Schattenmann Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 There was a big deal made about this last year, it was ultimately decided that we'll keep them on the list but add a reformation date because at the end of the day they are they same alliance flying the same flags.Im afraid name changes and merges are not counted as thats just gonna put me in a pickle Also IAA Updated. If you provide me with \m/'s Spawn Date i'll add it. They should be included at the end of the list in order of reformation rather than in order of original founding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 They should be included at the end of the list in order of reformation rather than in order of original founding. This man speaks great logic. We should all bow down to his intellectual superiority. Reforms should not count in the original list because they are not the same alliance, no matter how you want to spin it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Goby Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 (edited) This man speaks great logic. We should all bow down to his intellectual superiority. Reforms should not count in the original list because they are not the same alliance, no matter how you want to spin it. Even though I'd love for \m/ to have more street cred I agree. Being alive "in spirit" was definitely true of \m/, but it shouldn't count. Same for any alliance that disbanded. Edited January 10, 2010 by Comrade Goby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 I can't find a creation date for CIA/>_</\m/ on the wiki, next best thing is Jason8's disbandment thread in conjunction with \m/'s history. \m/... Our roots came from two sources. "Dey See Me Rollin'" was a semi-joke alliance started by Starfox, bm, Alom, Comrade Goby, and a few other random people I can't remember off hand. Anyways, when they realized they had a good thing going for them, DSMR was renamed to the Imperial Confederacy.Then I showed up. Early October 2006, right after the IC forums were created, I was recruited by some of (what I thought) the coolest guys in the game. They invited me to kick off their new alliance with them. I was something like the seventh member. IC (Imperial Confederacy, or, Dey See Me Rollin') and Jason Riveria.Com Alliance merged to become Confederacy of Imperial Alliances, which changed its name to >_< almost immediately. >_< was forced to change its name again (to \m/) when Admin disallowed the use of some special characters in the Alliance Affiliation field. So, the alliance we call \m/ was founded when IC/DSMR and Jason Riveria.Com Alliance merged. That date not listed, we have to do some reasoning: IC was founded in October, \m/'s wiki states: "In December 2006, however, >_< began making preparations for what appeared to be the start of the Second Great War. [As New Reverie's Red Team shens brought tensions to a head]" So, \m/ was founded, as a result of mergers, in October, November, or December 2006. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drugsup Posted January 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Poll added regarding reformed alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilrow Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 I voted in the poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 No guys! They're the same alliance! The EXACT SAME ALLIANCE! They existed in spirit the whole time, so it counts, guys! C'mon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master-Debater Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Some alliances have no choice but to disband because of terms or being kept in war forever. Back in the day it wasnt uncommon to see the harshest possible terms laid down to force an alliance to disband. Voted to keep them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunstar Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Some alliances have no choice but to disband because of terms or being kept in war forever. Back in the day it wasnt uncommon to see the harshest possible terms laid down to force an alliance to disband. Voted to keep them. Every alliance has a choice. Just because \m/, VE, and others chose to disband, doesn't mean that sticking it out wasn't an option. Just look at FAN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWConner Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Every alliance has a choice. Just because \m/, VE, and others chose to disband, doesn't mean that sticking it out wasn't an option. Just look at FAN. Agreed. Alliances that disbanded had the choice not to. FAN withstood well over a year of peace mode to emerge stronger than before the war. I find it rather sad to see alliances disband when times get rough then months/years later come back to reform because their issues have been swept under the rug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Voted "faded, unnumbered". VE specifically reformed so soon afterward that its second (continued, whatever) incarnation is old enough to get onto the bottom of the list by itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekhine Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Voted for the first option, but I posted in the (now closed) VE discussion topic what I actually think should be done, which is measure the total number of days the alliance has been in existence, so VE would have its number of days from its first incarnation plus the number of days since its reformation. I think that would be a pretty fair way to resolve the dispute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 I voted Remove. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farnsworth Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Feel free to count the date of reformation. The 1st and 3rd options should not apply to VE. I do believe our reformation date falls within the timeframe used for this list. ...unless someone starts arguing that reformed alliances are not alliances at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 They should be included at the end of the list in order of reformation rather than in order of original founding. Voted keep them on the list, as outlined above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
constapatedape Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 CRAP was formed on April 11, 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbs Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 I haven't seen it yet, so I thought I'd mention that MK was formed on July 28th, 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overlord Shinnra Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Voted to fade them out. They should really be just taken out though :/ Some alliances pride themselves on being the oldest. How can they ever achieve such a ranking if alliances keep reforming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Voted to fade them out. They should really be just taken out though :/ Some alliances pride themselves on being the oldest. How can they ever achieve such a ranking if alliances keep reforming. There is only one alliance that is oldest and thats GATO. Considering we aren't going anywhere I wouldn't plan on trying to get that title from us. Obligatory: Get off my lawn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James I Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Having re-formed alliances on there doesn't really bother me either way, and I don't really see why it should bother anyone. I will say that you might want to move the cut-off point back a bit for the sake of your own sanity. A lot of alliances were formed just before or after the Unjust War. I'd go with 13th July 2007 for your cut-off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunnar Griffin Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 You forgot GOONS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drugsup Posted January 12, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I didn't forget anyone, the data that is provided to me is added to the list, so you forgot GOONs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 NoR - October 13, 2006 to May 2, 2007 - Reformed May 7 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hombre de Murcielago Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 =LOST= was formed in towards the beginning of February 2007. Around the 11th I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prepenseloop Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 The Grand Lodge of Freemasons (GLOF) was founded Dec 7th, 2007. 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.