Rebounder
-
Posts
222 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Rebounder
-
-
Apparently you guys aren't much into hip hop.
I chuckled and tried to reply two days ago, but the forums said my "authorization" didn't match up
-
You contradict yourself. The fact that they are an ineffectual bunch who are incapable of working together, managing their alliances, or outputting enough damage does not make them any less of a "side". Post war, you may be correct, though there is no way to tell at the moment, but prior to this conflict and as it stands now, yes there are two sides.
The mere fact that NPO and allies required a completely separate declaration to enter the war completely disproves this. If there was any "this side, that side" mentality at all, NPO would have jumped into the war days after the initial declaration. Thus, they constitute two separate "mini-poles" that would stand quite well if it weren't for the massiveness of the DH-PB pole.
-
sure there is independence in that but there is also basically a bunch of mini-curbstomps for months to come.
Realistically, I think the only way for this to be overcome would be by mutual venture. The other poles would have to agree to fight the DH/PB/CnG-dominant world, then agree to go their separate ways afterward. Of course, this wouldn't have to be as obvious, it could really just happen by proxy if all the poles would be roped into a curbstomp together. For instance, if Duckroll joined the current war on the Pacific/Polar sides, DH would be overwhelmed, and the splitup of themega-pole could occur through careful moves by the multi-poles.
-
I agree with just about everything Shantamantan said
However, I disagree that the other "side" of DH-PB-CnG is simply a shamble. To the contrary, in the disjunction of the Pacific, Polar, and Duckroll alliance groups, I see a microcosm of the multipolarity that could exist in the future. Right now, NPO and Polaris have relations that are faulty at best, and neither alliance hopes to fix that, and Duckroll wants no part of either of them. Even though the three of them are surrounded and outmanned in war, they simply refuse to unite because they do not see themselves as the "other side." Rather, they value their independence as micro-poles in a world that was once unipolar. Imagine if the current "mega-pole" fractured, and the world fell into a multipolar society. I highly doubt any poles would be much larger than Duckroll or Polaris' immediate group of friends.
-
I hate when I go to post something, and I see that Schattenmann has already said what I was going to say.
Anyway, it's a transparent attempt to lure the alliances they are attacking without DoWs into posting their own recognitions of war or hostilities so that MK's allies can turn it around and start "defending" MK.
This is the part that irks me the most. MK is really insulting our intelligence with this little maneuver. With the undeclared wars, they're hoping they can avoid activating the treaties of the people they attack, and with the "recognitions of hostilities," they seem to think the rest of the world will see their wars as defensive.
I dearly hope that nobody in CN is stupid enough to see this situation in the way that MK would like us to.
-
This was surely worth knocking Kingzog's blog off the front page.
Zog had a blog?
/me looks
You !@#$%^&, Misr
-
What is this in reference to?
-
Also, NSO already tried to fill this role, and they did quite well for a while.
-
It's an ambition problem. All these complacent leaders willing to sign away sovereignty and potential in return for a comfortable postition in a tie for last place where no one wins or loses anything. Hope they're happy.
Someone's been reading my posts again.
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=95171&st=0&p=2525715
That's the second time this month, if I recall correctly. I'm glad to see you're learning from my writings.
(
) -
English was one of my worst subjects in high school and my worst subject of the 6 I took to a higher level -- I only just (and I mean just) managed a C. My spelling was atrocious, my style clichéd and ineffective, and my research near non-existent.
I like to think that I have improved a lot since then, and the feedback I receive seems to confirm that (though some may disagree), but it was down to time spent writing in places like this, my openness to criticism, and my increased reading that did it, rather than any pre-existing talent.
That is actually quite interesting. I would have thought by the third grade you would have been nailing to your teacher's door "99 Theses on Why Your Homework Stinks."
-
You know, this could develop into an interesting topic of discussion; I've personally always wanted to see some writings on psychological development of the average girl and the average guy from childhood until old age. Personally, I think your idea that the young male is irresponsible in comparison to the young female is highly off-base, and it's certainly not a defining characteristics of the sexes at that age.
But then again, that's not really the topic you chose to wrote about, but I'm not going to sit here and insult you for no good reason other than the post was sub-par to the usual standard for a blog post
-
I caught the Michael Scott reference right away, and I love it.
However, you know that the quote is true these days, don't you? The real question is: what are you gonna do about it?
-
Licking up the crumbs thrown you way? It's kind of sad, really, how far Pacifica has fallen. Here's an idea, though. Start kicking out incompetent leaders and building a coalition. Perhaps you should start with removing your lame duck tech-broker-turned-emperor.
NPO has incompetent leadership?
That one is news.
-
Not sure what the question is, voted my main man in a can, Schantamantan.
-
I think you may be reading to much into it. I think that these ten alliances truly are just bored. But you are right in that it was overhyped, and unless you're directly involved you're not going to care who wins.
I think you misunderstood. I do not mean to imply that the 10/10/10 announcement was an open conspiracy by CnG/SF or any affiliated alliances; I simply think it is a reult of the pressures on the "New Hegemony" to fulfill its duties to provide less boring structure than existed in the Pacifican Hegemony. Thus, feeling the boredom facing CN, and realizing they have an obligation to end that boredom, the 10 alliances who participate in this sport felt a need to take some action. Since none of them would ever do anything to endanger themselves, they settled on this sport. Nonetheless, the 10 alliances are still part of the problem in CN, rather than the solution.
-
People complain a lot that there is NOTHING TO DO, and that wars are too far apart. 0-10k infra levels should be cheaper to facilitate much faster rebuilding and therefore more wars!
And we have a winner. However, the complaining from the 10k infra nations would be unbearable if new nations can start buying the infrastructure for cheaper. However, it simply shouldn't take a year just to get a nation into a fun war range. That's just too much.
-
Interesting analysis. Yet another good blog from La Vanguardia Pacifica
-
If I had to guess, I'd say Bastion was presented to MHA (by Grämlins, maybe?) as a "Citadel+" bloc, which would have gone quite well with the Grämlins-lovers over there at the time (oh how times change).
But what I'm wondering is what exactly killed Bastion? Was it really MHA inviting NPO, the Tattler exposing it from MHA's forum in its foolhardy manner, or something more to do with FOK leaving Continuum?
-
Voltron clearly should have won that poll.
Can we have a retroactive OWF poll, to see what CN at large thinks it should've been.
-
Hangout? Damn, I voted for "&" on the poll :v . Would've been a great throwback to ~
But, correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the majority of proposed Hangout alliances sign off on the bloc, only to be stalled by TOP until the war was eminent?
-
The Neo Hegemons seem to have blatantly discarded their moral justification for hating Pacifica, revealing their true motivation: fear. If I were in the position of Xiphosis and others, I wouldn't be showing this kind of weakness.
-
To indicate that the leaders of CN adhere to a moral code for the sake of political survival (or gain) takes for granted that some entity is legitimately concerned about the ethical conduct of alliances. But if alliance leaders are thinking politically, then the only body left is the everyday member. Are some of you suggesting that the Machiavellian rulers and the moralistic members form an actual class system, and that the higher class of Machiavellians uses fake ethics (such as CBs to justify a clearly political war) to persuade the lower class into fighting for them?
Also, another interesting divide in moralists is the honorable moralists and the ethical moralists. Honorable moralists see cowardice as the lowest act in CN ad believe it to be an alliance's duty to honor their treaty obligations regardless of circumstance. Ethical moralists, on the other hand, look out for the "weak guy," and see maltreatment of weakened players and alliances to be a true violation of morality. How does this split possibly affect the divide between Machiavellians and moralists?
-
You have no idea how much I've pondered this same subject; how the practices of "good morals" and "realpolitick" in CN has affected the course of history. Though most nation rulers seem to consider either one or the other in determining their actions and opinions, neither realistically seems to guide the courses of alliances single-handedly, but rather they seem to share influence in the political decisions of every alliance leader, though that seems to contradict what I suggested earlier, in that each individual considers either one or the other to be important. Could it be, rather, that power corrupts, and moral appeal is a subconscious tool of the weaker entities in CN, who need the moral outrage to justify their attempts to bring down the stronger alliances? After all, most of the Vox Populi posters two years ago were heavily "moralist," but each of them had a political reason to oppose the continued reign of the Continuum.
Vladimir, which of the two motivational forces in CN (politics and moralism) has most guided the history of the game, and is either ultimately the dominant force? are they both legitimate, or is it possible moralism is just a means of political gain, utilizing the subliminal political agendas of each individual?
)
Mia's demand
in Vox Me-puli
A blog by Earogema in General
Posted
Man, that's bad