Karma, who are you?

[Un4Gvn1]

You're fighting for your friends. That's all fine and dandy. But your friends are fighting for bullying, aggressions, threats ... You're hence supporting those actions. You can't come in a war and ignore a CB. By siding with them, you're agreeing with them. Saying "You know, my friend, your CB is BS and I'm not going to fight for that kind of crap" takes more courage than blindly following your friends.

Interesting. So, if one stays with alliance mates and HONORS a treaty that means one is going to receive public derision. On the other hand, if one disagrees with the reasons for the war and leaves their alliance mates to stand without you there will be accolades of courage showered upon one? It isn't working that way ... think back to day 1, when several alliances said they'd not support NPO for what the world perceived as stabbing TORN in the back ... do you recall all the shouts of COWARD and DISHONORABLE?

One is damned if one does and damned if one doesn't. Admit that particular conundrum and we'll be closer to the road of truth.

[Un4Gvn1]

And if you're friends are evil jerks?

You may think that, but your opinion is not universal. Are you prepared to say that every last ruler in a particular group is EVIL and a JERK? Seems like those labels come about when one doesn't have anything else to add to their discussion...

[Bob Janova]

One is damned if one does and damned if one doesn't.

You damned yourselves with your craven support of an aggressive hegemony – or in TPF's case, being a central part of it. Yes, when one of you starts a war of aggression that turns bad, at that point you are damned either way, but it is only because of your prior choices. This is a truth that we recognised some time ago and is a central part of why we dissociated ourselves from those alliances in the first place.

If you are in this war to support your friends and not as part of the aggressive hegemon then you are probably already out of it under light or no terms, so you're not that damned.

Alterego: There are not bullies within Karma to compare with One Vision/Valhalla/TPF and you know it.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

Karma came together first on the basis of voicing displeasure and disapproval of what the Hegemony was doing [Hegemony = all those alliances, collective noun, not a bloc etc.]

Is it that hard a concept to grasp that those that think alike, on a particular aspect of the geopolitical spread, would slowly over time gravitate towards each other? That they would over time wittingly or unwittingly corner a part of the MDP web? After all it is rather easy to sign treaties with someone who you believe thinks like you on issues and shares your beliefs.

Even a cursory look at those making up Karma will tell you that not all the alliances are tied to each other directly. Ragnarok for example has no direct ties to The Grämlins. Yes, when the PR wind started blowing against the Hegemony in the not so distant past, every alliance not a part of the Hegemony [again a benign collective noun, for want of a better word etc.] paused and took stock of the fact that the Hegemony might be lashing out soon enough, it was time, summer and all that. Of course the expectations were as usual, the periphery, the non core of hegemony striking at a select alliance so as to draw in a few alliances via treaties to be slaughtered. Business as usual for the jackbooted overlords.

Only this time it was NPO itself that sallied forth and all the displeasure and the sense of not taking it anymore and actually doing something about it came to the fore. OV is well liked, and frankly the CB was BS, people talk, listen to others say they will stand with OV and feel, "Hey i ought to, too"

I guess that covers it. A miscalculation on part of the Hegemony, and the preceding PR !@#$storms raised by TWiP and Tattler and people in general, slowly eroding the veneer of omnipotence from the facade. Everything came together, almost like clockwork without much effort to rally folks. Almost like poetry.

Edit: I could add that the exit of Alliances like the Grämlins from the hegemony orbit also facilitated the tetris like falling into place of things, people see someone taking a stand, it becomes clearer to them, that this is what they wish to do after all. Specially if the alliance taking a stand is one as well liked as The Grämlins, for their decency.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Alfred von Tirpitz

[Un4Gvn1]

You damned yourselves with your craven support of an aggressive hegemony – or in TPF's case, being a central part of it. Yes, when one of you starts a war of aggression that turns bad, at that point you are damned either way, but it is only because of your prior choices. This is a truth that we recognised some time ago and is a central part of why we dissociated ourselves from those alliances in the first place.

If you are in this war to support your friends and not as part of the aggressive hegemon then you are probably already out of it under light or no terms, so you're not that damned.

Alterego: There are not bullies within Karma to compare with One Vision/Valhalla/TPF and you know it.

Personal perspective here *(not the view of anyone else that I know of):

The massacre of LoFN last year definitely passes the 'muster' test of bullying.

[Vhalen]

Let us glance at the peace terms thus far.

*takes a moment*

Hmm. Perhaps someone respects "fighting for your friends" and "honoring treaties," and is letting those groups off the hook easily? Perhaps giving them a chance, now that the gang mentality is weakened, to change their stances in the future.

[Alterego]

Alterego: There are not bullies within Karma to compare with One Vision/Valhalla/TPF and you know it.

Due to certain restrictions imposed on us at the moment I cant search back through my past posts. I believe only a few weeks ago someone important on the Karma side said GOD were the same as Valhalla and others. I have also seen negative posts from some Karma people about PC. These are not my opinions, they are Karma alliance members opinions. I only wish I could find each post. Former Q alliances were a party to everything that has happened over the last 17 months, jumping ship a few weeks before the war doesnt change what they have done or supported.

[Bob Janova]

P_S: Yes, the LoFN issue was pretty low class – if you recall I spoke up against it at the time. But that is one incident, from a long time ago, by one and a half (ArGo merged into VE) of the Karma alliances. I will not claim that Karma is an angelic coalition sent down from Heaven to do God's work here on Digiterra, because that is patent nonsense. But there are no alliances in Karma which have a track record of aggression and bullying.

Alterego: I don't like GOD or PC much myself, but you won't be able to find anything in their history (apart from the singular LoFN issue, which if you talk to GOD you will discover no longer represents them) to compare with say the ZI of BAPS, the GATO peace mode doctrine and viceroy, the Legion viceroy, the NoV war, etc etc. The only incidents on the Karma side are against unaligned nations, and while that doesn't jive well with my personal morality, it is far more acceptable in global politics generally (and even there, most of the poster-boy raiding alliances are on your side).

[AirMe]

Personal perspective here *(not the view of anyone else that I know of):

The massacre of LoFN last year definitely passes the 'muster' test of bullying.

To prove Bob Janovas point:

Valhalla extorting tech from an alliance because they ACCEPTED tech from an alliance they were at war with. Check

TPF launching a war with evidence that HAD NOTHING to do with the game. Check

Forcing alliances to disband. Check

Valhalla and GGA blackmailing Hyperion to get a CB on MK. Check

Forcing GATO/LoSS into year long surrender terms/exile. Check

Valhalla placing an alliance on Perma ZI for defending their allies. Check

The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.

[Mogar]

There are not bullies within Karma to compare with One Vision/Valhalla/TPF and you know it.

We'll see after this war is over, now wont we? The factions already forming inside Karma will certainly test that theory.

[AirMe]

We'll see after this war is over, now wont we? The factions already forming inside Karma will certainly test that theory.

I won't disagree that both sides have bullies. But, in my biased opinion, the worst reside on the hegemony side.

[neneko]

I love how the main argument against karma boils down to "you might be as bad as the hedgemony". It really shows how much the hedgemony have to stand on.

[Mogar]

I won't disagree that both sides have bullies. But, in my biased opinion, the worst reside on the hegemony side.

You've been "put down" by that sides bullies though, the other sides bullies have been untested with the reigns of leadership of the planet, I personally trust you guys in MK, Citadel alliances have done nothing to show any sign of wanting to be the big bad guy on the block, but there are a few alliances on your side that I'd be concerned about, though I'm betting you already have your eye on them. I have a feeling you'll be putting them down without hegemony remnants help should they ever act up, simply to remove any potential GOONS(I personally did not dislike them, but they're the most obvious example) alliances from being able to form a decent enough coalition of alliances surrounding them to become a real threat to everyone.

I love how the main argument against karma boils down to "you might be as bad as the hedgemony". It really shows how much the hedgemony have to stand on.

I wouldn't call it an argument, I would call it a concern, and if you studied the way politics works on this planet, it's a legitimate one, at least with NPO you knew your enemy, instead you're breaking up the main enemy and giving a lot of people who would have never had the chance to become enemies, I can see a few factions already forming in Karma, can you?

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mogar

[AirMe]

You've been "put down" by that sides bullies though, the other sides bullies have been untested with the reigns of leadership of the planet, I personally trust you guys in MK, Citadel alliances have done nothing to show any sign of wanting to be the big bad guy on the block, but there are a few alliances on your side that I'd be concerned about, though I'm betting you already have your eye on them. I have a feeling you'll be putting them down without hegemony remnants help should they ever act up, simply to remove any potential GOONS(I personally did not dislike them, but they're the most obvious example) alliances from being able to form a decent enough coalition of alliances surrounding them to become a real threat to everyone.

To be fair, MK has been put down publicly or privately by bullies on both sides. But I like this post. One of the best on the subject so far.

[Mogar]

To be fair, MK has been put down publicly or privately by bullies on both sides. But I like this post. One of the best on the subject so far.

Well from what I've gathered, the alternate goal(Read: besides the most obvious HURR LET'S KILL NPO!) is preventing any type of post GW2-Coalition War Era from ever happening again, there will not be another unipolar world for quite sometime, and if the alliances on Karma had their way, ever.

[King Srqt]

I wouldn't call it an argument, I would call it a concern, and if you studied the way politics works on this planet, it's a legitimate one, at least with NPO you knew your enemy, instead you're breaking up the main enemy and giving a lot of people who would have never had the chance to become enemies, I can see a few factions already forming in Karma, can you?

It does not matter what you call it the bottom line is that the best your side can do to undermine Karma is say "they might be as bad as us". so even if it is a valid concern that means in the WORST case scenario nothing changes and in a best case scenario things get better. Therefore this is a no risk situation with the possibility of a positive outcome.

[neneko]

I wouldn't call it an argument, I would call it a concern, and if you studied the way politics works on this planet, it's a legitimate one, at least with NPO you knew your enemy, instead you're breaking up the main enemy and giving a lot of people who would have never had the chance to become enemies, I can see a few factions already forming in Karma, can you?

Yes there are factions forming within karma (insert audible gasp here). So what? Why would they have to become your enemies? If you're going to view them as enemies and refuse to change your FA stance from Q: good, everyone else: bad then yes they're most likely going to be your enemies but that'd be due to your own incompetence not due to some huge plot by karma.

As for how the politics works on digiterra. If you havn't noticed NPO have controlled how the politics have been handled the last few years and that's one thing I hope will change. More freedom to individual alliances and less of bigger ones bossing smaller around. Now this freedom will surely make some evildoers pop up but that's how freedom works, it works both ways. I find it alot better than living under the oppression of a larger alliance.

You got a point though. All the incompetent alliances currently on digiterra will surely suffer because of this freedom since they're going to have to forge their own foreign relations and actually run the alliance well to have a chance. Seeing how your government have worked out I'd be suprised if IRAN survives the next year so I understand that this freedom scares you. Once again I'd like to make it clear that I'm not talking about a karma conspiracy taking iran out. It doesn't even have to have anything to do with any alliance currently in karma. If you don't shape up your foreign and internal politics you're going to be crushed under your own incompetence.

Edited May 4, 2009 by neneko

[Mogar]

It does not matter what you call it the bottom line is that the best your side can do to undermine Karma is say "they might be as bad as us". so even if it is a valid concern that means in the WORST case scenario nothing changes and in a best case scenario things get better. Therefore this is a no risk situation with the possibility of a positive outcome.

As I recall, numerous people stated GOONS being the superpower would be far worse than Pacifica, hence the turnout of the UJW, I'd rather have had GOONS instead of Pacifica for the past year and a half, so the worst possible outcome may be someone far worse than Pacifica in charge, but again, we'll have to wait and see what happens to the factions of Karma, I predict infighting while Pacifica licks her wounds, not a global war again, but some skirmishes to either put down potential threats to the largest factions, or to eliminate rivals to certain factions dominance, we ARE opening a can of worms by killing off NPO, (I don't personally mind the killing them off part, I'm glad they're finally experiencing what they've done to so many others(including myself)) but the problem is who we're allowing to take their place, I realize the goal of Karma is a multipolar world, but I'm pretty sure everyone is intelligent enough to realize someone is going to want to be in the same spot Pacifica was after GW3.

Yes there are factions forming within karma (insert audible gasp here). So what? Why would they have to become your enemies? If you're going to view them as enemies and refuse to change your FA stance from Q: good, everyone else: bad then yes they're most likely going to be your enemies but that'd be due to your own incompetence not due to some huge plot by karma.

As for how the politics works on digiterra. If you havn't noticed NPO have controlled how the politics have been handled the last few years and that's one thing I hope will change. More freedom to individual alliances and less of bigger ones bossing smaller around. Now this freedom will surely make some evildoers pop up but that's how freedom works. I find it alot better than living under the oppression of a larger alliance.

I removed the attack against me and my alliance because that's not what I'm discussing here, although thank you for the thought. by my enemies I meant your enemies, although I can see how my wording may have confused you, the problem with massive coalitions like Karma and the CoaLUEition in GW1, are there's just too many damn people in them, and all these people have different views on just about everything, there is alliances in Karma who want to see other alliances in Karma burn, and they're already preparing for that to happen, if you want to continue to think about just the right now, go ahead, those who are preparing for after the war is over will have a jump on you, and might just take you down because of it.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mogar

[Doitzel]

As I recall, numerous people stated GOONS being the superpower would be far worse than Pacifica, hence the turnout of the UJW, I'd rather have had GOONS instead of Pacifica for the past year and a half, so the worst possible outcome may be someone far worse than Pacifica in charge, but again, we'll have to wait and see what happens to the factions of Karma, I predict infighting while Pacifica licks her wounds, not a global war again, but some skirmishes to either put down potential threats to the largest factions, or to eliminate rivals to certain factions dominance, we ARE opening a can of worms by killing off NPO, (I don't personally mind the killing them off part, I'm glad they're finally experiencing what they've done to so many others(including myself)) but the problem is who we're allowing to take their place, I realize the goal of Karma is a multipolar world, but I'm pretty sure everyone is intelligent enough to realize someone is going to want to be in the same spot Pacifica was after GW3.

Want to be =/= be.

[Mogar]

Want to be =/= be.

Oh I completely agree it wont be quite the same, but I'm sure you understood my meaning, there will come a time after this war when another alliance is in a position where they can catapult themselves into being the superpower, whether or not they'll keep that position for long, but if they're not as hated as NPO is, then you wont be able to form another coalition against them, and a lot of the current coalition will be allied to them.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mogar

[Doitzel]

Oh I completely agree it wont be quite the same, but I'm sure you understood my meaning.

And I'm sure you'll understand that I am not too worried as this lurking threat you keep insisting is there doesn't even seem to have a name. Or a basis in reality, for that matter.

I think you're trying to argue that the political field naturally gravitates toward a bi-polar or uni-polar state but it just comes off as you desperately trying to cast aspersions on the collective character of Karma without being able to cite any clear examples or really express in clear terms what you're talking about.

[Haflinger]

Valhalla placing an alliance on Perma ZI for defending their allies. Check

I'm going to note here that noWedge made that call, and the Karma coalition has waged war against nearly every single person that I know who was responsible for getting rid of him except for Electron Sponge.

[Mogar]

And I'm sure you'll understand that I am not too worried as this lurking threat you keep insisting is there doesn't even seem to have a name. Or a basis in reality, for that matter.

I think you're trying to argue that the political field naturally gravitates toward a bi-polar or uni-polar state but it just comes off as you desperately trying to cast aspersions on the collective character of Karma without being able to cite any clear examples or really express in clear terms what you're talking about.

We're killing one monster, there's a lot more in the closet waiting to take its place, is the best analogy I can think of to summarize my thoughts on this subject, I'm not going to use clear examples since my protector is currently in a war against enemies who have explicitly stated they want to see my protector not exist, and I receive enough threats of ZI on a daily basis to add to it, but you cant honestly sit here and tell me that there isn't another war brewing before this one is even finished, every other war has led to the next one, I doubt this one will be any different.

I'm going to note here that noWedge made that call, and the Karma coalition has waged war against nearly every single person that I know who was responsible for getting rid of him except for Electron Sponge.

Is there anyone who actually misses him? I'm sure he was a great guy, but an absolutely horrible leader.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mogar

[neneko]

I removed the attack against me and my alliance because that's not what I'm discussing here, although thank you for the thought. by my enemies I meant your enemies, although I can see how my wording may have confused you, the problem with massive coalitions like Karma and the CoaLUEition in GW1, are there's just too many damn people in them, and all these people have different views on just about everything, there is alliances in Karma who want to see other alliances in Karma burn, and they're already preparing for that to happen, if you want to continue to think about just the right now, go ahead, those who are preparing for after the war is over will have a jump on you, and might just take you down because of it.

Yes the views on almost everything differs greatly within karma. That is the whole point. Karma is not a huge bloc and will not even exist after this war is over. Yes there are probably tons of people within karma that want to see other karma members burn and that's okay too, that's how freedom works. The point of karma is not to change one oppressive superpower to a slightly less oppressive super power. Karma will not exist after the war and everyone will have the same chance to build on their foreign relations as individual alliances.

So the argument that karma would be a bad super power is ridiculous because karma isn't aiming to become a dominating bloc of any kind.

[Alterego]

And I'm sure you'll understand that I am not too worried as this lurking threat you keep insisting is there doesn't even seem to have a name. Or a basis in reality, for that matter.

I think you're trying to argue that the political field naturally gravitates toward a bi-polar or uni-polar state but it just comes off as you desperately trying to cast aspersions on the collective character of Karma without being able to cite any clear examples or really express in clear terms what you're talking about.

You had no problem casting aspersions on the collective character of dozens of alliances many of then were not part of Q or IV. Your moral outrage is wasted on us, tarring everyone with the same brush, guilty or not is something we could learn a lot about from you.