Really NPO

[Guest Epi]

1

Edited February 17, 2021 by Epi

[Cooper_]

4 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Just ask @Cooper_ since I'm busy spending hours writing posts in response to him.

Ok, so I'm not the only one who takes hours to write those babies.  I love wall-of-texts, but good god do they take a lot of time to write.

[True King]

I’m still waiting to find out if GOONS are already here & that’s what the huge AA who formed overnight really is.

[Buorhann]

5 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Lol. The context was given. But if this is the hill you choose to keep harping after, go on. You really need new material to harp about.

You're right, the context was provided, the entirety of it was.

Again, serious question.  Does threatening a player with a moderation report count as toxic?

[True King]

16 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

You're right, the context was provided, the entirety of it was.

Again, serious question.  Does threatening a player with a moderation report count as toxic?

Compare to just reporting them without warning are you asking or asking whether reporting people for minor stuff is toxic? 

[Sir Scarfalot]

3 hours ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Compare to just reporting them without warning are you asking or asking whether reporting people for minor stuff is toxic? 

He's asking if reporting something in good faith for the purposes of honest rules enforcement is toxic, or if reporting and/or deliberately withholding reports in the explicit hopes of obtaining an in-game advantage from either is toxic.

[True King]

4 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

He's asking if reporting something in good faith for the purposes of honest rules enforcement is toxic, or if reporting and/or deliberately withholding reports in the explicit hopes of obtaining an in-game advantage from either is toxic.

I think if it’s in the grey, it would be less toxic to confront someone directly before trying to get them banned over small stuff.

[Guest Frawley]

4 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

He's asking if reporting something in good faith for the purposes of honest rules enforcement is toxic, or if reporting and/or deliberately withholding reports in the explicit hopes of obtaining an in-game advantage from either is toxic.

Thats a poor way to say: Checking with someone to see if they know they are breaking the rules or if there is an IC reason (act of war etc), and giving them an opt out.

Personally I'd rather give them the benefit of the doubt rather than just lodging a report.

[Sir Scarfalot]

4 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

I think if it’s in the grey, it would be less toxic to confront someone directly before trying to get them banned over small stuff.

Sure, but in this situation there was 100% an intention to intimidate a rival alliance with the threat of a report. "Fight the war in the way we want you to or we'll report" is what's going on, not "Hey, are you aware that's possibly on the wrong side of the rules?". Big difference.

[True King]

4 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Sure, but in this situation there was 100% an intention to intimidate a rival alliance with the threat of a report. "Fight the war in the way we want you to or we'll report" is what's going on, not "Hey, are you aware that's possibly on the wrong side of the rules?". Big difference.

Yeah, but you guys have went on about it pages. I also thought it dumb Bourann considered losing offensive wars on purpose war slot filling and thought it a big deal before. Although even if it was poor form, feel like TFP isn’t central to war & all points relating to that have been made already. ?

[Roquentin]

Know what's really toxic? Using a supposed moral game concern to score points instead of simply asking the person not to do it again or simply asking for it not to be allowed. You made it into a situation where there's no other solution. I have no real reason to see it from anyone else's point of view when I am treated like garbage outright and constantly provoked and told I should get warned when no rule was violated.

[alyster]

1 hour ago, Roquentin said:

Know what's really toxic? Using a supposed moral game concern to score points instead of simply asking the person not to do it again or simply asking for it not to be allowed. 

Wow. That coming from people who spent 3 weeks painting me as toxic because they didnt like propaganda. Your ability to BS is on new level. 

 

Let me help you. 

Toxic - noun, expresses anti NPO sentiment. For example "He refused to do as Roq commanded, hence he is  a toxic player."

Edited August 22, 2019 by alyster

[True King]

1 hour ago, Roquentin said:

Know what's really toxic? Using a supposed moral game concern to score points instead of simply asking the person not to do it again or simply asking for it not to be allowed. You made it into a situation where there's no other solution. I have no real reason to see it from anyone else's point of view when I am treated like garbage outright and constantly provoked and told I should get warned when no rule was violated.

Yeah, don’t think you should do that again; you’re better than that & not your best moment. Solution found, can ban you from doing it again; although don’t think it’s needed.

Edit: Think it’s better to crush your enemies with pure military might if you can, so should have threatened that over mods if anything. Also think you probably already know how I would deal with enemies both treating me that way and wanting peace.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Noctis Anarch Caelum

[Roquentin]

33 minutes ago, alyster said:

Wow. That coming from people who spent 3 weeks painting me as toxic because they didnt like propaganda. Your ability to BS is on new level. 

 

Let me help you. 

Toxic - noun, expresses anti NPO sentiment. For example "He refused to do as Roq commanded, hence he is  a toxic player."

You posted the propaganda at the same time another blocmate had put out a spliced interview with content from years ago. They took it down, but the timing of the two indicated it as a specific personal attack indicating I was just seeing things. You've gone on to say that wasn't the intent and Adrienne has gone on to clarify she could see how I arrived at my conclusion, so it's much better than before, but you needed to look at the context.  The fact that other segments of your side have descended to personal attacks and repeated provocations with no good faith effort to rectify whatever moderation concerns they may or may have had but simply attack someone over and over betrays a malicious intent. 

If someone has a moral concern with how an action was taken in terms of how game moderation is to be used and wants to establish a norm, then they would propose it in the appropriate forum. What they don't do is call the other person pathetic and shit on them endlessly. I gave my perspective on it and was simply met with additional opprobrium. It's clear our moral standards differ so it is up to the administrator to decide either way. 

There are two strands of thought:

One is "it is always wrong to tell a player forcefully you will report them if they act in a certain way if them complying with your request benefits you"

The other is "slotfilling can have rapid consequences in-game, so if it has to always be reported rather than dealt with ahead of time, it will cause the in-game events to be impacted before they can receive moderator attention and thus telling a player they will get reported is fine if you suspect them of committing a violation. If they choose to wait for moderation to arbritate the dispute and don't agree that is their choice."

They are not compatible but they are both logically consistent so it is simply up to the admin to make a final ruling. If the admin decides, "If I'm not on while wars are ongoing, people can act with impunity in the meantime and cannot be told they will get reported and it will get dealt with whenever it gets dealt with regardless of in-game consequences", then that's the ruling I have to go with but it is the implied outcome.

inb4 playing the victim

Edited August 22, 2019 by Roquentin
elaboration.

[Kastor]

On 8/20/2019 at 10:13 PM, Dad said:

So are you admitting that KERTOGG is in fact subdued? I thought the party line was that you guys were still winning, muh net damage and all.

I’m not in their party..?

[Adrienne]

3 hours ago, Roquentin said:

You've gone on to say that wasn't the intent and Adrienne has gone on to clarify she could see how I arrived at my conclusion, so it's much better than before, but you needed to look at the context.  

To clarify, I can see why you view us as a threat independent of your CB and a large part of that comes from what I know you believe of us, namely your belief in a TKR shadow gov that hates NPO and has unchecked influence on our FA direction. That's what I meant when I said I could see where you were coming from. This isn't a rallying point for you because your stated CB is still garbage and your beliefs about us are grounded in rumors and paranoia.

I've said it many times and I'll say it again. I had no intent of swinging around on you this war and, as has already been shown on here, I spoke out against expanding the war to your sphere. I know you guys don't trust me but you don't even need to take that at face value; there were more than a dozen witnesses to me saying all that before you ever hit and the stated reason you gave for me supposedly wanting to swing over, that I believed you to be working with BK, was refuted publicly here on the OWF prior to the attacks and in DMs with your alliance's gov. You made your rules, or t$ did rather, and we were going to play by them. And if you believe nothing else, consider what a poor move dragging in all of t$ sphere on the side of BK would have been strategically - we like a challenge but we're not stupid. If you were worried about retaliation for your actions post war/down the line and wanted to improve your chances post-war, that's fair. That is part of the game, after all, and there are consequences for every action you make. You picked the wrong alliance/sphere to worry about for that though.

Returning back to the propaganda bit, if you want to view our propaganda in a personal light, that's your prerogative. However, it's a decision that only serves to make things sucky for you on an individual level because it's a decision to take things personally, which can't possibly be enjoyable. So let me be clear: I don't know your history and I don't want to - it's none of my business and it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to do when greenlighting things. When we make ads, it's based on in-character actions; that ad wasn't directed at you specifically but at your alliance's actions, which I felt was clear. You are not mentioned in it after all, not your name, not your pfp; the ad only contains your alliance's flag. If something confuses you or you feel like it's an OOC hit against you, come talk to us. I'm not a mindreader and expecting me to understand your history and intuit that you might take it personally is an unrealistic expectation.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Nizam Adrienne
Typo

[True King]

Even if never allied with TKR, still don't think they're a bad alliances regardless of anything said of them. So don't think they deserve to get beat up forever for having loyalty to their coalition, as I can respect that kind of unwillingness to betray to trust.

I think it might be worth Roq talking it out with Nizam, as far as I know Chaos/KETOG don't plan to stick together past this war. Although will never know if the war doesn't end. However depending on how it ends; this bipolar gridlock could be avoided potentially. ?

[Yuri]

Hello there everyone, to think my first post on the forums would be in this thread ?

Though, I wonder why this thread is still so lively?

[True King]

1 minute ago, Yuri said:

Hello there everyone, to think my first post on the forums would be in this thread ?

Though, I wonder why this thread is still so lively?

Welcome to the forum, been waiting to hear from you guys. Been elusive so far,.

[Roquentin]

11 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

To clarify, I can see why you view us as a threat independent of your CB and a large part of that comes from what I know you believe of us, namely your belief in a TKR shadow gov that hates NPO and has unchecked influence on our FA direction. That's what I meant when I said I could see where you were coming from. This isn't a rallying point for you because your stated CB is still garbage and your beliefs about us are grounded in rumors and paranoia.

I'm not trying to rally anything. No one will  be convinced and I am not hoping to convince and never have been. This is your ground. I am just choosing to go into the lion's den to make my actions clear. Your perspective has been noted and I feel my multiple reasons for entering are all valid and not mutually exclusive. My particular justification was only posted to show why we had TKR as the target as we picked the only one we had credible intelligence on, and to test the cohesion of the opposing side. There were other potential targets and other potential CBs but it was the only one where we felt it would serve the purposes we needed it to serve. I do not even use the old guard as  the bulk of  the justification. It was simply why we didn't trust you during the period you said  you were alienated and began to dislike us. The reason we don't trust you not to hit us is there are multiple examples of you being ambitious enough to go for it. A few examples are willingness to do the bloc to improve your chances of winning a war, the planned nature of the transition,  and the variety of intelligence indicating power concentration increasing in TKR.

11 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

I've said it many times and I'll say it again. I had no intent of swinging around on you this war and, as has already been shown on here, I spoke out against expanding the war to your sphere. I know you guys don't trust me but you don't even need to take that at face value; there were more than a dozen witnesses to me saying all that before you ever hit and the stated reason you gave for me supposedly wanting to swing over, that I believed you to be working with BK, was refuted publicly here on the OWF prior to the attacks and in DMs with your alliance's gov. You made your rules, or t$ did rather, and we were going to play by them. And if you believe nothing else, consider what a poor move dragging in all of t$ sphere on the side of BK would have been strategically - we like a challenge but we're not stupid. If you were worried about retaliation for your actions post war/down the line and wanted to improve your chances post-war, that's fair. That is part of the game, after all, and there are consequences for every action you make. You picked the wrong alliance/sphere to worry about for that though.
 

Well it was also stated to me that it wasn't known how many people you shared your eventual plans with. Whatever you said could have simply been out anger or something else,  but it wasn't something we acted on right away. We waited to see the scenario play out and it was playing out and we couldn't risk it. It was also independent of the Guardian and GOB and more just that we were limited in scope and being cordoned off. Everything you said revolves around N$O. We know you don't have a problem with the other two. We're fighting our own battle. I can tell you the way you came off gave the people you claim to have talked to the opposite impression and they were quite concerned. So perhaps you said something or implied something you shouldn't have.

I don't really know what the eventual plan would have been but it's probably unlikely it would have involved fighting the entire tSphere. A scenario where the BKsphere collapses completely, sectors are progressively peaced and cut out, the core is locked down is one where a lot of things become possible. It was simply too much of a risk especially with the callouts and narrative building. 

11 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

Returning back to the propaganda bit, if you want to view our propaganda in a personal light, that's your prerogative. However, it's a decision that only serves to make things sucky for you on an individual level because it's a decision to take things personally, which can't possibly be enjoyable. So let me be clear: I don't know your history and I don't want to - it's none of my business and it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to do when greenlighting things. When we make ads, it's based on in-character actions; that ad wasn't directed at you specifically but at your alliance's actions, which I felt was clear. You are not mentioned in it after all, not your name, not your pfp; the ad only contains your alliance's flag. If something confuses you or you feel like it's an OOC hit against you, come talk to us. I'm not a mindreader and expecting me to understand your history and intuit that you might take it personally is an unrealistic expectation.

Well then you simply have a string of not really weighing the potential issues with your ads and how they come off. You don't need to understand it to know that doing it at the same time as the other thing came out would come off a certain way. 

[Pasky Darkfire]

16 minutes ago, Yuri said:

Hello there everyone, to think my first post on the forums would be in this thread ?

Though, I wonder why this thread is still so lively?

I'd say run from the OWF as fast as you can. But... You've posted.

So it's too late now.

[True King]

@Yuri So what website did you guys migrate from & how's the experiment going? If you don't mind sharing.

 

[Adrienne]

36 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Well it was also stated to me that it wasn't known how many people you shared your eventual plans with. Whatever you said could have simply been out anger or something else,  but it wasn't something we acted on right away. We waited to see the scenario play out and it was playing out and we couldn't risk it. It was also independent of the Guardian and GOB and more just that we were limited in scope and being cordoned off. Everything you said revolves around N$O. We know you don't have a problem with the other two. We're fighting our own battle. I can tell you the way you came off gave the people you claim to have talked to the opposite impression and they were quite concerned. So perhaps you said something or implied something you shouldn't have.

I don't really know what the eventual plan would have been but it's probably unlikely it would have involved fighting the entire tSphere. A scenario where the BKsphere collapses completely, sectors are progressively peaced and cut out, the core is locked down is one where a lot of things become possible. It was simply too much of a risk especially with the callouts and narrative building. 

We're going to continue to go in circles here but let me cut to the chase. You have provided absolutely no proof this was ever my intention. I have no idea where you would have gotten that impression from, you won't say, and you've implied repeatedly it had to do with impressions over any direct phrases, which makes me trust you even less that you have any factual basis to go off here. I've pulled up possible conversations I've heard said it might come from and nowhere in there did we discuss the possibility of me hitting your sphere. The closest conversation I had to that was someone asking me if I was worried about your sphere hitting mine. Furthermore, with what's been circulating in back channels, I am convinced your entry had nothing to do with us and was instead because you wanted to enter the war, whatever the reason. We were nothing little than a convenient means to do so because you believed you could make a convincing CB using us, although "test[ing] the cohesion of the opposing side" is an interesting statement. Considering that last war, your coalition supposedly threatened anyone that might have had plans to hit any portion of the coalition with war from the whole of it, I'm really not sure what you expected or what you were hoping to prove.

"Everything you said revolves around N$O. We know you don't have a problem with the other two." No idea what this means.

36 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

I don't really know what the eventual plan would have been but it's probably unlikely it would have involved fighting the entire tSphere. A scenario where the BKsphere collapses completely, sectors are progressively peaced and cut out, the core is locked down is one where a lot of things become possible. It was simply too much of a risk especially with the callouts and narrative building. 

You don't believe your allies would have defended you? I very much doubt attacking you would not have had the effect of dragging in most, if not all, of N$O.

36 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Well then you simply have a string of not really weighing the potential issues with your ads and how they come off. You don't need to understand it to know that doing it at the same time as the other thing came out would come off a certain way. 

And you have a string of reading too much into IC ads and taking things out of context.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Nizam Adrienne

[Yuri]

I skipped a few pages on conversation in the middle of this thread, but it seems like they were just people and their never ending feuds.

So. As some pics were leaked here anyways, first, GPWC is going to stay NEUTRAL in your Great Alliance War. NPO is there to protect us from raiders and people who attacks us, but our policy is to not get involved in your glorious slug fest to create a mountain of corpses. So please, feel free to turn each other into nuclear wastelands, just don't drag us in ?.

The past few days, some alliances decided to send their "greetings" to me and Reiji(who's not here). However, i'm glad that we all got the misunderstandings settled and everyone came home happily.

About the concern that we're disbanding or getting absorbed by NPO afterwards, no, it's not going to happen for the forseeable future. 

Despite what's shown in-game, we are not under NPO leadership. They're there to help us set up.

About the "ignore other discords/official PnW discord/ads", this is to avoid having our members interacting with individuals who have questionable conducts and motives as they're very new to the game and due to delicate circumstances involving where they're recruited from. I won't deny there are a lot of great and helpful people out there, but we don't want to take the risk for now. No worries! An embassy discord server is going to be set up soon for you guys to come and meet us!

However, i would like to condemn the action of certain PnW "finest" players who took the effort of searching for our main discord(which has nothing to do with PnW) and joined just to spam and troll in there, which caused us to have to go to lockdown which is really annoying for our affiliates. Raiding a discord server that's affiliated with the game is bad, but somewhat understandable. Raiding a discord server that has nothing to do with the game? That's going to far.?

P/s: the forum handles long post on a phone terribly

Edited August 22, 2019 by Yuri

[True King]

1 minute ago, Yuri said:

I skipped a few pages on conversation in the middle of this thread, but it seems like they were just people and their never ending feuds.

So. As some pics were leaked here anyways, first, GPWC is going to stay NEUTRAL in your Great Alliance War. NPO is there to protect us from raiders and people who attacks us, but our policy is to not get involved in your glorious slug fest to create a mountain of corpses. So please, feel free to turn each other into nuclear wastelands, just don't drag us in ?.

The past few days, some alliances decided to send their "greetings" to me and Reiji(who's not here). However, i'm glad that we all got the misunderstandings settled and everyone came home happily.

About the concern that we're disbanding or getting absorbed by NPO afterwards, no, it's not going to happen. 

Despite what's shown in-game, we are not under NPO leadership. They're there to help us set up.

About the "ignore other discords/official PnW discord/ads", this is to avoid having our members interacting with individuals who have questionable conducts and motives as they're very new to the game and due to delicate circumstances involving where they're recruited from. I won't deny there are a lot of great and helpful people iut there, but we don't want to take the risk for now. No worries! An embassy discord server is going to be set up soon for you guys to come and meet us!

However, i would like to condemn the action of certain PnW "finest" players who took the effort of searching for our main discord(which has nothing to do with PnW) and joined just to spam and troll in there, which caused us to have to go to lockdown which is really annoying for our affiliates. Raiding a discord server that's affiliated with the game is bad, but somewhat understandable. Raiding a discord server that has nothing to do with the game? That's going to far.?

 

Who did this?