The results are... on to step 2.

[Jackie Moon]

1) MK

2) RoK

3) NAAC

4) GOONS

5) \m/

6) LUE

7) Tie between the rest.

 

Pretty disappointed with how the final 10 ended up. I haven't read through the replies in this thread, so if I'm just repeating what someone else said, forgive me. If, as Rush intended, this list is based off of political impact on the game, why isn't Vox on this list at the very least? Not trying to sully the names of alliances who used to house friends of mine, but even using an "objective" standard as loosely as one can, PC, NoV, and Athens were voted onto list? We're not talking about political clout or movers and shakers here. We're talking about second tier alliances who (iirc) never achieved a sanction*, and most of their success came because of the alliances they surrounded themselves with at the height of their relevance.

 

*(Not that this is the only objective standard their political impact should be based on... I mean, GPA is sanctioned, wouldn't call them politically relevant.)

 

Rename this vote to "Top 5 Alliance Names Most Likely to Incite Nostalgia, Given the Political Climate of the Last 2-3 years." Its slightly longer, but it is much more accurate.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Dark Temptation

[Phil Coulson]

Well someone voted MK/GOONS on the completely wrong basis. He even said vote based on how they changed the game politically, so can we be objective about it?

What I'm getting at is MK changed the game a lot !@#$@#$ more than PC, Athens, FOK, or RoK, and most certainly more than NoV

Oh my, did two people disagree on an opinion poll? It's almost like we were supposed to say what we thought.

I ranked the alliances that I felt had a good impact in the 1-3s and the alliances that I felt had a bad impact in the 8-10s. The ones that weren't good or bad, I ranked in the middle. Edited December 24, 2013 by Monroe

[Neo Uruk]

Oh my, did two people disagree on an opinion poll? It's almost like we were supposed to say what we thought.

I ranked the alliances that I felt had a good impact in the 1-3s and the alliances that I felt had a bad impact in the 8-10s. The ones that weren't good or bad, I ranked in the middle.

It's overall impact. This isn't a !@#$@#$ Karma system, it's a political simulator. You can't deny that MK revolutionized the political game, which is an impact. Whether you feel the impact was good or bad is irrelevant, it is an impact. It is an opinion poll, but a qualitative opinion. It asks how much, not which way.

That would be like in ranking hurricane damages, you put Katrina dead last because of FEMA responses. Edited December 24, 2013 by Neo Uruk

[Agitprop]

1) NoV

2) LUE
3) GOONS
4) NAAC

5) MK

6) Rok, FOK

7) Athens, PC, \m/

[Norwood]

1) NoV

2) PC
3) MK

4) Rok

5) NAAC

6) Athens

7) \m/
8) LUE

9) GOONS
10) FOK

[Opportunity]

1) NoV
2) PC
3) FOK
4) MK
5) Rok
6) NAAC
7) \m/
8) GOONS
9) Athens
10) LUE

[Sunny Side King]

1. PC
2. MK
3. FOK
4. Athens
5. NAAC
6. \m/
7. LUE
8. GOONS
9. RoK
10. NoV         

Edited December 24, 2013 by Sunny Side King

[Valtamdraugr]

1) MK
2) LUE
3) GOONS
4) FOK
5) \m/
6) RoK
7) PC
8) NAAC
9) Athens
10) Norden Verein

[Hime Themis]

Gentle Persons

 

1) NAAC
2) LUE
3) MK
4) RoK
5) \m/
6) GOONS
7) PC
8) FOK
9) Norden Verein
10) Athens

 

 Of course one of the real issues is that the level of impact may have been similar between various alliances but I tend to give a little extra juice to those who swung the early alignment of the future of Digittera over those who came to prominence later as they set the tone for later politics.

 

Respectfully

Dame Hime Themis

[Supa_Troop3r]

1) PC
2) MK
3) FOK
4) NoV
5) LUE
6) GOONS
7) ROK
8) NAAC
9) Athens
10) \m/