Ramirus: Scourge of the Grämlins

[ChairmanHal]

I fail to see how giving a PR platform to what amounts to at best the leader of the remnants of an alliance (and at worst glorified nuke rogues) is all that constructive or interesting.

Sorry Schatt.

Also this...at this point amending the ESA does nothing more or less but reward and encourage the kind of behavior that Gramlins has been roundly criticized for since the ESA. With all due respect to those outside of Gramlins advocating such a move, Gramlins doesn't deserve your sympathy or support.

[D34th]

I'll repeat here what I said to Ramirus in our forums: While I doesn't agree with your point of views I understand and respect them.

Also Ramirus, doesn't forget our bet

[Ardus]

[quote name='ccabal86' date='29 June 2010 - 07:55 PM' timestamp='1277855715' post='2354531']
Nevermind the fact that we're merrily rebuilding and all...Really, your little war is only a minor nuisance.
[/quote]
That's good to hear. Looking forward to your reparations.

[Vladimir]

I sit here in utter and desperate confusion. The first half of the interview is a hectic assault on the 'realpolitik' of the Old Gramlins, then we come to a brief interlude where the dull-eyed plebs of Planet Bob are castigated for not pursuing "Machiavellian diplomacy," and then we are immediately launched into an attack on alliances who 'make the right realpolitik decisions' which 'can't be condoned from a moral point of view'. I fear that there may be some consistency missing from this train of thought.

[TehChron]

[quote name='D34th' date='29 June 2010 - 05:33 PM' timestamp='1277857998' post='2354575']
I'll repeat here what I said to Ramirus in our forums: While I doesn't agree with your point of views I understand and respect them.

Also Ramirus, doesn't forget our bet
[/quote]
I completely understand.

Sending mixed signals is something Im very sure that you, personally speaking, are sympathetic to.

By the way, Ramirus, how [i]can[/i] you endorse a Machiavellian approach to politics while also insisting that everyone should abide by stuff like honor, solid CBs, and refrain from opportunism?

Im actually very interested in hearing how those blatantly contradictory viewpoints are reconciled.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Vladimir' date='29 June 2010 - 08:37 PM' timestamp='1277858203' post='2354581']
I sit here in utter and desperate confusion. The first half of the interview is a hectic assault on the 'realpolitik' of the Old Gramlins, then we come to a brief interlude where the dull-eyed plebs of Planet Bob are castigated for not pursuing "Machiavellian diplomacy," and then we are immediately launched into an attack on alliances who 'make the right realpolitik decisions' which 'can't be condoned from a moral point of view'. I fear that there may be some consistency missing from this train of thought.
[/quote]
I think this may be the first time I've agreed with Vladimir since 2007.

[D34th]

[quote name='Chron' date='29 June 2010 - 10:37 PM' timestamp='1277858246' post='2354583']
I completely understand.

Sending mixed signals is something Im very sure that you, personally speaking, are sympathetic to.
[/quote]

What?

Please explain you better via private message please if possible.

[Tromp]

This is just a good summary for those of us who haven't been up to date with wordly events.

I love the effort you put into this though Schatt, well done.

[SiCkO]

This platform does not understand the necessity for a change to the terms.

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 05:46 PM' timestamp='1277851554' post='2354457']
I realize that most alliance governments are children with underdeveloped minds, meager worldviews, very little actual experience in politics, trade, high-level business, or international relations.

Most alliance governments don't go from having one of the strongest militaries in CN, and on the sanction race, to barely a million NS, and chase off most of their members in a just a few months. Save the condescensions for some one who at least half deserves to dish it out.

[Kalasin]

Really excellent journalism, I applaud you, Schatt.

(who is the good-looking fellow in those pictures? )

[janax]

Since Ram is answering questions...how does it feel to have to backtrack so much?

You should also be kissing FARK's butt for all they are doing for you.

Edited June 30, 2010 by janax

[Mark Reynolds]

This interview was an interesting read.

I don't think a peace deal can be reached between Gramlins and IRON/DAWN unless both sides can come to understand each other's world view and reasoning for choosing to continue this war. Hopefully this interview will help both sides to better understand each other's position.

[Diomede]

So the Grämlins never broke the Lux Aeterna... right, ok. lol.
So the Grämlins is a democracy when the vote of one can count as the vote of several. Ok, again. lol.

I'm sensing a slight disconnect from reality, but an interesting interview none the less.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Diomede

[Branimir]

The most famous leader of a micro alliance, this Ram person is. I am shocked to see him post. I thought he would never. lol

Well browsed the interview (quite long, dont care that much. It is a 19 man alliance leader, who cares) only thing I really wanted to comment (besides lol Ram person actually posted something) is good to see Shatt making publications. Shame he doesn't have better material. Though maybe things will pick up relatively soon, like,...within a year time. Heh.

[Biff Webster]

[quote name='Branimir' date='29 June 2010 - 07:37 PM' timestamp='1277865412' post='2354743']
The most famous leader of a micro alliance, this Ram person is. I am shocked to see him post. I thought he would never. lol
[/quote]


I think the interviewer has him beat.

[Haflinger]

OOC - Machiavelli was a patriot and a bit of a dreamer. Combining him with idealism isn't as far off as some think. However it is clear that Ramirus is not really following the advice given in [i]The Prince.[/i]

IC - Yeah, this is all pretty consistent with the other contacts I've had with Ramirus. He has a specific set of goals that are not really compatible with anyone else's, including the people he thinks are his friends, and he sucks at compromise.

[Xiphosis]

[quote][b]In your view what it is you hope to get out of this war? Is the ultimate goal a material victory over IRON, or are you instead trying to make a point?[/b]
Material victory over IRON, meaning reps? No, we're not seeking reps. We're seeking an explanation of why the war was fought, an assignment of blame, and an apology from those held responsible.[/quote]

How reprehensibly evil!

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='29 June 2010 - 08:09 PM' timestamp='1277856562' post='2354551']
I fail to see how giving a PR platform to what amounts to at best the leader of the remnants of an alliance (and at worst glorified nuke rogues) is all that constructive or interesting.

Sorry Schatt.

Also this...at this point amending the ESA does nothing more or less but reward and encourage the kind of behavior that Gramlins has been roundly criticized for since the ESA. With all due respect to those outside of Gramlins advocating such a move, Gramlins doesn't deserve your sympathy or support.
[/quote]
Frankly, I think you and your compatriots' reaction to Grämlins' course of action has been over-the-top emo drama at best and score-settling at worst; most probably both. I have hope and faith in Grämlins and it's the sort of alliance I want around and strong. Alone they never posed a real threat to IRON--and you know that--and in fact post-reps IRON poses more of a threat to the world than Grämlins ever has or ever will.

[quote name='Ardus' date='29 June 2010 - 08:35 PM' timestamp='1277858105' post='2354577']
That's good to hear. Looking forward to your reparations.
[/quote]
I lol'ed. Another IRONer mentioned that Grämlins' amendment to the ESA hasn't been run by IRON and/or wouldn't be approved--I think IRON forgets that they're still at war and still under terms.

[quote name='supercoolyellow' date='29 June 2010 - 09:39 PM' timestamp='1277861971' post='2354667']
Most alliance governments don't go from having one of the strongest militaries in CN, and on the sanction race, to barely a million NS, and chase off most of their members in a just a few months. Save the condescensions for some one who at least half deserves to dish it out.
[/quote]
Grämlins' government has done a number on the alliance, but they have done more than most alliances can say: Stood up for what they believe to be the right thing.
It has always been the case that people who disagree with their alliance's course should either exercise their vote, or walk. The government has survived at least one vote, the opposition has left or is hanging in.

[quote name='Diomede' date='29 June 2010 - 10:24 PM' timestamp='1277864622' post='2354725']
So the Grämlins never broke the Lux Aeterna... right, ok. lol.
So the Grämlins is a democracy when the vote of one can count as the vote of several. Ok, again. lol.
[/quote]
Direct democracy is actually very rare.

[quote name='Biff Webster' date='29 June 2010 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1277866560' post='2354768']
I think the interviewer has him beat.
[/quote]
I tend to agree.

[quote name='Haflinger' date='29 June 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1277867305' post='2354774']
OOC - Machiavelli was a patriot and a bit of a dreamer. Combining him with idealism isn't as far off as some think. However it is clear that Ramirus is not really following the advice given in [i]The Prince.[/i]

IC - Yeah, this is all pretty consistent with the other contacts I've had with Ramirus. He has a specific set of goals that are not really compatible with anyone else's, including the people he thinks are his friends, and he sucks at compromise.
[/quote]
I doubt anyone commenting on the Machiavelli comment has ever read 5 lines of Machiavelli.

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='29 June 2010 - 11:16 PM' timestamp='1277867763' post='2354781']
How reprehensibly evil!
[/quote]
I know, right?

Edited June 30, 2010 by Schattenmann

[Vilien]

Ramirus' assertions about the nature of diplomacy in our world display either a severe lack of experience in the area or an intentional misrepresentation of the truth.

That said, I'm sad to see a once great alliance dying at the hands of an incapable egomaniac.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 11:48 PM' timestamp='1277869676' post='2354811']
Frankly, I think you and your compatriots' reaction to Grämlins' course of action has been over-the-top emo drama at best and score-settling at worst; most probably both. I have hope and faith in Grämlins and it's the sort of alliance I want around and strong. Alone they never posed a real threat to IRON--and you know that--and in fact post-reps IRON poses more of a threat to the world than Grämlins ever has or ever will.
[/quote]

Save for one thing I've made clear fairly early on in the proceedings:

I want to see Gramlins brought back at some point in the near future by former members and those willing to live under what used to pass for Gramlins code of honor. Clearly the new Gramlins would need to make some sensible charter reforms--like eliminating the weighted voting structure--but there are enough former Gramlins out there who still remember what was that they should be able to rebuild the alliance to something resembling its former glory.

My interest in the continuing IRON-Gramlins conflict has much more to do with wanting to close the books on a long war the right way than anything IRON or Gramlins may or may not have done to each other in the past. Yes, Valhalla is a loyal ally of IRON. But even if we weren't, my view on the issue would not change. You issue "unconditional surrender" decrees when you wish to humiliate and/or totally subjugate your opponent. I don't care which is in play here, it's wrong. Future "potential threat" be damned.

[Xiphosis]

[quote]Frankly, I think you and your compatriots' reaction to Grämlins' course of action has been over-the-top emo drama at best and score-settling at worst; most probably both.[/quote]

More or less how I see it as well. Enjoy the terms fellas.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 06:46 PM' timestamp='1277851554' post='2354457']
[b]Essentially all of the allies you initially fought the war with have now made peace with IRON, why is it that the Grämlins have opted to continue?[/b]
Because, as you can check for yourself, there is no mention of the war beyond a military abstract made in the Easter Sunday Accords. There is nothing that shows IRON/TOP/etc did anything "wrong", and indeed they still claim innocence. Their only mistake, in their view, is losing the war. Military losses aside, this wasn't acceptable to the Grämlins. Currently, the ESA is essentially nothing more than a bribe to stop the beating. Our entry into the war was in defense of MK, primarily. Our intention was to make sure their attackers were dealt with. The ESA doesn't accomplish that in any way, not even just a little bit. The idea that tech reps implies admission of guilt is objectionable to anyone with a sense of common decency. Of course, it's also true that in the original publication of the ESA, having just a line in there where IRON/TOP/etc said: "Hurhur, we're sorry" would be meaningless as well, since the smooth-brained Digiterran community skips right over details like that, eyes hungrily searching for the tech rep numbers. Because that's all anyone gives a !@#$ about is reps. If the only reason you go to war is so you can greedily suck down some tech reps that you extorted off the losers of the war, then you're no better than they are.[/quote]

Being an individual who clearly values morality (or at least pretends to) do you think that there could be anything moral about IRON's opposition to your demands. I'll rephrase in a manner that you can directly address my argument. If I understand you correctly, you are attempting to add in "war guilt" clause to the ESA, yet you are aware that some if not all of the defeated parties do not believe themselves to be guilty for the war's origins. It isn't that we don't think we did anything "wrong" as you say, it is that we do not feel culpable for DoW's beyond our own. We don't feel we need to take responsibility for a war either \m/ or NpO began. I realize you like to believe yourself to be on the side of the "just" but it seems to that the party "in the right" is a matter of perspective. Unless it is you who would like to act like a child and say, "lol u started it!"

Given that you are attempting to foist your interpretation of events onto the defeated parties of the ESA, do you believe IRON and DAWN could be objecting to your continued aggression on principle, rather than simply being evil "realpolitikers".

How is requiring an alliance to give up their intellectual freedom (ie demanding they agree with you) in exchange for peace any different than a tech "bribe".

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 06:46 PM' timestamp='1277851554' post='2354457']
Good job you guys; you're well on your way to getting rid of CBs altogether.
[/quote]

For someone who has read so extensively on military theory I am surprised you would argue that CBs can be got rid of. "Just" CBs sure. I was under the impression that anything could be a [i]cause for war[/i], or CB. I will bow to your superior understanding of military theory though. Just please enlighten me as to where I went wrong. [OOC: If you are going to insist on knowledge of esoteric definitions for phrases such as "unconditional surrender" perhaps accuracy in speech should be your goal. Alternatively, we could cut everyone some slack./OOC]

Edit: damn it he left!

Edited June 30, 2010 by Lord Curzon

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='29 June 2010 - 11:48 PM' timestamp='1277869676' post='2354811']
I lol'ed. Another IRONer mentioned that Grämlins' amendment to the ESA hasn't been run by IRON and/or wouldn't be approved--I think IRON forgets that they're still at war and still under terms.
[/quote]

Don't worry Schatt, we're not.

[Alterego]

Why are you trying to give Gramlins a PR victory schatt? MK forcing through his appointment was funny, Gramlins did indeed die a long time ago if the loser of an election gets appointed by foreign powers.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Alterego