Official Independent Republic of Orange Nations Announcement

[iamthey]

Congratulations MCRABT, sorry to see you go peron :/.

Edited September 28, 2010 by iamthey

[potato]

[quote name='Deimos27' timestamp='1285699986' post='2467054']
This is your justification for the constant, exaggerated hostility behavior you show other alliances? The absolute you're using of not getting along making things entertaining may be true, but that doesn't have to mean disrespect and hostility. The alliances on the receiving end are not 'objectively terrible' - that's just your opinion and no, having it doesn't give you the right to behave with such negativity towards a community that plays the game in a different manner or is located at a rival sphere of influence.
[/quote]

We're an elite alliance and that gives us a sense of worth and smug that is only surpassed by the fact we're on top of the game right now. That being said, yes, some alliance we critic are objectively terrible. IRON may not be one of those but an alliance that is not capable of independant thought or not once haw showed it had a spin does deserve some flack. Sorry it hurt your feelings. You will also have to note MK has always been very critical of a lot of people. You just brushed it off because we couldn't do anything about it. Nowadays, the tables are turned and you !@#$ your pants all while complaining that we are mean and too harsh about your defaults. And before you go complain about us being negative to people on the other side, look at how we interact with TOP, who's proved its worth after that little blunder, and shut it.

Edited September 28, 2010 by potato

[kriekfreak]

Denial is right, the opposing side really is objectively terrible. If you loath MK that much, really, grow a freaking spine and rally support for your cause. The only thing I see this past weeks is constant whining and moaning from people that have less spine than a freaking jelly. Please act upon it or change your tune. This is getting boring.

[o-dog]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285702014' post='2467077']
Denial is right, the opposing side really is objectively terrible. If you loath MK that much, really, grow a freaking spine and rally support for your cause. The only thing I see this past weeks is constant whining and moaning from people that have less spine than a freaking jelly. Please act upon it or change your tune. This is getting boring.
[/quote]

What is this 'other side'? Or are you saying that if you are not a member of SuperComplaints, then, by definition, you are the 'other side'?

IRON make an announcement and the MucKers come out in their droves to whine. As do a lot of their suck-up mates. That is what I object to and voicing my objection does not require growing or rallying anything; nor is it a 'cause'.

[kulomascovia]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285701061' post='2467066']
We're an elite alliance
[/quote]

This is a rather amusing statement coming from a [s]troll[/s] controversial alliance.

[flak attack]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285701061' post='2467066']
flack
[/quote]
You're killing me man.

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1285702530' post='2467078']
What is this 'other side'? Or are you saying that if you are not a member of SuperComplaints, then, by definition, you are the 'other side'?

IRON make an announcement and the MucKers come out in their droves to whine. As do a lot of their suck-up mates. That is what I object to and voicing my objection does not require growing or rallying anything; nor is it a 'cause'.
[/quote]

The other side is the side we have been fighting in the BiPolar. Not everyone agreeing with MK is one of their suck-up mates. IRON is just that terrible as an alliance. Simple advice to IRON: Lead, don't follow. Perhaps then people might think better of you.

[kulomascovia]

[quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1285702530' post='2467078']
What is this 'other side'? Or are you saying that if you are not a member of SuperComplaints, then, by definition, you are the 'other side'?

IRON make an announcement and the MucKers come out in their droves to whine. As do a lot of their suck-up mates. That is what I object to and voicing my objection does not require growing or rallying anything; nor is it a 'cause'.
[/quote]

I'd say you're doing something right if you can get MK to come and complain in droves. I wouldn't worry about what others think of you.

Edited September 28, 2010 by kulomascovia

[potato]

[quote name='kulomascovia' timestamp='1285702544' post='2467079']
This is a rather amusing statement coming from a [s]troll[/s] controversial alliance.
[/quote]

hurr durr that was terrible

I'm not interested in your "This is Candy Land, let's all hug" moralism.

Edited September 28, 2010 by potato

[Edifice]

The complaining about how this would damage MK-IRON relations was quite excessive... from the MK side. I'm not sure how that transitioned into "stop whining, IRON".

Edited September 28, 2010 by Edifice

[kulomascovia]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285703533' post='2467094']
hurr durr that was terrible

I'm not interested in your "This is Candy Land, let's all hug" moralism.
[/quote]

That has very little relevance to my post.

If you intend to purposefully inflame others in order to laugh childishly about it then you shouldn't be taken seriously. Thus, "elite" would be more of an antonym to the Mushroom Kingdom.

In all honesty, I do not see why anyone should care about what the members of the Mushroom Kingdom say as their comments usually have little to none constructive material.

But I digress, this announcement isn't about the Mushroom Kingdom. Congrats IRON on the new government/president.

Edited September 28, 2010 by kulomascovia

[Aurion]

[quote name='kulomascovia' timestamp='1285704683' post='2467116']
In all honesty, I do not see why anyone should care about what the members of the Mushroom Kingdom say as their comments usually have little to none constructive material.
[/quote]

And yours [i]do[/i]? That's news.

On topic, what an interesting choice. I suspect that no matter how long MCRABT behaves himself for, people are always going to at least suspect that what was there before still is.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Aurion

[Deimos27]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285701061' post='2467066']
We're an elite alliance and that gives us a sense of worth and smug that is only surpassed by the fact we're on top of the game right now. That being said, yes, some alliance we critic are objectively terrible. IRON may not be one of those but an alliance that is not capable of independant thought or not once haw showed it had a spin does deserve some flack. Sorry it hurt your feelings. You will also have to note MK has always been very critical of a lot of people. You just brushed it off because we couldn't do anything about it. Nowadays, the tables are turned and you !@#$ your pants all while complaining that we are mean and too harsh about your defaults. And before you go complain about us being negative to people on the other side, look at how we interact with TOP, who's proved its worth after that little blunder, and shut it.
[/quote]

Justification is you guys have always been like this and right now your position boosts that attitude?

You can be critical without being rude, but if you feel the need to be so, oh well. I doubt you're truly hurting anyone's feelings, though your comments try to make that point. I don't mean you guys carry that hostility to all of the 'other side', but the exception of some cases doesn't excuse you from treating others that way.

Also, IRON members only respond to your aggression, not start it, for as long as I've been in IRON(which is relatively not much, first war was Karma).

I'm puzzled(though I admit I find it unpleasant) about your hostility, even more if you appear to recognize it as deriving from a 'sense of self worth' and 'turning of the tables' if the first is admitedly dubious and the second, even if true, doesn't even apply - MCRABT's first position toward you as president was cordial. I know about the past conflicts between you, and I was personally very much against the attitude displayed in that past QnA.

This might be fruitless - you still try to squeeze in as many insults as you can in one post while answering a thread where our newly appointed president didn't start picking fights with anyone, on the contrary.

I was genuinely curious btw. There's no fear involved in asking you this, nor 'whining'.

[Heft]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285702014' post='2467077']
Denial is right, the opposing side really is objectively terrible. If you loath MK that much, really, grow a freaking spine and rally support for your cause. The only thing I see this past weeks is constant whining and moaning from people that have less spine than a freaking jelly. Please act upon it or change your tune. This is getting boring.
[/quote]
There is no "opposing side," you realize, correct? Just a status quo of cowards who have to justify their inaction by propping up hypothetical bogeymen.

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285702863' post='2467083']
The other side is the side we have been fighting in the BiPolar. Not everyone agreeing with MK is one of their suck-up mates. IRON is just that terrible as an alliance. Simple advice to IRON: Lead, don't follow. Perhaps then people might think better of you.
[/quote]
Yes, they should be a leader, like iFoK.

[potato]

[quote name='Deimos27' timestamp='1285712916' post='2467249']
Justification is you guys have always been like this and right now your position boosts that attitude?

You can be critical without being rude, but if you feel the need to be so, oh well. I doubt you're truly hurting anyone's feelings, though your comments try to make that point. I don't mean you guys carry that hostility to all of the 'other side', but the exception of some cases doesn't excuse you from treating others that way.

Also, IRON members only respond to your aggression, not start it, for as long as I've been in IRON(which is relatively not much, first war was Karma).

I'm puzzled(though I admit I find it unpleasant) about your hostility, even more if you appear to recognize it as deriving from a 'sense of self worth' and 'turning of the tables' if the first is admitedly dubious and the second, even if true, doesn't even apply - MCRABT's first position toward you as president was cordial. I know about the past conflicts between you, and I was personally very much against the attitude displayed in that past QnA.

This might be fruitless - you still try to squeeze in as many insults as you can in one post while answering a thread where our newly appointed president didn't start picking fights with anyone, on the contrary.

I was genuinely curious btw. There's no fear involved in asking you this, nor 'whining'.
[/quote]

It's an explanation, not a justification. The fact is: our attitude hasn't really change per se, your viewing of our attitude has.

As for the rest, let's call it a culture difference and be done with it since most of our critics don't want to see our side of the story and keep on repeating the same old tired line over and over again. Feel free to PM me if you want an explanation.

That being said, I doubt the relationship between IRON and MK will improve and this has nothing to do with MCRABT "cordial" attitude in public. But it doesn't hurt to try if you really want something other than us taking reps out of you again.

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1285713259' post='2467257']
There is no "opposing side," you realize, correct? Just a status quo of cowards who have to justify their inaction by propping up hypothetical bogeymen. [/quote]

Who are you calling a coward, exactly?

[quote]
Yes, they should be a leader, like iFoK.
[/quote]

For our size, we have done way more to make this planet a little bit more interesting than IRON did. What did they do on their own? Nothing, right? Following every step of NPO and later TOP is not really something to be proud of. Even in Duckroll it seems they are the submissive part. I guess they don't know any other way to survive.

Not that you would agree with me, being (partly) responsible for all of it.

[NLights]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285715015' post='2467287']
Who are you calling a coward, exactly?
[/quote]

I believe he means the group of people who pretend an "other side" exists at all and worse act like it's secretly forming a cohesive unit to stand up together.

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='NorthernLights' timestamp='1285715611' post='2467299']
I believe he means the group of people who pretend an "other side" exists at all and worse act like it's secretly forming a cohesive unit to stand up together.
[/quote]

I got that part. But how are they cowards exactly?

[NLights]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285716316' post='2467309']
I got that part. But how are they cowards exactly?
[/quote]

Oh you may have meant why instead of who last post in that case.

[Denial]

[quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1285697304' post='2467008']
On the losing side and seeking redress from the NPO, you always used a lot of words to whine about the other side. You now do just the same, but with the added 'come do something about it' arrogance of power. Hence the adaptation of a quote some man made in some other world.
[/quote]
I never whined. Every substantial post I made was part of a greater, two-pronged campaign: i) to assist in the downfall of the reigning power structure, transforming the status quo, and ii) to provoke both oppressed and peripheral alliances in relation to the Hegemony to grow a pair and stand up for themselves. What separates my posts of the pre-Karma days (and pre-First Great War, if you want to go back that far) and those made by those such as IRON members today is that my criticism was poignant, consistent, and most importantly, it was [i]attached to real, actual foreign policy strategy[/i] in both the public and private arenas. Comments here in this venue should never just be sporadic and exist outside of a carefully-considered public affairs campaign. Before any significant post is made, a question should be asked: "does this help or hinder my alliance's strategy, and is it congruent with our overall direction?"

The leaders of every successful counter-movement in the Cyberverse's history have understood this; LUE prior to the First Great War, the New Pacific Order following the First Great War, the New Polar Order when planning for the Unjust War, and Complaints & Grievances before the Karma War. You can even witness this process outside of movements aimed at changing the status quo. The massive, organised campaign against the Green Protection Agency by the New Pacific Order and its allies is a prime example. That campaign was so successful that two thirds of the active Cyberverse actually bought into the nonsense that GPA was a terrible threat and no longer neutral.

I do not see how expecting the people that take issue with the status quo should develop some strategy beyond impotent and ill-considered propaganda lines is arrogance. I think if you got past your childish attempts to make it appear as if I am some sort of evil oppressor, you would see that I have a point. At least you acknowledge in your post that I have been consistent in my complaints that people should grow a pair. I am attempting to be as constructive as possible here without actually giving our detractors pointers on how to bring about our downfall. I realise that it will probably never be seen as constructive by those that are hostile to the Mushroom Kingdom and I. However, I would just urge those that are unhappy with who is currently dominant in the Cyberverse to sit back and spend some time on self-reflection. Take some time to think about whether constantly harping on about 'you're just as bad as we were!' and 'Super Grievances are ruining the Cyberverse!' is really an effective way to initiate change and improve your position.

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1285699255' post='2467039']
I'm sure regardless of the relationship shared between IRON and MK, you will never be short of someone to project your superiority complex upon, in this regard I would not be overly concerned about your "entertainment" drying up in the near future. You criticize for good reason yet you aim for hostility in order to satisfy your need for entertainment. I must have missed the memo that informed Bob that criticizing to create hostility was "for good reason".[/quote]
If criticism breeds hostility, hostility breeds conflict, conflict breeds political dynamism, and political dynamism breeds entertainment, I think it is thus perfectly acceptable to criticise. If you do not accept this, take my previous advice. Gather up those alliances that similarly do not accept my assertion, develop some meaningful and effective strategy, actually lead your own alliance and maybe even a larger force, and aim to change the status quo.

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1285699255' post='2467039']
Your perception of "objectivity" seems succinctly subjective to me my good sir, how can you possibly create and objective point of view when you are driven by a personal agenda such as the one detailed above?[/quote]
Look at aid slot usage and efficiency, technology levels, wonders, improvements, growth rate, war performance, whether an alliance is leading or following in foreign affairs, and so on. These are rather objective, easily-measurable criteria for alliance performance. In general, the alliances we criticise perform dismally in each of these areas. I'll use the example that another MKer mentioned earlier. We tend not to verbally assault TOP, an alliance that attacked us in the most recent war, because they perform far better in the aforementioned areas than the vast majority of alliances. They are a quality group, even if we do disagree with them on a number of more subjective issues. We are happy to let TOP be, so long as they don't attack us again

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1285699255' post='2467039']
IRON has never lacked independent thought, to the contrary we have always pursued our own agenda regardless of how you and your subjective objectivity would like to present us. I do concur however that we a have not done nearly enough to advertise the positive facets of our culture, we have let the propaganda go untackled and for that we have paid the price.
[/quote]
When exactly did you pursue your own agenda? Was it when you blindly followed the Pied Piper of Pacifica? Was it that brief period following the Karma War, the transition period between a Red master and an Orange one, when you flailed around with no direction? Or was it when you attached yourself to the Paradoxian underbelly, shadowing their every move, and even cancelling a whole range of treaties at their request?

[quote name='Deimos27' timestamp='1285699986' post='2467054']
This is your justification for the constant, exaggerated hostility behavior you show other alliances? The absolute you're using of not getting along making things entertaining may be true, but that doesn't have to mean disrespect and hostility. The alliances on the receiving end are not 'objectively terrible' - that's just your opinion and no, having it doesn't give you the right to behave with such negativity towards a community that plays the game in a different manner or is located at a rival sphere of influence.
[/quote]
That's just, like, your opinion, man.

Three amusing things from this post. Firstly, I can act towards any alliance I wish with hostility. I have always maintained this capability. Just as you can do the same. Secondly, yes, you operate in the Cyberverse in a different manner to more efficient and dynamic alliances. You may not see this as a point worthy of derision, but I do. Lastly, anyone trying to argue that IRON has, or has ever had, its own sphere of influence is laughable.


[quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1285702530' post='2467078']
What is this 'other side'? Or are you saying that if you are not a member of SuperComplaints, then, by definition, you are the 'other side'?
[/quote]
You know, you guys really need to get your story straight. First, we are evil oppressors restricting the sovereignty of the alliances that are on the 'other side' to us. In the very next criticism, there is no 'other side'! If there is no 'other side', how exactly could we oppress them? You're not Invisible Woman; you cannot choose to be visible or invisible when it suits.

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1285713259' post='2467257']
There is no "opposing side," you realize, correct? Just a status quo of cowards who have to justify their inaction by propping up hypothetical bogeymen.
[/quote]
How exactly are we cowards? You see, this is what I'm getting at above. There is a clear group of people that dislike the status quo, yourself included, but cognitive deficiency seems to limit you all to only being able to throw out a few nonsensical insults and hope that somehow this will change things. If we were cowards, we would be fabricating wars to curbstomp any sign of potential resistance to our dominance before it even formed, just as the Hegemony did. If we can be called a dominant force at all, we are a benign force. Not only have we not moved against any nascent counter-movements, we actively encourage them! How that equates to cowardice is beyond me. The New Sith Order is an alliance that once had the potential to be a leading force in a counter-movement, but instead of putting some effort into a greater campaign, you try and 'stick it to those Super Grievances jerks' by doing idiotic things like aiding rogues to the point that it initiates losing wars.

[quote name='NorthernLights' timestamp='1285715611' post='2467299']
I believe he means the group of people who pretend an "other side" exists at all and worse act like it's secretly forming a cohesive unit to stand up together.
[/quote]
I am not sure how we are pretending that an opposing side exists. Many of us are acknowleding an 'other side' does not exist in any meanignful form outside of a collection of misfits that venture onto the forum to find opportunities to brandish their brilliantly-crafted propaganda weapon of 'you're just as bad as we were'.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Denial

[Heft]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1285716316' post='2467309']
I got that part. But how are they cowards exactly?
[/quote]
By clinging to a conflict which no longer exists, and hasn't for a long time, they are able to avoid possibly entering a real conflict that they could actually lose something in.

[NLights]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1285731379' post='2467604']
I am not sure how we are pretending that an opposing side exists. Many of us are acknowleding an 'other side' does not exist in any meanignful form outside of a collection of misfits that venture onto the forum to find opportunities to brandish their brilliantly-crafted propaganda weapon of 'you're just as bad as we were'.
[/quote]

Ok? I guess my post doesn't relate to you then, which is great! However I have seen others on these forums try to play up a side that doesn't exist because it would benefit them. That's all I was getting at -- deep breaths!

[andrew734]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1285731379' post='2467604']
When exactly did you pursue your own agenda? Was it when you blindly followed the Pied Piper of Pacifica? Was it that brief period following the Karma War, the transition period between a Red master and an Orange one, when you flailed around with no direction? Or was it when you attached yourself to the Paradoxian underbelly, shadowing their every move, and even cancelling a whole range of treaties at their request?
[/quote]
Dang you figured us out, did you know Rab is actually our TOP viceroy yes in fact all of council is from TOP and They dont even answer to us. You know that makes all most as much sense as ODN and the rest of CnG following you guys around good point, if your in power it doesnt matter if you follow blindly.

[Clash]

o7 IRON and congrats to MCRABy.
Thread needs more Samus

[o-dog]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1285731379' post='2467604']
I never whined. Every substantial post I made was part of a greater, two-pronged campaign: i) to assist in the downfall of the reigning power structure, transforming the status quo, and ii) to provoke both oppressed and peripheral alliances in relation to the Hegemony to grow a pair and stand up for themselves. What separates my posts of the pre-Karma days (and pre-First Great War, if you want to go back that far) and those made by those such as IRON members today is that my criticism was poignant, consistent, and most importantly, it was [i]attached to real, actual foreign policy strategy[/i] in both the public and private arenas. Comments here in this venue should never just be sporadic and exist outside of a carefully-considered public affairs campaign. Before any significant post is made, a question should be asked: "does this help or hinder my alliance's strategy, and is it congruent with our overall direction?"
[/quote]
Revisionist justification.


[quote]
I do not see how expecting the people that take issue with the status quo should develop some strategy beyond impotent and ill-considered propaganda lines is arrogance. I think if you got past your childish attempts to make it appear as if I am some sort of evil oppressor, you would see that I have a point.
[/quote]
I've not attempted to make you appear as an 'evil oppressor', so drop the silly little insults, please.


[quote]
If criticism breeds hostility, hostility breeds conflict, conflict breeds political dynamism, and political dynamism breeds entertainment, I think it is thus perfectly acceptable to criticise. If you do not accept this, take my previous advice. Gather up those alliances that similarly do not accept my assertion, develop some meaningful and effective strategy, actually lead your own alliance and maybe even a larger force, and aim to change the status quo.
[/quote]
I have no issue with SuperComplaints being top of the tree for now. What I object to is your wholesale use of pompous, hypocritical and revisionist posting as a tool to create conflict or buttress your own position.

As for the rest of your essay, since when did the de facto role of the player or group of players become the formulator of conflict?

Edited September 29, 2010 by O-Dog