First off destroyman, ODA can be fairly.. deceiving. If you fight against any decent defender, your ODA shouldn't raise much, since they'll just dodge your nukes and split your nobles, resulting in your ODA barely rising if rising at all. Anyone can nuke down an inactive or experience player. That is simply point and click and is why I never even consider looking at ODA or ODD when scouting any player. A high ODD either means the attacker was careless, hitting constant stacks, you got lazy and instead of spending a few troops to split, you just stacked, wasting troops you may need to support or to stack against timed nobles, etc, etc, etc. Also, it doesnt take much if youre a frontline war account, and have a tribe stack you heavily, and to sit and take nuke hits for a few days.
If you want to make any point, show conquers. Generally (not always), if a player conquers from a varied amount of different players, in bursts, they are an effective offensive player. If they noble 10+ villages at a time from a single player (obviously depends on how far into the world you are for # of villages, just threw a decent number out there), then they are doing it right. If they noble 2-3 villages a day from various players, then they are easy grabs, since no decent defender would allow you to take a couple of villages at a time, unless of course they are getting massively attacked.
ODA in relation to growth (in a time period), can be an effective stat. If the player nobles lets say 20 villages from players X and Y, while having their ODA raised significantly, then they had to put in work for those conquers (unless of course, these are players in their own tribes, or inactives, both of which can be confirmed fairly easily).
Blah blah blah, I could go on, either way, I would suggest not using ODA to argue that someone isn't a hugger. Throwing nukes around carelessly doesn't help much. If anything, when you attack you should do so to get the least amount of ODA. Less Oda = less troops lost = more efficient. Strategic attacks, proper timing, etc, will allow you to take more villages with less troops lost, and less troops needing to be killed. It is just a stat which people use to boost their e-confidence, doesn't do much for you overall.
Now as for the world ending, generally since .us is a new server, we wouldn't want to end a world quicker than usual, unless the majority of the players are in large favor for it. If the majority is still having fun, no point in ending the world too quickly. Also as stated, since .us2 started with lower numbers of players than a regular .net world, there will have to be much less than the normal end game starting number to get the same effect.