Re: Alarishi cf OU

Laserlight wrote:

> Alarish would too, if it appeared cost effective.  The Emperor is not
likely
> to expend a cruiser to defend a single family habitat, however, so
settlers
> are encouraged to pick orbits within "safe" systems.

OU on the other hand, WOULD expend 1 cruiser, maybe more. Even for a
single habitat. Not neccessarily at the same place, and maybe even years
later. The idea is that one bad turn deserves another, grudges are held,
but restitution cancels the debt.

> Subvert?  Hey, move on in.  Our notion of territoriality is a little
skewed.
> The main things we ask:
> a) don't be a security threat;
> b) pay our tax (flat 5% sales tax); and
> c) recognize Imperial jurisdiction over Imperial citizens.

c) Might cause minor friction, but it seems "peaceful co-existence"
might be not merely possible, but very likely. Even symbiosis.

>  The other basic conditions are  on our web site. (Note: be aware that
> security risks are dealt with forcefully.  In one extreme case,
"forcefully"
> included several kilos of antimatter in what used to be a 5000 person
> habitat.  IBIS doesn't believe in half measures).

Well, that WOULD send a message all right.

OU would tend to use nanograms, but placed under various people's toilet
seats. Or, when really trying to send a message, genetically engineered
redback spiders placed ditto :) 

-- 
aebrain@dynamite.com.au     <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|	    xxxxx	Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |	xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
 abrain@cs.adfa.oz.au  o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo     oo oo	 oo  
		    By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale