Tamurin

[quote name='Clash' date='15 July 2010 - 06:26 PM' timestamp='1279211197' post='2372996'] Yeah I kind of expected posts like this. In your rush to criticize, did you see this part: [/quote] Weird that you would quote me with "Stuff" although I never used that word in my post. Well, if you had read it, you would have seen a lot of constructive criticism there. Maybe not written in the nicest way, I'll give you that, but still useful.

This is a very weird list. I have created two alliances myself and I'd like to comment on those points. 1.) Flag: Flag? That's your number 1 point? A flag is a JPEG-thing used for internal and external propaganda. It's a picture. It's packaging. Definitely not the number 1 thing to do. An alliance can exist for months without having a perfect marketing machine. 2.) Forums: Good. However, your forums should be unique in some way. Nobody will want to log on to some boring standard forums. You need a forum developer and someone who really knows about themes. [i]This[/i] is where you put your effort into marketing first. Second, much more important, you need to work out an application system, user masks and a good sub-forum structure. 3.) IRC: Optional. Only power-users use IRC and in the beginning you'll hang out there alone most of the time. 4.) Active government: On the contrary. In the beginning, that is just YOU. If you are lucky and you are co-founder of an alliance with 2+ founders, then YOU is in fact you 2+ people. If you are alone, then it's just you. Prepare yourself to do all jobs simultaneously. Too much work for you? Then don't found an alliance, join one. Also, I wouldn't start with six (!) ministries to begin with. In the beginning you can work with two ministries (Internal / External) with sub-divisions. External can include Defense and Foreign Affairs, Internal everything from Recruitment, Immigration to Finance. With just a few members in your alliance, there isn't much to manage, so you shouldn't start with a bloated structure. Remember, you don't write your charter for the new 1000 years. A small alliance should have a small-alliance-charter and adapt over time. 5.) Charter: That's your number 5 point? It should be number 1. The charter defines what your alliance is and how it works. Dictatorship? Oligarchy? Democracy? Communism? And most importantly: What makes your alliance unique? There are hundreds of alliances out there - what makes yours different from all others? What is your point, why did you found this place? Just because you could finally rule or do you have a point beyond that? 6.) Protectorate agreement: Probably necessary nowadays. There was a time when it wasn't necessary (and yes, GOONS existed back then as well). 7.) Just like Flag. Can be done later. 8.) Really, a DoE? Today? I recommend not to do that. It's just an invitation for raider-alliances to attack you and test if your Protectorate-agreement works. There is no rule that says you must write a DoE, so just skip that until you are someone who can really reach out (like a 20-member-alliance with at least one nation with nuclear weapons).

At least this web doesn't give you eye-cancer when you look at it and try to understand it. Back then, it was still possible to categorize everyone into "good", "evil" and "neutral" (although "good" and "evil" depended on the viewpoint, but you get my point). Today, you're practically allied with everyone and where you end up fighting depends on which "chain" arrives at your alliance first or a choice.

Congratulations to NATO and to the father of the princess. May the Royal Family prosper and enjoy many sunny days.

Look what "gems" I have here: [img]http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/2224/warmarch23rd.jpg[/img] [img]http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/6002/warmarch26th.jpg[/img] What I liked: - Alliances were much larger - Alliances were more rare - The treaty web was simple - One war didn't trigger everyone to join because of the many many many MDPs (and variants of that) around I fought AGAINST TI in GW2 and in GW3 I was neutral, but that time had its advantages. Today it feels like real-world politics.

I suggest that new alliances don't make DoE's anymore. You can declare your existence when you reach 50 members and can defend yourself.

Keep talking about yourself, Gear Anyways, congratulations to TFD and RoA.

True friends don't need treaties. They'll help each other out anyway That said, it's just reality that sometimes two alliances move into different directions and that is the case here. But that doesn't mean this can't revert. The CN-treaty web has fundamentally changed so often, I wouldn't rule out anything for the future.

What's wrong with blue? It's a good color. And with a little luck, this alliance will thrive.

Good luck, you blue dragons. [img]http://www.ryanthusar.de/Drachen-Pics/drache02.jpg[/img]

Congratulations, Europa! And welcome on board.

Congratulations, NEAT. Good to see that you're still out there.

GOONS raiding a protected AA...somehow this sounds familiar... Well, what can you expect? I'm sure TFD-gov will find a way to deal with the situation.

Congratulations and happy birthday, TFD! You've exceeded all my expectations. You are a great bunch of people that form a great community! I wish everyone of you the best of luck. o/ TFD (and thanks to Lusitan for pointing me to this epic topic)

o/ FARK o/ Nevermore o/ Peace I would like to thank my worthy opponents for their kind words and the great fight they put up. Despite their overwhelming odds, there was never a word of disregard or bragging. I'm looking forward to peace and I wish FARK and my former opponents the best of luck.

I would like to thank everyone for their moral support! It's very kind of you to show sympathy for an alliance that wasn't around that long and wasn't able to create long-term friendships. Thank you! I would also like to thank our allies and protectors who grant those members still flying the DOC AA protection even after the alliance is no more. And last, but not least, I would like to thank GOONS for their character display. As many of DOC, including me, will stay active in the game, but in several other alliances, we now know who you are, what you do and what we should expect from you. I'm sure that this will help us in the future - and I'm also sure that this experience will also have some impact within the alliances of our friends and allies.

Disbandment of the Democratic Open Community As of today, the Democratic Open Community (DOC) is no more. The alliance that was founded on the basis of total transparency and direct democracy decided to disband in November 2009 and to find new alliances for its members. During our short time in the Cyberverse, we successfully implemented our principles and proved once and for all, that you can govern an alliance without hiding information and without neglecting members the right to participate regarding decision-making. In the end, our problem was the inactivity of too many members and the workload shouldered by too few - a problem many alliances face. As prime minister, it was my duty to address and solve this problem, but I failed at it and take full responsibility for it. I wish the best of luck to all former DOC-members, wherever they go. I would like to thank all our friends and allies, especially the members of the "Train"-accords and our friends from NEAT and LSF. Salute and goodbye! Tamurin

Congratulations to TYR and to many more years!

A most impressive achievement! Congratulations! And may I say that this sort of strategy is awesome! Very creative, efficient and unorthodox. My respect to the brains behind that.

Greetings. I'd like to introduce the "Democratic Open Community" (DOC), a direct-democratic and fully transparent alliance to all of you. We are a small and young community with currently 30-35 members. We are looking for future staff and government members that want to help shape this alliance. You should have a vision of how alliances should be run. You should accept open discussions and open criticisms. You need to respect majority decisions. Then DOC is something for you! Our charta guarantees personal and political freedom. Our treaties with TFD and Zenith guarantee you security. Our multi-colored nature guarantees you economic freedom. Our tech deal agreements guarantee technological development. Our library of guides guarantee educational development. And our open community will introduce you to a lot of friendly people around the globe. Join us: http://s1.zetaboards.com/DOC/index/

I suggest that in the future you stay true to yourself, your principles and your believes instead of trying to make stealthy tactical moves. In the end, this is what will make you believable and respectable - your words, your actions, your loyalty over several years. And not some papers.

Despite all negative publicity - we're still here. 40 members is hardly dying now, is it? Nuclear protection included!

Seems like you need a place to start over and get a second chance now. Anyway, although you seem to have planned a Vox-Populi-like revolution under my watch (which I didn't notice) and dragged a lot of internals out to the OWF (which I was forced to notice), I wish you the best of luck.

There are two things I'd like to add here: 1.) An alliance fails when the members give up. Not before. Every alliance fights inactivity or struggles to replace active members that left. The smaller and younger the alliance, the harder it is. But you only fail when you stop trying. 2.) CN-history has seen all kinds of alliances with all kinds of systems. And for every system, there are examples where it worked out great and where it failed catastrophically. The best system won't survive the worst people. And the best people can make a horrible system work. It's the people. And that's all I'm going to say.