Do you think Karma has responsibility?

[KIADO]

I don't want to go into the argument if NPO deserves do get destroyed because of their past or because of the possibility of a future threat.

What i want to know is, if you think the leaders of Karma do recognize their chance and have some responsibility of shaping a better future by showing and giving planet bob a example how enemies are treated.

I understand the danger and risk by doing so but don't all altruistic and heroic actions come with a certain price and risk?

[Chief Savage Man]

Karma will not live to see the end of this war. The cracks are apparent already. The question is: Will the individual alliances uphold their commitment? Some more than other probably.

[Gatherum]

Gatherum shook his head.

You speak as if Karma is an authoritative entity to guide Digiterra on a new path. It is nothing more than a war coalition. It will cease to exist once the blocs and alliances within it separate into smaller factions based upon differing ideals. As CSM already stated, this is already apparent.

As a very, very early prediction, based upon the now and thinking for a second that not much will change (which it will, I am sure), I believe that there will be two opposing factions in the coming days: The "Neo-Karma" Faction, consisting of the Complaints and Grievances Union, the Rosular Kingdom, the SuperFriends, the Ragnablok, Frostbite, and Below vs. The Citadel and The Sweet Oblivion (which, I also predict, will eventually join The Citadel anyway).

That sounds like a heavily-lopsided war, yes, but keep in mind that I failed to mention (for I am not sure) how blocs such as NOIR, the Stickmen, AZTEC, the Nexus Agreement, the Pocahontas Accords, the League of Extraordinary Oranges, or the Chestnut Accords, will align. Those blocs that were of the Hegemony, such as the former and current alliances of One Vision, the P.E.A.C.E. Treaty, and the Overlord's Protectorate Pact are unknown to me. What will become of the Orange Unity Treaty is also unknown to me.

Please note that this is a very early prediction, and thus every part of it is subject to change. Note also that it doesn't quite take into consideration future alliances or blocs that might emerge later.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Gatherum

[William Blake]

"karma" is not the savior you are looking for.

[KainIIIC]

There is a serious collection action problem going on with Karma (which has really happened since its inception), and thus it is not only in the interest of NPO/TPF/Echelon, but also of the warring Karma alliances to make individual peace with the remnants. If you get fewer alliances in the room agreeing on terms, the more likely they'll come to a conclusion, so this is what may end up happening. We could also see a major shift in opinion as the lower tier of the nations attacking NPO begin getting destroyed more frequently due to higher tech/powered players with a low NS with nukes and such.

And as someone said earlier, the hippies will separate with the war group, making the war group look bad and force them to wind it down.

[mykep]

No, we are all young teenagers who dont have jobs and thus cant pay for cell phones. Is that not why we gathered together? To rebel and rid ourselves of the New Parent Order?

[Otherworld]

Your "game changer" is in another coalition.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Otherworld

[Vicea]

Karma's influence on how CN should be run hasn't been used to the extend some people would like to believe, their mission is punishment the way to administer it is what they are torn on.

Besides, for the future of CN look less at Karma and more to the parties that will be calling the shots or in position of power after this war.

The blocs, past-war NPO, unaffiliated parties will be the new powermongers.

[Bill Wallace]

We could also see a major shift in opinion as the lower tier of the nations attacking NPO begin getting destroyed more frequently due to higher tech/powered players with a low NS with nukes and such.

Actually, this has been the case for at least four weeks now. There was an initial shock when lower NS nations with no tech and no military wonders started to get blasted by nukes and level 9 bombers, but that shock has since subsided and has done more to create camaraderie amongst our members than anything else could have. Nothing has changed. We continue to fight and will do so for as long as we need to.

[Kiss Goodbye]

Karma does have one responsibility--to not try to dominate one another once this war ends.

There may be flak between individual members of Karma, but such disagreements do not a war make.

[Heyman]

Personally, I don't give a damn.

[VIdiot the Great]

Karma does have one responsibility--to not try to dominate one another once this war ends.

There may be flak between individual members of Karma, but such disagreements do not a war make.

I'm going to respectfully disagree here. Karma has no responsibility to anyone. Responsibility implies obligation. What Karma has done is essentially wipe the slate clean in many regards. While this is a welcome change in many respects, they are not obligated to do so, nor are they obligated to make sure that a future hegemony does not supplant the old one.

All Karma has shown is that enough folks working together to achieve a common goal can do so.

There's a lesson here somewhere, I'm almost sure of it.

VI

[Neo Uruk]

Some alliances more than others, but most do have a bit of responsibility. Karma is not a single entity, more of a club.

[neneko]

What i want to know is, if you think the leaders of Karma do recognize their chance and have some responsibility of shaping a better future by showing and giving planet bob a example how enemies are treated.

Better than what? Are you implying that your allies made something wrong?

To answer your question after the war every alliance will be responsible for their actions. Karma as a whole can't be held responsible for every alliance on bob that's not even part of them.

I'd be really happy if we saw a better bob after this war but making it karmas responsibility to do that for winning a defensive war isn't right. Regardless I don't think GDA has any place to tell others to take risks for what they belive in.

[mattski133]

I don't think any of us have any real desire to stay together after this is done. That being said, the alliances engaged with NPO have absolutely no problem working together, from what I've seen.

What happens after this is pretty much the responsibility of individual blocs and alliances.

[neneko]

I was going to make this post another thread but owf got enough threads with similar content without me adding to it so I'll just post it here.

I don't want to go into the argument if NPO deserves do get destroyed because of their past or because of the possibility of a future threat.

What i want to know is, if you think the leaders of Hegemony do recognize their chance and have some responsibility of shaping a better future by dropping the old routines that people have clearly shown that they do not agree with in this war.

I understand the danger and risk by doing so but don't all altruistic and heroic actions come with a certain price and risk?

[DogeWilliam]

I haven't heard a convincing argument why NPO should be let of the hook. Sure, Karma could be nice and just give them reps and not try to totally annihilate them. But, anything less then massive reps is probably not going to happen.

[bkphysics]

I think when the karma war finally comes to a close a few things will be in motion or have happened:

1. Curb stomps will become a rarity rather than the norm

2. Alliances will be more reluctant to engage in wars without solid proof that has been fact checked and holds up.

3. Like it or not, the Karma war demonstrates the value of the 'peanut galleries' opinion and how battles can be fought here on the forums.

4. Treaties will still be flying back and forth, but I think many alliances will be evaluating their treaty partners with a different measuring stick now. Especially after the way things shook down in the beginning of the Karma war.

5. BLOCs will actually become a bigger part of Bob's dichotomy, but these post-karma war blocs I think will have more solidarity and be less a grouping of back scratchers and more a collection of very like-minded alliances.

6. mega-BLOCs are done I think. Things like tC and such are just too big and filled with too many varied opinions to be effective when the times are tough. Smaller BLOCs with tighter cohesion (see citadel of SF for a good example) will be the new status quo.

After all the dust settles we know the NPO and remaining allies will be paying reps etc, but the thing I look forward to seeing is how diplomatic relations will be post-karma war. Will alliances quickly scamper to rejoin treaties with the NPO? How will apparent broken relations be mended?

[Proxian Empire]

Karma is a loose organisation of many non-allied alliances with a common goal. When that goal is achieved, they will disperse. I do not see them taking responsibility outside of their own individual interests.

[Alterego]

Most of Karma lack the moral authority to shape a better tomorrow. Their decision to permanently disable or destroy NPO has seen to that. If there is to be a brighter future it will come from Citadel, Frostbite or some regrouping of the losing side in the Karma war.

Some alliances more than others, but most do have a bit of responsibility. Karma is not a single entity, more of a club.

In the Karma war Karma blamed the allies of NPO for helping them do as they pleased. The same should be true for all of Karma in this war, if they dont openly oppose where the grouping is going they are just as guilty for any crimes that might be committed.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Alterego

[King DrunkWino]

Of for the love of......

There is only one responsibility, your own personal responsibility. I wish people would realize this. YOU the reader have a personal responsibility to conduct yourself the way you want. If YOU don't want to see or be a part of any of those things YOU disagree with, don't get involved in them. Find someplace that matches up with YOUR values and if that place doesn't exist, find some people that YOU agree with and make that place.

[PrideAssassin]

^ I can agree with that. "Karma" as a whole though is no better than the "supah ebil" hegemony. Gratz on swallowin' the hype. Eh, power grabs are power grabs, and they will occur whether people want them to or not. And the whole power = corruption bit still holds. There is no greater purpose.

[Mixoux]

People place far too much responsibility and trust in those who are currently in power.

You'd think this war would have shown that change doesn't have to start from the top.

[Stravolice]

Frostbite is most certainly NOT a part of any 'Karma' movement. We fought on a side of the war due to treaty obligations, but that's as far as we are involved.

[King DrunkWino]

People place far too much responsibility and trust in those who are currently in power.

You'd think this war would have shown that change doesn't have to start from the top.

Any sort of lasting change should never start from the top.

I've seen it, folks in an alliance that don't like the way it's going/running/whatever start trying to change things. That's good, that's the way it should be. You are a member of that alliance, and you to a degree are responsible for what that alliance does. Now if you turn around and find that the alliance is not going to be heading in the direction you like, I honestly suggest to you that you make a graceful exit and find someplace that more appeals to you. After all, if things go south, you are going to be one of the ones to pay for it if the bill comes due.

Don't be content simply to reside in the biggest alliance or the ones that give you the most stuff, find a place that you feel fits your way of playing.