The Future of the NPO

[Seerow]

I'm not sure what your point is. We're discussing the internal governance of the NPO. I'm not disputing what other alliances do or don't do, but responding to that post about our internal form of governance.

Not really sure how I feel being compared to a serial killer, but meh, I've heard worse.

Well the comparison could be rapists instead and possibly be more accurate. But we all know NPO's feelings about $%&@.

That said I will agree that it wasn't a comment that needed to be made in response to your post. You weren't saying the NPO should be let off clean, you were answering a question with your personal story. And I also will attest that anyone who is willing to join as a regular unrecognized member and be active enough can carve out a position for themselves.

[Cortath]

Before his recent retirement Bakunin was never an Imperial Officer. He went from being a member of the War Council to being Moo's Regent.

Also I recall your technology corps being shut down in because some of the IO's didn't like it. If I remember correctly you then needed to stroke Moo's ego for the better part of a week before he could find the courage to overrule them and reinstate it.

Thank you for the clarification regarding Bakunin's position.

The Technology Corps was shut down at one point, yes. I don't think you remember correctly, but I don't think we're going to gain anything by discussing these facts.

Are there disagreements within the New Pacific Order on substantive policy issues? Yes. I would not characterize that "some [...] IO's didn't like it." There were substantive disagreements on policy issues, mainly dealing with different ideas about the role the free market in regarding to our state-run Technology Corps.

Was there vigorous debate on the subject? Yes. Did I, personally, agree with all the decisions made? No. Was the final product made better because of that vigorous debate? Yes. Was the New Pacific Order strengthened by that debate? Yes.

I think that systems works pretty well. People frequently speak of the New Pacific Order as if there is some overarching autocracy that permits no dissent. Tgat's not true. We have a lot of internal discussion on debate on all variety of topics, large and small.

[RandomInterrupt]

I think that systems works pretty well. People frequently speak of the New Pacific Order as if there is some overarching autocracy that permits no dissent. Tgat's not true. We have a lot of internal discussion on debate on all variety of topics, large and small.

Unless of course an admin or IO disagrees with the point being made, in which case the discussion is closed and the initiator of the discussion mocked and insulted. I guess that is technically discussion, sure. Just not what normally comes to mind when people use words like discussion and dissent.

[Cortath]

Well the comparison could be rapists instead and possibly be more accurate. But we all know NPO's feelings about $%&@.

That said I will agree that it wasn't a comment that needed to be made in response to your post. You weren't saying the NPO should be let off clean, you were answering a question with your personal story. And I also will attest that anyone who is willing to join as a regular unrecognized member and be active enough can carve out a position for themselves.

In one post, you both compare us to rapists, and say that the comparison to serial killers is unwarranted. I appreciate your subtle distinction.

I appreciate your comment in regards to our story, and indeed, I think your comment is correct: people can rise up within our meritocratic system.

[Cortath]

Unless of course an admin or IO disagrees with the point being made, in which case the discussion is closed and the initiator of the discussion mocked and insulted. I guess that is technically discussion, sure. Just not what normally comes to mind when people use words like discussion and dissent.

I haven't found that to be the case. Discussion is closed for much the same reasons as here: [ooc]trolling, flaming, comparing us to RL felons or other nasty conduct[/ooc] and such.

[Seerow]

In one post, you both compare us to rapists, and say that the comparison to serial killers is unwarranted. I appreciate your subtle distinction.

I'm glad you can appreciate the irony. I feel the dsitinction is important, $%&@ victims live on, most of the time. They can commit suicide, but that doesn't add murder to the rapists' crimes.

Now which crime is worse? Some people will debate it until the end of time, but I will hold that murder is a worse crime than $%&@, and that fine distinction can make a difference between capital punishment and life in prison with potential for early parole on good behavior.

I appreciate your comment in regards to our story, and indeed, I think your comment is correct: people can rise up within our meritocratic system.

Such is the definition of meritocracy. The problem with such systems is that many people feel that their own contributions are more merit worthy than they actually are, leading them to feel they're going nowhere fast in the meritocracy and blame the system rather than themselves for not being more innovative.

[Cortath]

I'm glad you can appreciate the irony. I feel the dsitinction is important, $%&@ victims live on, most of the time. They can commit suicide, but that doesn't add murder to the rapists' crimes.

Now which crime is worse? Some people will debate it until the end of time, but I will hold that murder is a worse crime than $%&@, and that fine distinction can make a difference between capital punishment and life in prison with potential for early parole on good behavior.

I suppose perhaps we can agree to disagree on the comparisons of the New Pacific Order to rapists and serial killers and perhaps end this train of discussion?

Such is the definition of meritocracy. The problem with such systems is that many people feel that their own contributions are more merit worthy than they actually are, leading them to feel they're going nowhere fast in the meritocracy and blame the system rather than themselves for not being more innovative.

Indeed, I think that is a problem with meritocratic systems of government, and it is one we try to combat. We try to make sure that our members don't feel that their contributions are unwanted or unnecessary, because all contributions are valued. All discussion and ideas help make our alliance better. The good contributions are incorporated into the discussions, and contributions that are less worthy made by nonetheless, wise members, can allow everyone to learn more about the system.

[Seerow]

I suppose perhaps we can agree to disagree on the comparisons of the New Pacific Order to rapists and serial killers and perhaps end this train of discussion?

I suppose we could, but I might ruin my good reputation as a traitor if I don't have something negative to say for everything positive/constructive I say in turn. We can't have that can we? I suppose I'll find something new for my next post.

Indeed, I think that is a problem with meritocratic systems of government, and it is one we try to combat. We try to make sure that our members don't feel that their contributions are unwanted or unnecessary, because all contributions are valued. All discussion and ideas help make our alliance better. The good contributions are incorporated into the discussions, and contributions that are less worthy made by nonetheless, wise members, can allow everyone to learn more about the system.

To be perfectly honest, I'd question the effectiveness of this unless it has only been recently implemented as the bad perception lingers. Of course I can't comment on the merit of the suggestions being presented, but cutting down some of the bureaucracy in the middle would probably help you a lot. Shed another 200-300 low activity members and you might be able to do that effectively without wearing out your most active government.

But that may be a bit too drastic of a change for the NPO to swallow, even with the transformation you're being forced to undergo from this war. Only time can tell.

[Cortath]

To be perfectly honest, I'd question the effectiveness of this unless it has only been recently implemented as the bad perception lingers. Of course I can't comment on the merit of the suggestions being presented, but cutting down some of the bureaucracy in the middle would probably help you a lot. Shed another 200-300 low activity members and you might be able to do that effectively without wearing out your most active government.

But that may be a bit too drastic of a change for the NPO to swallow, even with the transformation you're being forced to undergo from this war. Only time can tell.

*shrugs* I don't know that shedding the middle bureaucracy would be helpful. Not really sure if we can have a productive discussion in the abstract.

We have a bureaucracy, so does every alliance. We have many ranks in our government structures, because we have a pretty large alliance, and it requires a lot of officials to deal with pretty complex processes and departments with a very many people.

[Seerow]

*shrugs* I don't know that shedding the middle bureaucracy would be helpful. Not really sure if we can have a productive discussion in the abstract.

We have a bureaucracy, so does every alliance. We have many ranks in our government structures, because we have a pretty large alliance, and it requires a lot of officials to deal with pretty complex processes and departments with a very many people.

You're right, fully abstract discussions won't get very far, and I'm too far removed from the alliance to give much more helpful input. I'm not saying take out the entire middle bureaucracy, just cut down on it significantly. Either by removing some intermediaries, or giving the intermediaries enough power to act on things without an IOs approval. Obviously not in something like war, but if a member has a suggestion for something that they think would work better than it currently is, they'll probably feel better seeing it come together within the course of a week or two rather than months. If it then proceeds to fall on its face the member will understand that their idea wasn't the best, and if it flourishes, reward them for it and so much the better.

I understand this is likely an ideal you already strive for though, so speaking in the abstract we will get nowhere. So I'll go ahead and stop now.

[Cortath]

You're right, fully abstract discussions won't get very far, and I'm too far removed from the alliance to give much more helpful input. I'm not saying take out the entire middle bureaucracy, just cut down on it significantly. Either by removing some intermediaries, or giving the intermediaries enough power to act on things without an IOs approval. Obviously not in something like war, but if a member has a suggestion for something that they think would work better than it currently is, they'll probably feel better seeing it come together within the course of a week or two rather than months. If it then proceeds to fall on its face the member will understand that their idea wasn't the best, and if it flourishes, reward them for it and so much the better.

I understand this is likely an ideal you already strive for though, so speaking in the abstract we will get nowhere. So I'll go ahead and stop now.

It is an ideal we strive for. Not that the outside knows (and probably doesn't care) about our internal bureaucracy, but we recently radically restructured our internal member-services divisions and did pretty much exactly what you're talking about: dismantling an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy, and bringing the people closer to their leaders, and giving the Council, elected by the people, a better understanding of how these departments worked through increased advisory abilities.

[HeinousOne]

It is an ideal we strive for. Not that the outside knows (and probably doesn't care) about our internal bureaucracy, but we recently radically restructured our internal member-services divisions and did pretty much exactly what you're talking about: dismantling an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy, and bringing the people closer to their leaders, and giving the Council, elected by the people, a better understanding of how these departments worked through increased advisory abilities.

Maybe that will help, I know as a regular member that occassionally desired to share my thoughts and ask a few questions it seemed that since I did not have the time nor the desire follow the steps and do work in one of the departments that my opinion became worth less.

Do you think that there is a point where a meritocracy only values those members that contribute to the day to day menial upkeep of the alliance as a whole? I felt that was out of line considering I fought in every war I was asked to and gave my nation strength to the NPO. To me that should never be taken for granted.

[Cortath]

Maybe that will help, I know as a regular member that occassionally desired to share my thoughts and ask a few questions it seemed that since I did not have the time nor the desire follow the steps and do work in one of the departments that my opinion became worth less.

Do you think that there is a point where a meritocracy only values those members that contribute to the day to day menial upkeep of the alliance as a whole? I felt that was out of line considering I fought in every war I was asked to and gave my nation strength to the NPO. To me that should never be taken for granted.

Well, it's a balancing act. There's something to be said for having expert opinion in a field. For instance, I am the Imperial Officer who oversees the Technology Corps of the NPO. I like to think I know quite a bit about technology distribution and general economics. Not infrequently, a member comes to me with what could charitably be described as a "bad" idea about something to do with the Tech Corps. I never dismiss any idea out of hand, because I know as well as the next person that you don't have to be an expert to have a good idea, but there is something to be said for fully understanding a process and a system before beginning to improve it. In the Tech Corps, for instance, we have dozens of discrete and different processes that are repeated hundreds of times. Making even a small change to one of those processes translates into significant change for a how a process works, due to its repetition. So there's a lot of impetus in a bureaucracy such as that to keep on doing what it does, and carefully evaluate proposed changes and reforms before enacting them on a mass scale.

So, I will say, I think an opinion about a bureaucracy or a process tends to be better informed when it comes from within that bureaucracy or by a person with such specialized knowledge. That's not to say that I do not "value" only those members or their suggestions who have that knowledge; I was once such a member and I made suggestions too. I don't think it's particularly radical to say that I value say, a General's opinion on war strategy more than a soldier's, but in saying that, I do not say a soldier's opinion does not have value, but rather that its value is of a different, but no less important, nature.

Generally speaking, as I said before, when a member makes a suggestion that I think is unwise, I treat it as a learning experience for both of us. If I can convince them that I'm right, maybe I can help them learn something about economics (or whatever was suggested). If I attempt to justify the status quo them, and they disagree, that gives me pause. If I can't convince someone that this is a good idea, maybe they have a point. It's very important how bureaucracies and processes are perceived by the people, because it is they, after all, whom these bureaucracies and processes are designed to serve.

[edit grammar]

Edited June 22, 2009 by Cortath

[kingzog]

We have many ranks in our government structures, because we have a pretty large alliance, and it requires a lot of officials to deal with pretty complex processes and departments with a very many people.

Employing that reasoning, the NPO becomes less bureaucratic with each passing day.

I congratulate you on streamlining things.

[Doitzel]

Thank you for the clarification regarding Bakunin's position.

The Technology Corps was shut down at one point, yes. I don't think you remember correctly, but I don't think we're going to gain anything by discussing these facts.

Are there disagreements within the New Pacific Order on substantive policy issues? Yes. I would not characterize that "some [...] IO's didn't like it." There were substantive disagreements on policy issues, mainly dealing with different ideas about the role the free market in regarding to our state-run Technology Corps.

This is utter crap. I was a manager there and on the Council at the time and the tech corps was shut down literally because Koona didn't like it; the substance of it was that he thought we weren't producing fast enough to meet demand and that other alliances could do better. It was a completely moronic, one-or-the-other decision that was made without consulting us really at all. This wasn't an isolated incident, either. I do distinctly remember one Frawley swearing to destroy the PCIA because I made a report on one of his bankers swearing someone out. I think we all know how that department turned out.

[Haflinger]

This is utter crap. I was a manager there and on the Council at the time and the tech corps was shut down literally because Koona didn't like it; the substance of it was that he thought we weren't producing fast enough to meet demand and that other alliances could do better. It was a completely moronic, one-or-the-other decision that was made without consulting us really at all. This wasn't an isolated incident, either. I do distinctly remember one Frawley swearing to destroy the PCIA because I made a report on one of his bankers swearing someone out. I think we all know how that department turned out.

Doitzel, you need to realize that there were external pressures working against you at the time too. Making posts like this one didn't help your efforts.

[Fallen Fool]

Doitzel, you need to realize that there were external pressures working against you at the time too. Making posts like this one didn't help your efforts.

You're arguing that Doitzel's posting played a major role in the eventual dissipation of the PCIA, and the issues with the Technology Corps?

[Doitzel]

Doitzel, you need to realize that there were external pressures working against you at the time too. Making posts like this one didn't help your efforts.

What the hell does that have to do with anything I've said?

[New Frontier]

NSO, TLC, STA. Read your Planet Bob history as to some of the rationale. If I led NPO however, I would also avoid it. While signing treaties will be a priority once the war is over and terms have expired, Frostbite is a new, likely aggressive bloc in the near future and NPO will be ill placed there. A conservative FA approach, avoid war for a while would be best.

Right, I forgot. NSO and NPO are just waiting to sign a treaty.

[Sal Paradise]

I think Haflinger's got a crush on Doitzel. I was going to pick a random post of Halfinger's that had nothing to do with anything and make a hilarious joke of it, but I was disturbed to find that one of the posts I randomly selected was yet another instance of Halfinger linking to a post of Doitzel's months after the fact.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...st&p=989489

I bet Halfinger has his own "Quotable Doitzel" on hand at all times to whip out during any chance Doitzel encounter. Unfortunately, he got a little too excited this time.

[Cortath]

Employing that reasoning, the NPO becomes less bureaucratic with each passing day.

I congratulate you on streamlining things.

Thank you for your congratulations.

This is utter crap. I was a manager there and on the Council at the time and the tech corps was shut down literally because Koona didn't like it; the substance of it was that he thought we weren't producing fast enough to meet demand and that other alliances could do better. It was a completely moronic, one-or-the-other decision that was made without consulting us really at all. This wasn't an isolated incident, either. I do distinctly remember one Frawley swearing to destroy the PCIA because I made a report on one of his bankers swearing someone out. I think we all know how that department turned out.

You were not a Manager of the Technology Corps. Your position on the Council gave you no access to the substantive discussions that I (now) have access to regarding this incident.

That there are disagreements within the New Pacific Order, on an issue as new (then and relatively speaking) as technology procurement is nothing surprising, or even worth pointing out, unless you are someone with an axe to grind against the NPO. Yes, Koona had a different opinion on the best way to get technology into the NPO. In the end, we all discussed it, and from that discussion, we were made better, and a compromise was struck.

In retrospect, it's easy to say that Koona was wrong, and indeed, Koona himself had said as much. But back when we were just beginning to create state-sponsored technology procurement departments, there was a significant group of people who felt that the free market was more effective. Now, in the New Pacific Order, we encourage both.

[lazaraus45]

well here are my opinions on this

What will be of the NPO after this war?

they will take a while to rebuild but they will still have the capacity to make it back to the top

What kind of changes do you see the NPO will do after this war?

they will stay in the background for a while at first, after that they will go back to the way they are now

Will the NPO play a role on the next war? If so, in what capacity?

probably not the next war

Will there be an alliance that is willing to sign a treaty with the NPO, If so, which ones?

probably, the kind of alliances who think they will benefite from having them as thier allies

Do you see any Karma alliance being allied with the NPO? If so, who and why?

not in the short term, but over time probably

Will the NPO seek vengeance? If so, which alliance(s)?

probably, their would probably be quite a list

Will the NPO disband?

i doubt it

Will there be a leadership change in the NPO?

probably not

Do you want to see a leadership change in the NPO? If so? Who do you want to lead it?

no

What kind of political influence the NPO have left towards the CN community? Do they still have any?

not much at first but they will regain their influence slowly

Feel free to answer all or some of the questions I post. I might come here and add more questions if I think of something good to ask.

Hopefully, I posted this on the right forum.

“I will rest when I die”

[hawk11]

I punish Hawk11, that VE spy, all that time. I need no excuse.

If you're going to punish me publically Bilrow, please at least have the decency to get my name right.

hawk_11

It's an evil brand, it deserves to be respected.

[joracy]

I think Haflinger's got a crush on Doitzel. I was going to pick a random post of Halfinger's that had nothing to do with anything and make a hilarious joke of it, but I was disturbed to find that one of the posts I randomly selected was yet another instance of Halfinger linking to a post of Doitzel's months after the fact.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...st&p=989489

I bet Halfinger has his own "Quotable Doitzel" on hand at all times to whip out during any chance Doitzel encounter. Unfortunately, he got a little too excited this time.

That was a pretty good quote though. So simply and plain, but hilarious at the same time.

[Haflinger]

You're arguing that Doitzel's posting played a major role in the eventual dissipation of the PCIA, and the issues with the Technology Corps?

I don't actually know what Doitzel's role really was with the PCIA; that's an internal NPO matter, and I don't know the details of it.

What the hell does that have to do with anything I've said?

Heh.

The fact that NPO allies were making complaints about some of your statements on the forums was undermining your position inside NPO. Clear enough?

I bet Halfinger has his own "Quotable Doitzel" on hand at all times to whip out during any chance Doitzel encounter. Unfortunately, he got a little too excited this time.

You spelt my name right the first time

Ah well. No, I don't have any Doitzel quotes bookmarked, but I do have roughly 1.5 gigs of IRC logs, and am pretty good at looking up stuff in them.

Which is part of the reason why I can dredge up stuff from the past about certain people rather efficiently