Vladimir Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 I read that one, the substantial argument I got out of it is that you need an absolute sovereign to mediate disputes and prevent internal conflict and politicking from preventing anything from getting done.Why is it then, that NPO seems to produce the most "traitors" and disgruntled ex-members of any alliance? Vox had numerous x-NPO members. My alliance has numerous x-NPO members and officials, most of whom left on bad terms. Nearly all describe NPO as mired in petty conflicts and power struggles between IOs, IOs domineering and power-tripping over membership, etc. In many ways NPO is a textbook case of what not to be and of problems to try to avoid. People who left to serve in an alliance whose sole purpose is to destroy us gave you a bad impression of the NPO? I must say, I'm shocked. It's almost as if they had an agenda. There are many reasons for traitors: it's an incredibly complex issue that 'dictatordidit' doesn't come close to grasping. For a start we have had thousands (perhaps nearing tens of thousands) of members over the years and there are what, half a dozen vocal anti-NPO ex-Pacificans? Not too bad a record. You then have to consider that we were the most powerful (and polarising) alliance for over three years. Other alliances had people leaving vocally and, simply put, nobody cared. They were vocal, people got bored, they got less vocal and disappeared. Those who left us, on the other hand, can make entire careers out of being vocally anti-NPO and tend to stick around doing exactly that (not to blame them for it, you're just more likely to continue doing what you're doing if you get applause rather than yawns). A number of those who left did so on good terms, and only opportunistically discovered that they hated us a few weeks later. Such is life. And it is important to point out that one being a vocal anti-NPO ex-Pacifican can actually be a sign of good governance. How many alliances have sat with members causing trouble and damaging the alliance? Sure, you kick them out and they might put up a fuss, but that is far better than leaving them within to do so. Not to say that there aren't legitimate grievances -- we're not perfect -- and where we consider there to be we do try to correct ourselves. Sometimes there are personality conflicts; sometimes someone does go on a bit of a power trip; sometimes something else happens. And in 99.9% of these cases the Emperor resolves the issue with ease and the alliance is improved as a result -- a success of the system. Or there may have been genuine disagreement with policies (in comes that polarising aspect again) as a result of our former power, which obviously isn't something that could be resolved so long as the policy was the correct one. Would any other system have had so few issues with so many members and so much power? I doubt it, and I think the histories of much smaller and much weaker alliances backs me up on that. So what I would say is: don't take everything you're told at face value just because you want it to be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 I like a government run by common sense. Just like GR: If there is a loophole and someone tries to use it, the higher government does not allow it. And people who do stuff for the alliance have to be credited somehow: Ministerial positions, consulting senate seats. Deputy ministers. \m/ came up with the loophole clause. It also included what I consider to date one of the best clauses ever - no being an asshat/<insert bad words here> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Considering that this is an OOC venue it makes sense, at least to me, that the answers simply be the out of character description of the governmental form, not an argument on the IC ideologies behind them. NPO doesn't believe in IC and OOC, everything he is saying is IC, not OOC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 NPO doesn't believe in IC and OOC, everything he is saying is IC, not OOC. This is an OOC area of the forum, therefore posts are automatically OOC unless stated otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Oz Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 An elected dictatorship: not only does it represent the views of the alliance people, but creates a unified and efficient government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormsend Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 People who left to serve in an alliance whose sole purpose is to destroy us gave you a bad impression of the NPO? I must say, I'm shocked. It's almost as if they had an agenda. Given the wonderful treatment NPO gave MK, I'm fairly certain we exist not to destroy you, but in spite of you. Could be wrong. Besides, pay attention to the boards. We exist to destroy Purple. And TOP. And... who else is on that list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 MK exists to !@#$post and annihilate Pacifica. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Who was talking about MK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 The only noticeable difference between a "Francoist" dictatorship and any other authoritarian system is the number of essays written to try and convince us of the prior's validity. Both demand the sacrifice of personal and political freedom for the benefit of the dictator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 If you want to roleplay being a slave buy some whips and find someone you can trust. Don't forget the safe word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Vladimir, shut up and go advertise your spam elsewhere. You need to let go of your grudge, man. It just makes you look obsessed and it's not healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Anything without Doppelganger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Anything without Doppelganger. Seconded. He's the CN patron saint of fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Seconded.He's the CN patron saint of fail. You both are five sorts of dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 You both are five sorts of dead. That's just one short of enough to take me down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 Given the wonderful treatment NPO gave MK, I'm fairly certain we exist not to destroy you, but in spite of you.Could be wrong. Besides, pay attention to the boards. We exist to destroy Purple. And TOP. And... who else is on that list? I think he was talking about Vox, unless this is a meta thing I'm not in on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 People didn't read Azaghul's post carefully and assumed Vladimir was referring to Azaghul's alliance. As for me, I'll take Archonism any day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhysicsJunky Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Farkistan is technically ruled by a Holy Emperor who transcends Planet Bob and does not walk upon its earth, which they honor by drinking beer, eating bacon and ogling naked women. You can say what you wish about the republic ruling in his place but they have something going for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proxian Empire Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 The only ideal government is a communist government that supports amazing spies like myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 (edited) Crimson Guard's government structure (I'm ignoring the obligatory lulz), which I designed, is still more or less my ideal one. It combines aspects of democracy with the strong figurehead position necessary for alliances to succeed. An unelected leader, who appoints ministers, would administer the alliance. However the government would be answerable to the people in that a mandatory, though non-binding, discussion period would exist for all treaties and by-laws. This serves to keep the membership informed. The membership would also be able to change the constitution/charter or remove an appointed minister with a two thirds supermajority, and remove the leader with an 80% supermajority. I believe this system would have served Crimson Guard well if it had been given the chance to operate as intended, rather than essentially acting as toilet paper for an IRC community. Edit: I forgot to say this system would work best with a heavily active, elitist community. But then again, I suppose they all do. Edited October 25, 2009 by President Kent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Crimson Guard's government structure (I'm ignoring the obligatory lulz), which I designed, is still more or less my ideal one. It combines aspects of democracy with the strong figurehead position necessary for alliances to succeed. An unelected leader, who appoints ministers, would administer the alliance. However the government would be answerable to the people in that a mandatory, though non-binding, discussion period would exist for all treaties and by-laws. This serves to keep the membership informed. The membership would also be able to change the constitution/charter or remove an appointed minister with a two thirds supermajority, and remove the leader with an 80% supermajority. I believe this system would have served Crimson Guard well if it had been given the chance to operate as intended, rather than essentially acting as toilet paper for an IRC community. Edit: I forgot to say this system would work best with a heavily active, elitist community. But then again, I suppose they all do. It would indeed have worked well, but there were several other problems with Crimson Guard and I made some very stupid decisions in giving the wrong people a second chance, and relying too much on them for the alliance to succeed. Therefore, although we largely kept to the charter, we kind of just ignored sections like the mandatory 48 hour alliance-wide discussion on treaties, but that wasn't central to the actual government structure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 The New Sith Orders system of government it the greatest the Cyberverse has ever seen. Thread over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 It would indeed have worked well, but there were several other problems with Crimson Guard and I made some very stupid decisions in giving the wrong people a second chance, and relying too much on them for the alliance to succeed. Therefore, although we largely kept to the charter, we kind of just ignored sections like the mandatory 48 hour alliance-wide discussion on treaties, but that wasn't central to the actual government structure. The spirit of the charter, in binding an alliance into a solid, forum-using, constantly growing alliance, just wasn't there. Therefore, though we may have technically used aspects of the system of government that it outlined, it never reached its full potential because of CG's numerous problems, internal and external. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 The spirit of the charter, in binding an alliance into a solid, forum-using, constantly growing alliance, just wasn't there. Therefore, though we may have technically used aspects of the system of government that it outlined, it never reached its full potential because of CG's numerous problems, internal and external. Should have made the positions challengable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Should have made the positions challengable. Yes, see my post above. 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.