Fireandthepassion

x=-83.8299454239804,y=-163.125 effectiveness= 85%

[quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1287702469' post='2490147'] [color="#FF0000"]Have you looked at your alliance lately? Do you have any clue what the average alliance seniority for the Minister in all 4 ministries is? 1155.25 days OR 3.165 years And you still beleive Polaris is purely a meritocracy? You have got to be kidding me.[/color] [/quote] You do realize that NPO doesn't turn over their ministers like that right? In fact, I'm pretty sure their ministers are tenured members of their alliance. I'm not going to bother with trying to find who their ministers are, or how long they have been apart of NPO. I'm just trying to find your point here, and I'm not seeing it. So? They're senior members of the alliance who served the alliance for a long time. I think that qualifies as having the ability and talents to be in power. People get promotion based on their work. You do the work you get rewarded. [quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1287704911' post='2490185'] There was something that was lost in translation between what I mean and the meaning I have communicated. I do not mean to say that, Polar is a pure Oligarchy, but rather that the structure at the very top functions more or less like one. The prospect of becomming a "Minister" within Polaris is out of reach of most members, simply because they lack, and will always lack that component of allianceseniority that a few others possess regardless of the quality of work they produce. The component of seniority is also not neccesarily tied to being in Polaris for a set period of time either. Before either of us left Polaris, the Ministry of Science was formulated to reward others who had held senior positions in [i]other[/i] allliances. Coursca would not have advanced within Polaris at nearly the pace he did, and be trusted with as much responsibilities as he was, if it was not for the simple fact that he was a former IRON Council member. It would be misleading to simplfy my argument to the point of Alliance Seniority = High Govt. Position, because that is not exactly the case. The reality though is, that when it comes to the selection of government officials, seniority does play a large part these days, and is the determining factor of who gets the job, and who doesn't get the job. [/quote] So you just defeated your own argument at the end, and at the begining. Seniority doesn't mean crap. If they put in the work they're more likely to be recognized than others that aren't doing the work. If that's promotion in their job, or by being elected deputy minister.

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1287637921' post='2489429'] Pretty much my thoughts, I think you should find a new acronym rather than use theirs. Good luck though. [/quote] So should Polaris do the same thing since Pacifica was here first? It's an acronym. Get over it. o/ NsO

Good luck with destroying the ever so useful and unrepairable lower tier.

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1283867295' post='2445240'] Because you thought you were only fighting GOONS when your 8 people declared. As such you still pretty much are. About 3/4 of the war slots are still ours. We asked around and were like "Hey any of you guys want some slots?" If there actually were a significant number of you, our allies could actually get involved in a more meaningful way. And far more GOONS could actually participate than now. Already you guys have dropped by over 50k NS before nukes, and put many more GOONS nations in range -- all of which are waiting impatiently. What I'm saying is, in war our allies and our low-tier expect and appreciate the opportunity to bust some heads. Since there aren't that many of you, pretty much all of us are disappointed. Poor show by UOKMB. [/quote] So you picked a tech raid that you couldn't win and had to call in your allies? That sounds awfully pathetic of GOONS that they can't handle their business even if you're a bottom heavy alliance. Is their just like no planning in whom you fight?

[quote name='Byron Orpheus' timestamp='1280128523' post='2389474'] Yeah, remember those glory days when GGA was...oh no, wait, GGA has sucked for like four years. These last few months have been the closest to alive GGA has been since the middle of the last decade. [/quote] Fixed that for you. New decade and everything. Again, don't see how this has any relevance. Most of us will just laugh at how bad GGA is.

[quote name='Sardonic' date='28 June 2010 - 08:31 AM' timestamp='1277731842' post='2352652'] Willfully aiding a nation at war with an alliance, is an aggressive act worthy of reparations. I could [b]not[/b] care less what you think about tech raiding, an act damaging to a nation of an alliance is an aggressive act. However, that is not to say that we help idiots who bite off more than they can chew, we follow the same guidelines as every other raiding alliance. Tech raiding is a special case, as noted. Regardless, if you really cared about the well-being of this unaligned fellow, you would help him secure lasting peace. I can assure you, if it was us attacking him he'd run out of money a lot faster than we would. I can't really be bothered to backpedal, because you're spouting nonsense. 3v1 tech raiding is just as valid as 1v1. The definition of alliance war does not come into it. Tech raiding does not automatically cause alliance wars. People aiding the targets with the express purpose of hurting us however can expect repercussions. We pursued and secured reparations from people aiding Methrage, for example. It's not worth the annoyance to do it for little incidents, but for things like nuclear rogues where that 3m can be used to buy a nuke, well that's another thing entirely. [/quote] Except 3 v 1 leads to anarchy sooner meaning the less likely they are of getting tech. So no 3 v1 tech raiding isn't as valid as 1 v 1 in a sustained tech raid.

[quote name='Seth Muscarella' date='29 June 2010 - 06:00 PM' timestamp='1277852439' post='2354476'] I've actually been working on a new one, since that is years old and could use a serious overhaul [/quote] I'd go with the A (or is that suppose to be Lambda?) with the swords crossing as your PIP that may be just me though. Also to OP, could you put NPO and NpO next to the two Orders so that people can see the acronym difference?

[quote name='Goose' date='29 June 2010 - 11:33 PM' timestamp='1277872378' post='2354852'] If we get sanctioned, our pip will be a crispy strip of bacon background with 'The Commonwealth' written across it. Heaps of lens flare would be included. [/quote] It's beautiful! Must see it now just for the bacon!

[quote name='Letum' date='06 June 2010 - 07:39 AM' timestamp='1275827944' post='2326208'] Summer isn't really that much of a necessity for wars. Sure, the increase in time that a large part of our demographic has helps, but the influence isn't [b]that[/b] big. The whole "time to kill" factor is killed by the substantial number of people - and leaders - who do not have the work schedule of students. It's also counter-acted by people who would spend their time on vacations rather than the computer. I mean, if you look at when all the "world wars" started, and keep in mind that most of the major fighting is over within a month or two, it's spring, rather than summer, that tends to be the busiest time of the year. GW1: July GW2: January GW3: March UJW: September WoTC: August Karma: April UJW2: January [/quote] Maybe it's because I live in the midwest, but I see 3 winter months on there. January x 2 and March. April is a borderline month.

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='18 June 2010 - 02:17 AM' timestamp='1276845442' post='2341697'] heh. Congratulations RIA, rIa and RiA. [/quote] Who is this rla you speak of?

[quote name='Captain Flinders' date='08 June 2010 - 05:00 PM' timestamp='1276034418' post='2329207'] First off I thank you for the informative post. This is obviously what people need to hear from UINE government to get things cleared up. However, I believe you misunderstand why people said you should have attacked the ghost. Actively harassing those who ghost your AA serves two major functions. Firstly, it keeps those who do not follow or know your guidelines off your AA because their single nation likely cannot stand against the combined forces of your alliance. Secondly, even if the offender does not leave the AA outright, if/when the offender does indeed breach your guidelines, other alliances can clearly see that the offender is not one of your own and you are taking steps to distance yourself from them. If you make no effort at all and ignore the problem, it doesn't just go away and situations like this can arise. [/quote] Polaris has ghosts that we attack fairly often that refuse to get off our AA. You can't force people off the AA no matter how much you try. You should let others worry about your ghosts/rogues. It's a trade off. You let them attack the rogue/ghost and you shouldn't be paying reps. I can't think of any circumstances in which an attacked alliance that gets the go ahead should want reps from a ghost/rogue nation. I don't know how much you've dealt with those cases, but from my experience the attacked side is usually satisfied with attacking a ghost/rogue. [quote name='Mayzie' date='09 June 2010 - 08:10 PM' timestamp='1276132218' post='2330928'] Right, not meaning to be funny but when you try and pick my points apart, don't rip a sentence in half. You're arguing a pint that isn't there to be argued and missing out the main point of what I said. Fernando did, the leader of FAR, despite NOIR, there's no valid reason for what he did. Rather than sort it, which appears so easy now, he inflamed it. That short snippet which was taken so out of context that Keve apologised for the interactions of his Triumvir? Give me a break, that's not the story of someone who didn't act out of order. If I selecively chose the points of my post where UINE left a ghost and fed him cash through tech deals, which funded the attack, would that be appropriate now? [/quote] So Fernando came to defend his ally after NOIR already stoked the flame into something larger? You realize, you just defeated your own point there with your own wording in your own statement right? NOIR got aggressive. Did you not expect someone to step and say yeah we got UINE's back? Or are you dense, Mayzie? Uhh... what if that tech deal wasn't set up by Keve? What if that tech deal was a fraud committed by the seller? You want to conspire something; why not look at the obvious conspiracy to that situation than making a delusional alliance conspiracy for a ghost/rogue nation?

No one can stop this new super bloc.

What have we, the New Polar Order, done? Or are you mistaking the New Polar Order (NpO) for the New Pacific Order (NPO)?

[quote name='Barix9' date='25 May 2010 - 10:14 PM' timestamp='1274843628' post='2311998'] Please re read it FATP, You will see that it says that's NOT the reason we cancelled. [/quote] Ideals of what? UINE and ARES haven't changed. TCU is now politically weaker because you have a redundant ODAP bloc with two MDoAP partners. I mean what other reason would you have to pull out other than ARES and UINE not wanting to join Sirius?

[quote name='Barix9' date='25 May 2010 - 12:25 AM' timestamp='1274765112' post='2311040'] Absolutely not, while we were dissapointed that they were not joining Sirius, the decision to leave Valor was already being talked over between our government before we knew about UINES decision to back out of Sirius, and ARES choice not to join. [/quote] Wait you're upset that they didn't join an ODAP bloc? That's kind of a dumb reason to cancel. It's an ODAP bloc!

Congrats to TKTB and TCU. Cato

[quote name='Tilton53' date='28 April 2010 - 11:54 PM' timestamp='1272516875' post='2279432'] Mansa Musa, I have known Lanna since back before the days of Coldfront in Esper.net; The fact that a 3 month conversation of jokes and stupidity about the whole situation from day one has come to a single day of logs being quoted so far out of what it really means amazes me. If Lanna really thought I had done this, she should have told RIA when we started joking about this months ago, not let me apply to TYR. But like I quoted before with Kaitlink many people had already made up their minds about this; I can't stem to change everyone's opinion. [/quote] Are you stupid? You were caught with tech analysis. The logs support the tech analysis. The logs have you ADMITTING AND TALKING ABOUT THE HACKINGS. There is no joking context ESPECIALLY with the context of Lanna's speech. You're trying to save face that has no structure while spinning the merry-go-round.

[quote name='TrotskysRevenge' date='27 April 2010 - 12:35 AM' timestamp='1272346538' post='2277031'] This is not something I welcome, especially with the lack of confidence on your part to keep your alliance in line, i.e. not repeating previous /b/ behavior. But if you can, I believe you deserve a shot. However, I don't see this ending well. Feel free to prove me and others wrong. [/quote] Oh no, Moo. I see this ending [i]very[/i] well for some people. Good luck. You're going to need it.

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='15 April 2010 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1271309851' post='2260998'] You mean like how GDA kept the NPO propped up for years by being allied to them when NPO was holding FAN hostage? Yeah... cry me a river. [/quote] http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum I think you should take a gander at that Londo.

[quote name='Jake Liebenow' date='08 April 2010 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1270779667' post='2253754'] You signed a PIAT with the same alliance that you all refused to fight to defend us. If this doesn't prove that NpO went out of their way to backstab us in this past war, I'm not sure what does. [/quote] Can you QQ some more please? Where is the hate for Ivan for not taking terms when Grub offered to do the beer review for him? Where is the graciousness that we fought GOD and VE taking some of the heat off you? Where is the anger for your own alliance for not making sure your nations were prepared for war (kinda like a lot of Polaris was)? You want to whine about how we stabbed you in the back; what about NSO treatying IRON knowing that STA and IRON weren't (aren't?) on good terms? Blame EVERYONE but yourselves, and eventually you may get something right. That is the only feeding you will get. Good day.

A piat? I thought those didn't exist anymore. Anyway congrats us and YAY FARK!

[quote name='Fireandthepassion' date='29 March 2010 - 11:01 PM' timestamp='1269921688' post='2240802'] Bumping before I go to sleep. No offers the first offer made will be accepted right away. [/quote] This is not a quote and reply. It's a bump because I'm still looking.

Bumping before I go to sleep. No offers the first offer made will be accepted right away.

So here I am again trying to fix a trade circle that lost a long time trade partner to inactivity. If you are interested PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PM my nation. Iron/Rubber - [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=229455]FireandthePassion[/url] Fish/Wheat - [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=334015]Da Overseer[/url] Cattle/Marble - [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=102017]Thomas123[/url] Lumber/Water - [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=155681]CrimeScene[/url] Coal/Oil - [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=194017]KMBanana[/url] Aluminum/Uranium - <insert picture of you getting a high-five> Benefits (please note these are under the assumption that your nation has nukes if not add your 7.5 income ): Economic effect: Citizens: +22.47% Happiness: +8 Infra cost: -35.2% Land cost: -23.05% Land bonus: +38% Environment: +1 Bill effect: Infra UpK: -23.7% Tank UpK: -9.75% Nuke UpK: -50% Navy UpK: -14.5% Military effect: Soldier eff.: +42.56% Soldier cost: -$6 Navy Cost: -19.25% Aircraft Cost: -15.21% Aircraft Limit: +10