The Future of Neo-Hegemony ?

[neneko]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='29 March 2010 - 05:49 PM' timestamp='1269877761' post='2240020']
As a bloc mate of TOP for two years I can tell you, what one government member of TOP says is not what TOP as a whole says. I think this is simply a propaganda line, to be honest, because you have one thing (Crymson) that you can point at and shout 'OMG TOP IS EVIL'. That line never worked when the Hegemony used it to justify rolling alliances based on what a leader had done, and it doesn't work for the new hegemony either. It's the other side of the same coin as MK's 'Oh, 90% of our membership is hostile to you? That doesn't matter, it's only members! ... as long as we, government people, moderate our comments in public, we can claim you're just paranoid' which is just as ridiculous.
[/quote]
Crymson doesn't represent TOP when he is elected to the highest position in the alliance?

I would also like a list of the 160 MK members (90%) that was hostile towards TOP to the point that it warranted a war. Actually just the first 50 would do, or 30 or 20.. 10? okay 5 is my last offer.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

The alliances that are referred to, here, as the neo-hegemony [we will stick with that nomenclature for simplicity's sake], have a future as bright as any other alliance out there. All that matters is the decisions they take in the weeks, months to come.

They could circle the wagons, stay huddled with each other while muttering and planning in a ghetto of the mind, while the rest of the world, which already is united to take them down if they come looking for trouble, gets on with having fun and smoother lives in general while keeping a wary eye open, just in case.

Or, they could open the windows and let some fresh air in. Get talking to those that they think are waiting to club them.

Personally i would go with the second approach. At worst, it will confirm your worst fears, and you will know for sure that they hate you. At best you might make a friend. Talking usually always helps. In the recent past, since before the NoCB and till date I have been witness to many examples of that. I know for a fact that some of the neo-hegemony list would find this easier than others, being that they had long standing treaties and relations with the karma side, before treaty obligations made the decision for them in the war. People generally do not think less of those that did what they agreed to do while signing paper. NEW is a prime example of that, i dont think it is easy to find someone on the Karma side that did not respect NEW then, and now. hell even TPF earned some amount of respect for their last stand actions.

Bottom line, hate is not as prevalent as communication barriers, fortunately the latter are easier to overcome, just by reaching out.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='30 March 2010 - 06:35 AM' timestamp='1269911087' post='2240602']
The SF-TOP gov Q&A that ran for a good chunk of his term did an amazing job of rehabilitating that opinion of TOP. I don't think we ended his term as close friends, but there was a lot more success at airing out issues and ironing out differences than I had anticipated going in. Then he lost re-election to Crymson and all of the progress up to that point was trashed in about a week. You have [i]no[/i] idea how frustrating that was. He then went on to alienate a number of TOP's own long-standing allies.
[/quote]

Yeah, that was indeed a inducing turn of events. but maybe its just that we were bigger chatterboxes than them and they got irritated by all the communication. I miss Dr Dan though, reasonable sort of fella if i ever met one, oh, and Kiss Goodbye too. Ah well, C'est la vie.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='Penkala' date='29 March 2010 - 03:14 PM' timestamp='1269839652' post='2239835']
Pretty much. You two were enemies as well. It's just that you got a shot at CnG first. But when that shot requires your other enemy's assistance... well, you can't count on it.
[/quote]
Just to clarify (as it looks like you might have overlooked my AA, judging by your post), I'm not a member of TOP.

Edit:
[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='30 March 2010 - 01:27 PM' timestamp='1269919603' post='2240759']
Nobody in the alliance knew we were going to pre emptively strike CnG except for Council and milcom. The Heptagon actually just voted to enter the war on IRON's side and gave the Council the license to declare war however they saw fit.
[/quote]


That was a bloody silly thing to do.

[quote name='Banksy' date='30 March 2010 - 01:20 PM' timestamp='1269919203' post='2240744']
They have no future.
[/quote]
I must admit that I've never really liked the ODN very much. This post helped remind me why, ta.

Edited March 30, 2010 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Banksy' date='29 March 2010 - 08:20 PM' timestamp='1269919203' post='2240744']
They have no future.
[/quote]

Of course they do. Do you honestly think that you're going to be the ruling power forever?

[Lonely]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='30 March 2010 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1269930192' post='2240947']
I must admit that I've never really liked the ODN very much. This post helped remind me why, ta.
[/quote]

Like the vast majority of people on these forums, he probably doesn’t care in the least about your opinion.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='30 March 2010 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1269930204' post='2240950']
Of course they do. Do you honestly think that you're going to be the ruling power forever?
[/quote]

C&G got where they are because they have some of the best leaders in the world. They won’t rule forever, but their reign will probably be a long one.

You, on the other hand, will never rule anything.

[Sup4l33t3ki11a]

[quote name='Lonely' date='30 March 2010 - 07:00 AM' timestamp='1269932425' post='2240964']
Like the vast majority of people on these forums, he probably doesn’t care in the least about your opinion.



C&G got where they are because they have some of the best leaders in the world. They won’t rule forever, but their reign will probably be a long one.

You, on the other hand, will never rule anything.
[/quote]

Mr Damsky's iron fist pulled the strings in MCXA's MoFA for a while, he RULED something, but as to any future ruling.. je suis d'accord avec toi

Edited March 30, 2010 by Sup4l33t3ki11a

[Lonely]

[quote name='Sup4l33t3ki11a' date='30 March 2010 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1269933008' post='2240974']
Mr Damsky's iron fist pulled the strings in MCXA's MoFA for a while, he RULED something, but as to any future ruling.. je suis d'accord avec toi
[/quote]

Oh, sorry. I should’ve said ‘anything remotely important.’

[Sup4l33t3ki11a]

[quote name='Lonely' date='30 March 2010 - 07:32 AM' timestamp='1269934351' post='2240981']
Oh, sorry. I should’ve said ‘anything remotely important.’
[/quote]

MCXA are pretty darn important as an Alliance, people are too quick to forget that they were once the 3rd ranked alliance in the game before the TSO stuff. There are some great people there who do a good job maintaining a (in my opinion) fairly respectable alliance nowdays.

No-one can second guess the gopherbashi

[Choader]

[quote name='Sup4l33t3ki11a' date='30 March 2010 - 12:36 AM' timestamp='1269934590' post='2240984']
MCXA are pretty darn important as an Alliance, people are too quick to forget that they were once the 3rd ranked alliance in the game before the TSO stuff. There are some great people there who do a good job maintaining a (in my opinion) fairly respectable alliance nowdays.

No-one can second guess the gopherbashi
[/quote]
So would you say GGA are pretty darn important too?

[Sup4l33t3ki11a]

[quote name='Choader' date='30 March 2010 - 07:45 AM' timestamp='1269935084' post='2240987']
So would you say GGA are pretty darn important too?
[/quote]

Almost as important as PC are

[Starfox101]

Their future is bleak. They have no charismatic, skilled leaders. Not to say they don't have good leadership, but they don't have any bloc leading candidates.

Until then they will be the second class.

[Sup4l33t3ki11a]

[quote name='Starfox101' date='30 March 2010 - 08:59 AM' timestamp='1269939579' post='2241001']
Their future is bleak. They have no charismatic, skilled leaders. Not to say they don't have good leadership, but they don't have any bloc leading candidates.

Until then they will be the second class.
[/quote]

I agree apart from the fact that you said they have good leadership, PC have let me down before on that point.

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='30 March 2010 - 07:23 AM' timestamp='1269930192' post='2240947']
I must admit that I've never really liked the ODN very much. This post helped remind me why, ta.
[/quote]
Judging ODN on the basis of one man's post? or letting your natural aversion to ODN have full rein?? enquiring minds would like to know

[Banksy]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='30 March 2010 - 06:23 PM' timestamp='1269930204' post='2240950']
Of course they do. Do you honestly think that you're going to be the ruling power forever?[/quote]
I replied to this
[quote name='supercoolyellow' date='30 March 2010 - 09:04 AM' timestamp='1269896648' post='2240293']
Hey everyone, why don't we talk about the [b]future[/b] of the [b]old hegemony[/b] alliances?[/quote]

There is no future in being 'old-hegemony,' or even 'neo-hegemony.' They need to adapt and come up with something a little different. Alliances like Legion, UPN, NEW and some other appear to be doing this. They are heading in the right direction with their military, economics, recruitment etc. Hopefully they can shrug off the tired 'hegemony' stereotype. If not- they will simply sit where they currently are.

My post was simply too short and coarse to communicate that sentiment Apologies and such.

[Choader]

[quote name='Sup4l33t3ki11a' date='30 March 2010 - 12:46 AM' timestamp='1269935197' post='2240989']
Almost as important as PC are
[/quote]
My point was that by your logic any number of fallen, formerly relevant alliances could be considered important, even ones like GGA and MCXA who are no more then an afterthought on the scene today. Previously holding a sanction does not make an alliance important.

[quote name='Sup4l33t3ki11a' date='30 March 2010 - 02:20 AM' timestamp='1269940813' post='2241004']
I agree apart from the fact that you said they have good leadership, PC have let me down before on that point.
[/quote]
What did PC ever do to you? I would say that Poison Clan has pretty damn good leadership, considering the way they turned a scheduled beat down into a decisive victory and the alliance emerged stronger then ever. Just try to find any other alliance who went into a war hopelessly outnumbered, fought 7 alliances, and came out the other side 15 places higher in the alliance rankings.

[Banksy]

[quote name='Choader' date='30 March 2010 - 10:19 PM' timestamp='1269944349' post='2241013']
What did PC ever do to you? I would say that Poison Clan has pretty damn good leadership, considering the way they turned a scheduled beat down into a decisive victory and the alliance emerged stronger then ever. Just try to find any other alliance who went into a war hopelessly outnumbered, fought 7 alliances, and came out the other side 15 places higher in the alliance rankings.[/quote]
We can't all absorb FoB :colbert:

[Sup4l33t3ki11a]

[quote name='Choader' date='30 March 2010 - 10:19 AM' timestamp='1269944349' post='2241013']
My point was that by your logic any number of fallen, formerly relevant alliances could be considered important, even ones like GGA and MCXA who are no more then an afterthought on the scene today. Previously holding a sanction does not make an alliance important.


What did PC ever do to you? I would say that Poison Clan has pretty damn good leadership, considering the way they turned a scheduled beat down into a decisive victory and the alliance emerged stronger then ever. Just try to find any other alliance who went into a war hopelessly outnumbered, fought 7 alliances, and came out the other side 15 places higher in the alliance rankings.
[/quote]

Do you remember Crimson Guard? Popcorn war? Ring any bells?

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

[quote name='Cataduanes' date='30 March 2010 - 03:20 PM' timestamp='1269942599' post='2241008']
Judging ODN on the basis of one man's post? or letting your natural aversion to ODN have full rein?? enquiring minds would like to know
[/quote]
I dont see anything wrong in judging ODN based on one man's posting. I for example judge it based on your posting. [img]http://fc07.deviantart.net/images3/i/2004/146/9/1/Two_thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[Bob Janova]

Delta, you got mod-sniped, so I'm afraid I can't continue that line of discussion in detail. But if you let a change of government completely change your opinion of an alliance, then you're a fool. Ironically, this is precisely the mistake that Hegemony alliances made, which is why those relationships were paper thin and broke so easily in Karma – and from my time so far in SG, it appears that most of those relationships are similarly thin and between only a few people.

Neneko, just look at any MK post in a TOP or IRON thread in the last 9 months. Enough for war? Well, not in my opinion, but that wasn't what they declared on you for anyway.

Alfred, Supergrievances has pretty clearly shown a great willingness to club the other side, and is in fact still clubbing some of them two months later despite the war being won, so I think you can understand why the ex-Hegemony alliances might consider it a hostile hegemony in the making. C&G has always been hostile to them, having never really got over the NPO blacklist and their early victim mentality, and SF sphere and other fringe alliances (Umbrella, FOK, Sparta) have shown that if there's a choice to be made, they'll jump onto the C&G side, so I'm not sure what you think reaching out will accomplish except possibly 'friendships' which will be broken next time there is a major global issue.

[LJ Scott]

Actually we entered this war initially in defense of another "fringe" alliance, Sparta. Later helping GOONS, MK and FoB. If there is a choice to be made, we'll go where treaties dictate. This time that led to the C&G side, the time before that we would have been on the Ex-Hegemony side along with TOP.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

Bob, there have been quiet a few occasions in the past where the expected did not happen. One never knows till one tries.

Of course there has to be genuine goodwill and a sincere effort on the part of both, in the case of alliance X from NH and alliance Y from SG/karma to come to common ground and build bridges. I know there are hindrances and preconceived notions on both sides, but time and history has shown that such can be overcome. Case in point Ragnarok-Polar MDoAP, post NoCB which before it was signed would have made most folks sit back and lol.

Of course there is always option one, the ghetto of the mind. I do believe though, that it will get stale rather soon. People being people, they will gravitate towards their old friends on the opposite side one way or another. Case in point, there are folks in Valhalla that i consider to be cool to hang with, some in IRON i would like to know better, hell theres some in TPF i dig :shrug: There is no lasting hate on this planet anyway. Mistrust? Yes, hatred? nope.

[neneko]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='30 March 2010 - 01:04 PM' timestamp='1269947074' post='2241024']
Neneko, just look at any MK post in a TOP or IRON thread in the last 9 months. Enough for war? Well, not in my opinion, but that wasn't what they declared on you for anyway.
[/quote]
If I do look will I even find 160 MK posts? Face it the "90% of MK" you spouted out earlier is actually 2, maybe 3 members in non-gov positions. Your propaganda just keeps getting worse the more you go at this.

The fact that you try to claim that whatever crymson says is in no way representative of TOP when he's elected to the highest position in the alliance in the same post that you claim that what 2-3 MK members say is an official MK policy is sort of amusing. You realize that you're not good for much more than a cheap laugh at this point right? Congratulations on becoming another RV. Might I suggest green text for your posts in the future?

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='30 March 2010 - 11:55 AM' timestamp='1269946522' post='2241023']
I dont see anything wrong in judging ODN based on one man's posting. I for example judge it based on your posting. [img]http://fc07.deviantart.net/images3/i/2004/146/9/1/Two_thumbs_up.gif[/img]
[/quote]
Thanks Alfred


[quote name='Bob Janova' date='30 March 2010 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1269947074' post='2241024']
Neneko, just look at any MK post in a TOP or IRON thread in the last 9 months. Enough for war? Well, not in my opinion, but that wasn't what they declared on you for anyway.
[/quote]
so what exactly did they declare for if not the following?

[quote name='Crymson' date='29 January 2010 - 05:47 AM' timestamp='1264740440' post='2138664']To our opponents: We agree with the New Polar Order's reasons for war against \m/, and we consider ourselves part of that particular side of the war. [b]For our part, however, much our reason to enter this war [/b]lies in our desire to defeat those who have shown time and time again, in public and in private, that doing harm to us is high on their agenda---and that, indeed, they would take advantage of any advantageous opportunity to do so.
[/quote]

forgive my ignorance Bob but i have been out of the loop for a while, perhaps you could help my poor ignorant $@! understand the situation better than i do at present.

Edited March 30, 2010 by Cataduanes

[Bob Janova]

[quote]Case in point Ragnarok-Polar MDoAP[/quote]
Yes, and look how that turned out in the two major wars since. In Karma, NpO were effectively neutral, and in Bipolar, they were (at least in their main combat engagement) directly engaged against SF.

[quote]Face it the "90% of MK" you spouted out earlier is actually 2, maybe 3 members in non-gov positions[/quote]
The 90% was not used in that way, it was in fact in a hypothetical quotation which is the logical extreme of the MK position, which appears to be that whatever members say 'doesn't count'. (I'm not sure why they bother, for example, having membership interaction with Grämlins and Umbrella, or foreign embassies on their boards, if they really believe this, which is why I am sure they don't and it's just an anti-TOP propaganda line because really Crymson is the only thing about TOP that they can pick on for PR.)

I didn't say that 3 members make alliance policy, or that Crymson is 'in no way representative', so that's a straw man, and the below is an ad hom, so you just have slippery slope to go and you'll have a full set!

Let's make this totally clear, hopefully you might get it this time. An alliance leadership member carries more weight than a general member – if Cortath, or Archon, says something opinionated, you should pay more attention to it than if you or I do. But it does not suddenly mean that all the alliance thinks that way, or that you should base your policy on that alliance on one leader's opinions.

If Archon steps down, would you expect all your allies to drop you and re-evaluate whether you're the same alliance?

[quote]You realize that you're not good for much more than a cheap laugh at this point right? Congratulations on becoming another RV. Might I suggest green text for your posts in the future? [/quote]
No u

Edit: Cata, it was a pre-emptive attack based on military determinations of how the war would play out if they attacked in the 'correct' place. The fact that C&G had been hostile to them forever might be partly why they chose C&G as the targets, but the reason they declared war was to make sure their side won.

Edited March 30, 2010 by Bob Janova

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='neneko' date='30 March 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1269955076' post='2241071']
If I do look will I even find 160 MK posts? Face it the "90% of MK" you spouted out earlier is actually 2, maybe 3 members in non-gov positions. Your propaganda just keeps getting worse the more you go at this.

The fact that you try to claim that whatever crymson says is in no way representative of TOP when he's elected to the highest position in the alliance in the same post that you claim that what 2-3 MK members say is an official MK policy is sort of amusing. You realize that you're not good for much more than a cheap laugh at this point right? Congratulations on becoming another RV. Might I suggest green text for your posts in the future?
[/quote]

It was far more than 2-3 members in non-government positions and if you'd like a list of names, I can probably dredge one up for you. As for people in government positions commenting officially/unofficially, why bother commenting at all when it gives the government the ability to simply affirm or deny responsibility for their members' actions as the mood strikes? Let's also not forget the various members of the "Fans and Alumni of MK Country Club" (and you know who you are) that come strolling into a thread, speak as though they have the authority of Moses (great guy, comes for bagels at the East New Jerusalem Deli every Saturday before Temple) and then talk down to anyone who disagrees.

That said, 90% is way off the mark. It presupposes that the literacy rate in MK is actually that high. [i](I kid...sorta)[/i]

P.S. for MK in general: End the war. You're starting to look a bit pathetic...like NpO making sure that the old GOONS was totally destroyed pathetic...and how exactly did that work out for them in the end anyway? Next target in the next Great War, which I'm sure some of you remember quite vividly.

Pardon me while I shake my head and walk away.


EDIT: for grammar not message...in case you were wondering

Edited March 30, 2010 by ChairmanHal