Moridin
-
Posts
4,592 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Moridin
-
-
I have always held you in the highest regard, Virillus. I would hope that this could be resolved peacefully, but it's not looking good, so, farewell.
-
Unbelievable. The fakers want the guy who told them that someone in their midst is a faker to falsely confess. Yeah, right. Track down whoever lied to you first (I'd name my best guess, but I happen to like that person..). I know Junkalunka, and I know that his photoshop skills are not exactly brilliant, he did not even know that the colloquy file could be edited.
Because anecdotal evidence is the best kind.
-
Anything can be faked (though Vladimir's only IRC fake had obvious mistakes). That does not mean it was, proof presented by Junkalunka has been more compelling.
Only because he made a hasty job of it. It would have taken another ten seconds to make the space after RV's name. The simple fact is that IRC logs are not difficult to fake, and so Junkalunka's "proof" is in fact anything but that.
-
I am not around for that long, but isnt El Bruc the main reason tl;dr was introuduced to the citizens of Planet Bob?
I wouldn't be surprised. His Stockhold Syndrome thread was the worst waste of server space I've ever seen. At any rate, I suppose it's time to steer this back on topic.
-
this topic needs more El Bruc as MoFa
Oh god no. Then he'd have even more reason to make incredibly long-winded posts that could be summed up in one sentence.
-
I really miss USBR, the fatcat. Most of these kids probably don't even remember him. :\
Always loved USBR's posts. The best was when he wrote a new charter for GATO.
-
It would effect the MDP web, because eventually relations with be...changed with all of the new members coming in. I also don't like how you keep putting words in my mouth. The 31 alliances would be the committee, it's only purpose is to make sure no new alliance form until it is time for them to do so.
You think they would be changed for no apparent reason. Alliances don't change their foreign policy just because new nations join, especially if all other alliances receive the same influx of new members.
Also, where have I been putting words in your mouth?
-
An intelligent idea, maybe
I would dispute that.
-
And yes I would like to know of the flaws.
Here goes...
The obvious problem is who is this ruling council, how are they determined? If it is a representative from every of the 31 alliances, then you create a problem worse than the current one - every alliance will be working together to keep themselves as the only alliances in existence. Even aside from the fact that this "solution" would hardly even affect the MDP web as it is mostly tangled between the top alliances, what this means is that there will no longer be any reason for war at all, as each alliance's existence is guaranteed.
If this ruling council, or "CyberNations Committee" was not composed of representatives of each of the 31 alliances, then there is a similar problem problem. For the sake of my sanity, I will just copy/paste my previous post that you never fully addressed. This ruling council will of course do everything to advance itself, so alliances in the 31 but outside the ruling council will die off quickly in favor of alliances more pre-disposed towards the ruling council. And lo behold, you are stuck once again with the original problem of a Cyberverse where the powers that be are all friends with each other, and we end up quite possibly worse off than before you came and posted this dreadful excuse for an idea.
And finally, the reason this can never be achieved: No one wants to. No alliance is going to compromise their sovereignty just because you happened to notice there's a lot of treaties in in the Cyberverse these days. Every major alliance has rejected time and time again the idea of a CN UN, which this suggestion is really implying. In fact, I'm not entirely sure why this hasn't been locked for being a repeat and altogether idiotic thread.
-
Right now we would take the top 31 alliances in the game and force the rest into merging them or else destroy them. Reason we have 31 alliances is that there is 31,000 nations in the Cyberverse. Once we reach 32,000 then another alliance will be able to form. Before forming however, you must first get 50 members to commit to joining. They have to commit, they wouldn't form the alliance in-game before they got the 50 members. They show the 31 alliances the 50+ nations who will be joining the alliance. Then they have a time period to make 50 nations, etc.
I can point out every place where this is a terrible idea if you like, or you can just be satisfied that no one in their right mind would ever agree to such an idea, and furthermore, that it would be absolutely impossible to implement and subsequently enforce.
-
The game would be funner and better iffffffffffffffff it was OOC, everybody cries about OOC attacks, so if everybody is OOC then who cares.
OOC ftw
Unfortunately for you, this is a game where you play as a national leader. If you want an entirely OOC experience, I suggest you turn off your computer and go outside.
-
If that were the case then the new alliance would have to consist of 50 members before forming.
So your suggestion so far:
We have a ruling council of CN that decides which alliances exist. This number is to be restricted to 31. However, if an alliance is under 50 members it does not count towards the 31. This ruling council will of course do everything to advance itself, so alliances in the 31 but outside the ruling council will die off quickly in favor of alliances more pre-disposed towards the ruling council. Of course for someone to be admitted into the 31 after another alliance drops, someone has to meticulously watch the CN stats of various 49-man alliances to see who hits 50 first and is allowed into the 31, and anyone who hits 50 after that first alliance is destroyed or merged into an existing alliance.
Yes, this sounds like an incredible idea.
-
Well then again I am not one to take offense to anything, so why should I take offense to their names being mentioned?
Then we have fundamental differences. When a player drops to level of Yaridovich, making OOC attacks, I make no difference between the person and their words. I do not find any jokes about what they did to be funny, and so I do not find jokes about them to be funny either.
The point is, from which we have strayed so far, I do not take kindly to someone altering my words to something I find so disagreeable.
-
It's obvious that you didn't read the whole post.
The comittee would handle it to make sure that no new alliances were formed and that the current alliances that are not the 31 are either merged into one of the 31 or is toppled.
And what happens if one of the 31 is forced to disband? Do we just have a mad dash to see who can found the next alliance first, or does this committee just create another puppet alliance?
-
You realize this is hypothetical, right? It's not like he is calling for the to be the leaders of NpO or something.
Because nothing made-up in CN history has ever mattered.
Are you honestly comparing what he said to a $%&@ joke? Jesus Christ.....Not calling them equal, but in the same spirit. I am not one to differ from OOC attacks and the person behind them, as it is OOC anyway. I would not take any joke about Yaridovich lightly, why should I take one about Dizzay lightly?
-
Dizzay never made any OOC attacks did he? (I am seriously asking because I don't remember) The post that got him banned was for revealing mod identities. Or suspected Mod identities.
He certainly did. I'll take this to PM if you want to know details.
-
There is a difference though Tela. 404 was just an !@#$%^& trying to push all the buttons he could. I don't think it was about a laugh for him. It was seeing how far he could push the limit. There is a big difference in getting a laugh and being a jerk.
And when combined with Dizzay, who was responsible for disgusting OOC attacks (and possibly others in the list as well, I don't remember them well), I don't find any post calling for them to be an alliance's leaders to be funny in the least.
-
Learn to take a joke or something, jesus.
Then it was a joke in incredibly poor taste, for the same reason that $%&@ jokes are no longer welcome here.
-
Also with a limited amount of alliances you get more diversity, thus making things more interesting.
....what?
-
Leader: Dizzay
Regent: 404 Error
Foreign Affairs Minister: Helsbecter
War Minister: DV, Sarafina
Interior Affairs Minister: Tontoro
Finance Minister: binnay
If it's not broken, don't fix it.
Why you even bothered quoting me is beyond me. Though one has to wonder why an MK member would desire a government made up almost by either banned, perma-ZI, or other former GOONS when I believe your alliance has spent a great deal of effort to clear its name.
-
EAT IT SNAPE!
Necromancer V4LWhat happens if I vote Snape now?
-
Leader: Assington
Regent: RandomInterrupt
Foreign Affairs Minister: Myworld
War Minister: AlmightyGrub
Interior Affairs Minister: Zbaldwin
Finance Minister: Jphillips
If it's not broken, don't fix it.
-
Sure, sounds like a fantastic idea. How do you plan to implement it?
In all seriousness, if a tangled MDP web is your only concern, then this will do little to nothing to fix it. The vast majority of MDPs and major blocs are between those upper-tier alliances - all you will do even if this could ever be implemented is create a Cyberverse where literally every alliance has multiple treaties and is thus unassailable.
As for limiting treaties, again, how do you propose this be implemented? No alliance is going to cancel treaties just because some poster in the OWF made the astute observation that the MDP web is tangled.
-
Bakunin, Z'ha'dum, and Vladimir are easily the top three. Ivan and Joseph Thorne if they were still around here would be in that list as well.
Necromancer V4L
STA Declaration of War
in Alliance Politics
Posted
Awesome.
o/ STA