Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

From: The Predictable Unpredictable Treaty Name [Insert Here]

Posted by OsRavan , 11 December 2012 · 799 views

Source: The Predictable Unpredictable Treaty Name [Insert Here]

Decided to make a blog post rather than derail poor iron and int's thread further. Cause my eyes were rolling so hard reading some of that thread they were threatening to roll right out of my head. Warning, incoming WOT:

(all quotes trimmed for length reasons)
Addressed to:

But the CnG spirit(friends>infra) died a long time ago and please, before you come with your poor ad hominem attacks just pay attention to the members of your bloc and within your own alliance when they say that in a war they pursue victory above everything else.

Hm, so C&G's external treaties only look like a mess because those of us on the outside take every legal defense obligation literally. But you all know that ultimately they don't mean jack !@#$, because you're going to do whatever you need to do to maintain self preservation. Great plan, but I think people are starting to catch on!

AirMe I wish you would stop being a fig leaf for TLR's many divergences from the "old C&G" founding principles.
Yes you were not there for C&G's change in direction from scrappy underdog to backstabbing realpolitikier, nor were you in power when TLR moved

And everyone else criticizing my bloc and alliance in this thread.

To answer all of these in one big bunch. What I find amusing about all this rage is, forget for a second whether you are right or wrong (you are wrong for the record though ::grins: :). Why exactly do you care? Why is it any of your business.. whether cng is 'scrappy' or 'true to the cng spirit' 'blindly following mk' etc? That’s a rhetorical question though the answer imo is ‘to score political points.’

I always roll my eyes when the peanut gallery with no connection to us proceeds to lecture my bloc on what we REALLY think, WHY we think it, and WHO we are. I mean honestly. Do I go around telling you what your alliances REALLY think?

Are you required to like us? World would be boring if everyone liked each other. But I find it a bit ridiculous to engage in an argument that essentially amounts to "we know what you truly believe better than you do."

Really, the only ones whose opinion carries real informed weight to us is CnG and our allies. I can't help but point out to many of you who are trolling in this thread that you and cng actually have allies *in common.* And for most of the rest of you when we dont have allies in common our bloc is allied to alliances you seem to respect and admire. That’s almost a given considering said treaty sprawl.

Now im not a fan of treaty sprawl, it DOES cause problems and isn’t always smart politics. I won’t argue that. But putting aside the political issues for a second, said treaty sprawl means one of three things. And please this is key imo.

1) These allies of ours are on both sides of the web and in almost every major bloc (including ones you admire). They deal closely with us and have the most to lose if we were real politik backstabbers or lackeys. Do you think they are all great IDIOTS and dupes and thus they cant figure out cng's 'true nature'? Are you saying they are all fools and pawns for the masterful cng propaganda machine?

2) Are you saying *THEY* are using *US* for real politik reasons? That they know our true nature (as you describe it) but think to get some corrupt benefit from have treaties to us? How dastardly!

3) Or maybe (just maybe) some of YOUR extremist propaganda is just that... extremist propaganda. And our allies took the time to get to know how various cng alliances think, ticks and function. They put aside preconceived notions and came talk to us. And saw something worth respecting there and to all of our mutual benefit.

Considering the quality and intelligence of some of the alliances... on both sides of the web... tied to CnG I tend to doubt 1 and 2 is whats actually going on here. Say what you will about cng’s allies they represent the greatest minds on bob on ALL sides.

I know reflective thought is difficult in this community. But come on. Lets put on our common sense hats. Since when in politics, life, or anything are things black and white? Good and evil? I eye roll at those people who neatly divide things between good people (those who agree with them) and corrupt scum (those who disagree).

Seriously. Is it so difficult to imagine that CnG might just be what it says it is? A decent bloc that means what it says but just happens to disagree with you on some things? I never understood this tendency on Bob (on BOTH sides) to demonize people who are your rivals/potential enemies. I much prefer to treat my opponent with respect on and off the battlefield.
Note, this doesn’t mean you have to LIKE us, agree with our choices, or anything else. Hell, you want to roll us? That’s fine, I can respect it. I think its fair to say “CnG did x, y, and z. I want you rolled and will try to do it.” That’s totally cool. What I DON’T like is when people go “You don’t really believe in fiends greater than infra” or “you really THINK y… I know this cause I know what YOU think and what your motivations are… better than you do.”\


Yep. If you ever said something like "I dunno Xiph isn't so bad" you'd be met with "lol what the $%&@ are you even talking about" from everyone else towing the party line, regardless of whether or not his actions directly affected them. He became a convenient boogeyman who happened to rub the right people the wrong way in the past.


*I* always stuck up for xiph in public and in private. I like the guy a lot, even if I get the sense im not his favorite person these days. One of my biggest regrets is politics doesnt let us talk much anymore without devolving into argument. He is one of the smarter leaders out there, and genuinely a good person despite the propaganda. A fun person to have on your side, and a tough enemy. Much respect to xiph even when we disagree on everything (as we often do!) I’ve always felt it the height of stupidity to start hating someone because of the political climate. Xiph and I may end up sparring on the battlefield, but that doesn’t diminish my respect for him.

So to some up my mega wot.
  • The world isn’t black and white, good and evil. Stop trying to force everything into those categories.
  • Respect that you will never know a third party as well as the people who are allied to them or *in* said alliance/bloc.
  • You don’t have to portray someone as evil corrupt scum in order to disagree with them and want to fight them.
  • I personally still adhere to the Friends Greater than Infra Policy.. and im far from alone in CnG. And when the time comes, CnG will do the best we can via *all* our allies. Doesnt mean we will be perfect. But we WILL do our best, and you cant ask for more than that. If our allies are not satisfied with said best, they will move on. If they are satisfied they will tell us so. And that will be between us and our allies not the peanut gallery.





Photo
Prodigal Moon
Dec 11 2012 11:14 AM
I'm annoyed both IC and OOC with any group that signs treaties all over the place - especially when it just blew up in their face earlier in the year. C&G (especially INT) are particularly deserving of criticism for that reason, and for continuing to sign new external treaties. It also seems like almost everyone agrees the game would benefit from fewer treaties (or at least fewer individual, inter-bloc treaties), but 99.9% of the players out there don't bother advocating for that on the boards,

So, my goals are twofold:
1) Help create the public backlash that INT and C&G deserve for failing to honor treaties and then signing new ones that aren't likely to be honored.
2) Help give a voice to the popular sentiment that blanketing the world in treaties that you can't honor is cowardly and sucks for everyone.*

*It won't suck for those with the most treaties unless someone takes care of 1)

Nothing any of you say about the true inner workings of C&G matters for any of this. Actions speak louder than words, and when people do try to explain things it only reinforces my grievances (no pun intended).
Well theres a difference for saying 'i dont like you cause x stance or x war' and 'you think/want/believe x'. The first is reasonable the second is just annoying.

Nothing YOU say about what CnG thinks or wants matters actually. Other than being irritating to read (ill give you that). Because YOU dont matter to cng. Sorry to be blunt, but its true. Nor does 'popular sentiment' (meaning a crew of owf trolls) matter a fig to anyone in cng. Our allies and friends opinion do.

If you are actually trying to convince us to change our approach to the game, trolling on the OWF is not the way to achieve it. Having an open discussion where you are also prepared to accept you were wrong about some of our motivations is the best way. Call me contrary, but when i have to read posts like yours, my reaction is to thumb my nose at you and keep on going with a grin on my face.


And thats not getting into the sheer lack of logic of your statement. Since almost every alliance in this game has had a treatied partner on the opposite side in a war, and I dont see you going on crusades against them. Why? Because this isnt actually about int or odn or how we treat our treaty partners so much as it is you trying to deride and insult alliances who have an in-game position you view as opposite to your own.

The sheer hypocrisy of you pretending to be hounding int for not defending lsf (and the rest of cng for who knows what, im not even sure) due to you being some sort of noble crusader for the greater good... while you ignore anyone who had a divided treaty web but agrees with your general political outlook. Well the hypocrisy is enough to choke on. Why arent any of these allies on the other side being yelled at for not backing *us* up? Ohh yes.. because YOU *think* they will be on the side you want and *think* cng wont.

Bah ::head shake:: seriously go back and reread your comment and you'll realize that people on both sides of the web make similar accusations about every alliance in the game. And that doesnt mean any of you are right, it means its mindless PR.

And this is just my personal opinion, but for *me* theres nothing more annoying in this game then a sanctimonious preacher spewing out NEGATIVE hate on an alliance for the "good of the public" or whatever your excuse is. Notice people never seem to spew out *positive* things for the good of the public. ::snorts:::. Do you honestly think that alliances are so incapable of judging us on their own that they need YOUR help to tell them the 'truth' about us? Seriously.. the fact that you honestly think of yourself as some sort of public defender is so bizarre to me. Who asked you to defend them in the public? Who needs you to?

Hate us. Roll us. Whatever. But kindly dont subject me to preachings about how noble and brave your friends are and how cowardly and honorless I am, because frankly it insults my intelligence.

Ill stop now so i dont keep ranting about the sheer level of hypocrisy and thoughtless moral certitude that your comment reaked of.

it means its mindless PR.

Would you really rather people not post mindless PR? if we kept our posts to meaningful fact filled posts these boards would be dead

Would you really rather people not post mindless PR? if we kept our posts to meaningful fact filled posts these boards would be dead


Also less painfull to read. ::grins:: But if im making my hypothetical dream scenario, it would be filled with *debate* and *discussion* not PR. It is a subtle line (im being serious) and easy to cross over when people get heated. But there is a difference. And good discussion should leave room to accept that the situation is complex and no one is completly right.

It would also help us actually understand where other alliances are coming from and how they see the game, which I find fascinating.
C&G alliance talks about how they care about all their allies

Unironically criticizes others for 'mindless PR'
Photo
Prodigal Moon
Dec 11 2012 01:11 PM
1) Apparently I matter enough to C&G to get you ranting about my position and draw people out of the woodwork to defend yourselves on OWF. But no, I'm not trying to convince anyone in your bloc. You're really not the audience of my comments. It's the rank and file members, the lower gov, and once in a while the leadership of alliances who might read these threads and think to themselves "He's got a point, let's rethink signing with these guys." They don't "need" my help, but why wouldn't I try to help sway their opinion by manifesting negative PR for you guys?

2) What you're describing isn't hypocritical - CoJ is about as true to what I espouse as you can be. What you're describing is playing favorites or giving people more slack to avoid alienating them. And of course I do that sometimes when I think it will benefit my agenda. That's just politics/managing relationships. But I've leveled these criticisms at just about every corner of the web, and give positive reinforcement for dropping treaties all the time. I criticized INT this time, but I'm pretty sure I can find a post where I say the exact same things about IRON. I noted why C&G deserves extra attention at this moment.

3) Sorry, I'm going to "subject" you and your alliance to whatever posts I feel like. When you're not leading a huge AA, that's like the whole game. I speak out both as a player who wants the game to be more fun and as someone sick of people getting away with treaty spamming with little public accountability (which ties back to the game being less fun). Feel free to hide my posts if you think they're that meaningless and don't want to get worked up over them.
Photo
Schattenmann
Dec 11 2012 02:28 PM
Welcome to the OsRavan Two-Sided Mouth Tour, the show that took West Germany and Japan by storm has landed in North America and you're sure to be amazed!

Question: "Do I go around telling you what your alliances REALLY think?"
Answer: "The sheer hypocrisy of you pretending to be hounding int for not defending lsf (and the rest of cng for who knows what, im not even sure) due to you being some sort of noble crusader for the greater good... while you ignore anyone who had a divided treaty web but agrees with your general political outlook. Well the hypocrisy is enough to choke on. Why arent any of these allies on the other side being yelled at for not backing *us* up? Ohh yes.. because YOU *think* they will be on the side you want and *think* cng wont."

And that's all you need to know about the OsRavan Show. : ::eye roll:: :

"Encore!" you say? Well alright

I personally still adhere to the Friends Greater than Infra Policy.. and im far from alone in CnG. And when the time comes, CnG will do the best we can via *all* our allies. Doesnt mean we will be perfect. But we WILL do our best, and you cant ask for more than that. If our allies are not satisfied with said best, they will move on. If they are satisfied they will tell us so. And that will be between us and our allies not the peanut gallery.

The audacity involved in decrying anyone who thinks politically about politics while yourself chanting a propaganda line from a war that pre-dates your existence as a philosophy is mind-blowing. Not to mention the irony of doing so while deriding anything you don't like as "propaganda." Friends>infra may explain C&G's internal dedication, but it does not explain C&G's actions on the global stage. It is just that, 4-year-old propaganda, and it is not a philosophy which allows for long-term coherent strategy. You hold yourself in high regard, OsRavan, for having no motive but to be a friend and make friends, but your pride in that point is in fact a hubris which has brought C&G to the vexing crossroads that you are rapidly approaching with no means of determining which way to go, or, as Vladimir put it: You are forever a slave and never a master. And as the defunct theory that serves as the foundation of your 'practical' action is undermined and destroyed by contraduction, the destructive life-denying force of nihilism begins to take hold and destroy you along with it.

If we are to understand what C&G is up to and what C&G will be up to, and why we had better look to the more frank reflections of GATO's MagicNinja.
ahh schatt. Way to side step what i was actually posting about with some irrelivant randomness. ::Grins::. Just what this blog needed.
Photo
Schattenmann
Dec 11 2012 06:34 PM
If you don't have any response to what I said, I'm sure you'll have all the more time to answer ProdigalMoon.
But then, you never open these "discussions" with any intent of discussing anything, anyway.
Photo
Markus Wilding
Dec 11 2012 09:30 PM
I think OsRaven thinks arguments only work when one side makes dumb points.
no schatt, I never open them with any intention of discussing them with *you*. A subtle difference. Im happy to debate with anyone else. But I learned a long time ago that 'debating; with you tends to be you looking for ways to score points as opposed to an engagement on the topic of hand.

Wittness for example me making a long post about the need to stop fitting alliances into categories for political reasons and to stop acting like you are an expert of other alliances when you have nothing to do with them.

You respond with a snide aside and then attempt to act as though my point is wrong by debating over the idea of friends greater then infra.. which is essentially irrelivant to the larger point I was making. I dont really care if you do or do not like the term friends greater than infra. To each their own. I dislike debating with you, because you arent actually interested in what I have to say (and to be fair, im not all that interested in what you have to say at this point) so much as you are in figuring out how to try and attack whatever im saying.
OsRavan says that what we say doesn't matter to CnG, that they doesn't care and criticizes our mindless PR to then write a long blog post replying for what we said and full of mindless PR. Few players can match OsRavan expertise on hypocrisy, one of the best examples was when he said a few days ago that he abhors spying, he just forgot that his alliances is one of the biggest MK enablers of all time, an alliance well know to support and make use of such heinous weapon.

OsRavan says that what we say doesn't matter to CnG, that they doesn't care and criticizes our mindless PR to then write a long blog post replying for what we said and full of mindless PR. Few players can match OsRavan expertise on hypocrisy, one of the best examples was when he said a few days ago that he abhors spying, he just forgot that his alliances is one of the biggest MK enablers of all time, an alliance well know to support and make use of such heinous weapon.



Actually I specificaly said "Nothing YOU say about what CnG thinks or wants matters actually. Other than being irritating to read (ill give you that). "

It doesnt *matter* in that you are actually affecting what we do. But I at least find it annoying to read. *Obviously* I find it annoying or I wouldnt have written a giant wot on the matter. That doesnt mean make my larger point irrelivant.

Also.. what the hell does spying have to do with anything I typed? Hell, what does *MK* have to do with anything I typed?

You are making my point for me D34. Namely that you are arguing and debating for PR reasons and political agendas as opposed to anything based on reality. If you really want to know my thoughts on spying or MK spying you can ask me and ill answer you happily. But again, what the hell does it have to do with the topic of this blog? The problem here is that it doesnt matter what anyone types on the OWF (on either side to be fair) the *Response* is some generic canned campaign slogan such as the above.
Photo
Schattenmann
Dec 12 2012 12:42 AM

You . . . act as though my point is wrong by debating over the idea of friends greater then infra.. which is essentially irrelivant to the larger point I was making.

Here you are again. Moving the goal posts so you can whine about me and avoid the point.
You, OsRavan, YOU posted a recap of your main points, #4 was "Friends > infra" If it was irrelevant to your point, why did you make it your concluding argument? It is your longest point.
I addressed the weakness of your argument, which is that friends > infra is not a foreign policy that allows for a coherent long-term strategy. It is a simplistic propaganda line from a war fought 4 years ago., and it is not suited to make the decisions that C&G must make in the coming weeks.

C&G's direction is the subject of this blog, you cite f>i as C&G's guiding principle, I have addressed that, you have no answer so you state that your own argument is irrelevant to this blog which you wrote.

no schatt, I never open them with any intention of discussing them with *you*.

I wouldn't either, if I were you.

I dont really care if you do or do not like the term friends greater than infra. To each their own. I dislike debating with you, because you arent actually interested in what I have to say (and to be fair, im not all that interested in what you have to say at this point) so much as you are in figuring out how to try and attack whatever im saying.

I think my next big hit is going to be an article where I reply to something you say, but I get someone else to post it, then after I've collected several, I put them all in one place. You're going to love it!

For what it's worth, you dislike debating me because you never have debated me. You post something riddled with all the things you're decrying--hypocrisy, propaganda, demonization--I point it out (because it's fun) knock your point (if one was made) and then you take your toys and go home with an : ::eye roll:: : and a : ::head shake:: : and a "I wasn't talking to you" right out of the elementary school cafeteria.

But it's not just me, as I pointed out, you can still answer ProdigalMoon.

Well theres a difference for saying 'i dont like you cause x stance or x war' and 'you think/want/believe x'. The first is reasonable the second is just annoying.


And here I was almost about to be sad, thinking I was left out in the OP. Come to find out, you actually agree with me. :v:
::grins to hereno:: excellent! Agreement is a plus.

Hows SL doing by the bye (thats your alliance right?)? Purely based on numbers, you guys seem to be doing a great job this last month.
Photo
Nintenderek
Dec 12 2012 09:22 AM
I think OSRaven thinks he actually understands CN politics. After a two year break, I think at this point I can say with ease that I understand CN politics better than he does. That's pretty embarrassing to him.
::waves to nintenderek::

Its OsRavan by the bye, with an A. ::grins:: You should at least spell the name of the person you are attacking correctly! Only polite
Photo
White Chocolate
Dec 12 2012 01:26 PM

You're really not the audience of my comments.


This is the key to understanding what happens on the Open World Forum in general.

That being the case, just as a general argument style (and not commenting about this particular political situation) I personally am not persuaded by your #2 point.

"Respect that you will never know a third party as well as the people who are allied to them or *in* said alliance/bloc."

Yes, it is true that a person not involved will not know a situation he or she wasn't directly involved in as well as those who were. And most people who read the OWF accept that, and thus give only so much "weight" to what's said there. However - when we are dealing with a public space like the OWF - the overall public perception (be it correct or not, or in ones favor or not) is what matters.

That's the audience.
I wonder if Os is starting to work out how SF felt all last year. ^_^

April 2014

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223 24 2526
27282930   

Categories