The New Grämlins

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='01 April 2010 - 02:01 PM' timestamp='1270148444' post='2244138']
Trust me, my friend, I have dealt with enough situations in need of repair to know that it is not black and white. It just seems to me that within the context of an alliance on this (OOC)game(OOC), if you claim your heart is one place, while you are another, then questioning the reality of that heart vs the drama of using the word heart, is legitimate. I suppose I am just annoyed at seeing sentimentality used to bash an alliance, when that sentimentality is dubious at best.
[/quote]

Rush, when you have this many long-time members of Gre, founders of Gre, ex-gov of Gre, and original members of Gre all saying the same thing, do you not think that maybe there is a hint of truth to it?

Impero - I agree whole heartedly.

[Bob Janova]

Yeah ... just because things get so bad that you don't think you can fix it doesn't mean you give up any right to disappointment when the people who were breaking it before drive it over a cliff. This is not something like the VE disbandment or other cases of an alliance destroyed by external forces, where the combined strength of character of the membership can restore things when the external force is lessened or removed, and your argument has some merit (though I still don't buy it). In this case it's a hostile takeover from within, and if you think those of us who were founders or early joiners did not do our utmost to fix things before leaving, you really have no idea what transpired.

I am happy that so many have not had their alliance destroyed in such a way, but please do not think that we are cutters and runners, or that we did not put the effort in to keep Grämlins off the track which it has ended up on.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='01 April 2010 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1270148444' post='2244138']
Trust me, my friend, I have dealt with enough situations in need of repair to know that it is not black and white. It just seems to me that within the context of an alliance on this (OOC)game(OOC), if you claim your heart is one place, while you are another, then questioning the reality of that heart vs the drama of using the word heart, is legitimate. I suppose I am just annoyed at seeing sentimentality used to bash an alliance, when that sentimentality is dubious at best.
[/quote]
I can understand you going through situations my friend, but it was hard leaving. People did all they could and it was more than one problem; whether it was Ram (some didn't feel he was a problem, but look were they are now. I wanted him gone, failed, I tried working with him, he acted like a child and said "No, you tried kicking me" etc etc) A Failing rank system, hostility amongst members, people e-lawyering the charter, [b]inactivity[/b], and the list goes on. Not EVERYONE believed the rank system failed, not EVERYONE felt Ram was a menace, and people just began arguing and being generally rude to each other -- some put themselves before the greater whole and constantly threatened to leave the alliance if leadership/archons did something which was against their own individual opinion. Ram wasn't the whole problem, but in my opinion, he surely didn't help it. I loved Ram when he first joined the alliance, then it went South. I guess it was due to his pessimism and my moral ranting on how everyone should be treated equal, etc. Our old friendship is completely destroyed and there is no working with him or trying to rekindle the old flame.

Old Gremlins are the most proud people I have met, and I understand why, which isn't hard for me to understand why they get all bent up over The New Gremlins ruining the very alliance they built up (though some there have been there for a very long time, such as Omas). Gremlins can shape themselves however they wish as they are a new alliance now, I accept that, but not everyone else should be expected to.

Many of them old Gremlins are now in The Ninjas and it feels good to sense the same environment Gremlins once had in it's first two years or so, particularly the first year.

Also, hello Skyes. We meet again. Why so serious? [/end terrible joke]

Edited April 1, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Lincongrad' date='01 April 2010 - 02:05 PM' timestamp='1270148707' post='2244147']
I tend to agree. I was just as infuriated when former members of the Legion decided to bash us and lament our "passing". LM may have some very valid reason for leaving, but if he's not going to explain it he shouldn't bring it up. It accomplishes nothing. There are plenty of things to bash Gramlins about without talking about them like they're a rebellious adolescent.
[/quote]

My reasons for leaving are irrelevant to the state of Gremlins now and a separate matter. Afaik, the only people that even know are the people involved (myself and another), the Archons during that time period, and TOP's voting council when I applied. It'll stay that way and as I said, it is irrelevant to this discussion and different then why other people left. That being said, I can lament how the alliance has turned.

[Gamemaster1]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='01 April 2010 - 11:40 AM' timestamp='1270136383' post='2243803']
We were heavily engaged in the conflict; and we could be even more so. It's [b]solely on IRON[/b] et al that we are engaged in few wars at present.
[/quote]
I've got 3 defensive slots open. I believe the term is, do something about it.

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='bigwoody' date='01 April 2010 - 06:45 PM' timestamp='1270143904' post='2244029']
Is this supposed to be ironic, or have you been on vacation for this war?

Further, since what you're really trying to do is divert the topic away from Gremlins, do you have a stance on "Unconditional Surrender"?
[/quote]

Yes I do. A nice freshly revised one.


[quote name='shahenshah' date='01 April 2010 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1270144769' post='2244051']
No Gramlins wouldn't bash TOP. Instead they had asked us to essentially backstab TOP while being treatied and in a bloc with them, oh wait.
Anyway, TOP and Gre isnt an issue anywhere, its Gre's terms to IRON and I slightly more bizarre ones to DAWN.
[/quote]

I have no idea what you are trying to hint at. You can shoot me a pm if you don't feel the need to elaborate on it in public.

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='01 April 2010 - 07:13 PM' timestamp='1270145573' post='2244075']
What's sad is how Gremlins has deteriorated. You've got most of the original core left, one founder deleted just recently, another one here at TOP, a good amount of ex-gov from Gremlins here at TOP and other various places (Bob's over at VE). Sadly what I always considered my heart and hearth is now no more. I think many of us feel that way and are truly distraught in what we built up, died. [b]Your argument of course is "well you shouldn't have left if you cared so much." My response is of course, you know very little of what happened.[/b]
[/quote]


How did you came up with that? I never said anything about that, not even remotely close.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='01 April 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1270151136' post='2244218']
How did you came up with that? I never said anything about that, not even remotely close.
[/quote]

Your as in the critics of ex-gre who left. And amazingly enough, just after I posted that 2-3 people used that argument.

[Azrael Alexander]

Apologies for not getting through all of this thread, it's long and I skimmed most of it.

The main point of the thread seems to be about our uncharacteristic demand for unconditional surrender. Now not being an Archon (the folks who run my alliance) I an tell you that news or information about this change in FA policy was hinted to the Zealots and Templars of the gremlins. I could stand here and apologise for our lack of presence on these boards but most of those left in Gre are simply either inactive and don't have the time to view these forums like the used. RL happens so while many of you feel Gre is dying or dead i prefer to think of it as beast falling to sleep. Many prominent members have left us and thier tales have been banded around.

I ask that you remember what gre was and what it did stand up, the respect it has built up as an alliance. The reason most of the members of the gremlins stay is based on that which made the alliance great. I can tell you personally and while I don't speak for my fellow gremlins I think this opinion resonates within the alliance well. I am very much against our leaderships decision to pursue this unconditional surrender from IRON. Notice I say leadership not any certain member as it's my belief that if Gre continues to go down this road which many are actively right now trying to right now. It will end in the destruction of the gremlins and a betrayal of it's fine name. But it will not be one persons fault, the blame will be on every archon allowing this to happen. I still believe in gremlin dream and hope that you will see the right decision made by my alliance. But jut like the average TOP who I respect immensely, were led to their ruin by their leadership but stood firm. You will find that Gre will stand till this war reaches it's conclusion. But when it does depending on the decision made you will either see a resurgent Gremlin alliance or one with very few members left.

En Taro Adun

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='01 April 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1270151731' post='2244231']
Your as in the critics of ex-gre who left. And amazingly enough, just after I posted that 2-3 people used that argument.
[/quote]

To be fair, I think they used that argument [i]after[/i] you used it.

[deSouza]

[quote name='Bilrow' date='31 March 2010 - 07:28 PM' timestamp='1270070867' post='2242421']
Hardly surprising. Anyone with half a brain knew the Gramlins Codex was just a public relations move.
[/quote]

Its one of the most relevant documents on the entire planet.
They gathered the opinions of their membership and turned it onto doctrine into a sound structure, which unfortunately has been torn apart.
As it is, its just a piece of paper, a relic of ancient, immemorial times that will never come back, but it once did mean something.
The fact that they have the best codex in the entire planet certainly makes people envious, but you can't really remove merit from where it deserves.

With saying this, I agree with RV.
You (gre)are being dogs (thats the direction I didn't like). Wake the $%&@ up.

Edited April 1, 2010 by deSouza

[Crymson]

[quote name='Shamshir' date='01 April 2010 - 02:14 PM' timestamp='1270152864' post='2244251']
But jut like the average TOP who I respect immensely, were led to their ruin by their leadership but stood firm.
[/quote]

I know your comment refers to me, but I'll respond in a general sense. While TOP may be suffering in the sense of nation strength based on some of the actions I undertook, we're doing just fine as an alliance. There has been nothing in the area of major departures; there is no significant internal discord (we haven't had any serious drama in years, really); our character has not changed; etc. Our community continues as before; if anything, this war and its consequences has reinvigorated an interest in the game that many were beginning to lose beforehand.

Conversely, Ramirus and co ruined the Gramlins from within. The community has been devastated---masses of senior members have left and the remaining membership is largely inactive---and the alliance's prior character and integrity has been irrefutably lost.

I think you're really missing the point of the allegations that are being made against your alliance.


Edit: And that was the second time Roquentin got crabs.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Crymson

[Heft]

So why doesn't everyone else just peace out and leave Gramlins to it? At what point did Gramlins, who are at best a tertiary participant in this war, get veto power over peace terms?

[Azrael Alexander]

[quote name='Crymson' date='01 April 2010 - 10:26 PM' timestamp='1270157147' post='2244352']
I know your comment refers to me, but I'll respond in a general sense. While TOP may be suffering in the sense of nation strength based on some of the actions I undertook, we're doing just fine as an alliance. There has been nothing in the area of major departures; there is no significant internal discord (we haven't had any serious drama in years, really); our character has not changed; etc. Our community will continue as before; if anything, this war and its consequences has reinvigorated an interest in the game that many were beginning to lose beforehand.

Conversely, Ramirus and co ruined the Gramlins from within. The community has been devastated---masses of senior members have left and the remaining membership is largely inactive---and the alliance's prior character and integrity has been irrefutably lost.

I think you're really missing the point of the allegations that are being made against your alliance.
[/quote]

This comment was not actually directed at you, more that just as TOP stuck together in your endeavour. Expect the same from the average gremlin to stay as one till the end of the war. That was the point i'm trying to get across. I have no doubt that TOP's community will continue on as before, I hope that gremlins will also.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Shamshir' date='01 April 2010 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1270157589' post='2244366']
This comment was not actually directed at you, more that just as TOP stuck together in your endeavour. Expect the same from the average gremlin to stay as one till the end of the war. That was the point i'm trying to get across. I have no doubt that TOP's community will continue on as before, I hope that gremlins will also.
[/quote]

Ah. I wasn't aware you were making the comparison based only on the event in question; I thought you were referring to the references of the Gramlins being not at all the alliance it once was.

[Drizuz]

[quote name='Shamshir' date='01 April 2010 - 06:33 PM' timestamp='1270157589' post='2244366']
This comment was not actually directed at you, more that just as TOP stuck together in your endeavour. Expect the same from the average gremlin to stay as one till the end of the war. That was the point i'm trying to get across. I have no doubt that TOP's community will continue on as before, I hope that gremlins will also.
[/quote]

Tbh, Well you'd get ZI , like Jarlaxle and Sol-Guk , if you left anyways. So there not much choice there Shamshir

[Azrael Alexander]

[quote name='Drizuz' date='01 April 2010 - 10:38 PM' timestamp='1270157880' post='2244371']
Tbh, Well you'd get ZI , like Jarlaxle and Sol-Guk , if you left anyways. So there not much choice there Shamshir
[/quote]

Synth is a good guy, if I asked to leave i'm sure he would let me. Those two guys being ZIed is a discussion for another time. But the I'm a firm believer that, especially in a military alliance that you cannot leave without permission when the alliance goes to Defcon 3 or below.

[President Hardin]

i think its funny how alliances think they "own" their members. well they dont! we own ourselves and to think that they can run rough shod on someone just because they are under their alliance banner makes me sick. i'm also a believer in keeping your word, which in this instance, looks like gramlins surely did not. thats a shame because i used to hear very good things about them.

[Bob Janova]

To be honest, leaving during war [i]is[/i] desertion, so it's right that the exodus be held until the war is over – though if Ram is using this to hold members like NPO did with Jarheads, that's another level of bad behaviour.

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='HellAngel' date='01 April 2010 - 11:45 AM' timestamp='1270147508' post='2244115']
I dont get how a man of integrity like yourself can still be in Gremlins. Dont get me wrong, whatever suits you right... just didnt expect it.
[/quote]

An intent to help steer a ship you abandoned long ago?
Remember when I was pushing for us to exit Karma and the gov (did that include you?) at the time said "We need to stay at war so that we have a right to sit at the peace talks to encourage our allies to do the right thing"

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='Drizuz' date='01 April 2010 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1270157880' post='2244371']
Tbh, Well you'd get ZI , like Jarlaxle and Sol-Guk , if you left anyways. So there not much choice there Shamshir
[/quote]
You are deliberately muddying the waters.
There is far more to the Sol and Jar situation than "they left"

There would be more dignity in your position if you honestly presented situation you want to criticize.

[Meer Republic]

Hi Gramlins, you should probably just change your name and have done with it. No point pretending you're something you're not. It's sad that you've let the legacy that the likes of Syz left be destroyed by the likes of Ram.

[Drizuz]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='01 April 2010 - 07:24 PM' timestamp='1270160671' post='2244429']
You are deliberately muddying the waters.
There is far more to the Sol and Jar situation than "they left"

There would be more dignity in your position if you honestly presented situation you want to criticize.
[/quote]

Good Point, Gremlins did let Thorgrum leave, my apologies.

OOC: since Jarlaxle and Sol-Guk "leaving" the gremlins involves RL obligation, it would be pointless to present a position.

[tobbogon]

[quote name='President Hardin' date='01 April 2010 - 04:54 PM' timestamp='1270158865' post='2244395']
[b]i think its funny how alliances think they "own" their members. well they dont! we own ourselves[/b] and to think that they can run rough shod on someone just because they are under their alliance banner makes me sick.[b] i'm also a believer in keeping your word[/b], which in this instance, looks like gramlins surely did not. thats a shame because i used to hear very good things about them.
[/quote]
Bolded type is conflicting. When you join an alliance, many will have you sign a contract of some kind that says what you can and cant do, and what you are expected to do/not do while in said alliance. In nearly every one of these 'contracts', Deserting is on the "dont do" side of the list. As soon as you join that alliance, and sign that contract, or what ever you want to call it, you are giving your word that you won't leave during a time of war without permission. And even if there is no written contract, its probably in the charter which states the "laws" or something of an alliance. So yes, alliances do, to an extent, own you. In order to keep your word, you must do as per charter, since you said you would when you joined.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 April 2010 - 10:05 AM' timestamp='1270134315' post='2243754']
That's the second time I've seen you make that claim. I'm going to have to ask you to provide sources for that, because being in the Karma coordination channels and forums I know that it was always the intention to offer NPO standard surrender terms (if ones with large numbers in), as was in fact done, and I suspect that you're responding either to a joke or to someone making a personal comment and not representing Karma. Certainly, the Karma coalition as a whole would not have supported such a thing and that can be seen from the fact that every alliance in Hegemony was, in the end, given standard surrender terms without an argument of this kind.
[/quote]

In the end, the terms were not unconditional surrender, that's true enough. But that doesn't mean they were not used in a previous offer which was refused.

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='01 April 2010 - 10:35 AM' timestamp='1270136114' post='2243794']
Really? We did? Hmm I sure don't remember writing that into any of the versions of terms. But what do I know....
[/quote]

Do you remember saying that for every NPO nation who didn't leave peace mode, reps would be added, in addition to the other reps and terms, which you were not willing to tell NPO about? You don't remember the "pre-terms"?

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='01 April 2010 - 11:27 AM' timestamp='1270139210' post='2243873']
No, that never happened.
[/quote]

It happened.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=58946&st=0

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=58638&st=0

Both of those threads (and others) talk about the NPO being told that all NPO nations had to exit peace mode. Reps would be added daily for each nation who remained in peace mode. The rest of the terms would only be given to NPO after NPO had complied with that, and after all NPO nations were beaten under 5,000 NS.

There were several threads about this, and it was a long time ago. I've found some of the threads, and if you want to see the others, you can look them up yourself.

I don't recall the Karma side using the term Unconditional Surrender", but it was used on the NPO side, because that's what was being required - do anything Karma asked. Step one, before NPO would even learn what the other terms would be, was to bring all nations out of peace mode where they could be knocked down. After that, then they would give out the rest of the terms.

The entire reason these were called "pre-terms" is because the rest of the terms hadn't been given out. NPO was being asked to start following Karma's orders, beginning with "let us nuke your banks", and the rest of the terms would be given later. That's unconditional surrender.

[FreddieMercury]

Could mean a couple of things

1) Unconditional Surrender is a means for Ramirus to make IRON feel completely at his mercy, then let them off relatively lightly after messing with them for awhile thus inflating his own sadistic ego.

2) I don't claim to know Ramirus all that well, in fact I've only interacted with him once. But damn, he came off as a psychopath that seemed completely capable of the utmost cruelties, and this is just a ruse to cripple IRON.

I'm sure Ramirus wants to do #2, but I don't think he can even accomplish #1 with this volume of backlash here.