Rating alliances

[Londo Mollari]

I have a pretty fair idea of why some folks would post high or low; I was the most curious about this one. I will gladly send you the stuff via pm if you like, on #6 (there was no incident there, was a guy that we had already ZId two different times for spying, who was trying to stir up trouble), but the others are fair enough I suppose. And I'm right there with you on the military bit; that is a feature that colors my like/dislikes a bit actually.

Thanks for taking the time, was most interesting.

Yeah from what I can tell the spy thing wasn't really Valhalla's fault, but at the time, watching that huge spike in Valhalla's NS from militarization, thinking that our buddies in Sparta were gonna get attacked and that'd we'd be in war soon against a much better prepped enemy... just kind of left a bad taste in my mouth at the time.

[HellAngel]

Reasons I dislike Valhalla

1) Talking reps from GPA after the War on Peace. Seriously. You just did basically the biggest tech raid in the history of CN on the softest targets (a lot of them didn't even fight back from what I hear, just kept rebuying troops) and then you made them pay reps?!

2) chefjoe's behavior to MK in IRC immediately before noCB war.

3) Valhalla, along with GGA, starting the noCB war. The 160 day old Redoubt of Mind was reduced from 5k infrastructure and 1300 tech to 1.2k infrastructure and 800 tech in this war. The Redoubt of Mind also lost time on its wonder clock due to the severe devastation.

4) GR being forced by Valhalla to post a can of crisco in noCB war surrender terms. Of all the noCB war terms for our side, this was the one that angered me the most. )):

5) STA being threatened with disbandment/eternal war by Valhalla during the noCB war.

6) The Sparta-Valhalla spy incident. Thought Athens would be deploying on Valhalla at that time in defense of Sparta. Gov meetings between us and Sparta and our other allies planning our response to Valhallan attack on Sparta.

7) chefjoe becoming involved in the case of our ZIing a purple (Neb-X) rogue that attacked us. Although he was nice enough, it wasn't his place to get involved in the situation IMO.

8) Valhalla members threatening Athens in our IRC channel and being generally unpleasant over us joking that we didn't know who Valhalla was and had never heard of them. That's pretty much the only interaction we've had with Valhalla's membership.

9) Purple. Leader of the NPO meatshield sphere. )): NPO )):

Wow, sounds like Valhalla. I regret having been allied to them. There are some decent people, but the politics they do are bs mostly.

[jerdge]

Valhalla 7 ... Awesome theme, Kryievla, Buds, Hal.

Stunning to say the least.

Your theme, Kryievla (), Buds and Hal are all excellent. You're not that bad either, I've seen and been worse, sometimes.

[ooc]

Bob, you just need to understand why I frequent the Moderation Forums (i.e.: not for personal in-game related reasons) and I'm sure we could get along quite fine. OOC, at least.

[/ooc]

[Edit:syntax]

Edited November 6, 2009 by jerdge

[astronaut jones]

All in due time. The relative size difference between those that I'm referring to and the NSO would make starting a conflict between us a bit foolish on our part. I know you'd love to see us go off and get ourselves killed, but we're not stupid.

The Wu-Tang soundtrack would be dope though.

I wouldn't really care either way, again, I don't like the NSO largely because of heft, but I'm in no position to make anything happen between any alliance and yours, and I rather like it that way.

I'd suggest bring da ruckus, naturally, as track #1 on the soundtrack, maybe followed by bring the pain.

[NLights]

I wouldn't really care either way, again, I don't like the NSO largely because of heft, but I'm in no position to make anything happen between any alliance and yours, and I rather like it that way.

I'd suggest bring da ruckus, naturally, as track #1 on the soundtrack, maybe followed by bring the pain.

Don't forget "Method Man." The uses for screwdrivers become much more varied after that song.

[astronaut jones]

Don't forget "Method Man." The uses for screwdrivers become much more varied after that song.

You know, that's not a bad song for track #3, I'd also throw in uzi (pinky ring) on the soundtrack somewhere. It would make a nice war soundtrack for the NSO to use whenever they do something about all the supposed hate thrown their way.

Hmm, you know, just with those 4 tracks, that would be a pretty dope soundtrack for war.

[NLights]

You know, that's not a bad song for track #3, I'd also throw in uzi (pinky ring) on the soundtrack somewhere. It would make a nice war soundtrack for the NSO to use whenever they do something about all the supposed hate thrown their way.

Hmm, you know, just with those 4 tracks, that would be a pretty dope soundtrack for war.

Then at the end throw Hit Em Up in just to really nail the point home. Pac neva a bad choice.

[astronaut jones]

Then at the end throw Hit Em Up in just to really nail the point home. Pac neva a bad choice.

I think his output is enough that he could have his own soundtrack for war. NSO can take the wu, whoever they're fighting can take Pac, and they can throw down until someone is sufficiently served, maybe even have a pants off dance off. The NSO seems like they'd enjoy that a fair bit.

[Jens of the desert]

Would be interesting to see the overall average of the scores people gave for each alliance. It would at least be a simpler way of getting an idea of what people in general think of these alliances, without having to go through pages of these lists.

[anenu]

I like you > 5

Neutral = 5

Meh < 5

TOP - 5 nice stats

MHA - 4.2 if you don't appreciate this its your actual score

Sparta - 8 good allies

NpO - 7 nooks

IRON - 5

ODN -8 cool peeps

FARK - 6

GPA - 5

NPO - 3 benfit of the doubt here

FOK - 6

MK - 9 awesome people

WTF - 5

TOOL - 4

TDO - 5

VE - 6

Legion - 4

RoK - 6

GATO -7

CSN - 6

Athens - 10 cause they are awesome

Gremlins - 6

MCXA - 5

UPN - 4

RIA - 5

STA - 7

Invicta - 4

RnR - 5

MASH - 5

NADC - 5

WAPA - 5

NV - 5

NSO - 4 sometimes your annoying, honestly

NEW - 5

MA - 5

Umbrella - 7 nice stats and seems like nice people

FAN - 7 survivers who are also cool and have gun pron

LoSS - 5

TSO - 5

NATO - 5

Nordreich -5

GR - 8 CnG 4 life

Vanguard - 8 see GR

GOD - 5

FoB - 8 see Vanguard

PC - 6

Valhalla - 5

GGA -5

TPF - 4

If you got a 4 or 6 it means i have mildly negative or positive feelings about you but no real reason for it, unless the reason is mentioned.

[Ivan Moldavi]

So your posturing isn't posturing at all, and it's not threatening at all when you do it, only when the posturing is done to you is it a "threat"

Gotcha. It's only when it's done to you, is it "put up or shut up" time, your rules don't apply to your own behaviour though.

[edit:] It's also funny that you assume that, everyone not liking NSO hates them, and their hate is unjustified, but you can dismiss your alliance's behaviour towards pretty much everyone, as negative as it is, by simply stating "I really don't have an opinion on them, really I don't. We don't, even. Seriously, I mean it." or something like that anyway.

So, you can try to have it both ways, you can form opinions on people and alliances, antagonize them, goad them into trying to do something, and then turn around and say "oh that? yeah, no opinion." all you like, but.. no one is buying it.

Again, your alliance is only innovative in your own minds.

Again, you fail.

At some point I would suggest you stop trying but considering I have seen a lot of your posts over time I know that to be a futile suggestion. You enjoy the failure it seems.

If you could be so kind as to "put up or shut up" as you so eloquently stated it and provide the audience with evidence of myself as leader of the NSO threatening another alliance "just because" without valid justification or without it being in response to a direct threat against myself, my members or my alliance as a whole, please do so.

The only antagonism that I have observed in this thread stems from ignorant citizens like yourself attempting to make a statement without any actual substance.

[astronaut jones]

Again, you fail.

At some point I would suggest you stop trying but considering I have seen a lot of your posts over time I know that to be a futile suggestion. You enjoy the failure it seems.

If you could be so kind as to "put up or shut up" as you so eloquently stated it and provide the audience with evidence of myself as leader of the NSO threatening another alliance "just because" without valid justification or without it being in response to a direct threat against myself, my members or my alliance as a whole, please do so.

The only antagonism that I have observed in this thread stems from ignorant citizens like yourself attempting to make a statement without any actual substance.

You're so far up your own behind you refuse to even acknowledge that what you and yours do, on a very regular basis here, is exactly the same as what you're accusing others of doing to your own alliance. The only difference is, in your own mind, is that you're justified in being the antagonist, in being arrogant, and attempting to spin everything in your favour (by ignoring the vast majority of what people say, and picking out one very minute part of what they stated, and pretending as though that is all they said), and anyone who bites on your antagonism, on the arrogance of you and your members is "threatening you." And, then the whole "put up or shut up" thing happens, and we end up right back where we started.

So, hi, how you doing?

[Ivan Moldavi]

You're so far up your own behind you refuse to even acknowledge that what you and yours do, on a very regular basis here, is exactly the same as what you're accusing others of doing to your own alliance. The only difference is, in your own mind, is that you're justified in being the antagonist, in being arrogant, and attempting to spin everything in your favour (by ignoring the vast majority of what people say, and picking out one very minute part of what they stated, and pretending as though that is all they said), and anyone who bites on your antagonism, on the arrogance of you and your members is "threatening you." And, then the whole "put up or shut up" thing happens, and we end up right back where we started.

So, hi, how you doing?

But you are the one that said it, not me. So your entire response to me asking you to substantiate your claims is that you now don't want to be petty and do what you have been doing throughout this entire discourse? Wow.

Good job.

[mhawk]

Yeah from what I can tell the spy thing wasn't really Valhalla's fault, but at the time, watching that huge spike in Valhalla's NS from militarization, thinking that our buddies in Sparta were gonna get attacked and that'd we'd be in war soon against a much better prepped enemy... just kind of left a bad taste in my mouth at the time.

Was that the crisco?

Reasons I dislike Valhalla

4) GR being forced by Valhalla to post a can of crisco in noCB war surrender terms. Of all the noCB war terms for our side, this was the one that angered me the most. )):

Edited November 6, 2009 by mhawk

[Fallen Fool]

TOP 6

MHA 5

Sparta 4

NpO 10

IRON 7

ODN 7

FARK 6

GPA 5

NPO 5

FOK 5

MK 8

WTF 5

TOOL 6

TDO 5

VE 4

Legion 4

RoK 8

GATO 4

CSN 4

Athens 4

Gremlins 7

MCXA 5

UPN 8

RIA 5

STA 10

Invicta 4

RnR 5

MASH 5

NADC 4

WAPA 5

NV 8

NSO 10

NEW 5

MA 5

Umbrella 6

FAN 7

LoSS 5

TSO 3

NATO 5

Nordreich 6

GR 8

Vanguard 7

GOD 5

FoB 5

PC 3

Valhalla 4

GGA 4

TPF 6

[astronaut jones]

But you are the one that said it, not me. So your entire response to me asking you to substantiate your claims is that you now don't want to be petty and do what you have been doing throughout this entire discourse? Wow.

Good job.

No, that's not what I said at all, and you're smart enough to know that. But, I understand that you have to drive home your point at all costs, and I understand that involves ignoring what the other person says, so long as you can fake a coherent response that, sort of, not really, has something to do with what they said, in an effort to make them look bad. And yeah, it works a lot of the time, tricking people into believing that they said something and meant something that they didn't, people bite on that a lot.. it doesn't work with me though. Not unless I'm bored and I want to play.

So, you know what I meant, you're a smart cookie, I think, maybe, so let's just leave it at that.

Are you feeling okay? You never did answer my question.

Edited November 6, 2009 by astronaut jones

[Gopherbashi]

I take it that the two of you are enjoying this thread.

[Ivan Moldavi]

No, that's not what I said at all, and you're smart enough to know that. But, I understand that you have to drive home your point at all costs, and I understand that involves ignoring what the other person says, so long as you can fake a coherent response that, sort of, not really, has something to do with what they said, in an effort to make them look bad. And yeah, it works a lot of the time, tricking people into believing that they said something and meant something that they didn't, people bite on that a lot.. it doesn't work with me though. Not unless I'm bored and I want to play.

So, you know what I meant, you're a smart cookie, I think, maybe, so let's just leave it at that.

Are you feeling okay? You never did answer my question.

Right, you keep telling yourself that.

You stated that the NSO is antagonistic towards other alliances and makes threats to them. You then stated that the NSO should "put up or shut up" (your words, not mine) and then when I asked you to support your claims you whined about not wanting to get into a "put up of shut up" type of situation, which you introduced.

Again, good job.

Also, what are feelings?

[Ivan Moldavi]

I take it that the two of you are enjoying this thread.

Yes, thank you. I wish there where more participants in my weight class though.

[astronaut jones]

Right, you keep telling yourself that.

You stated that the NSO is antagonistic towards other alliances and makes threats to them. You then stated that the NSO should "put up or shut up" (your words, not mine) and then when I asked you to support your claims you whined about not wanting to get into a "put up of shut up" type of situation, which you introduced.

Again, good job.

Also, what are feelings?

I stated that the NSO was antagonisic towards other alliances, and by your own accounts, antagonism towards NSO is a threat, and that you were sick and tired, something like that, of alliances not doing something about their hate towards NSO. By your own standards, which you don't apply to your own alliance for whatever reason, your alliance's actions and behaviour would constitute a threat, and I said you should put up or shut up, or do something about it yourself if you wanted to.

You're very good at trying to twist people's words to fit your argument, I'll give you that much.

But, playing games is more fun than actually doing something about it. When people are angry enough to do something about it, it means they're not really thinking clearly, and they're more likely to make a mistake or two. It's easier and safer to wait for people to come to you, for them to act on their anger or resentment, or whatever emotion it is they feel like acting on, and then to capitalize on their mistakes with a few well thought out plans, a few well laid traps.

Edited November 6, 2009 by astronaut jones

[Jyrinx]

That'd be interesting if true, since at least Umbrella and STA obviously view each other as nothing but arrogant tools.

I actually like Umbrella for what it's worth

[dragonknight1000]

A five is equal to my not knowing or having an opinion on an alliance. Nothing shall be granted a ten because I don't believe in perfect.

TOOL - 7 One member gave you guys these two points: Dragonknight

knew there was a reason I liked you Xana

my results (and it reflects personal opinions only - not TOOLs) and 5's indifferent :

TOP - 7 classy bunch

MHA - 4

Sparta - 6 were great and fun opponents during Karma (sup Andrewb)

NpO - 8, don't know much about the alliance itself but always liked your positions in CN (plus Katsumi's worth 2 points )

IRON - 8 great bunch

ODN - 5 (indifferent though Wacky karma and Sunstar's cool)

FARK - 5

GPA - 6

NPO - 3

FOK - 7 same as TOP, a classy bunch

MK - 3

WTF - 5

TOOL - I'll follow my alliance mates and not be biased here (though I have no problem giving us a 10 XD)

TDO - 7 also a classy bunch

VE - 7 have mixed feelings though more like than dislike plus there's Xana

Legion - 8 a very friendly bunch

RoK - 5

GATO - 8 definitely like their position in CN despite the fact they have Esau

CSN - 8 friendly bunch

Athens - 5

Gremlins - 5

MCXA - 8 mainly b/c Gopher kicks $@!

UPN - 8 very likable group of people

RIA - 6

STA - 8 can never hate anyone from white team

Invicta - 7 classy bunch

RnR - 6

MASH - 5

NADC - 7 classy bunch

WAPA - 8 (see STA)

NV - 7 classy bunch

NSO - 7 like GATO, like their position in CN plus there's Chron

NEW - 9 coolest guys on the east side

MA - 5

Umbrella - 5

FAN -5

LoSS - 7 classy bunch

TSO - 5

NATO -6

Nordreich -5

GR-5

Vanguard-5

GOD-5

FoB-5

PC-2

Valhalla -6 mainly b/c of Chairman Hal (I find myself agreeing w/ most of his posts)

GGA - 3

TPF - 9 like NEW, among the coolest guys around

and I'll add a few alliances for kicks:

FEAR - 9 I <3 FEAR

TSI - 8 excellent group of people

CCC - 9 I <3 CCC

SOS - 9, highly entertaining bunch

edit - @Lord Boris: if you check a few of our nations - you can see we've dropped our cruise missile count to almost 0 so does that warrant another point or 2?

Edited November 6, 2009 by dragonknight1000

[Ivan Moldavi]

I stated that the NSO was antagonisic towards other alliances, and by your own accounts, antagonism towards NSO is a threat, and that you were sick and tired, something like that, of alliances not doing something about their hate towards NSO. By your own standards, which you don't apply to your own alliance for whatever reason, your alliance's actions and behaviour would constitute a threat, and I said you should put up or shut up, or do something about it yourself if you wanted to.

You're very good at trying to twist people's words to fit your argument, I'll give you that much.

But, playing games is more fun than actually doing something about it. When people are angry enough to do something about it, it means they're not really thinking clearly, and they're more likely to make a mistake or two. It's easier and safer to wait for people to come to you, for them to act on their anger or resentment, or whatever emotion it is they feel like acting on, and then to capitalize on their mistakes with a few well thought out plans, a few well laid traps.

Um, no. Again.

You stated that the NSO was antagonistic towards other alliances without acknowledging said antagonism as a direct response to like treatment from those being antagonized. As you said earlier, you can't have it both ways. Either the NSO is threatening alliances, as you claim, or is responding to threats, as I claim. I believe my position is readily supported by most of what has been floating around lately whereas I have simply asked for one instance to support yours and you will not (can not) provide it.

The two instances are not the same, you can repeat yourself as often as you wish, it will still not be so.

[Heft]

Also if anyone knows a good way to use a formula to fill in the frequency columns, let me know.

=countif(range,">=7") and =countif(range,"<4") Gives the upper and lower tiers.

Not sure how to do a between, but you could just do =count(range,">=4")-cell where cell is the 7-10 frequency and that should work out okay.

[Locke]

SOS - 9, highly entertaining bunch

Entertaining?

We you too. ♥