Some Thoughts on the Karma Coalition

[Augustus Autumn]

Since the beginning of the war there appear to have been many differing schools of thought on the aims and motivations of this conflict, so called the Karma War. As a person who fought on the so-called Hegemony side of the conflict I've had the time to speak with several friends on the other side as well as to read the various lines of discussion here in this forum. Having done that and then pondered for a bit I thought I might share some of my insights with an eye toward constructive criticism and the hope that someone might find this enlightening.

Before I begin, let me make two things clear. First, this essay does not seek to become a value judgment. I am leaving concepts of "right", "wrong", "good" and "evil" to the side in the hope of achieving some objectivity. Second, I will avoid using names of national rulers or alliances in the negative but I will commend what I see as respectable and correct behavior. Should it look as though there is an implicit slam on you or your alliance please be assured that this is not my aim.

It seems that, of the alliances that make up the Karma Coalition, you can place them into three broad categories as far as motivation:

Crusade Alliances

These alliances entered the coalition with the aim of pursuing justice for those nations and alliances destroyed, sidelined or otherwise prompted into disbandment by the New Pacific Order, the Continuum, One-Vision and the other powers-that-were within the Cyberverse. The intent was to bring those powers to heel militarily and then, through the use of appropriate terms of surrender, ensure that those alliances were politically neutered to prevent them returning to power and reasserting control of the Cyberverse to the detriment of others. The driving force for the involvement of these alliances was very much ideological with any economic reparations received being done so as an object lesson rather than as a price for their own betterment. When thinking of these alliances and their leaders one can only bring to mind King Archon of the Mushroom Kingdom (MK), Liquid Mercury of The Gramlins (GRE) and Crown Prince Mishka of the Siberian Tiger Alliance (STA) for their purity of vision as to how things should proceed. Were there to be a "Karma High Command" making dire decisions, these alliances would form it.

Auxiliary Alliances

These alliances came into the conflict for the purposes of righting old wrongs (more negative persons might call this revenge though I dislike the connotation) and to assert themselves more directly on the military and political stage. While not sharing the same ideological drive as the Crusade Alliances, these powers possessed a strong motivation to enter the conflict and to assist the Karma Coalition for the betterment of all. While this might fall under the "enemy of my enemy" heading these alliances show the very heart of what making a coalition is - crossing political lines and divides for common purpose. They are fighting just as hard as the Crusade Alliances but may not share the same ultimate desires for the war nor are they pursuing it in the same fashion. I would hazard that a good number, if not the majority, of Karma Coalition forces fall within this category.

Peripheral Alliances

These alliances, typically smaller and less-well-known, have entered the conflict with little to no understanding as to the wider political implications of this war and often will little more motivation than the chance to experience war, make their mark and potentially secure profit at the end. Some might call such aims greedy or less-than-noble. I would tend to call them honest and correctly self-intentioned. Largely ignored by the wider course of the war, these alliances have little to no impact on the general decision making capacity of the coalition as a whole but also tend to escape the closer scrutiny (unless something goes wrong) giving them a wide range of freedom. I'd argue that these alliances are very much experiencing the freedoms fought for so hard by the Crusade Alliances - the chances to make their own destinies.

Three broad camps, each with more divergent views, all fighting under one banner. How has that impacted the current conflict and its conduct?

On April 21st, King Archon made a statement to the Cyberverse as a whole regarding the Karma Coalition and its formation (albeit not as a military entity but as an ideological one). Because of this statement being made, a general impression seemed to form which regarded this coalition as a group fighting for justice and the betterment of the Cyberverse as a whole. Gaining its own momentum, it appeared to very much be a crusading force setting out to right the wrongs of the past, to remove the fear of attack by the imperial forces of the New Pacific Order and its allies and to overturn close to three years of harsh terms, political isolation and deprivation of the right to existence. Many flocked to the cause and voiced outstanding support for the intentions of this coalition (though their motivations for doing so may have differed - see above). The more national rulers and alliances who came to voice open support for this ideological effort, the more momentum the effort gained. More by accident than manipulation and design the war exploded into full force as the coalition came together through unity of purpose. For one amazing moment thousands of nations marched to war because they saw it as their ideological duty.

On the same day, The Order of Righteous Nations (TORN) announced its withdrawal from the growing conflict and was permitted to gracefully bow out with minimal reparations asked for. This was hailed as a sign that the Karma Coalition would be both merciful and appropriate in its requests for repayment to those offended and to those who fought. It also, perhaps inadvertently, set a precedent for future behavior. It became the expectation that alliances aligned with the Hegemony would receive terms commensurate with their conduct during the conflict as well as their attitudes during the surrender negotiations. Some calls did go out for harsh punishments for Hegemonic alliances (the vast majority being from members of alliances rather than from prominent government) but these calls were often countered with equally vocal statements calling for the respecting of the honor and purpose of Hegemonic alliance entries into the war. The trend begun with TORN on April 21st certainly began to play out as shown below:

April 27th - Independent Republic of Armed Nations (IRAN) and United Foundation (UF) surrender with White Peace

April 28th - The Foreign Division (TFD), the Global Republic of Armed Nations (GRAN) and Veritas Aequitas (VA) surrender with White Peace

April 29th - Invicta, Nebula-X (NX), the Global Democratic Alliance (GDA), the United Purple Nations (UPN), the Fellowship of Elite Armed Republics (FEAR), the United Commonwealth of Nations (UCN), Wolfpack, the Order of the Four Leaf Clover (OFLC), Soldier, Legion, The Order of Light (TOOL), Fear none Kill all (FnKa), the Rubber Ducky Division (RDD) and Olympus surrender with White Peace

And then, on April 30th, we saw the arrival of the first conclusion of a conflict with something other than White Peace being granted. She Said She Was 18 (SSSW18) was given conditions before being allowed to quit the field of battle. Immediately questions were raised as to why this alliance was given less-than-total peace while the others that came before were not. Allegations were made of attempts to extort the alliance, that less-than-correct conduct on the part of the victors had taken place and that the departure of this alliance from the field of battle was done under threat of additional damage. Suddenly it seemed as though the precedent was perhaps not total and that the assurances given that peace terms would be handled according to conduct during the war were less than trustworthy. Ideologically, the Karma Coalition found itself having taken a hit and its detractors gained ammunition to use for the purposes of showing that justice was not, in fact, the true aim of the war. The argument raged but it seemed that what occurred with SSSW18 was a fluke and would not be repeated for other alliances of its stature. By and large it appeared that the objections raised came from Crusade Alliance

Again, we return to a timeline.

April 30th - the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and Alliance of International Defense (AiD) surrender with White Peace

May 2nd - Terra Prime (TP) partially surrenders with White Peace (later to disband under controversy)

May 3rd - Ordinary Men Fighting Giants (OMFG) surrenders with White Peace

May 4th - Old Guard (OG) surrenders with White Peace

And on May 4th, once more, a problem occured. On May 4th The Sasori Initiative agreed to terms which were less-than-total peace. Again, the outcry began against the terms given and seen as approved by the Karma Coalition. Again, it was pointed out that assurances made that the conduct of an alliance determining its terms of surrender had been less-than-binding. Questions were asked as to how much control the Crusade Alliances had over the general conduct of the war and what the defeated could realistically expect to receive as far as conditions. Questions concerning the disbandment of Terra Prime were raised, further adding fuel to the fire. This was the first time the author began to see Karma-aligned alliances openly criticizing other Karma-aligned alliances (admittedly, I did not pay total attention to the SSSW18 line of conversation and debate) and what seemed to be a divide in ideology began to be apparent. Incidentally, this is what prompted the author to begin considering the very subject of this essay.

Since May 4th what has seemed to be the cause of the divide is the very diversity of the Karma Coalition (as outlined above). The coalition has become less of an ideological effort and more of an opportunity for personal/alliance gain through military force. The message that the Cyberverse must change has been replaced by celebrations of the rise of alliances to higher numerical ranks and the expression of disgust by some of the Crusade Alliances at how the war is being conducted. That drive, that momentum, that very binding force which raged so brightly in the hearts of the Karma Coalition forces on April 21st seems to have been replaced in part by anger, resentment and disillusionment. That wonderful moment on April 21st seems already to have been lost as the realities of this war have set in.

So what is to be done about this? I would hazard that the coalition, in part or as a whole, must choose a direction from a set of less-than-ideal options. Should the coalition reaffirm itself as an ideological force then it must seek to redress the inconsistencies of behavior within its own ranks in the coming months and to reestablish the moral authority of the alluded-to Karma leadership. Should the coalition accept the inconsistencies of behavior then it must acknowledge that the ideological effort for change in the Cyberverse has, in the short term, failed and that further efforts will be required at a later time. Should the coalition simply accept these inconsistencies and do nothing the history of the Cyberverse would then likely reassert itself and the cycle of fear, perceived hypocrisy and power-mongering shall persist with the tacit acknowledgment that the effort was a failure. This is dark place to try and wander out of - though I do tend to wax pessimistic I do hold out hope that the dominant personalities of the Karma Coalition will be able to find a better answer than those I've suggested and that, as a whole, the Karma Coalition might remember that feeling on April 21st when they committed their forces to the field of battle. Only time will tell if this coalition will be able to remain steadfast to the example set by the Crusade Alliances or if it will truly break apart into multiple camps who will, inevitably, find themselves at odds with each other.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I'll answer questions and counterpoints as best I'm able and as promptly as possible.

Tokugawa Mitsukuni

Shogun (ret.) and Citizen of The Sasori Initiative

Honorary Citizen of Apocalypse

Member of the Nordreich Community

[boscher]

So you are saying that nothing (or not enough) has changed since the start of this war?

[Augustus Autumn]

So you are saying that nothing (or not enough) has changed since the start of this war?

From my viewpoint it seems that some sort of change has happened - what seemed to begin as an ideological conflict for the Karma Coalition (Ordo Verde is not included since they were attacked and I'll eschew the Viridian Entente and the Global Order of Darkness due to their close ties) has appeared to either change or splinter into several things. I'm more curious to see if the ideological message will win out or if the Cyberverse will accept that, in fact, life will simply carry on as it did before with the aims of self-preservation and self-betterment ruling the conduct of global-scale conflict.

[Captain Flinders]

I think a lot of this war has been over sensationalized and your essay might be doing that as well. This war boils down to a couple key points. The first is the breakdown of diplomatic discourse between the NPO, NPO's allies, Ordo Verde, and VE prior to any shots being fired. The second is the NPO's offensive against Ordo Verde. Now the NPO knew Ordo Verde had allies and the NPO knew that VE would defend Ordo Verde because they had been told explicitly. This means that the NPO leadership knowingly went to war with VE. This was a calculated risk and one that did not fall in their favor. After that core understanding, every other alliance is just a chaining effect as we've seen in most every large scale war. Right and wrong, karma, Karma, hegemony, white peace, and reparations are all the fluff around the edges and the sooner people realize that the better. War is hell and it's about time people start putting alliances that lose through their proper paces.

*edit

Though upon reflection I do believe there are certain individuals who need to be taken down a notch and this war may accomplish that i nothing else.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Captain Flinders

[D34th]

Crusade Alliances

These alliances entered the coalition with the aim of pursuing justice for those nations and alliances destroyed, sidelined or otherwise prompted into disbandment by the New Pacific Order, the Continuum, One-Vision and the other powers-that-were within the Cyberverse. The intent was to bring those powers to heel militarily and then, through the use of appropriate terms of surrender, ensure that those alliances were politically neutered to prevent them returning to power and reasserting control of the Cyberverse to the detriment of others. The driving force for the involvement of these alliances was very much ideological with any economic reparations received being done so as an object lesson rather than as a price for their own betterment. When thinking of these alliances and their leaders one can only bring to mind King Archon of the Mushroom Kingdom (MK), Liquid Mercury of The Gramlins (GRE) and Crown Prince Mishka of the Siberian Tiger Alliance (STA) for their purity of vision as to how things should proceed. Were there to be a "Karma High Command" making dire decisions, these alliances would form it.

Do you notice that The Gramlins was part of Continuum right? So you are saying that they are in a crusade against their past and some of the other Karma alliances past too?

As I said before this was isn't a moral/justice crusade, this is just about power and revenge. NPO started war and give to Karma Coalition they change that they were looking for, if NPO didn't start this war or if the so called "CoC" do not honor their treaties do you really think that Karma could not found another CB to attack them? Poeple need understand that this war is not about just NPO attacking OV but a war for political change. As fast people understand this they can understand this war better.

Edited May 15, 2009 by D34th

[Augustus Autumn]

I think a lot of this war has been over sensationalized and your essay might be doing that as well. This war boils down to a couple key points. The first is the breakdown of diplomatic discourse between the NPO, NPO's allies, Ordo Verde, and VE prior to any shots being fired. The second is the NPO's offensive against Ordo Verde. Now the NPO knew Ordo Verde had allies and the NPO knew that VE would defend Ordo Verde because they had been told explicitly. This means that the NPO leadership knowingly went to war with VE. This was a calculated risk and one that did not fall in their favor. After that core understanding, every other alliance is just a chaining effect as we've seen in most every large scale war.

The morality, motivations and circumstances of the NPO/TORN-OV conflict are, unfortunately, beyond the scope of this document as they tend to devolve into the realms of "right" and "wrong".

Right and wrong, karma, Karma, hegemony, white peace, and reparations are all the fluff around the edges and the sooner people realize that the better. War is hell and it's about time people start putting alliances that lose through their proper paces.

As always, Captain Flinders, your blunt tone and cut-to-the-chase methods serve you well. This perception of the current conflict is wide-spread but also, you must admit, at odds with the ideological goal of changing the Cyberverse for the better as a means of escaping past problems and injustices motivated by simple self-preservation and self-betterment.

Do you notice that The Gramlins was part of Continuum right? So you are saying that they are in a crusade against their past and some of the other Karma alliances past too?

That may very well be a central motivation on the part of that alliance. Unfortunately I'm not well-informed enough nor presumptuous enough to suggest the specific motivations of the Gramlins. I include Liquid Mercury as an individual voice, not as a proxy for the entirety of his alliance.

As I said before this was isn't a moral/justice crusade, this is just about power and revenge. NPO started war and give to Karma Coalition they change that they were looking for, if NPO didn't start this war or if the so called "CoC" do not honor their treaties do you really think that Karma could not found another CB to attack them? Poeple need understand that this war is not about just NPO attacking OV but a war for political change. As fast people understand this they can understand this war better.

Very much an ideological goal, but clearly at odds with the stance Captain Flinders has taken. This forms the heart of what I perceive to be the rift in the aims of the Karma Coalition as a whole. Again, I make no value judgment but simply comment on the disparity between the two.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Tokugawa Mitsukuni

[shahenshah]

/Tinfoilhatry/ I think you forgot the top most hierarchy. /Tinfoilhatry/

[rsoxbronco1]

Interesting read.

It's important to recognize that at no point did the Karma coalition say there would be no reps. White peace was offered originally to remove outlying alliances quickly and with as little damage to Karma as possible so more important targets could be focused on. Basically, anyone who left after 1 week got away clean. Anyone staying in the war longer than that ran a risk of receiving real terms.

NPO knew what they were going to get when they hit OV in terms of immediate reaction. I know they've worked through spying situations peacefully before, but they decided to push the situation to war. A DoW on OV meant SF, C&G, and VE DoWs in response. NPO knew this and went ahead anyway. It is that kind of arrogance that pulls Karma together.

[Bjornoya]

Well during the war I was in TGE and happy to find myself on the 'Karma' coalition, but it was precisely the white peace offered at the end of the conflict that made me disillusioned, partly because the leadership had promised it would happen to help us rebuild but also because it was an opportunity lost to make sure the same mistakes made by our then enemies weren't made again. NATO, a close ally of NPO went into the war with a certain $@iness and belligerence I haven't seen in a while (maybe being funny but their DOW on The International didn't come off as such to me), and were let off the hook. Personally I thought the victory would be a chance t isolate NPO diplomatically, that in the peace there could have been either a direct clause that NATO would remove itself from the Continuum and not conspire with NPO again, or a less direct 'either pay these reps or stop aligning yourself with NPO' incentive deal. Fortunately NATO left regardless of the terms and the Continuum disbanded.

I think the goal of this, realistically should be the KARMA alliances use the end of the wars to isolate NPO so they cannot do the same misdeeds over and over again in our game. A more lucid and less monolithic culture should form after this, with a stern message to 'choose your friends wisely.'

[HellAngel]

That may very well be a central motivation on the part of that alliance. Unfortunately I'm not well-informed enough nor presumptuous enough to suggest the specific motivations of the Gramlins. I include Liquid Mercury as an individual voice, not as a proxy for the entirety of his alliance.

I know no one will believe this but LMs participation in the Karma organization was never sanctioned by our alliance. He did not ask the Conclave for approval and was therefor acting on his own. Although we of course can be accounted for allowing him into a position where he was able to do that, but to be honest, id rather have LM in karma than anyone else. No offense to Karma alliances, but his influence has proven to be partly the driving force behind light peace terms and white peace and that is something i very much agree with if the according alliances only honored treaties.

Edited May 15, 2009 by HellAngel

[Augustus Autumn]

/Tinfoilhatry/ I think you forgot the top most hierarchy. /Tinfoilhatry/

As I asserted in my essay, I don't believe for a moment that some grand manipulative entity has had an affect on the formation or ideology of the Karma Coalition. Certainly elements painted as shadow-entities in the past (Blackstone Collusion, Vox Populi, the Federation of Armed Nations, etc.) have been blamed for this occurrence but, in all honesty, I see the events of April 21st as a collective expression of moral outrage captured extremely well by King Archon and others.

Interesting read.

It's important to recognize that at no point did the Karma coalition say there would be no reps. White peace was offered originally to remove outlying alliances quickly and with as little damage to Karma as possible so more important targets could be focused on. Basically, anyone who left after 1 week got away clean. Anyone staying in the war longer than that ran a risk of receiving real terms.

The issue at hand has less to do with a statement of intent and more to do with precedent and inconsistency. Also, what needs to be equally recognized is that, while there is an alluded-to leadership element of the Karma Coalition is does not actually have any direct authority to establish guidelines and enforce them. This admission of fact has been used in this war and speaks directly to the problem of direction for the coalition as a whole - who has the power to make that choice and how will it be enforced?

NPO knew what they were going to get when they hit OV in terms of immediate reaction. I know they've worked through spying situations peacefully before, but they decided to push the situation to war. A DoW on OV meant SF, C&G, and VE DoWs in response. NPO knew this and went ahead anyway. It is that kind of arrogance that pulls Karma together.

Again, this moves into the realm of "right" and "wrong" which is simply beyond the scope of this essay. The last sentence is relevant as it speaks very much to that crucible event which gave birth to the coalition as a whole.

Well during the war I was in TGE and happy to find myself on the 'Karma' coalition, but it was precisely the white peace offered at the end of the conflict that made me disillusioned, partly because the leadership had promised it would happen to help us rebuild but also because it was an opportunity lost to make sure the same mistakes made by our then enemies weren't made again. NATO, a close ally of NPO went into the war with a certain $@iness and belligerence I haven't seen in a while (maybe being funny but their DOW on The International didn't come off as such to me), and were let off the hook. Personally I thought the victory would be a chance t isolate NPO diplomatically, that in the peace there could have been either a direct clause that NATO would remove itself from the Continuum and not conspire with NPO again, or a less direct 'either pay these reps or stop aligning yourself with NPO' incentive deal. Fortunately NATO left regardless of the terms and the Continuum disbanded.

As a whole, this speaks to the feeling of disillusionment I noted earlier. Unclear war aims and confusion about the reason for participation in the conflict have contributed largely to the divide that seems to exist between Karma-aligned alliances and their memberships. Your honesty on this subject is refreshing to say the least.

I think the goal of this, realistically should be the KARMA alliances use the end of the wars to isolate NPO so they cannot do the same misdeeds over and over again in our game. A more lucid and less monolithic culture should form after this, with a stern message to 'choose your friends wisely.'

Very much the change that the Karma Coalition has sought to bring to the Cyberverse as a whole. I personally am in hearty agreement with the message being sent as it coincides with my beliefs concerning who to trust to help protect your comrades and, if you are a member of government, those nations under your charge.

I know no one will believe this but LMs participation in the Karma organization was never sanctioned by our alliance. He did not ask the Conclave for approval and was therefor acting on his own. Although we of course can be accounted for allowing him into a position where he was able to do that, but to be honest, id rather have LM in karma than anyone else. No offense to Karma alliances, but his influence has proven to be partly the driving force behind light peace terms and white peace and that is something i very much agree with if the according alliances only honored treaties.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify this issue and bring some facts to the discussion I was unable to provide. As an ideological driving force in the Karma Coalition he has indeed been an outstanding source of forward-oriented thought and his willingness to stand a moral stand despite not receiving permission from the Gramlins as a whole speaks to the passion he felt.

Edit: Clarified something.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Tokugawa Mitsukuni

[Matthew Conrad]

I know no one will believe this but LMs participation in the Karma organization was never sanctioned by our alliance. He did not ask the Conclave for approval and was therefor acting on his own. Although we of course can be accounted for allowing him into a position where he was able to do that, but to be honest, id rather have LM in karma than anyone else. No offense to Karma alliances, but his influence has proven to be partly the driving force behind light peace terms and white peace and that is something i very much agree with if the according alliances only honored treaties.

Are you saying he's our secret overlord?!? You offend me good sir!

[Augustus Autumn]

Are you saying he's our secret overlord?!? You offend me good sir!

This is clearly not the case though your attempt at humor is appreciated.

[Matthew Conrad]

This is clearly not the case though your attempt at humor is appreciated.

I'm sure that was obvious the first time I read it

[Dochartaigh]

Do you notice that The Gramlins was part of Continuum right? So you are saying that they are in a crusade against their past and some of the other Karma alliances past too?

As I said before this was isn't a moral/justice crusade, this is just about power and revenge. NPO started war and give to Karma Coalition they change that they were looking for, if NPO didn't start this war or if the so called "CoC" do not honor their treaties do you really think that Karma could not found another CB to attack them? Poeple need understand that this war is not about just NPO attacking OV but a war for political change. As fast people understand this they can understand this war better.

lawlz no offense man but true, for Karma it is meant as a war for political change. A political change from the oppressive regime that ruled before to one that will hopefully be much better. thus, it is also for morality and justice. say what you will but you are not in any of the alliances within Karma. You may know some but you don't know all and thus, you cannot even attempt to paint a broad brush on what the future is hoped to be for the majority of Karma.

so you need to understand that you know next to nothing of most of the alliances within Karma and your painting us as just attacking NPO for vengeance (which is part of the reason true but not all) is ridiculous. Several alliances on Karma's side had absolutely not vengeful reason to attack NPO and in fact, many alliances that had vengeful reasons did not attack NPO.

Most of the alliances on Karma's side do not want Hegemonic power, just the power to be able to live free without worrying whether they will be the next alliance/bloc on the serving platter of NPO/Q/1V.

after reading your posts since the beginning, you seem to only know one thing, power and revenge. That seems to be the reasons you would fight a war like this but we are not you. If you think it is so bad, you need to rethink your obsession over power and revenge before attempting to paint a broad brush that has yet seen very little evidence to actually back it up. I mean check out the surrender terms thus far. White peace for the majority, and the couple of times that reps were seen as unwarranted, a majority of the Karma alliances were the ones speaking out against it the hardest.

so please stop with the baseless accusations. it is even more drivel based than some of the stuff Vox or FAN wrote in the past.

[Bob Janova]

Do you notice that The Gramlins was part of Continuum right?

Do you notice that the Grämlins did not take part in most of Continuum's 'injustices', and that therefore even if this were a crusade (which it isn't), our own past is not that bad.

[Augustus Autumn]

A few points of interest. My apologies for not including the entirety of your post in my analysis.

Most of the alliances on Karma's side do not want Hegemonic power, just the power to be able to live free without worrying whether they will be the next alliance/bloc on the serving platter of NPO/Q/1V.

Unfortunately I must highlight the word most in this statement as it is central to the idea I've put forward. Most by definition is not all and is, in a way, an admission that there may in fact be alliances within the Karma Coalition with less-than-pure intentions (I feel this is supported by statements from previous persons). This discord, in my view, is very much at the heart of the inconsistencies which have appeared in the coalition's pursuit of the war.

after reading your posts since the beginning, you seem to only know one thing, power and revenge. That seems to be the reasons you would fight a war like this but we are not you. If you think it is so bad, you need to rethink your obsession over power and revenge before attempting to paint a broad brush that has yet seen very little evidence to actually back it up. I mean check out the surrender terms thus far. White peace for the majority, and the couple of times that reps were seen as unwarranted, a majority of the Karma alliances were the ones speaking out against it the hardest.

While disagreeable, revenge is very much a motivation in the current conflict for some alliances. I do agree that it is unfair to paint a broad stroke across the entirety of the Karma Coalition and to say that this is the collective motivation (I don't see it as such) but for some it is a very real reason to be involved. As for the stance taken on the reparations issue the problem has always been one of authority - do you have the power to pass a blanket edict? If not, who does? Is there anyone who can? Observed behavior suggests that this is not the case, hence the question about who will be able to direct the ideological progress of the Karma Coalition and how, when all is said and done, the coalition alliances will be able to resolve this divergence of thought.

Do you notice that the Grämlins did not take part in most of Continuum's 'injustices', and that therefore even if this were a crusade (which it isn't), our own past is not that bad.

Again, "right" and "wrong" (or "good" and "bad") are simply not germane to the current discussion. The ideology of the Karma Coalition is the central issue here, not the morality of it.

Edited May 15, 2009 by Tokugawa Mitsukuni

[Dochartaigh]

Unfortunately I must highlight the word most in this statement as it is central to the idea I've put forward. Most by definition is not all and is, in a way, an admission that there may in fact be alliances within the Karma Coalition with less-than-pure intentions (I feel this is supported by statements from previous persons). This discord, in my view, is very much at the heart of the inconsistencies which have appeared in the coalition's pursuit of the war.

i used the word most as i do not know the motivations for every alliance. i know what i see on the forums and hear on IRC. that is it. so, for all i know, revenge may play a small role in all or none of the alliance's in Karma. some members may be hellbent on revenge but does that mean the entire alliance is?

While disagreeable, revenge is very much a motivation in the current conflict for some alliances. I do agree that it is unfair to paint a broad stroke across the entirety of the Karma Coalition and to say that this is the collective motivation (I don't see it as such) but for some it is a very real reason to be involved. As for the stance taken on the reparations issue the problem has always been one of authority - do you have the power to pass a blanket edict? If not, who does? Is there anyone who can? Observed behavior suggests that this is not the case, hence the question about who will be able to direct the ideological progress of the Karma Coalition and how, when all is said and done, the coalition alliances will be able to resolve this divergence of thought.

read my statement above. as for blanket edicts, Karma is not fighting everyone in a blanket format. alliances within Karma are fighting individual Hegemony alliances. which means that Karma has a guiding hand but as has been shown, is not the one to dictate surrender terms.

[Augustus Autumn]

i used the word most as i do not know the motivations for every alliance. i know what i see on the forums and hear on IRC. that is it. so, for all i know, revenge may play a small role in all or none of the alliance's in Karma. some members may be hellbent on revenge but does that mean the entire alliance is?

I appreciate your hesitation to pass judgment on the motivations of alliances you can't speak for. Perhaps the issue lies with the members of some alliances being terribly vocal about the urge/drive for revenge and their governments are simply remaining silent on the issue? Unfortunately silence is often seen as a form of tacit consent and approval as has been the case when alliances (such as my own) have been labeled as supporting a preexisting policy simply because I and others did not voice outstanding disapproval on a consistent basis.

read my statement above. as for blanket edicts, Karma is not fighting everyone in a blanket format. alliances within Karma are fighting individual Hegemony alliances. which means that Karma has a guiding hand but as has been shown, is not the one to dictate surrender terms.

Again, the central problem seems to be the impression given that the Karma Coalition possesses or did possess a leadership including a person to speak for it (the "Voice of Karma") and that, as such, a set of guidelines could be established and adhered to. Nothing was initially done to rectify this (incorrect) general impression and, as such, the outcry began when some alliances seen as deserving of harsh reparations were released easily while other alliances seen as simply honoring treaties were given terms beyond the implied White Peace. With inconsistency in behavior as well as no rationale to back it up the question now is whether or not the Karma Coalition can be guided onto a path, who (if anyone) could do that and how will it be done?

[Dochartaigh]

I appreciate your hesitation to pass judgment on the motivations of alliances you can't speak for. Perhaps the issue lies with the members of some alliances being terribly vocal about the urge/drive for revenge and their governments are simply remaining silent on the issue? Unfortunately silence is often seen as a form of tacit consent and approval as has been the case when alliances (such as my own) have been labeled as supporting a preexisting policy simply because I and others did not voice outstanding disapproval on a consistent basis.

i do believe that several of the more vocal individuals do have gov that state contrary statements. I have been busy RL and thus, for the last week to week and a half, have not been paying particular attention to the OWF, so i could be wrong though.

Again, the central problem seems to be the impression given that the Karma Coalition possesses or did possess a leadership including a person to speak for it (the "Voice of Karma") and that, as such, a set of guidelines could be established and adhered to. Nothing was initially done to rectify this (incorrect) general impression and, as such, the outcry began when some alliances seen as deserving of harsh reparations were released easily while other alliances seen as simply honoring treaties were given terms beyond the implied White Peace. With inconsistency in behavior as well as no rationale to back it up the question now is whether or not the Karma Coalition can be guided onto a path, who (if anyone) could do that and how will it be done?

the other thing that has been constantly said about Karma is that it is a loose confederation of alliances. that there is no central gov since it is not an actual bloc. Once this war is done, Karma will splinter back into the previous blocs/alliances that created karma.

[D34th]

lawlz no offense man but true, for Karma it is meant as a war for political change. A political change from the oppressive regime that ruled before to one that will hopefully be much better. thus, it is also for morality and justice. say what you will but you are not in any of the alliances within Karma. You may know some but you don't know all and thus, you cannot even attempt to paint a broad brush on what the future is hoped to be for the majority of Karma.

So if I'm not part of Karma I can't see the truth behind this war? You talk about oppressive regime, morality and justice, you just forgot to say that near half of Karma coalitions were in Hegemony and helped in one way or another to build this "oppressive" regime. Karma can keep trying paint them as warriors of morality and justice, I just find it funny. I look to some Karma alliances and see blood in their hands, the same blood that is in NPO hands.

so you need to understand that you know next to nothing of most of the alliances within Karma and your painting us as just attacking NPO for vengeance (which is part of the reason true but not all) is ridiculous. Several alliances on Karma's side had absolutely not vengeful reason to attack NPO and in fact, many alliances that had vengeful reasons did not attack NPO.

Most of the alliances on Karma's side do not want Hegemonic power, just the power to be able to live free without worrying whether they will be the next alliance/bloc on the serving platter of NPO/Q/1V.

I never said vegeance has the only reason, but in fact is the main reason. I never said that all alliances are just looking for vegeance, but most of them are. I'm glad that you recognize that vegance is one of the reasons.

I also never said that most of alliances on Karma's side were looking for hegemonic power, I said just power and one more time you recognize that.

after reading your posts since the beginning, you seem to only know one thing, power and revenge. That seems to be the reasons you would fight a war like this but we are not you. If you think it is so bad, you need to rethink your obsession over power and revenge before attempting to paint a broad brush that has yet seen very little evidence to actually back it up. I mean check out the surrender terms thus far. White peace for the majority, and the couple of times that reps were seen as unwarranted, a majority of the Karma alliances were the ones speaking out against it the hardest.

so please stop with the baseless accusations. it is even more drivel based than some of the stuff Vox or FAN wrote in the past.

Yeah all I know is power and revenge. I'm an obsessive hater.

If you think in this way I'm not even going to comment the last part of your post.

Do you notice that the Grämlins did not take part in most of Continuum's 'injustices', and that therefore even if this were a crusade (which it isn't), our own past is not that bad.

I never saw Grämlins or other ex-Q members who are in Karma's side now condemning NPO actions while you were part of Q, and if you no condemns you support it.

"Evil prevails when good men do nothing."

Edited May 15, 2009 by D34th

[President Obama]

I never saw Grämlins or other ex-Q members who are in Karma's side now condemning NPO actions while you were part of Q, and if you no condemns you support it.

"Evil prevails when good men do nothing."

You've obviously never seen Bob Janova/some other Gremlins(including me on a few things iirc) post during the Q era then.

Edited May 15, 2009 by President Obama

[Augustus Autumn]

i do believe that several of the more vocal individuals do have gov that state contrary statements. I have been busy RL and thus, for the last week to week and a half, have not been paying particular attention to the OWF, so i could be wrong though.

I'll admit to my own potential overlooking of discussions as well. Admin has not been so kind as to grant us the ability to see all things despite our fervent wish to the contrary.

the other thing that has been constantly said about Karma is that it is a loose confederation of alliances. that there is no central gov since it is not an actual bloc. Once this war is done, Karma will splinter back into the previous blocs/alliances that created karma.

Thank you for this assessment. This is precisely what I was hoping to see produced from this discussion.

...and if you no condemns you support it.

This does seem to be a consistent trend of thought within the Cyberverse. Unfortunately, in my experience, this has led to the shifting of blame for past events onto the shoulders of persons and alliances who were not even present for what transpired.

[D34th]

You've obviously never seen Bob Janova/some other Gremlins(including me on a few things iirc) post during the Q era then.

You and Bob talk for all alliance? I was talking about Gremlins as entity.

This does seem to be a consistent trend of thought within the Cyberverse. Unfortunately, in my experience, this has led to the shifting of blame for past events onto the shoulders of persons and alliances who were not even present for what transpired.

When you are part of a bloc as Q, you have the same responsability of other alliances on it, blame just NPO is hypocrisy.

Edited May 15, 2009 by D34th

[Dochartaigh]

So if I'm not part of Karma I can't see the truth behind this war? You talk about oppressive regime, morality and justice, you just forgot to say that near half of Karma coalitions were in Hegemony and helped in one way or another to build this "oppressive" regime. Karma can keep trying paint them as warriors of morality and justice, I just find it funny. I look to some Karma alliances and see blood in their hands, the same blood that is in NPO hands.

i stated that if you are not in the alliances in Karma you do not know what their reasoning is. NPO has much more blood on their hands than even Polaris did and that is just the plain truth. Very few alliances are free from a dirty past. it is whether or not they change and how they wish to future to be that is also important. As can be seen from this very war, NPO did not change one bit. it attacked an alliance in the middle of peace talks and basically lied to two of their allies while doing so. Then they got all pissy over the fact that TOP was offended about their actions.

I never said vegeance has the only reason, but in fact in the main reason. I never said that all alliances are just looking for vegeance, but most of them are. I'm glad that you recognize that vegance is one of the reasons.

actually, you listed two. power and revenge. which means that those are 50/50. from what i have seen power and revenge actually rank quite low on the list of any of the Karma govs. some members may be seeking that. some alliance may be seeking some more power. but those are for most of Karma not the only two reasons and are in fact ranked quite low if at all in their reasons behind this war.

I also never said that most of alliances on Karma's side were looking for hegemonic power, I said just power and one more time you recognize that.

in all honesty, what other power is there besides hegemonic? the power to be equal to other alliances????? sorry but if that is the case, then that is going into the morality side of this war, since many on Karma's side is fighting for just that. the ability for alliances to exist without having to worry bout a hegemony waiting to pick them off or become bored.

Yeah all I know is power and revenge. I'm an obsessive hater.

from reading your posts lately, that is exactly how you sound. since you seem to want to open everyone's eyes to what your version of the truth is disregarding much of what the actual events are or what actual gov on Karma's side has written (including the actions of PC/TFO and the shouting down of their terms by many Karma alliances), i will open your eyes to what you are becoming.

If you think in this way I'm not even going to comment the last part of your post.

lawlz. you can't comment because the white peaces and lenient terms and the shouting down of any terms seen as too harsh do not show evidence of this act of vengeance or power that you seem to think solely makes up the reasoning behind Karma.

nor does the fact that most gov in Karma, tend to think along those same lines and the only alliance that is truly being held as going to have harsher terms is NPO.

so yes, don't comment because you can't. you have very little evidence beyond the likes of PC and TFO (a couple of other alliances), all of whom were shouted down for those terms by Karma alliances.

so yes, you are in fact making very baseless accusations. and yes, your post does read like drivel of someone who is nothing more than an obsessive hater. especially since you just present your views as god's truth with absolutely no evidence to back up why your views are golden.

I never saw Grämlins or other ex-Q members who are in Karma's side now condemning NPO actions while you were part of Q, and if you no condemns you support it.

"Evil prevails when good men do nothing."

actually, while i was in Polaris, i saw just that. it was one of the things that attracted me to Gremlins, despite them being in Q. I also remember hearing that Gremlins were pushing for more lenient terms for Polaris and they also paid for the reps they took.

so, yeah, i do believe they often condemned actions done not only by NPO but by Q. You should also realize that shortly after the SPW, Gremlins left Q as well.

but yeah, Gremlins are horribly evil and deserve retribution far in access of anything NPO did.......