Jump to content

Salmia

Members
  • Content Count

    1,100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Salmia

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday March 28

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Blue Sky Waters

Previous Fields

  • Sanctioned Alliance
    Independent Republic of Orange Nations
  • Nation Name
    Earthly Heaven
  • Alliance Name
    Independent Republic of Orange Nations
  • Resource 1
    Aluminum
  • Resource 2
    Rubber

Recent Profile Visitors

2,438 profile views
  1. Just finding this. I can't believe this, I am in such shock. RIP, old friend.
  2. Leave me out of your ad hominem attacks that have no legitimate basis and still aren't doing much to your original point. P.S. his actual hat is much uglier than that.
  3. First of all, @James Spanier, that hat of yours is atrocious. But how is complimenting a hat same to blind loyalty? I have been curbstomped many times, and I didn't always agree with it, but no matter what happens, once war starts, you're obligated to honor your treaties unless it is a suicidal way to go out. Also, people complimenting others, recognizing them on a human level that they're human is one of the simplest things anyone can do. A compliment that wasn't needed, it was a simple exchange of human goodwill. The recognition of as we go on in our daily lives, we have intersections and pleasant interactions with others who also share our world. Blind loyalty never helped anyone but if it comes to a fight, I will kick down whoever is hitting my friend and then tell my friend how stupid they are. But only if the fight is in front of me. But to argue that in this day and age that anyone cares about legitimate CBs, well that time and day is far over. P.S. finding random quotes about random things is a very nice ad hominem attack. Maybe actually stick to your points.
  4. By depriving NG of their legitimacy, they're trying to discredit their actions and imply that they aren't an alliance and by extension, therefore, none of their actions hold political clout. It is essentially a PR move that would open the door to any alliance doing something that goes against the grain, they get rolled. Seems to be a repeat of days before. Vox Populi wasn't recognized as an 'alliance' for the same reason.
  5. Competent leadership can be anyone. NG may do things people don't like, I don't know the full back story, but at least they're actually doing something. Calling them a rogue entity, that I would always disagree with. That is a new level of low. Anyone can be a leader, it is easier these days. Shockingly, all you have to do is actually do something. It took me years to gain the network I did, but I wasn't anyone special. All I did was actively reaching out, actually putting my foot where my mouth was. People can lead, if they're willing to risk it. It is not going to be me, I did my part. But people declaring alliances who go against the crust and then complain that things stagnate. NPO was specifically held back to never allow the alliance to come back into power. I can't really blame them for 'playing it safe' considering no one would ever allow NPO to come back into power, the fact they weren't perpetually at war was only due to Superfriends or CnG, I don't remember. Being a leader is doing things like NG or actually being willing to do things other people won't like you for. As for Sparta - they always sucked. But if you're going to declare alliances as not being alliances simply for being alliances for going out, I would point to MK. TOOL also went out with a bang, MK wanted to hold TOOL members perpetually at war if the alliance didn't actually disband at with the peace terms. This whole shtick about declaring an alliance not to be an alliance because they're going out with a bang is new and boring. How dull. Being a leader isn't as hard as people think it is. Shockingly, it is being willing to do things other people may not like you to, but you have to stay true to your culture. If an alliance believes in what they're fighting for, and I am sure NG is having a blast, who is to complan? This whole thing on one entity declaring an alliance not to be an alliance just because you're in power is just part of the problem. If this is really what the world has turned to, that is sad. People used to respect people for things they did, even if they weren't on the same side. Now it appears everyone has decided to take validity and legitimacy from long standing alliances for things other alliances have done in the past. Not everyone loved what MK what did but no one ever claimed they weren't an alliance.
  6. I was around since 2008 and while jerdge and @Finster Baby are right, I have been through the rise and demise of CN. Through the leadership of two different alliances through March 2008 until my retirement in late 2013. Even in 2012-2013, it is the same story over and over. When I was in TOOL, we were the underdogs. We were moralists, people had a CB and had to work at declaring wars. Things became more interesting after Q dissolved but once again, over six years later, once again you have a bloc of alliances choosing who to roll. The basics of politics is people became too afraid to do things. When I first was a babe in Planet Bob, it was a few alliances in power, even commenting on OWF could get you rolled by Q and NPO. I spent most of my first months playing a balancing game. When defeat could mean an alliance demanding to control your forums and you could be permanently subjected to EZI. There were people that rose up like Vox willing to put it all on the lines. In the end, it always comes back to the same basics. Too many people complain, people don't actually do anything and want to be on the winning side. I actually wasn't afraid of being rolled coming from TOOL to IRON, I had spent my entire time on the bottom. Alliances held perpetually at war simply because they didn't like them. People crushed resistance and then wonder why people were bored? Everything became homogeneous and over time, even the most moralist alliances became practical and vying for power. Once it became acceptable to roll an alliance for any reason, all this bickering lost meaning. OWF became a cesspool because people became contradictions. When we fought for morals, when people had different opinions and weren't permanently EZI just for different politics, it was far more interesting. The lack of tolerance for dissimilar beliefs is what led to the downfall. But over time, people levelled up and while people can always claim this AA was to blame for this or that, the truth is we all were at fault. I have been gone for 6 years and people are posting the same circular arguments. Chew on that. I was around for years, seen it all, and I once believed in everything I was saying but people became afraid of being knocked down. Again and again the same pattern repeats itself, why else once again was there a bloc of alliances controlling everything? Part of it is people move on and life changes as other mentioned, that was my personal reason but the other reason is I had already done there is to do in this world and it became the same cycle. There aren't many doers and there are many whingers. Over the years, people quit and there is always people on the bottom and on the top. When wars are fought for no real reason and CBs became politic fodder what suited the moment, politics meant nothing. When treaties mainly became a means to get you somewhere. I was allied, and we were motivated to actually fight. OWF was full of people believing in what they're actually fighting for. Now, it is just political moves, taking turns to be rolled, and it was already headed that way in 2013. Different views became intolerant, the result is there is no challenge and what are you really fighting for? So, the same arguments for years have been repeated, the same propaganda. But does anyone really believe what they're saying? Do words really mean anything these days other than what it is politically convenient these days? To anyone calling NG rogues because they are doing something you disagree with, you're exactly the problem. An alliance doesn't lose its credibility just because they are doing things you don't like, it is also laughable in a day and age where alliances the size of 40 have validity and major alliances are only the size of 100 nations to ignore that. Those were micros back in the day, but in this day and age? Those are alliances. Just because someone is saying something you don't like doesn't mean their words don't have validity.
  7. The problem is these terms are all subjective. What is honorable to one person is not necessarily honorable to another. It is a criteria that each person ascertains to be their own "interpretation" of it. I will agree however that people's criterias can be quite flimsy and change from stance to stance. If people are more consistent with their own criteria of what they deem honorable then it is not hypocritical. However, there is another factor to keep in mind and that is people change. So it is perhaps people have grown or something has happened to change their stance/criteria on what they view as honorable. It is hard to simplify something that is complex on so many different levels and in the end is all subjective.
  8. Forge your own path rather than be led.

  9. Time for the annual cupcake smash. *sits on* :P

  10. I have a license to run you over.

  11. You've got a license to kill? I didn't know I was dealing with Double-0 Penguin. I'll have to take you more seriously from now on.

×
×
  • Create New...