Jump to content

Neutrality ?


KingEd

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Näktergal' timestamp='1283558458' post='2440851']
Congratulations - you just figured out the point he was making. The reason why C&G is multiple alliances - namely, that each one has its own unique culture, identity, history, and means of viewing the world - is not somehow trumped by the overlying fact that they share similar political beliefs. In the same sense, while various neutral alliances exist, the fact that they ARE neutral doesn't somehow trump every single other aspect that makes them unique groups.




I'm not just specifically replying to your words and your words alone, though, as much as I'm addressing the issue as a whole, and how it relates to the topic we're currently discussing (as per the topic title/first post/trend of discussion). You can consider the post of yours I quoted as being a jumping off point for related ideas, directed at people who DO feel the way I implied.

As for the direct response, you basically asked what the differences were in a way that implied you were skeptical that any exist at all. My reply implied that such is a somewhat naive point of view to have. Of COURSE there are differences, even if they aren't immediately obvious to outsiders who never actually spent much time trying to find out what those differences are.




All of them together? No. But you're also being deliberately obtuse if you're going to deny that, say, TOP and the NPO have any number of superficial similarities of style and political method to anyone who doesn't examine either closely, or that alliances like GOONS, \m/, and PC have very similar cultures and political ideologies that look very much alike from the outside.

Is that to say that GOONS and PC are identical in every way? No. But it does suggest that surface similarities aren't always the best possible way to completely judge and condemn entire groups, or suggest that one is completely superfluous because a similar group already exists.




On the other hand, one person's interesting is another person's annoying. How many players were driven away by the way the NPO played the game when they were in power? How many people actively dislike the GOONS now (and/or disliked their original incarnation)? How many people hate the very aspects of the game that you enjoy, or vice-versa?

Now why should your opinion hold any more weight than theirs does?

Sometimes, that sort of dislike some of the more active alliances can generate will spur interesting interaction or outright wars. Sometimes, it just spurs disinterest and frustration which leads people to hate the game and stop playing. But again, is that any reason to say that particular style of play should be outright banned? Why does there always seem to be such a drive on the part of some CN players to enforce some sort of One True Way to play the game, condemning every other possible style as being heresy?

Why is it so unacceptable to say that some people like playing the game one way, and that's fine, while other people like playing the game a different way, which is also fine? As long as someone isn't outright cheating or breaking the rules, why should they be forced to conform to a style they clearly don't prefer but others think is "right"?




To be fair, you're not actually asking them where it would actually do any good, though. You're asking them on a board filled with people who parrot along with each other and self-reinforce existing biases, where the single dominant paradigm of any given moment tends to shout out dissenting points of view by virtue of some people posting far too much and other people not posting enough. Many neutral alliances by nature avoid the main forums to avoid stupid drama, and some of the ones who DO come here have something akin to a gag-order which would prevent them from answering you even if they wanted to.

I mean, honestly, I'm probably putting the most energy into defending neutral alliances in this topic right now, and I've never been in a truly neutral alliance in the 4+ years I've been in CN. I can't tell you how the GPA sees the world, or how WTF sees the world, or how any other given alliance sees the world. But I can tell you that just because you can't see the differences doesn't mean they don't exist, any more than all "lulz" alliances were/are the same, or all "srs bzn" alliances were/are all the same, and so on. And I can tell you that I've known people in the GPA and people in other neutral alliances, and that it's easy to see that some of them probably wouldn't fit in different neutral alliances. I absolutely know some people who consider themselves neutrals who would be thrown out of the GPA in less than a month because their ideology would massively clash with the dominant culture.

If you were actually interested in the answers, rather than simply throwing the questions out as a challenge meant to express and reinforce what you already believe, you'd be asking them of the actual neutrals in question, on their own boards. If you went to the GPA boards and asked individual members to explain why they're part of the GPA as opposed to any other neutral alliance, or what they perceive as the difference between the GPA and other groups (and if you didn't phrase your initial post in a way that comes across like a blatantly insulting attack thinly-veiled as sincere interest), you'd probably get any number of actual answers.
[/quote]

I like your style. But, again you're putting way too much into what I'm [b]REALLY[/b] saying. I'm not trying to get TDO and WTF rolled only to allow GPA to survive or something. I am asking members of neutral alliances what the main differences are. And, no, it isn't obvious to me. I don't get why anyone would want to play a game of not doing a whole lot but, again, that's beside the point. Maybe I should go to their boards and ask them there but this is a discussion about neutrality, isn't it? So I'm asking here. Maybe, when I have the will, I'll go and seek the answer I, according to you, I'm not so interested in (putting words in my mouth seems like a hobby of yours, btw). Meanwhile, I've asked here twice at least and if a member of said neutral alliance I'd be happy to here an explanation. I'll even accept a PM if you're scared of being unneutral.

Oh and here's the lulz answer everyone's expecting: my opinion hold more weight because I'm MK. :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='emperor keith' timestamp='1283613375' post='2441397']
Actions Speak Louder than Wars. Think about that.
[/quote]
Entirely true in the light of the fact that war is inaction at it's worst. <_<

Neutrality is not all smooth sailing. I believe their FA guys actually have to work harder on maintaining the status quo. Neutral alliances also provide a service which is much needed. They provide a sink for nations that are getting tired of the mind-numbing methodology of war. Once a non-neutral alliance nation finds itself in a neutral alliance, they have not left outright, and still retain the off-chance that they might recover from the 'burnt-out' phase and rejoin a non neutral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='emperor keith' timestamp='1283616699' post='2441444']
I think we as a community should have some internationally protected alliances. Why should every nation always be on the defense? In fact we should launch a huge effort to outlaw rogue attackers.
[/quote]

I hereby declare that all nations of Planet Bob are under the protection of the New Polar Order as long as they meet the following simple requirement; Successfully apply for membership of the New Polar Order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am having great difficulty trying to imagine how you could possibly be more wrong.

Neutrals did not create the MDP web. Neutrals do not perpetuate it.

In fact, if you want to put some excitement back into the game, you'd be better off MANDATING neutrality than outlawing it. Not that I would advocate either one, but think about it.

Other than that, the nightingale has already said most everything I would think of, and said it quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hazard that the neutral stance of such alliances as the GPA, TDO or WTF is the ultimate expression of "do[ing] something about it" that we have in the game. Endlessly, players whine and moan about the treaty web and these organizatiins have decided to remove themselves from both the headache and the circular nonsense. Bravo to them for finding the best way to win at the political game - not playing it at all.

And yes, I made an oblique War Games reference. Matthew Broderick is a golden god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think [smart edit wise edit sage edit]. Or I don't know why I typed that. Might as well let it stand since there is no correction tape on the internet. Oh! Oh, cool fixed! I read some long post and saw an avatar and I forgot what I was going to say about the OP. Well, guess that's it. No. I really came here to express my outrage about banning neutrals from playing the game and got distracted. I need to get out of here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283526386' post='2440405']
Cyber Nations is a political simulator; nonetheless, there are a few alliances that have chosen not to participate in the politics of the game. ie; TDO, WTF, GPA, etc.

I'm only 800ish days old. There are many of you that have been here much longer. If you could please share some knowledge as to how neutrality began on BOB, it'd be highly informative to me and probably a few others. Lastly, please state whether you think being neutral should be allowed by the world at large or by [i]Admin[/i] himself.

PS: It's also my belief that Neutrals should not have the ability to acquire a sanction since there's no point to them having it.
[/quote]Neutrality is a trick. Just as /b/, the remaining neutrals will impose their perceived military powers on us as soon as they feel confident to do so.

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='PhysicsJunky' timestamp='1283528397' post='2440431']
Darned straight. Kill the neutrals, cleanse the game of their weakness. Force them the join real alliances.
[/quote]
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic here, but if you're not, what makes you think they won't just all quit? From what I remember of the GPA war, not many of those refugees joined "real alliances". Most of them quit, and maybe some joined TDO or WTF.

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283526386' post='2440405']
Cyber Nations is a political simulator; nonetheless, there are a few alliances that have chosen not to participate in the politics of the game. ie; TDO, WTF, GPA, etc.
[/quote]

What politics in particular are you talking about in reference to an alliance being "neutral" about them? If I knew that for sure, then I'd be better able to give you my opinion as to why one would want to be neutral.

For instance, if you are complaining about people who are neutral about the old NPO-Karma conflict, and any subsequent war - that would include me. My primary reason - it's over and I don't care to fight the same war over and over again. My second reason, both sides have done such a good job of ruining the reputation of the other side and making the other position look utterly distasteful that some days I want to nuke both into oblivion. :P However, I don't have that sort of power. Therefore, I'm neutral. :D

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BamaBuc' timestamp='1283701184' post='2442624']
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic here, but if you're not, what makes you think they won't just all quit? From what I remember of the GPA war, not many of those refugees joined "real alliances". Most of them quit, and maybe some joined TDO or WTF.[/quote]
No worries Bama, it was pure sarcasm. I've spent a majority of my 3.6 years in this game helping to run small neutral-leaning alliances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1283531597' post='2440494']
The real question is: why are there more than one? What's so different between GPA, TDO or WTF?
[/quote]

There is so much difference, you might not imagine. That is like saying what's the difference between MK and NpO and NPO and NSO and ROK and... well you get the picture.

I've been neutral for well over 1000 days and I hope to be neutral for over 1000 days more.

However, neutral does not have to mean isolationist. I see GPA members participating all the time here on the forums. I rarely see anyone from TDO. That's a difference to me, right there. Using the Swiss example, they are quite involved in the affairs of the world, just not the military ones. They became a banking giant partially as a result of being militarily neutral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Franz Ferdinand' timestamp='1283527638' post='2440423']
Running an alliance in the manner of Switzerland might look appealing, yet in the long run, you'll most likely be missing out on things in the long-run.
[/quote]

I agree, lies, deception, backstabbing your best friend, all wonderful attributes in the long run. /sarcasm

I know this may come as a shock from someone like me, however those closest to me [i]know[/i] how I really think, some people have no idea what the IC/OOC divide is, and will never be able to distinguish the two. Those who choose a neutral way of life on this planet and [b]stay[/b] that way is an honored time tradition and we as inhabitants of this world should honor that, though the harsh reality this world as Earth is a brutal place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='PhysicsJunky' timestamp='1283710979' post='2442817']
No worries Bama, it was pure sarcasm. I've spent a majority of my 3.6 years in this game helping to run small neutral-leaning alliances.
[/quote]
Cool, just making sure. Though I'm afraid the person you quoted was probably serious. :facepalm:

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's getting harder to distinguish between neutral and non-neutral alliances.

Neither contribute to any real politics, neither are very interesting and both sets are more concenred with survival than success.

I don't mind neutral alliances, at least they have an excuse for being dull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neutral alliances are perfrect targets to relieve boredom. Compared to unaligneds rolling neutral alliances provide more challenge and require
better organizing. Also it's easier to squeeze huge reps from such collective.

Gangbanging them, one by one every now and then, would keep them from bloating as well.

It's a win-win situation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before anyone gets any cute ideas, I want to make it known that while I have absolutely no opinion on the actual content of the issue, if anyone touches the neutrals on Green without cause there is a very good chance I'll !@#$ing break your head.

Aqua neutrals, blue neutrals, couldn't care less, have yourselves a field day. Green neutrals...broken head.

Just sayin.

Edited by Il Impero Romano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1283756801' post='2443512']
Before anyone gets any cute ideas, I want to make it known that while I have absolutely no opinion on the actual content of the issue, if anyone touches the neutrals on Green without cause there is a very good chance I'll !@#$ing break your head.

Aqua neutrals, blue neutrals, couldn't care less, have yourselves a field day. Green neutrals...broken head.

Just sayin.
[/quote]

[quote name='Telchar' timestamp='1283755680' post='2443500']
Neutral alliances are perfrect targets to relieve boredom. Compared to unaligneds rolling neutral alliances, [b]and their possible defenders[/b], provide more challenge and require
better organizing. Also it's easier to squeeze huge reps from such collective.

Gangbanging them, one by one every now and then, would keep them from bloating as well.

It's a win-win situation!
[/quote]

Thanks, I think I got it right this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...