what you have to say and may or may not decided to hold you accountable in some form or fashion.
Maxwell |
| Aleksander (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 03:09 pm
One of the secrets to survival for economic players is a low profile. To post on the forums is to be noticed.
To express an opinion is to make a difference between yourself and others. That is why Wendy picked you - an expressed opinion.
In a game like this there are people who enjoy building and people who enjoy tearing down. Make you empire strong enough to defend what you build.
The good news is that destroyers soon tire and go away. |
| John R | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 03:18 pm
This forum is so different of how it used to be... I blame the players.
My hostility used to come in the form of a single post asking something like "Do you want a nuke up your arse?" or just a war declaration followed by the most beautiful radio silence. Or even some nice lulz.
I don't see much utility in writing about the same thing 70 times and never actually finding a solution. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 03:21 pm
Yeah Q Im tried, I will nap for awhile . If you bow down and make obesiance, I will forgive your trespasses and return to mercy. How say you? |
| Stuart Taylor (Golden Rainbow) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 04:51 pm
It's not just Q Wendy. Its the rest of us too. As you know, I am now on KB and GR and my plan there is to fight a C3 war against you. To bring as much death and disruption to your empires as possible with a C3 full of nukes can do.
You have gone against peace treaties, you have threatenend people and declared on innocent presidents. I for one am sick and tired of your forum trolling and although I cannot stop that, I can hurt your in game assets.
Now you say you are tired. Well thats fine. If you want to be left alone, I will do so. But only once you apologise to me and others you have needlessly pissed off. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 04:56 pm
More Yiddish??? |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 04:59 pm
"As you know, I am now on KB and GR and my plan there is to fight a C3 war against you." LilBo PEep
This very statement is on over thirty threads on multiple forums.
"I don't see much utility in writing about the same thing 70 times and never actually finding a solution." John R
Stuart Take a hint. Quit beating your chest and actually get something done. |
| nix001 | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 05:11 pm
Forum: Meeting or medium for the open discussion of sujects of public interest.
JR, have you never seen the UN in action? 
I agree with Max and Alek.
If someone was attacked due to posting on a thread that I had started though, I would be all to willing to sacrifice my empires and defend that persons freedom of speach (if I thought that posting on my threads was the only reason for the attack) even if I did not agree with their opinion on our thread and as long as they had not been slanderous.
Sacrifice brings freedom, freedom brings peace. |
| FarmerBob | Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 10:19 pm
One man's "justification" is another's "what did I do?"
Read some International Relations texts. Morgenthau rules the roost here.
This is a game. But as in life, choices have consequences. You chose to sacrifice war preparation for accelerated leveling. You received many GC's that could have guaranteed your safety, but plowed them back into something else.
Those were choices that left you vulnerable to attack.
A player need no reason whatsoever to attack another player. There may be consequences for the aggressor, in game, but moral considerations are irrelevant; there are none.
It is the obligation of the player to ensure his own security. W3C gives you plenty of options to do it. Exercise them or don't.
Yes. It would be nice if we could all get along and sing "We Are the World" in "Perfect Harmony",
But the world doesn't work that way, why should SC?
This is, at its core, a war game.
You are talented new player, just pay attention to all aspects and understand that you not entitled to anything from your fellow players. Wendy may attack everything she sees, but she is already paying for that style.Don't take it personally.
The beauty of it is, Q, that if you don't like what I am telling you, you may blow me away for it ingame.
Post Script. The activities of players on the forums who engage in HateFest threads,(See LU), are subject to the disciplinary actions of John R and W3C. I agree that those threads are getting out of hand and serve little purpose;but again, that's not our call. You can just not read them as I do. |
| Slare (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 12:00 am
Morganthau was a proponent of Realpolitik and National Interest as the guiding principles in international politics.
In a world of effectively no scarcity, where geopolitics is irrelevant to national interest, and where war gains or loses you very little in the greater scheme of things, Morganthau has absolutely no relevance.
Don't try to disguise what is usually nothing more than the typical widespread bad internet behavior by claiming its analogous to international relations.
Regards |
| Alexander Platypus (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 02:12 am
Well i guess the question is - do forum posts create hostility or only reflect already existing hostility within the players egos? I mean, i dont think censorship is going to change people's psychologies. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 02:58 am
Ok, Farmerbob, let me respond this way to you.
I have a VERY LARGE defense in all my slaves. It is NOT set up for leveling anymore, and hasn't been for quite awhile.
The problem is, Wendy (or anyone else) can attack me from crappy C3's full of debt, that she could care less what happens to them. The only thing she's losing is the weapons and ammo. She does NOT care how strong someone is. Her good countries stay in WP while her crappy ones do the work. I could have 1000 of each airforce wing, and full garrisons, but it doesn't matter against an opponent who attacks regardless of losses.
This is why I am upset. I am more than capable of defending myself. The problem is an opponent who will CONSTANTLY harass me and fight me, regardless of losses. If I take the C3's, she would just make new ones.
Q |
| Alexander Platypus (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 03:07 am
Q, i think thats why the game gods are trying to weaken war protection and secured mode. Plus Q maybe you ought to join a fed to help guard you better? |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 03:18 am
Alexander, do you not understand?
I have MORE than enough defense. The problem is, regardless of the amount of defense, I still will take losses which I don't desire. Heavy losses.
I have 5 countries in the top 22 war ranks on GR. I'm well-defended. Its not a deterrent though.
Q |
| Alexander Platypus (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 03:45 am
right well then its an issue of war protection and secured mode being too strong right? |
| Stuart Taylor (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 03:46 am
Alexander, do you actually know what your talking about dude? Because I sure as hell don't..... |
| Aleksander (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 04:49 am
I like secured mode and war protection - personally.
While I haven't played long and so may have a poor idea, I would like for the membership to be able to police itself better through the Security Council. We have it let's use it.
1. The Security Council elected by the membership or in a way tied to the Feds with a proportional representation based on those ubiquitous Fed standings.
2. Limit General Voting to members only - if it isn't already.
3. Make removal of war protection/secured mode an SC issue. Perhaps require a 60% vote.
This would allow for the protection of assets and dealing with people abusing the game mechanics. |
| Princess FluffyBritches (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 04:54 am
To give the Security Council that much power would require it be entirely unbiased and fair.
You can often have a federation with a majority of members on the security council, and thus it is not. |
| zapadka (Fearless Blue) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 05:06 am
The Security Council should be
able to revolk war protection. |
| Jack Frost (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 05:08 am
Thank you for bringing that up Dub. I whole heartedly agree with Dub on this matter. |
| Aleksander (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 05:40 am
Changing the way that the SC members are chosen must happen. I have been playing 3 months - 3 months and I am a SC member!!!
Also note items 1 and 3 in the above list.
Right now it takes 4 members out of 15 to veto a measure. That coupled with a proportional representation would eliminate what you are afraid of.
We should also be a able to impeach SC members for failure to perform duties, negligence, or corruption. |
| Jack Frost (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 05:48 am
ok going from fed stats and representation... I would like to direct you to LU Fed stats. VS has 20 members and we have dominated the list for months. It wasn't until recently that we were removed from the top by feds with well over 40 members each...
#1 is flawed |
| The Grand Poobah (Golden Rainbow) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 07:13 am
I know for a fact that SC's can be dominated by a Majority of one fed. Especially on GR, which has few large feds. (actually the reason it remained so peaceful for so long).
Impeachment- maybe- that also could be used as a means of war. by garnering support to oust rival fed members from the SC.
Further freedoms lead to Further Corruption. |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 07:13 am
Sadly, some people look for excuses to make war, and the forum is a good source. The chatroom is an even better one.
It is not necessary to stay under the radar to avoid a ridiculous war, only to remain objective and reasonable in public, and walk away from silly and meaningless provocations.
Having a very strong fed is also an advantage
White Giant is probably the most peaceful world at the moment, precisely because the dominant fed has a lot of active members, is reasonable and doesn't rise to the bait. Respect engenders co-operation and mutual prosperity. Disrespect engenders strife and misfortune.
Some people want war, others want peace, and hopefully they gravitate to the appropriate world. If you want war, don't come to White Giant. That way, everyone can be happy.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| FarmerBob (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 08:47 am
@Slare. You might be getting your schools crossed there, my friend. Marxists are the ones who saw economics as the driving force in international relations. Realists were about power relationships.
This whole thread is an interesting study of Idealist normative philosophy VS the realpolitik of the Realists.
If you are into the subject, start up a thread and we'll talk about the application of RW political theory in SC. It could be fun. |
| Alexander Platypus (Little Upsilon) | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 12:53 pm
stuart what i was trying to explain is that i dont think forum posting causes people's personalities... its just a way for those personalities to get expressed you know? if someone is mean and cranky, then they're going to make insulting and offensive forum posts. etc... i dont believe in any censorship at all, because i think the best way for us to get to know each other is through honesty |
| John R | Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 01:39 pm
I think its even sadder when people provide those excuses than when they look for them.
War Protection and Secured Mode will never be lifted by anyone, but by the Owner. Notice the never.
Quote:I mean, i dont think censorship is going to change people's psychologies.
You mean personalities, and yes it does.
Also, what is doesn't imply it should be. Nor that it has to be necessarily accepted.
There are standards to be met by everyone. You will have to act within these standards. This, you and everyone, already do here and anywhere, even if they aren't aware.
Quote:JR, have you never seen the UN in action?
You obviously don't know the work it takes to hide corruption.
If you have a complain regarding someone on the forum, either message me or mail the Gamemaster. Send me what disturbs you and the link to the thread(s). |
| Alexander Platypus (Little Upsilon) | Monday, January 12, 2009 - 12:54 am
/quote{You mean personalities, and yes it does.
Also, what is doesn't imply it should be. Nor that it has to be necessarily accepted.
There are standards to be met by everyone. You will have to act within these standards. This, you and everyone, already do here and anywhere, even if they aren't aware. }
I dont quite understand? I am just saying that people will make forum posts given their pre-existing state of being, and that just preventing them by threat of ban from making what posts their instincts tell them to make isnt going to alter their "bad" or "unwanted by community" instincts. Usually attempts to repress behavior only make it even more deviant and extreme |
