Overrated Alliance Government

[Jack Diorno]

Pop into #paradox and ask around. I'm sure you'll get enough to sate the drama llama for a day.

(Ex-GC and Ex-GH of TOP, long story short, what the hell was I and the voters of TOP thinking?)

I am not your slave

[Schattenmann]

That's probably because Dilber is in China.

Dilber has only been in China for like 2 months.

I can't say if Dilber is overrated or not--when he came to CoJ as a diplomat he was never able to post :S

We go through cycles. When Dilber was on top of his game, I'm sure he was a very good diplomat, as he was able to devote less time to CyberNations, then of course by default he became overrated. If everyone expects you to be a FA supergenius because of stuff you did 2 years ago, but now you only have time to log on for 2 hours a week, then you're automatically overrated. Not because you're not good at what you do, but because you can't do what you're able to do. That's the way I view Dilber.

Someone mentioned Philo, whjen he showed up during the de Profundis scandal, I was cracking up that he was being viewed as some serious contender, his posts were total jokes. But again, it had been like a year since he was active when that happened.

If I started trying to be the heavyweight troll I used to be tomorrow, I'd look like an idiot too, because frankly I can't get my give-a-damn working when it comes to all these brave new world alliances.

Pop into #paradox and ask around. I'm sure you'll get enough to sate the drama llama for a day.

(Ex-GC and Ex-GH of TOP, long story short, what the hell was I and the voters of TOP thinking?)

Same thing they were thinking whe--- nevermind

[Coursca]

Same thing they were thinking whe--- nevermind

---n they admitted BOWWOW3000.

Perhaps, perhaps...

[Azaghul]

That's probably because Dilber is in China.

That's not really an excuse. If RL means you can't do your job properly, than you're doing a bad job. Especially if you base many of the treaties your alliance relies on primarily on your personal relationships with those alliances leaders.

[hizzy]

MCXA comes to mind for me.

I disagree.

After MCXA's leadership ditched them and ran, a lot of folks stepped up and tried to right their wrongs. They didn't need prominent (if not notorious) figures to rally around.

MCXA as a whole is certainly not over-rated. Their leadership was.

Also, what Archon said; Grub's hot. If he was a chick, I'd definitely do him.

[Ejayrazz]

Ehhh, I wouldn't go that far, Ejay.

I'd say any leader who has let their emotions engulf their senses during a diplomatic situation that brought forth holy hell upon their alliance at some point would definitely be eligible for this honor.

Everyone has emotions and everyone, no matter how much they try, has subjective urges override objective thought at some point.

I'll agree with you. WalkerNinja did pretty well over here in TOP -- he knew well enough to bring me along for the ride. B)

Good show, Archon.

I do not consider those who freak out in diplomatic discussions foreign affair experts, which eliminates half of these 'big wigs'. I am not expecting someone to always remain calm 24/7, hell me and LM duked it out once in private channels - but if him or I were in different alliances on official FA business, neither one of us would have behaved the way we did as we were brothers in the same alliance. When it comes to diplomatic discussions, I envy those who can keep their cool even during the worse of times while standing their ground. ONOS had good representatives in this. Its like working a job, when the customer freaks out you are expected to stand your ground and present yourself respectfully. I will always hold this as a key principle for FA work, it will never change either. I am sure others have other opinions, but I have my own I live up to and will continue doing so.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[Hasin]

Pop into #paradox and ask around. I'm sure you'll get enough to sate the drama llama for a day.

(Ex-GC and Ex-GH of TOP, long story short, what the hell was I and the voters of TOP thinking?)

We don't think, your sig was shinier than everyone else's.

[Coursca]

I do not consider those who freak out in diplomatic discussions foreign affair experts, which eliminates half of these 'big wigs'. I am not expecting someone to always remain calm 24/7, hell me and LM duked it out once in private channels - but if him or I were in different alliances on official FA business, neither one of us would have behaved the way we did as we were brothers in the same alliance. When it comes to diplomatic discussions, I envy those who can keep their cool even during the worse of times while standing their ground. ONOS had good representatives in this. Its like working a job, when the customer freaks out you are expected to stand your ground and present yourself respectfully. I will always hold this as a key principle for FA work, it will never change either. I am sure others have other opinions, but I have my own I live up to and will continue doing so.

You didn't address my last point, though, about the line between objectivity and subjectivity and what happens when it is crossed. The true issue isn't the "freak out" -- freaking out is a symptom, not a root cause, of the failure of diplomacy in this game. The root cause is the failure of the diplomat to continue operating objectively in a situation. Emotional involvement is inherently subjective (and, thus, inherently pervasive in both analysis and negotiation) -- its how that subjectivity is controlled and contained that determines who the good diplomats are and who the poor diplomats are (and thus how objective somebody can be -- not to be confused with 'objectionable' ).

I think in this frame, your criticism is a bit harsh of many people who would otherwise be classified as good diplomats, though almost on the money in my view. Everyone here is human, after all.

[Nintenderek]

I think almost everyone who was mentioned in this thread three or more times is defiantly at least a little bit over rated, especially considering half the people who mentioned their names, haven't even actually met those people, ever, unless you count maybe the occasional run in on these forums. They've never talked on any forum outside this one, and they've never talked on IRC. I think part of it is because we all as humans have this natural tendency to over exaggerate part of the time, and so it leads to a LOT of people being over rated.

[RustyNail]

Settle down. You know what I meant.

Yes, we all know. He's irrelevant like me though so his over-ratedness doesn't matter I on the other hand am amazing and you should all bow down and hang on my every word.

IMNSHO, I think that many alliance leaders are over-rated largely on the fact of their ability to post on the boards. Many leaders never say anything and can do good things or fail without ever being on the radar. I believe it's the ones that do great things or fail in a stupendous manner that really catch our fascination and are therefore the ones we always talk about. The poll of public opinion tells us who is overrated and i'm of the majority rules school of thought....good allies or not, if the majority of Bob thinks you're a smelly orifice...well, you probably are

That being said....any TOP leadership is overrated if for no other reason than association with Coursca

[JBone]

Mentioning banned member in a post with the ones on your first line should be forbidden. He was famous because he produced massive amounts of worthless posts. I don't think anyone ever though otherwise.

Actually a little harsh there Musso.

When he was TPF MoFA he was very effective.

Granted most of his effectiveness came about from folks knowing his name due to all his annoying posts and that asshat amsg thing he did in IRC all the time, but when he was sent out to complete a task and knocked on doors, people answered. When he left word that he was looking for someone..they got back to him. He was hard to ignore, in a pesky kinda way.

He was never a guiding force behind TPF FA, we have others who handle that, but he was a very good messenger.

Now as an absolute leader, No.1 guy in charge.....I never had the pleasure.

EDIT: How can it say his name in your post, but when quoted it changes to banned member? Quite odd.

People actually did. That's the worst part of it, imo.

See above.

Edited October 5, 2009 by JBone

[AirMe]

You didn't address my last point, though, about the line between objectivity and subjectivity and what happens when it is crossed. The true issue isn't the "freak out" -- freaking out is a symptom, not a root cause, of the failure of diplomacy in this game. The root cause is the failure of the diplomat to continue operating objectively in a situation. Emotional involvement is inherently subjective (and, thus, inherently pervasive in both analysis and negotiation) -- its how that subjectivity is controlled and contained that determines who the good diplomats are and who the poor diplomats are (and thus how objective somebody can be -- not to be confused with 'objectionable' ).

I think in this frame, your criticism is a bit harsh of many people who would otherwise be classified as good diplomats, though almost on the money in my view. Everyone here is human, after all.

I once kb'd fourOHfourError from peace negotiations during GW2.....freak outs happen to a lot of people during negotiations. It's how people recover from those freak outs is whats important.

And I know some of you are waiting for me to throw a name into the ring here and say Xiphosis is overrated. I'm not going to. Just because I don't like his style or his attitude doesn't mean he is bad at what he does. If we all had the same style, the game would be boring.

[Hydro]

Margrave was a bit over-rated while he was in government, although to be fair he had way too much on his plate because he was in the Marines. Come to think of it, every overrated government member that I can think of seems to have gone inactive because of RL commitments.

[Uralica]

Jarkko Salomäki. How that guy continues to be in gov escapes me.

[Azaghul]

I think almost everyone who was mentioned in this thread three or more times is defiantly at least a little bit over rated, especially considering half the people who mentioned their names, haven't even actually met those people, ever, unless you count maybe the occasional run in on these forums. They've never talked on any forum outside this one, and they've never talked on IRC. I think part of it is because we all as humans have this natural tendency to over exaggerate part of the time, and so it leads to a LOT of people being over rated.

True for FA more than internal stuff (military/treasuri/IA etc.)

For example it's relatively easy to judge economic capability by how well an alliance grows. The fact that NpO, despite being nearly all ZI'd a year ago, has higher average stats than nearly all other sanctioned alliances says a lot about how much better their banking officials are than those others. I can say their leadership is great while only knowing one of their assistant banking officials (Swiper through another game.)

[General Scian]

I could rattle off a few names of people I think are overrated. But I'll save it for another day.

That being said. Goldielax. End of story.

[King Srqt]

hooo thats hard.

That was both clever and failed to fit the real criteria put forth in the OP. Hoo only had his reputation from what he actually accomplished as a high government member and nothing else. Unless yo think he got his reputation from being some noob in \m/ who made a good post in the \m/ private forums that one time...

[Coursca]

Yes, we all know. He's irrelevant like me though so his over-ratedness doesn't matter I on the other hand am amazing and you should all bow down and hang on my every word.

IMNSHO, I think that many alliance leaders are over-rated largely on the fact of their ability to post on the boards. Many leaders never say anything and can do good things or fail without ever being on the radar. I believe it's the ones that do great things or fail in a stupendous manner that really catch our fascination and are therefore the ones we always talk about. The poll of public opinion tells us who is overrated and i'm of the majority rules school of thought....good allies or not, if the majority of Bob thinks you're a smelly orifice...well, you probably are

That being said....any TOP leadership is overrated if for no other reason than association with Coursca

Who are you again?

[Coursca]

I once kb'd fourOHfourError from peace negotiations during GW2.....freak outs happen to a lot of people during negotiations. It's how people recover from those freak outs is whats important.

Exactly.

I agree. Everyone is human, everyone makes mistakes, but we move on from them and learn.

[MagicalTrevor]

Van Hoo

KaitLinK

/thread

Edited October 5, 2009 by MagicalTrevor

[TheEraser]

I can get behind Hoo and Sam.....even myself at certain points in time....but if there is anyone in this game who is under rated...it's Grub. The man has worked his way up from the bottom to the man on point in 2 Sanctioned alliances. He has stared down the barrel of certain doom and survived. If that proves anything is that he is far from over rated. If there is one leader in this game that has earned a free pass from this thread it is Grub.

basically this.

Sam and pretty much his entire personality cult in TSO are overrated.

Hoo, idk, i wouldn't necessarily call him overrated, but then again i haven't had a grea deal of interaction with him

Anyone that things Grub is overrated really needs their head checked. He was basically thrown into the position of Emperor of an alliance that was about to be rolled and he kept a cool head. He was able to keep an alliance of over 600 nations (at the time) positive and generally in good spirits while we were getting stomped on by a massive coalition. He had the difficult task of selling a new relationship with the NPO to our body republic and tried tirelessly to make that relationship work, despite what some of our allies thought of it. He led us through the darkest hour Polaris has seen and brought us out even stronger and more capable than ever. Yeah, Grub is definetly not overrated (same goes for the rest of polars gov really; Penguin, Dajobo, et. all)

[SunnyInc]

basically this.

Sam and pretty much his entire personality cult in TSO are overrated.

Hoo, idk, i wouldn't necessarily call him overrated, but then again i haven't had a grea deal of interaction with him

Anyone that things Grub is overrated really needs their head checked. He was basically thrown into the position of Emperor of an alliance that was about to be rolled and he kept a cool head. He was able to keep an alliance of over 600 nations (at the time) positive and generally in good spirits while we were getting stomped on by a massive coalition. He had the difficult task of selling a new relationship with the NPO to our body republic and tried tirelessly to make that relationship work, despite what some of our allies thought of it. He led us through the darkest hour Polaris has seen and brought us out even stronger and more capable than ever. Yeah, Grub is definetly not overrated (same goes for the rest of polars gov really; Penguin, Dajobo, et. all)

He was good enought to get Polaris rolled and Grub wasn't good enough to stop him.

I rest my case.

Edited October 5, 2009 by SunnyInc

[Ejayrazz]

You didn't address my last point, though, about the line between objectivity and subjectivity and what happens when it is crossed. The true issue isn't the "freak out" -- freaking out is a symptom, not a root cause, of the failure of diplomacy in this game. The root cause is the failure of the diplomat to continue operating objectively in a situation. Emotional involvement is inherently subjective (and, thus, inherently pervasive in both analysis and negotiation) -- its how that subjectivity is controlled and contained that determines who the good diplomats are and who the poor diplomats are (and thus how objective somebody can be -- not to be confused with 'objectionable' ).

I think in this frame, your criticism is a bit harsh of many people who would otherwise be classified as good diplomats, though almost on the money in my view. Everyone here is human, after all.

I didn't cover it because it shouldn't be crossed during negotiations, though I must admit - your explanation is word boggling so I will explain step by step.

Obviously freaking out is a reaction and not a root cause, however there are individuals who have always presented themselves respectfully in the worse situations imaginable vs. those who 'freak out'. This is the difference between an expert and a 'regular diplomat' in my opinion. I did touch upon part of your last thoughts by explaining we are human and I do not expect someone to always be 100% up to par with this standard with everyone, but in diplomatic discussions I do. If you are unable to do so, have someone fill in. This would be a wise decision, though I am sure we both can draw technical nonsense which will lead us no where.

Experts are experts, too many people use the word too loosely these days. Some have an inadequate balance which seems to be black and white - either you're an expert or you're terrible with no mediocre category filling in between. Maybe my systematic thoughts are too harsh and maybe yours are too lenient, but I am merely describing my opinion on the subject at hand. Ask your TOP brothers: In the 2 years I dealt with TOP, not once did discussions get heated between myself and them.

Its a matter of how you view foreign affairs, but within my near 4 year experience, I have realized this is the easiest way to get things done and never had a problem.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Ejayrazz

[watchman]

Sam and pretty much his entire personality cult in TSO are overrated.

Which part of us is overrated?

If we're a personality cult, then why did Jose just coup Sam?

mas tequila!

Edited October 5, 2009 by watchman

[Heracles the Great]

Virillius is massively overrated as an alliance killer - he's actually one of the better govt. members I've worked with in my 2 years of govt.