A Dose of "Old-School"

[Windsor]

Today, it seems as if CyberNations is in some desperate need of the "old-school" mentality. You kids had a great run for a while, but you've created something that can only be fixed by reverting back to a few practices that can only be solved by the old-school. Let's elaborate:

Current mentality: It's not uncommon to see quite a few anti-NPO topics in the forums these days. Got a problem? Blame NPO. Game getting stale? Blame NPO. No wars? Blame NPO.

Old-school mentality: Can anyone see where blaming NPO has yielded any sizable results? This is something we've seen for quite a while now, and still.... nothing has changed.

I think the idea of each and every player taking responsibility for the political fabric of this game is a new notion, although it has been the case since the game's creation. In the traditional sense, alliance leaders who login and make important decisions that shape this game are the only ones that can make changes. The old-school way of thinking about this would point out that without any followers, those leaders aren't leaders at all. Therefore, it is the average player that holds the REAL power.

This is where you and "old-school" cross paths: if you're not happy with what your leaders have done with this game..... then stop following them. If you can look and see other leaders that are doing things in this game that you agree with - then follow them. It's not that complicated. Yet there are some of you that support your leaders despite the fact that you disagree with what they have done to this game. As long as you continue to give your support, don't expect to see any changes. Too easy.

If you feel like CN needs some changes, and your leaders aren't bringing it, then stop blaming NPO, and start blaming yourself. You do nothing about your own complaints.

Today, there seems to be a divide between those that are "pro-war" and those that are "anti-war". Some favor economic growth (collecting taxes and paying bills.... just to collect more taxes and pay more bills), and some favor military action (the only thing to really spend money on outside of economic growth). Where does your alliance stand on this position? Where do you stand? Are you supporting the right alliance?

Let's use NPO as an excellent example. They like to preach, "Peace, Strength, and Prosperity". Is NPO pro-war, or anti-war? Stop and think about this. I've seen its members thirst for war, and, afterall, you don't make it to the top by being anti-war. Or do you? Does anyone really know? Is it really important? When you can constantly change your official stance on an issue, it doesn't matter at all. What matters are the end-results. You can preach "peace" for years and stomp many alliances while convincing everyone that war is the peaceful thing to do. Were you convinced?

We can attribute all of this to the war/peace preference part of this game. As peace-mode carries an economic handicap, those that are pro-war get an advantage over those that are pro-peace. It is clear that admin wants us to fight. Yet, the result is just the opposite - those that are pro-peace have banded together, fearful of war, and have dominated so that they could provide themselves with a place for consistent economic growth, and have done all they could to rid themselves of those that are pro-war. While everyone would like to grow their nations, not everyone wants to risk its health to carry out political objectives. It is in this sense that pro-peace dominates the cyberverse despite any handicap imaginable.

Yet, times have changed. People are begining to understand the pointlessness of growing a nation for absolutely nothing. If your leadership is responsilble for creating the stagnation that you see today, then it's time for you to leave them. They are incompetent. We are begining to see hoards of players leaving their alliances to offer support of alliances that share their views. I can assure you that when everyone is sitting where they belong, this game will become a lot more entertaining.

This is where the Blackstone Collusion comes into play. We are an idea. We are a living, breathing, and functioning idea. Although we are officially an alliance with just enough of our members in-game to be considered one (to conduct in-game business), we don't consider ourselves one. Our main objective is the restoration of this game to a more entertaining state. While this involves undoing much of what has been done to create the game that we see today, we do not consider ourselves to be "anti-NPO". Because we are an "idea", we cannot be "anti-alliance X". We can only be "anti-idea". Only alliances can carry an "anti-alliance X" mentality. At our birth, this was a difficult scenario to explain, and it was necessary to portray an "anti-NPO" environment to attract those that we felt would be useful at that time.

If you support the desire for change in this game, and you support making this game more entertaining, then you are supporting the Blackstone Collusion, and you have supported us without even knowing it. This is why we have stated repeatedly that "we do not exist". This idea for change and its existence is dependent entirely upon you. Now that the desire for change has sparked a few significant embers, this idea of change does exist, and consequently, so does the Blackstone Collusion. If you have grown bored with this community, then you have two choices: support this idea openly, or support the boredom.

The choice does not belong to your leaders. It belongs to you. Learn it. Know it. Love it. Play it.

[bobjohnny]

Wow. The concept of Bourgeoisie and Proletariat in CN.

Edit: I'm not awake.

Edited April 19, 2009 by bobjohnny

[Arrnea]

Interesting read, to say the least.

Of course, those that support the status quo are likely to think different.

Edited April 19, 2009 by Arrnea

[cjav0]

lol sorry but this is fail, people did blame the NPO and tried to do something about it. DOo you think there were no anti NPO topics in the past? It isnt just, well my alliance leader sucks and its all NPO's fault. No it is NPO that sucks and that is their fault. Forgot about the wars fought? The leaders of the alliances that lost those wars were certainly trying to do something about it. Same goes for the members that supported them.

[Windsor]

lol sorry but this is fail, people did blame the NPO and tried to do something about it. DOo you think there were no anti NPO topics in the past? It isnt just, well my alliance leader sucks and its all NPO's fault. No it is NPO that sucks and that is their fault. Forgot about the wars fought? The leaders of the alliances that lost those wars were certainly trying to do something about it. Same goes for the members that supported them.

Fail? I think you missed the entire point. Getting rid of NPO will not get rid of the ideas that created it, nor will it prevent other alliances from coming in and replacing NPO and restoring its policies and practices. While there have been some that have tried and failed, the target audience here are the ones that haven't done anything about their own complaints.

[cjav0]

No but it will be fun, that is what the game is about? A large part of CN doesn't care. Simple as that.

[Windsor]

No but it will be fun, that is what the game is about? A large part of CN doesn't care. Simple as that.

And this is because of the state of the game. Once that state changes, I surmise the players will begin to care a bit more....

[Delta1212]

I...

I hate tl;dr's but I can't resist summarizing:

"There's political upheaval going on... Look at us! We're relevant!"

[Rextu]

If you feel like CN needs some changes, and your leaders aren't bringing it, then stop blaming NPO, and start blaming yourself. You do nothing about your own complaints.

^This.

[cjav0]

And this is because of the state of the game. Once that state changes, I surmise the players will begin to care a bit more....

Nope...

War will happen, some one gets destroyed, some will quit and the rest will talk for a while about how awesome it was. Followed by some humiliation and victory rush. Then everyone licks their wounds, new sides form, or old sides solidify. Treaties are made web becomes a mess. People become bored and paranoid. stagnation happens. Someone will start some !@#$.. some random curbstomps some new alliances. Then at some point people are bored again and start aiming for a new war.. rinse and repeat..

[Windsor]

I...

I hate tl;dr's but I can't resist summarizing:

"There's political upheaval going on... Look at us! We're relevant!"

We are a functioning political idea. You bet we are. Now, back to the OP....

Edited April 19, 2009 by Windsor

[Rebel Virginia]

We are a functioning political idea. You bet we are. Now, back to the OP....

No, Delta's right, this looks like a cry for attention to me.

But if you insist on going back to your OP.....well, I didn't read it, but it looks like you're trying to say.....I don't know what you're trying to say. In fact, I don't even know if you know what you're trying to say either. I'll take into account what you said to cjavo though. You're saying that once the NPO is gone people will go back to doing things the NPO way, and the NPO's ideas. Doubtful. Want to know why? Because this political upheaval we got going on here is a response to that. People don't like it. Why would they want to go back to it?

[agnews]

We are a functioning political idea. You bet we are. Now, back to the OP....

windsor

your "idea" is nothing but a failure

your alliance is nothing more then a tool for spying and gathering information

i assure you anything people dont want you to see

you wont see

if you have a problem with the way the game is run

get out of peace mode and stick it to them

until such a time you are nothing more of a tool in my books

[Finch]

Man if you guys are just waiting to claim responsibility and say we told you so, i think you need to get inline behind Vox.

[Delta1212]

No, Delta's right, this looks like a cry for attention to me.

But if you insist on going back to your OP.....well, I didn't read it, but it looks like you're trying to say.....I don't know what you're trying to say. In fact, I don't even know if you know what you're trying to say either. I'll take into account what you said to cjavo though. You're saying that once the NPO is gone people will go back to doing things the NPO way, and the NPO's ideas. Doubtful. Want to know why? Because this political upheaval we got going on here is a response to that. People don't like it. Why would they want to go back to it?

Because everyone is like the people who've been running things for the past two years and will do exactly the same things once they have usurped power!

It's actually kind of odd watching Blackstone Collusion spouting the same type of propaganda that the current political order is. Makes you think.

[Rebel Virginia]

It's actually kind of odd watching Blackstone Collusion spouting the same type of propaganda that the current political order is. Makes you think.

Well, it was founded by former NPO members. They didn't have a problem with the way NPO does things, but rather that NPO was the one running things. I believe they had a falling out with the NPO and now want NPO dead so that they can rule. That's their stated goal or something.

Now as for Blackstone spewing NPO-type propaganda, I do believe I've seen them on IRC mocking FAN for being in peace mode. So yeah. Oddly similar.

[agnews]

Well, it was founded by former NPO members. They didn't have a problem with the way NPO does things, but rather that NPO was the one running things. I believe they had a falling out with the NPO and now want NPO dead so that they can rule. That's their stated goal or something.

Now as for Blackstone spewing NPO-type propaganda, I do believe I've seen them on IRC mocking FAN for being in peace mode. So yeah. Oddly similar.

this is hardly suprising

[General Vengeance]

Nope...

War will happen, some one gets destroyed, some will quit and the rest will talk for a while about how awesome it was. Followed by some humiliation and victory rush. Then everyone licks their wounds, new sides form, or old sides solidify. Treaties are made web becomes a mess. People become bored and paranoid. stagnation happens. Someone will start some !@#$.. some random curbstomps some new alliances. Then at some point people are bored again and start aiming for a new war.. rinse and repeat..

You have this down to a fine science.

[Rextu]

I didn't read it, but it looks like you're trying to say.....I don't know what you're trying to say.

Try reading it. Then you will understand.

Just give 'm a chance to speak is what I'm saying.

[Gabe Logan]

The game needs changes that only admin can bring. An organization with an idea of change is good, but in this case, it's methods are not.

Art imitates life. Here, we see one alliance that is the dominant player in the game. There's a lot that could be said here.

1. The largest alliance in the game tends to attracts many new players, basically because they're the largest and perceived as the strongest and safest bet.

2. Many political ties to other alliances increases that strength. Without those, even an alliance of NPO's size could not stand alone.

3. Due to all of these ties, and so many people playing, and spies everywhere, attempts to wage war against such an alliance will most likely be snuffed out before they begin....and as such, most don't even bother to try.

4. Groups such as Vox and Blackstone who blame the NPO for the stagnation in the game and seek change, primarily through the destruction of the NPO (due to what it represents, and not so much the alliance itself), do not hold the military advantage...see #3. They are forced to spread their message from the shadows.

5. Until such a time as Blackstone, Vox, FAN, and others against the ideals represented by the NPO and her allies (or just against them for other reasons), are strong enough to unite and take them down, then the primary challenge offered to the majority by this game is to do so.

6. The tides are turning in this quest. More and more people hunger for war and many see the opposition to the NPO as being the harbinger that's going to bring it, so they are taking sides.

7. If and when the Continuum loses a war and if the NPO is ever reduced to rubble, the cycle will repeat itself. There will be a new challenge and that will be to see who can claim the top spot. Once achieved, the efforts to take them down will begin as they have with NPO.

8. In response to the OP, there are more followers than leaders in this game, as it is in the real world. People simply will not resist when they feel their leaders are wrong because although they disagree, they can't offer a solution or provide for themselves. I was always taught to never point out a problem without offering a solution. This doesn't apply to everyone, but to the majority.

In conclusion, refer to my opening statement. This game needs change only admin can bring. Until then, choose your side and get ready for the only thing truly worth playing this game for.

[Windsor]

[Long quote.]

This is indeed the case. While most are too short-sighted to see that revamping the way we do things in this game > taking down NPO and her allies, everything continues on course as has been for years. Until a true change (which is widely embraced) begins to take shape, business will continue as usual.

Bringing change to this game > anything else. And the masses will follow that when it becomes a bit more accepted. The desire is already there. If this means NPO and her allies bringing change to the game, then that will satisfy Blackstone. As long as change is implemented in one way, or another.

[Windsor]

No, Delta's right, this looks like a cry for attention to me.

But if you insist on going back to your OP.....well, I didn't read it, but it looks like you're trying to say.....I don't know what you're trying to say. In fact, I don't even know if you know what you're trying to say either. I'll take into account what you said to cjavo though. You're saying that once the NPO is gone people will go back to doing things the NPO way, and the NPO's ideas. Doubtful. Want to know why? Because this political upheaval we got going on here is a response to that. People don't like it. Why would they want to go back to it?

Nope. That's not what I said. I'd love to read it to you out loud in front of a warm fire-place over a glass of brandy, but I don't know if you're old enough.

[Delta1212]

Nope. That's not what I said. I'd love to read it to you out loud in front of a warm fire-place over a glass of brandy, but I don't know if you're old enough.

Ad hominems: Change you can believe in.

[Windsor]

Ad hominems: Change you can believe in.

Indeed. But I'm not about to request that admin implement an "18 to party, 21 to drink upon verification" policy so that we can serve brandy while we read each other's OPs.

[Delta1212]

Indeed. But I'm not about to request that admin implement an "18 to party, 21 to drink upon verification" policy so that we can serve brandy while we read each other's OPs.

I think you either missed my point or decided to ignore it in favor of more ironic snarkiness.