Which alliance is the biggest MK lapdog?

[AAAAAAAAAAGGGG]

If GOONS were truly toadies to MK, they would have had forced to eject ReyTheGreat based on how awful his posting is.

I think that in itself is an argument against the idea of MK toadies.

Edit: typing on a phone is difficult.

Edited July 12, 2012 by AAAAAAAAAAGGGG

[flak attack]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1342092405' post='3009043']
I remember that fork in the road. Being part of the hegemony again was so tempting. I imagine when MK get theirs TOP will be looking to the next hegemony for company.
[/quote]
Remember that time that IRON was pretty much the only alliance on your side Cit was tied to? Maybe there was a reason they chose not to tie themselves to the rest of you.

Hmmm, makes you think...


[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1342117283' post='3009279']
"We may act like we don't think, but if you saw the real us you'd see otherwise."

How do you make such an argument with a straight face?
[/quote]
So we don't think, yet we somehow have managed to play the politics in the right way to help build a network of alliances that has kept your nose in the ground for 3 years?

Doesn't say much about you, does it?

Edited July 13, 2012 by flak attack

[Neo Uruk]

I love you NFL

[Groucho Marx]

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1342137269' post='3009418']
If GOONS were truly toadies to MK, they would have had forced to eject ReyTheGreat based on how awful his posting is.

I think that in itself is an argument against the idea of MK toadies.

Edit: typing on a phone is difficult.
[/quote]

Yeah that's my bad. Oops.

[TurnipCruncher]

Surely the LSF are MKs greatest false flag operation? There must be some reason or plan behind it. No?

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='kingzog' timestamp='1341938193' post='3007866']
If everyone who'd ever started a dumb thread stopped posting, this would be a very lonely place.
[/quote]


[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1342142899' post='3009448']
Remember that time that IRON was pretty much the only alliance on your side Cit was tied to? Maybe there was a reason they chose not to tie themselves to the rest of you.

Hmmm, makes you think...



So we don't think, yet we somehow have managed to play the politics in the right way to help build a network of alliances that has kept your nose in the ground for 3 years?

Doesn't say much about you, does it?
[/quote]
Dont you think many could have said the same to you when MK was held under a boot. Perhaps lessons can be learned lest history repeats itself.

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1342137269' post='3009418']
If GOONS were truly toadies to MK, they would have had forced to eject ReyTheGreat based on how awful his posting is.

I think that in itself is an argument against the idea of MK toadies.
[/quote]

He fits right in though.

[Unknown Smurf]

This poll was destined for doom from the start, the definition of lap dog is much too vague.

There are 3 types of lapdogs (in the realm of CN that is) as far as I'm concerned. You have those that are used for their NS in order to achieve a (usually common) goal without significantly hurting the "master" (for lack of a better term). This was recently seen when MK "used" the mjolnir bloc to roll SF. Now Mjolnir won't say they were lapdogs because they wanted to roll SF, but the fact that MK/DH/PB was able to use that desire to roll SF to take the most of the damage in that war causes them to be lapdogs in that example as far as I'm concerned. Another example of this, for those that prefer historical ones, is the unholy treaty between MK and TOP. Both parties there knew the treaty was not there for a friendship, it was put in place because it ensured Polaris would be kept down as long as that treaty was in place. TOP was livid about bipolar, and MK capitalized on that.

The second type of lapdog is the one who obediently does whatever is asked of them from the master. We saw this best in the NPO era where alliances such as GGA would do anything asked of them. This usually occurs with much smaller alliances clinging onto their main tie into the treaty web though. I think a prime example of this is when that tiny 10 (?) man alliance declared in defense of NPO while the coalition of cowards was doing their coward thing. No one remembers what that alliance was called, yet they declared because of the agora accords (red/blue economic pact, why do I remember that?).

The third type is the unaligned alliance that just goes with the power sphere. This alliance usually thinks that they are serving their best interests by making sure they put themselves on the victorious side of the battle, but they usually end up furthering the agenda of the puppet master. A prime example of this (prior to this war) is VE. Contrary to popular belief, they were not aligned to MK when they pulled the MK/VE stunt on Legion during the Legion/Tetris war. I'm sure at the time they thought that they were asserting their dominance over the world by forcing an end to a war which involved their ODP ally but in the end (when it came out that MK went to them in order to facilitate this stunt and not vice versa) they came off as a pawn.

[flak attack]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1342202922' post='3009757']
This poll was destined for doom from the start, the definition of lap dog is much too vague.

There are 3 types of lapdogs (in the realm of CN that is) as far as I'm concerned. You have those that are used for their NS in order to achieve a (usually common) goal without significantly hurting the "master" (for lack of a better term). This was recently seen when MK "used" the mjolnir bloc to roll SF. Now Mjolnir won't say they were lapdogs because they wanted to roll SF, but the fact that MK/DH/PB was able to use that desire to roll SF to take the most of the damage in that war causes them to be lapdogs in that example as far as I'm concerned. Another example of this, for those that prefer historical ones, is the unholy treaty between MK and TOP. Both parties there knew the treaty was not there for a friendship, it was put in place because it ensured Polaris would be kept down as long as that treaty was in place. TOP was livid about bipolar, and MK capitalized on that.

The second type of lapdog is the one who obediently does whatever is asked of them from the master. We saw this best in the NPO era where alliances such as GGA would do anything asked of them. This usually occurs with much smaller alliances clinging onto their main tie into the treaty web though. I think a prime example of this is when that tiny 10 (?) man alliance declared in defense of NPO while the coalition of cowards was doing their coward thing. No one remembers what that alliance was called, yet they declared because of the agora accords (red/blue economic pact, why do I remember that?).

The third type is the unaligned alliance that just goes with the power sphere. This alliance usually thinks that they are serving their best interests by making sure they put themselves on the victorious side of the battle, but they usually end up furthering the agenda of the puppet master. A prime example of this (prior to this war) is VE. Contrary to popular belief, they were not aligned to MK when they pulled the MK/VE stunt on Legion during the Legion/Tetris war. I'm sure at the time they thought that they were asserting their dominance over the world by forcing an end to a war which involved their ODP ally but in the end (when it came out that MK went to them in order to facilitate this stunt and not vice versa) they came off as a pawn.
[/quote]

Other than your first, second and fourth paragraphs, this is a spot on analysis based on actual fact.

[bkphysics]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1342202922' post='3009757']
This poll was destined for doom from the start, the definition of lap dog is much too vague.

There are 3 types of lapdogs (in the realm of CN that is) as far as I'm concerned. You have those that are used for their NS in order to achieve a (usually common) goal without significantly hurting the "master" (for lack of a better term). This was recently seen when MK "used" the mjolnir bloc to roll SF. Now Mjolnir won't say they were lapdogs because they wanted to roll SF, but the fact that MK/DH/PB was able to use that desire to roll SF to take the most of the damage in that war causes them to be lapdogs in that example as far as I'm concerned. Another example of this, for those that prefer historical ones, is the unholy treaty between MK and TOP. Both parties there knew the treaty was not there for a friendship, it was put in place because it ensured Polaris would be kept down as long as that treaty was in place. TOP was livid about bipolar, and MK capitalized on that.

The second type of lapdog is the one who obediently does whatever is asked of them from the master. We saw this best in the NPO era where alliances such as GGA would do anything asked of them. This usually occurs with much smaller alliances clinging onto their main tie into the treaty web though. I think a prime example of this is when that tiny 10 (?) man alliance declared in defense of NPO while the coalition of cowards was doing their coward thing. No one remembers what that alliance was called, yet they declared because of the agora accords (red/blue economic pact, why do I remember that?).

The third type is the unaligned alliance that just goes with the power sphere. This alliance usually thinks that they are serving their best interests by making sure they put themselves on the victorious side of the battle, but they usually end up furthering the agenda of the puppet master. A prime example of this (prior to this war) is VE. Contrary to popular belief, they were not aligned to MK when they pulled the MK/VE stunt on Legion during the Legion/Tetris war. I'm sure at the time they thought that they were asserting their dominance over the world by forcing an end to a war which involved their ODP ally but in the end (when it came out that MK went to them in order to facilitate this stunt and not vice versa) they came off as a pawn.
[/quote]

I agree with your distinctions very much and a well said post. I think those of us who were discussing this at higher than a grade school level took what you have written in our own minds when we responded/voted on the poll. Though the original poll I will admit was poorly constructed, the subsequent discussions (that are far and few between) were enriching.

Thanks!

[Yankees Empire]

Voted ODN and was very shocked to see us so far behind

I guess being so optional makes us bad lapdogs :'(

[Commander shepard]

[quote name='Joe Kremlin' timestamp='1342114356' post='3009248']
Someone makes a poll trying to score some cheap PR points against MK, and MK+co respond by strategically voting in a way that makes the results of the poll irrelevant. I don't see what the problem is.
[/quote]


The poll was always irrelevant and no PR points were ever on the table.
The problem is you think otherwise.

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1342206058' post='3009775']
Other than your first, second and fourth paragraphs, this is a spot on analysis based on actual fact.
[/quote]

Only NPO had lapdogs, but not MK

[flak attack]

[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1342214108' post='3009838']
Only NPO had lapdogs, but not MK
[/quote]
MK hates lapdog alliances regardless of side. If there's an alliance we perceive as a lapdog, we won't get close to them.

Consider this, there are plenty of alliances out there that would love a chance to become MK's lapdog, yet in the past year, we've upgraded one treaty (NoR), dropped one (FOK) and signed another (NG). Given that a startling number of the names on the MK-FOK treaty were in NG at the time of the signing of that treaty (literally over half of the FOK signatures), it hardly counts as a change of policy. When our friends changed AA, we changed our treaty.

MK could have signed a dozen treaties with lapdog alliances over that time, yet we chose not to because we're not in the collecting business.

Edited July 13, 2012 by flak attack

[Melancholy Culkin]

Fwiw Rey's a much better OWF poster than a lot of you guys.

[Tromp]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1342216840' post='3009852']
MK hates lapdog alliances regardless of side. If there's an alliance we perceive as a lapdog, we won't get close to them.

Consider this, there are plenty of alliances out there that would love a chance to become MK's lapdog, yet in the past year, we've upgraded one treaty (NoR), dropped one (FOK) and signed another (NG). Given that a startling number of the names on the MK-FOK treaty were in NG at the time of the signing of that treaty (literally over half of the FOK signatures), it hardly counts as a change of policy. When our friends changed AA, we changed our treaty.

MK could have signed a dozen treaties with lapdog alliances over that time, yet we chose not to because we're not in the collecting business.
[/quote]

Flak attack, you [i]wound [/i]me.

But seriously, a relationship needs to be advantageous not just for one, but for both. This wasn't the case with the MK-FOK relationship, at least not when you started aiming for our allies to be rolled. That people such as Cheeky (who now resides in your halls) went along with it is a disgrace, and doesn't validate your point about 'friendship' at all, rather it shows what a tool people such as him are.

So the core of the matter: I'm not really blaming MK for this turn of events (although I do believe the abovementioned was quite disrespectful at the very least) as much as I do the fellowtravellers.

[Ogaden]

[quote name='Melancholy Culkin' timestamp='1342220596' post='3009875']
Fwiw Rey's a much better OWF poster than a lot of you guys.
[/quote]
I'll give you one thing, you are a better poster than Rey.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='TurnipCruncher' timestamp='1342179363' post='3009656']
Surely the LSF are MKs greatest false flag operation? There must be some reason or plan behind it. No?
[/quote]

NoR knows a thing or two about being at the center of false flag operations. This man knows what's up.

[Ogaden]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1342202922' post='3009757']
This poll was destined for doom from the start, the definition of lap dog is much too vague.

There are 3 types of lapdogs (in the realm of CN that is) as far as I'm concerned. You have those that are used for their NS in order to achieve a (usually common) goal without significantly hurting the "master" (for lack of a better term). This was recently seen when MK "used" the mjolnir bloc to roll SF. Now Mjolnir won't say they were lapdogs because they wanted to roll SF, but the fact that MK/DH/PB was able to use that desire to roll SF to take the most of the damage in that war causes them to be lapdogs in that example as far as I'm concerned. Another example of this, for those that prefer historical ones, is the unholy treaty between MK and TOP. Both parties there knew the treaty was not there for a friendship, it was put in place because it ensured Polaris would be kept down as long as that treaty was in place. TOP was livid about bipolar, and MK capitalized on that.

The second type of lapdog is the one who obediently does whatever is asked of them from the master. We saw this best in the NPO era where alliances such as GGA would do anything asked of them. This usually occurs with much smaller alliances clinging onto their main tie into the treaty web though. I think a prime example of this is when that tiny 10 (?) man alliance declared in defense of NPO while the coalition of cowards was doing their coward thing. No one remembers what that alliance was called, yet they declared because of the agora accords (red/blue economic pact, why do I remember that?).

The third type is the unaligned alliance that just goes with the power sphere. This alliance usually thinks that they are serving their best interests by making sure they put themselves on the victorious side of the battle, but they usually end up furthering the agenda of the puppet master. A prime example of this (prior to this war) is VE. Contrary to popular belief, they were not aligned to MK when they pulled the MK/VE stunt on Legion during the Legion/Tetris war. I'm sure at the time they thought that they were asserting their dominance over the world by forcing an end to a war which involved their ODP ally but in the end (when it came out that MK went to them in order to facilitate this stunt and not vice versa) they came off as a pawn.
[/quote]

This is a very underrated post and you deserve props, bravo.

[Prodigal Moon]

Any alliance with strong treaty bonds and little agenda of their own will end up getting pulled into a more involved alliance's agenda eventually. I think the terms meatshield, satellite, and lapdog have been used more or less interchangeably. But lapdog, for me, has some additional connotation that the alliance actually looks up to the master alliance, and even [i]wants[/i] to carry out their agenda, not because it empowers them or advances their political standing, but because their main goal is social approval. A pat on the head, if you will. From my observations, ODN is the alliance among the options that best fits into that role vis-a-vis MK.

[bkphysics]

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' timestamp='1342252308' post='3010061']
Any alliance with strong treaty bonds and little agenda of their own will end up getting pulled into a more involved alliance's agenda eventually. I think the terms meatshield, satellite, and lapdog have been used more or less interchangeably. But lapdog, for me, has some additional connotation that the alliance actually looks up to the master alliance, and even [i]wants[/i] to carry out their agenda, not because it empowers them or advances their political standing, but because their main goal is social approval. A pat on the head, if you will. From my observations, ODN is the alliance among the options that best fits into that role vis-a-vis MK.
[/quote]

Hmm a very interesting point and observation. Hmm, I may need to rethink my vote now.

[Blue Lightning]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1341877631' post='3007524']
[img]http://i565.photobucket.com/albums/ss93/alohaalliance/Aloha/AlohaProp/coattailriders.png[/img]

You're not wrong. The lead spot on the coattails belongs to TOP. They had it all and now they can't do anything without MK; and it's pretty much entirely their own fault. Of all the named alliances, they'd have the most to lose if MK disappeared tomorrow.
[/quote]
[b]Haters gon hate.[/b]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/lcrak.gif[/IMG]

[Pingu]

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' timestamp='1342252308' post='3010061']
Any alliance with strong treaty bonds and little agenda of their own will end up getting pulled into a more involved alliance's agenda eventually. I think the terms meatshield, satellite, and lapdog have been used more or less interchangeably. But lapdog, for me, has some additional connotation that the alliance actually looks up to the master alliance, and even [i]wants[/i] to carry out their agenda, not because it empowers them or advances their political standing, but because their main goal is social approval. A pat on the head, if you will. From my observations, ODN is the alliance among the options that best fits into that role vis-a-vis MK.
[/quote]

If only Roq, Schatt and other haters would pat us on the head rather than spew mild, ineffective venom, maybe we would have defected by now and brought down the evil fungal hegemony. What use is analysis unless it leads to changed, effective action? The point is not merely to understand the world, but rather to change it.*





*Head-patting strategy not guaranteed to work. No warranty given or implied.

[King Louis the II]

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' timestamp='1342252308' post='3010061']
Any alliance with strong treaty bonds and little agenda of their own will end up getting pulled into a more involved alliance's agenda eventually. I think the terms meatshield, satellite, and lapdog have been used more or less interchangeably. But lapdog, for me, has some additional connotation that the alliance actually looks up to the master alliance, and even [i]wants[/i] to carry out their agenda, not because it empowers them or advances their political standing, but because their main goal is social approval. A pat on the head, if you will. From my observations, ODN is the alliance among the options that best fits into that role vis-a-vis MK.
[/quote]

Totally agree and it is exactly what I said some pages ago

Edited July 14, 2012 by King Louis the II

[King Louis the II]

[quote name='Pingu' timestamp='1342283666' post='3010141']
If only Roq, Schatt and other haters would pat us on the head rather than spew mild, ineffective venom, maybe we would have defected by now and brought down the evil fungal hegemony. What use is analysis unless it leads to changed, effective action? The point is not merely to understand the world, but rather to change it.*





*Head-patting strategy not guaranteed to work. No warranty given or implied.
[/quote]

A MDoAP treaty is much more than a pat on the head

Edited July 14, 2012 by King Louis the II