 Fateful Ending wrote:
Harmless? have already said they are concentrating on the leadership, and that all other members do have a chance to redeem themselves ETC.
Unfortunately it comes down to whether or not the defence "I was under Orders" works. (which it shouldn't, free-will exists)
PS, just relised that came off a it harsh, What i meant was that no-one who attacks should use the excuse. Bullied Members should have no consequences thrust upon them, unless of course they join in.
|
I do not recall anyone asserting this with regard to war against TMM, but it certainly is our modus operandi and hold true here. We assign blame (and correction) proportional to a player's involvement in both military/diplomatic activity and leadership/coordination. To us, the most grievous actions in order from worst to least are:
- instructing aggressions
- coordinating aggressions
- performing aggressions
- supplying troops to combatants
- defending instructors or coordinators
- defending aggressors
- financially supporting any of the above
- politically supporting the aggressors through insincere (biased/ulterior motive) public advocacy.
- politically supporting their alliance through affiliation
- trading with the aggressors (selling them equipment)
Note that actively attacking is quite high on that list, and no, "I was only following orders" is definitely not a viable defense (so don't even waste your breath). You are always responsible for your own actions, and when they are this grievous, they cannot be absolved by good deeds alone. The last three items generally earn no consequence other than showing us a player's character for future reference which sways future political dealings, but there's no guarantees here. As is our general policy, we allow any non-participants to
truly non-participate by leaving the alliance and all is forgotten (suppose we don't catch those players secretly providing financial support or troops). Players who only appear to be non-participants while remaining a member of the offending alliance tend to raise our suspicion and ultimately have no promise of safety.
Total destruction of TMM is not at all our goal, nor is there a lack of alternative outcomes. But we wouldn't be declaring war if the time for bloodless resolution weren't long past. TMM doesn't get to push and push to see how far they can go without consequence, then stop there when they finally meet true resistance and just say "no harm no foul." (As if plenty of harm hadn't been done already.) It's not just cowardly, it's a bad precedence that encourages potential enemies to constantly test us. If you try to test us, we will make sure failing that test hurts.
TMM have already shown that some significant portion of them need to be
disabled because they would not restrain themselves for any other reason. It's too late to say "ok, we'll stop" now...but we'll listen again when we no longer have to simply accept the word of the primary culprits.
Tweet
Should Harmless get involved
Topic Options
