KenoDurkster Posted June 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I believe his point was that blocs are formed through treaties. No one signed a treaty to form a bloc called Karma. and a bloc was made for the same purpose as karma making it karma.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) In Cybernations terms, a bloc refers to a group of three or more alliances united by a single treaty document, usually MDP or higher. There is a significant difference between a war coalition (~, Karma, Coalition, CoaLUEtion, etc) and a bloc (Continuum, SuperFriends, Citadel, etc). and a bloc was made for the same purpose as karma making it karma.. Elaborate? Edited June 7, 2009 by Lord Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 and a bloc was made for the same purpose as karma making it karma.. I don't really understand the structure of your sentence. If you would care to rephrase it that would be wonderful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 a combination of persons, groups, or nations forming a unit with a common interest or purpose yeah I believe that makes you a bloc. Why the fear of affiliation? Where's your pride in a job well done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 So essentially you're saying people disagreed and tried to get their way before the war and they're still going to disagree and try to get their way now? While you're absolutely right about this, what on earth made you think this was ever in question?You do realise when people said "we different" they were talking about not enforcing viceroys, EZI, forcing disbandments/eternal wars, bogus CB's etc, and not about disagreeing on reps figures right? again, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REPS. you gremlins are all the same, god damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Yvl Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) Remember kids: Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Well, uh, yeah, that's why we took you guys down. Karma isn't a bloc, it's a coalition. We aren't putting ourselves "on top," what we are doing is, as Archon said, leveling the playing field. People talked about lines being drawn before the war, but I believe the lines were drawn during the course of the war. This war was a sham. The real war is going to roll around soon, and hopefully by then most logical people will see "Karma" for what it was. A bad joke. Keep telling yourself that, but I still think you don't really understand what Karma is exactly. Though if you are going to make those claims, back them up. Who's going to war, for what reason, and what makes you think this way? Really, do tell, I love speculation. Was it a group of "innocents" drawn into doing things they didn't want to do because they were contractually obligated? A power grab? What was it? What was your purpose? Not trying to be an $@!, I'm genuinely interested. You... really still don't see how bad NPO was? Or do you not understand that some people simply are enraged over injustice despite having no involvement, let alone when it's done to their friends? Nearly all of us in Karma have been effected one way or another by NPO's tyranny. They were waiting for justice or revenge from however far back their history goes. We've all tried and failed several times before, we just happened to muster enough strength this time around. The way people worked openly to align others against the great and terrible Hegemony has been pretty blatant and overt for quite a while now. While I can only speak for GR in this regard, as I don't know the inner workings of other alliances - We're not the Hegemony, we don't do propaganda (aside from in jest). I've been in NPO, I've seen the difference in how the facts are presented. In GR, we bring up history from time to time, and have an open discussion on who was right, and tend to reach the same conclusion, so we move in that direction. In NPO, they have a history guide in plain sight that explains how they won the Great War, or how there was no question over who was right in GW3, etc. Now all you need is a cape and a sidekick. I will give you this point. Dictionary definition It's used in another sense in this world. A bloc is held together by a single treaty. This was just a chain reaction from a series of treaties and poorly planned DoWs (OG's declaration on GR comes to mind, since it brought in OBR, who got OG on their knees in days.) Edited June 7, 2009 by Prince Yvl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 a combination of persons, groups, or nations forming a unit with a common interest or purposeyeah I believe that makes you a bloc. Why the fear of affiliation? Where's your pride in a job well done? Using the wrong terminology causes confusion. As for fear of affiliation, I hereby affirm that Lord Brendan of Alzadar fought alongside the war coalition known as Karma and contributed indirectly to the defeat of the New Pacific Order. I know where I stood: do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Look at it this way, everyone labelled Karma as Karma. In reality its only allies helping out allies. So I would call it honoring treaties not a bloc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoDurkster Posted June 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) I am saying the alliance has the same purpose and structure karma and hence forth must be or makes it karma. War Coalition & Bloc are different.... unless ur gonna get everyone to stop calling Karma a bloc don't bother saying it's a war coalition Look at it this way, everyone labelled Karma as Karma. In reality its only allies helping out allies. So I would call it honoring treaties not a bloc. i would not call that honoring treaties backstabbing others and canceling others because you know somthing is gonna happen is not honoring treaties it's called playing favorites. or looking out for yourself and not caring about the other half. Might as well keep the treaty but not follow through IMO. Edited June 7, 2009 by KenoDurkster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 a combination of persons, groups, or nations forming a unit with a common interest or purposeyeah I believe that makes you a bloc. Why the fear of affiliation? Where's your pride in a job well done? If I ever mentioned that I feared affiliation with Karma, feel free to quote me on it. My belief that Karma is not a bloc by definition has no bearing on how I feel about it's principles or otherwise. I'm arguing your statement that Karma is a "power bloc" as you are using the incorrect term. Your attempt at proving Karma is a bloc has become so desperate that you've given a definition that covers any organized entity. By your definition a family is a bloc; an alliance is a bloc; your school sports team is a bloc. Do you consider IRON a bloc? I don't. Do you consider the Denver Broncos a bloc? When you introduce your family do you say "This is my bloc"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anenu Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I swear if you people studied your history you would see that war time coalition are not the same things as blocs. Just take a look at previous war time coalitions and it will tell you what will happen to Karma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I'm honestly surprised that there's this much disagreement over what a 'bloc' is in CN. For 99% of the players and essentially the past 3 years of the game, a bloc is noted as a treaty, entirely separate from a wartime coalition. (For example UJW, there was the Unjust Path [bloc] but the entire side was coined the 'Unjust highway' [coalition], as was ~ [another coalition]). Karma is not entirely treatied to each other, thus it isn't a bloc. There are, however, blocs that are participating on the side of Karma. (C&G, Supefriends, Citadel etc) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoDurkster Posted June 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 If I ever mentioned that I feared affiliation with Karma, feel free to quote me on it. My belief that Karma is not a bloc by definition has no bearing on how I feel about it's principles or otherwise. I'm arguing your statement that Karma is a "power bloc" as you are using the incorrect term. Your attempt at proving Karma is a bloc has become so desperate that you've given a definition that covers any organized entity. By your definition a family is a bloc; an alliance is a bloc; your school sports team is a bloc. Do you consider IRON a bloc? I don't. Do you consider the Denver Broncos a bloc? When you introduce your family do you say "This is my bloc"? I would call that not having common sense to believe they are blocs... now you believe in it's principles so you believe in revenge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoDurkster Posted June 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) If a war coalition is brought togather by treaties then it is a bloc 90% of the considered karma alliances could be connected to each other by treaties or just un-official agreements. making it a Pact. i apoligize for the double post. Edited June 7, 2009 by KenoDurkster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I would call that not having common sense to believe they are blocs... Yet you don't have common sense to realize that Karma isn't a bloc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoDurkster Posted June 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 i have enough to understand what you believe in is no better then NPO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 If I ever mentioned that I feared affiliation with Karma, feel free to quote me on it. My belief that Karma is not a bloc by definition has no bearing on how I feel about it's principles or otherwise. I'm arguing your statement that Karma is a "power bloc" as you are using the incorrect term. Your attempt at proving Karma is a bloc has become so desperate that you've given a definition that covers any organized entity. By your definition a family is a bloc; an alliance is a bloc; your school sports team is a bloc. Do you consider IRON a bloc? I don't. Do you consider the Denver Broncos a bloc? When you introduce your family do you say "This is my bloc"? My definition of bloc fits "Karma" quite nicely. IRON is a bloc of nations with a common purpose: Swill beer (and cream soda) and have fun. Main Entry: alliance Part of Speech: noun Definition: An association, especially of nations for a common cause. Synonyms: Anschluss, bloc, cartel, coalition, confederacy, confederation, federation, league, organization, union Karma is a bloc of Alliances. Quite simple really. Unless you're saying you had no common purpose with the movement's core and used the opportunity to reposition yourself into a more personally amicable situation. Oh, wait... That was the common purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Yvl Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Again, dictionary references have no bearing on a world with its own dictionary. It's just meaningless semantics anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I would call that not having common sense to believe they are blocs... now you believe in it's principles so you believe in revenge? Congratulations, you found my point. Maybe you can go on and understand what I was responding too. Karma got so large because it was focused on change and defending against an unjust attack. If it were just for revenge it would be probably half the size it is right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 My definition of bloc fits "Karma" quite nicely.IRON is a bloc of nations with a common purpose: Swill beer (and cream soda) and have fun. Main Entry: alliance Part of Speech: noun Definition: An association, especially of nations for a common cause. Synonyms: Anschluss, bloc, cartel, coalition, confederacy, confederation, federation, league, organization, union Karma is a bloc of Alliances. Quite simple really. Unless you're saying you had no common purpose with the movement's core and used the opportunity to reposition yourself into a more personally amicable situation. Oh, wait... That was the common purpose. Once again, you've failed to actually address the issue and posted another dictionary definition. Well, I suppose trying to put words in my mouth is always a logical way to prove me wrong on something I haven't even commented on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) My definition of bloc fits "Karma" quite nicely.IRON is a bloc of nations with a common purpose: Swill beer (and cream soda) and have fun. Main Entry: alliance Part of Speech: noun Definition: An association, especially of nations for a common cause. Synonyms: Anschluss, bloc, cartel, coalition, confederacy, confederation, federation, league, organization, union Karma is a bloc of Alliances. Quite simple really. Unless you're saying you had no common purpose with the movement's core and used the opportunity to reposition yourself into a more personally amicable situation. Oh, wait... That was the common purpose. Then from now on, IRON will be a bloc. Alliances are no longer called such; rather, they are now blocs. Alliance affiliation will be replaced with 'bloc affiliation'. All future wartime coalitions will be named blocs. Actual alliance blocs like SF, C&G, etc are also to be named as blocs. Thus, my bloc GOD is currently partaking in the Karma bloc, and is also a part of the SF bloc. See where it gets confusing and thus hasn't been in use so far? edit: What I'm trying to say here is that it's much easier to differentiate by using different words. Technically, an alliance bloc should really just be called an 'alliance', since they're a joining together between alliances. But that becomes redundant and confusing. Thus, different terms are used. Dictionary terms may call it one thing, but the cyberverse is a game with a very complex system of overlapping definitions. It's simply more efficient to use a different set of terms. Edited June 7, 2009 by Mixoux Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Then from now on, IRON will be a bloc. Alliances are no longer called such; rather, they are now blocs.Alliance affiliation will be replaced with 'bloc affiliation'. All future wartime coalitions will be named blocs. Actual alliance blocs like SF, C&G, etc are also to be named as blocs. Thus, my bloc GOD is currently partaking in the Karma bloc, and is also a part of the SF bloc. See where it gets confusing and thus hasn't been in use so far? edit: What I'm trying to say here is that it's much easier to differentiate by using different words. Technically, an alliance bloc should really just be called an 'alliance', since they're a joining together between alliances. But that becomes redundant and confusing. Thus, different terms are used. Dictionary terms may call it one thing, but the cyberverse is a game with a very complex system of overlapping definitions. It's simply more efficient to use a different set of terms. Pieces of Lego will now be known as blocs instead of blocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 See the confusion is avoided by using a synonym. Can't change what is though, no matter how hard you try. Why would you try anyway? It is what it is. Ignore me and I go away. I must be off for awhile, and in the interim, have chosen a black wardrobe in mourning of the sudden and untimely demise of the English language. I will return later. Until then best of luck, and Admin bless. Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Well, I'm perfectly fine with using botched language if it means not having to say that I'm in a bloc whose bloc of blocs is partaking in the greater bloc at war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) Well, I'm perfectly fine with using botched language if it means not having to say that I'm in a bloc whose bloc of blocs is partaking in the greater bloc at war. Don't forget your bloc of blocs' goal of dismantling NPO bloc by bloc. Edited June 7, 2009 by Lord Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.