Sterling Shmigadoo

Where is my pipe and footstool and fire-stoking servants? Nice... the WALLo'TEXT rant seems a bit out of tune or place, but I do enjoy the interview"logs," even if the party(ies) in question know the lights are on. Also, no one escapes the public consideration's inquisition. /subscribed

Pardon my insolence, but as I was reading your reply I had to do a double take on your avatar. Instead of cloth I saw hair... lots and lots and lots of hair... so much hair I thought she/you had wrapped her/your wandering underarm hair around your/her breasts. Also, back on topic to a point, I enjoy these mamby-pamby indirect challenges to alliance messages. A lot.

Given the history of our politics: the most important treaty of all time = non sequitur Amirite or amirite? /chuckles

Remind me not to google "spreading cheer." Merry Christmas

Apparently, this is1 a hair question. [1] Forsooth!

Can I say "this"? Yet...and yes: the OP is right on. Right on. Indeed, there is no answer to this question. Like it or not, as soon as we collect taxes, let alone post here, we are all LARPers, a broad term which in itself is a frothy frothiness blend of frothy somethingness and nothingness all rolled into one tasty or not so tasty milkshake.... you and I are about to drink up.

Holy tarp bailout, my bills on the first day were t.w.e.n.t.y.do.n.g.s!!! 20-eleeventy! Although....apparently even with zero infra I do have 56 (homeless) citizens lurking about. Spare a bro a dime? If I walk your leader's dog every other Thursday? No euphemisms needed. :-*) <--Winston Churchill at the mike

Experience has shown, and a true philosophy will always show, that a vast, perhaps the larger portion of the truth arises from the seemingly irrelevant. With full force of spirit, good fortune to you on your merger's designs. ~Shmigadoo o' //Ravenprice

I'm here for the humor. 227? ROFLOLCOPTER. That's hilarious, mange! Serious..lee... Congrats en' all on the great growth and the new former ex-consejero-advisor-dewd. //

Could ya link a bro out? I have no idea what "last time" you are talking about. Thank you, Shmiggy

You are a funny one. What's even funnier is that word not it, I don't think.

Aye, it is beyond disappointing to see we are still stuck in a dark age of thoughtlessness. Is is most distressing to see that so many leaders of nations still confuse the whispers of infantile insecurity with international security in their alliance affairs. What strength does an alliance truly have when it cannot trust its member nation leaders to receive and read what most here should readily recognize as junk mail? Further, is there any message any nation can send another that can challenge the sovereignty of your alliance? If there is, your alliance has its work cut out for you.

Please keep us informed here in advance (reminder threads like AirMe's shows perhaps) if possible of your weekly radio shows. Thanks for all you have done with this! Sad to see it end, but most understandable.

With this post, you, kind Sir, discredit the spirit of your alliance. o/ Vanguard for x, y and z.

What drew you to your alliance? Best recruitment message (i.e. message content and alliance principles) Why have you stayed in your alliance, what makes it better (in your mind) than maybe a larger alliance? They are not national micromanagers. Why, in your opinion, do people "hop" alliances? What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow? 12 gallons

The icing is tastier than the cake. And the filling is what makes the pie. In other words, indeed?

I agree and, for the life of me, I simply cannot see how anyone could not vote"none of the above." I mean come on... messaging a nation that your alliance is better than the one they are in... violates anything???

We live in a litigious society.

Hmmm... so many pages and this sentiment was expressed on the first one. If rogery were my cup o' tea, I'd go rogue on Watchman for appealing to "regardless of political affiliation," and a general disregard for what is entailed in a cup of tea. Also, I fear if I took the time to read this entire thread of vitriol and ado I'd... I don't know what I'd do... Chimcheeeree!

I think the semantics and open endedness of what many of us take or dispute to be "democracy" is to blame here, for I actually agree with much, if not all, of what you wrote. I think most of what we take to be democracy naturally leads to flawed ways of conducting any organizational venture, here or elsewhere, but... like you, I also agree that it is still a far better approach to dealing with others than any alternatives we have seen. Back specifically to this topic, I suppose my central objection to the OP is that I simply do not see how we approach or attempt to practice "democracy" in Cyber Nations differs at all from how we approach or attempt to practice it in "real life."

Everything you have written sounds reasonable... But... Consider for a moment that, at least according to your qualified post, you don't even really believe in democracy in real life. Consider further that we've never seen a democracy result in anything but mediocrity at best and chaos at worst in real life. Finally, ponder for a while just why and how self-proclaiming democracies receive their senses of legitimacy. I'd argue that what we see here evenly mirrors real life, from theory right through practice: the greater the illusion of democracy, the higher the level of individual acceptance of said governing system, no matter how any system, real or gaming, really is organized. People want to think they make a difference. Tell them they do and give them a way to make a difference, throw in a little charisma to guide the "public" discourse, and they will believe a "limited" dictatorship is actually a form of democracy.

I disagree. I believe in the use of defensive destructive force a la defensive warfare. I find it to be quite consistent with any natural law discussion of morality, or with even the most relativistic approach to your quandary.

Why do you think so many of the cyberverse's more dynamic nation leaders are drawn to dark or evil-themed alliances such as yours?

Interesting perspective, heavily weighted down by complicating factors that, to me at least after reading the OP, have little to do with the claim made as the title of this topic. From what I read here in these forums, the Sith alliance very closely resembles a direct democracy. I cannot speak to their success, but I can speak to the level of discourse of their members here. By that standard alone, I would judge it a very successful aka healthy alliance, inasmuch as I judge success or health here primarily on the engagement of an alliance's members. Or am I missing something?

My knee-jerk reaction here as I prepared to post was to object to how Msr Vilien has his opening discourse framed. I see some others also objected to this, perhaps or even likely on similar grounds objecting to the characterization of fear and the human spirit. Yet....I still feel motivated to further challenge that opening assertion regarding fear since so many responses here overlooked that slight and jumped to reject any consideration of morality qua morality. But... yet^2 or even indeed^1 or perhaps ^3, I am mostly disturbed by those who object to any universal expression, let alone acceptance of any moral standard. I applaud this topic's pursuit and further consideration all the more so upon seeing lines of thought such as that expressed and pursued by President Kent above. There is a right and there is a wrong. All you need to do to see what distinguishes these two fallaciously dichotomized terms is to stand in front of a mirror the next time you prep your next presidential or dictatorial address. You will see it. Thank you for your thought and consideration of this important topic. Shmiggy