The Draconian

It was a step that we weren't emotionally prepared to take at that time. While it might have been politically expedient to do so, we do have standards to which we try to adhere. Refraining from masterminding the destruction of your oldest ally is one of those standards.

I'm pretty sure TOP was in Karma leadership, so uh, what?

I'm pretty sure TOP was in Karma leadership, so uh, what?

While I wasn't there for KArma, from the old threads I've seen Liquid Mercury's signature was on a lot of karma announcements. Which LM wanting to be in leadership of a war time coalition should come as no surprise to anyone, which should be no surprise to you Damsky due to your last experiences with us at MCXA before you moved on.

Also would some one like to query me on IRC, and tell me why a lot of announcemnts in the war needed the signatures of LM, Archon, and Delta?

Cool story bro.

I remember CentCom.

Also:

Actually, it sounded to me as if they'd put Gre first. I even asked a Heptagon member before Karma started(months before) and he told me they'd side with Gre and FOK.

I doubt, to say the least, that the decision had been made months before.

Just look at what became of Hangout. Every alliance but TOP had signed it some time before Karma started.

Clearly they weren't committed, which especially showed when we (mostly Sparta) got the !@#$ trolled out of us by TOP for declaring we'd side against the NPO in Karma.

I'm pretty sure TOP was in Karma leadership, so uh, what?

No, uh, TOP wasn't. LM was, and he was a member of Old Gramlins.

You are giving TOP rather too much credit. They certainly did not 'single handedly' defeat Bastion; Harmlins were never fully convinced of the purpose or character of the proposed bloc, and I don't remember a time when Grämlins was in 'we will probably sign this' mode. We had no relationship with several of the proposed alliances and did not want to sign purely political treaties (we learnt our lesson on that from Continuum).

And again with Hangout, you put too much of your thought into TOP. That bloc was an attempt to formalise the 'Citadel+' power sphere and invitations were given to all Citadel signatories and most of their allies (but not IRON and NPO). The list of alliances with Q&A threads on the Hangout boards (I am the board owner) is: MHA, TOP, FCC, Sparta, FOK, Fark, Grämlins, Umbrella. Old Guard were also invited but decided not to proceed. The rest of SF wasn't included because none of them had a strong relationship with Citadel alliances, not because of TOP.

This.

The Hangout was a forum originally created solely for the purpose of creating better communication (hence the term "Hangout") between the Citadel and various allies who were heavily tied to the bloc. FOK and MHA were allied to just about every member of the Citadel. Fark was extremely close to the Gramlins, FOK and MHA. Sparta was allied to Umbrella and ourselves through the Continuum. The vast majority of alliances involved had multiple overlapping treaties and were all completely friendly with one another at the time.

When I was in Gremlins, and I could be wrong about this, I don't think there was any serious chance of us joining the proposed Bastion bloc even without TOP pressure. Obviously Bob and others would know better than me on that though, but I just can't remember any discussion about it where there was much support for the idea.

Hangout bloc was a different story though.

I'd like to congratulate Xiphosis on yet another invective of pure BS. Repetition of lies won't ever convert them into the truth, so sorry.

I know little about Bastion. I was out of activity for medical reasons between February and April of 2009. However, I can tell you that what you're saying about Hangout is nonsense; and I bet that what you're saying about Bastion is total BS also. From what others who were involved are saying, I'm thinking that I'm correct in that.

Fact is that the Karma War began very soon after the Hangout was finalized, and we didn't want to rush into signing onto the bloc before a major war. Fact is that we were still part of Q until just before the war. Fact is that once the war's results were a foregone conclusion, FARK and Umbrella weren't very interested in it either; I remember Ackbarian Idol telling me that he felt the bloc would simply be the new Q, and that he didn't want to be part of that. Etc. I don't feel the need to continue on.

I don't even know why you wasted your time on writing up this bunch of lies about something that happened over a year ago---but in any event, I'm very glad we didn't enter into a bloc with an alliance led by such an insane, inane person as yourself; and I'm sure that given how you are, it wouldn't have worked out anyway.

I remember CentCom.

Also:

I doubt, to say the least, that the decision had been made months before.

Just look at what became of Hangout. Every alliance but TOP had signed it some time before Karma started.

Clearly they weren't committed, which especially showed when we (mostly Sparta) got the !@#$ trolled out of us by TOP for declaring we'd side against the NPO in Karma.

Tromp: Pretty much everything you say about TOP is colored, twisted, and, in general, total BS. Stop trying.

Turns out you should've joined in on that, eh?

Your tears of rage and bitterness against TOP taste like sweet, sweet candy.

While I wasn't there for KArma, from the old threads I've seen Liquid Mercury's signature was on a lot of karma announcements. Which LM wanting to be in leadership of a war time coalition should come as no surprise to anyone, which should be no surprise to you Damsky due to your last experiences with us at MCXA before you moved on.

It was a rhetorical question :3

Hangout? Damn, I voted for "&" on the poll :v . Would've been a great throwback to ~

But, correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the majority of proposed Hangout alliances sign off on the bloc, only to be stalled by TOP until the war was eminent?

It was a rhetorical question :3

oops, it happens

Voltron clearly should have won that poll.

Voltron clearly should have won that poll.

Can we have a retroactive OWF poll, to see what CN at large thinks it should've been.

Tromp: Pretty much everything you say about TOP is colored, twisted, and, in general, total BS. Stop trying.

People would take you more serious if you actually tried to argue instead of whine like a little kid who was denied a lollypop.

Voltron clearly should have won that poll.

LJ still has voltron graphics for our next aborted bloc attempt.

Voltron clearly should have won that poll.

There has already been a bloc that came to near finalization which ended up not going through which was going to bear the name name, called The Voltron of Awesome. I recommend all to stay clear if you wish your bloc to come into existence

Though to be fair that is a year or two older.

Also thanks for shedding light on this story, I have always wondered why everyone decided to keep it such a secret even after failing. I mean its not like it wasn't ever exposed in the first place.

Anyone wishing to see our classless avatars should proceed to our forums where we would be happy to have a roll call in your embassy.

Funny how you got mad at Polar for doing just that.

It's much more funny that you guys don't.

No, mainly we put treaties that we have signed over treaties that we haven't. I like how you take issue with that.

Ah, but the NPO was first even in issues where you had signed other treaties.

This was debated heavily on within the MHA. While you are correct that Crushtania was largely in favor of this bloc, the fact of the matter was that it was only he and a select few non-government officials who had pushed this initiative. The alliance was split on joining a bloc that was seemingly redundant given our treaties at the time to Gre and FARK. It was also sudden and amidst some internal issues we felt that joining a new bloc was probably not in our best interest. The killer was that the bloc would do nothing for those treaties (they would've remaind at the same level.), but gain us relatively strong ties to alliances we did not know and at least who had recently become seemingly provocative in their decisions (that we could see,) on the OWF.

In hindsight, each of those alliances have proven to be honorable, good and fun people. The necessity and relationship factor wasn't there though and thus the general membership was meh. I further don't know if the inclusion of MHA was a must for this bloc to haave succeeded where it was intended to, either, for the same reasons I gave earlier.

As for who invited the NPO, I can't comment on that. I don't know why that would've happened, and am hard-pressed to believe that it actually did without proof. The only real active leadership at the time was Floyd.

I don't see why he would though. That would be a disappointment to me of one of the most successful Triumvir's we've ever had.

A lot of the "facts" presented are wildly inaccurate distortions.

1. There was no hard evidence pointing towards an attack on NPO's then allies and the Bastion was not a rebuke against that.

2. The Bastion Project was in motion before my time in upper government - before I had even entered the halls of MHA let alone those of power. Pointing fingers squarely at MHA is naive and insulting. There were many other tensions within the group that you clearly have glossed over (read: purposely omitted.)

If I had to guess, I'd say Bastion was presented to MHA (by Grämlins, maybe?) as a "Citadel+" bloc, which would have gone quite well with the Grämlins-lovers over there at the time (oh how times change).

But what I'm wondering is what exactly killed Bastion? Was it really MHA inviting NPO, the Tattler exposing it from MHA's forum in its foolhardy manner, or something more to do with FOK leaving Continuum?

If I had to guess, I'd say Bastion was presented to MHA (by Grämlins, maybe?) as a "Citadel+" bloc, which would have gone quite well with the Grämlins-lovers over there at the time (oh how times change).

But what I'm wondering is what exactly killed Bastion? Was it really MHA inviting NPO, the Tattler exposing it from MHA's forum in its foolhardy manner, or something more to do with FOK leaving Continuum?

The 'Bastion' treaty was debated extensively within MHA government upon its presentation to us. Many of us opposed it strongly because of the fact that it would tie us to a number of alliances with which we had little to no experience or communication with. The opinions were strongly split, and so we presented it to the membership for further review (although, by that time, it was practically doomed as far as MHA involvement was concerned.) Sponge evidently had been spying on our forums and reported it in such a way as to suggest that the involved parties were creating a bloc to destroy the NPO. However, by this time, the treaty had lost significant momentum and it was likely that it had seen its best opportunities pass.

The bit about the treaty existing as protection for Gremlins is a misrepresentation. Gremlins were never solid on the bloc and the government I spoke to said it had never really gained any support from the beginning. Gremlins saw this circumstance and brought it to us (we would have probably not been invited otherwise) and henceforth we were invited to join as incentive to have the gremlins join. The treaty was indeed intended to serve as a consolidation of the Citadel+ sphere of influence, only when the Gremlins proved reluctant to join did they become a focus of attention.

A Triumvir did approach the NPO about the treaty, but his motivation stemmed from the fact that the treaty was loosing ground in MHA discussion and he wanted to have another ally to increase support. Very misguided yes, but the fact remains that the treaty, by this time, was mostly dead and regardless of the NPO influence, it really was on its way out even before Sponge and the NPO joined in.

I'm not sure about the motivation of this blog post, but it seems like a genuine attempt to reason why such a promising bloc failed to materialize - not at all an ignoble goal, but the way it was presented certainly leaves much to be desired.

If I had to guess, I'd say Bastion was presented to MHA (by Grämlins, maybe?) as a "Citadel+" bloc, which would have gone quite well with the Grämlins-lovers over there at the time (oh how times change).

But what I'm wondering is what exactly killed Bastion? Was it really MHA inviting NPO, the Tattler exposing it from MHA's forum in its foolhardy manner, or something more to do with FOK leaving Continuum?

That is something you will never be at liberty to know. Speculate away!

I'm not sure about the motivation of this blog post, but it seems like a genuine attempt to reason why such a promising bloc failed to materialize - not at all an ignoble goal, but the way it was presented certainly leaves much to be desired

As I said in the OP, largely because no one's talked much about Bastion [outside of the gov involved in trying to make it happen] since it collapsed, I run into people fairly often who conflate it with The Hangout which inevitably forces me to explain the difference. I simply hate repeating the same tl;dr.

It wasn't intended as a shot at MHA - though the NPO [as you noted did happen] certainly made a lot of us facepalm, and the bloc was intended to defend Gre as was understood by all involved. The feeling at the time amongst a decent portion of us almost obligated to defend them was that they weren't making the necessary FA preparations to face a full-frontal attack by NPO and the majority of Q.

Given that 'lack of preparation' got a lot of us rolled in UJW and we didn't see Gre consolidating anyone, once SF decided to have their backs we made where we stood clear [something I think people are hinting at with the 'provocative' stuff] - which was largely Hoo [before he left], me and Delta making the rounds and leaking our position regarding NPO to see who was similarly inclined so we could treaty and network them quickly.

Bastion was meant to serve as a solid military grounding for a war we felt was inevitable, it wasn't meant as a permanent bloc [for fear of just replacing Q] - it was said from the onset we'd disband it by mutual agreement as soon as the threat had been eliminated. I definitely recognize that it didn't have the momentum in Gre/MHA that I felt it should, but I still feel firmly that TOP's "No" vote lead to an almost overnight shift of support away from the bloc.

I feel that way because I saw it. My friends from then [who've read this and remember it as clearly as I do] saw it. People who were arguing heavily for the bloc in their alliances were screaming about how SF was evil the next day after TOP found out and started 'voicing their opinion'. It was simply obvious.