Bordiga Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 This analysis seems to skip over unaligned, Trikoupis. Other than that I am afraid that, while I agree really in that in terms of what sort of goal I would like to work towards on Bob yours would be it, I don't really think it is achieveable. While it is true that national development is hindered by war and thus without war national development would be able to occur without interruption, as you point out nation and alliance strength is really only definable vis-a-vis others. Surely it would be better to start with an analysis of why alliance combination occurs on Digiterra in order to understand the social interactions that take place. As it is I think your analysis is based on observation to be sure, but it isn't really comprehensive enough to be convincing. I don't understand the needless flaming from Zeke here. Get a grip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298625063' post='2644612'] If you want order.. stand with us. [/quote] There are other ways to established order. No one alliance or philosophy holds the key. [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298625063' post='2644612']They fear us because they know we have reformed from our old ways. They fear us because we learned from the war known as the Karma Conflict.[/quote] The opposite, actually - assuming fear is a part of it (which I think it is.) They fear you because they know you have NOT reformed from your old ways and they know this because if they had the power to the level you all had, they would not either. Personally, I don't see this as a negative in and of itself. However, I CAN appreciate people not wanting to be on the bottem of whatever "order" those on the top create "for the greater good" - so if forced to choose, I'd rather go for everyone equal. However, if people insist - I'm available to be elected queen of the cyberverse [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298625063' post='2644612'] Someone must enforce the structure of the global society. [/quote] And it might as well by you, eh Meh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balbo Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298625063' post='2644612']Whilst we sat back and peacefully constructed our society they plotted our destruction. How clearer a picture do you need? They fear us because they know we have reformed from our old ways. They fear us because we learned from the war known as the Karma Conflict. They fear us because we have perfected ourselves and they know the moment we have power the slavish hold they have locked over bob since Karma will be shattered.[/quote] Despite what you've been spoon-fed to believe, those who oppose Pacifican "Order" aren't saying that there should be chaos in the world, merely that personal freedom and individual free will should be protected. While you may have imposed your order in the past, the NPO's boot heels will never be able to march across Planet Bob again and eliminate free will, and that's what Doomhouse, Karma, and their allies are standing for. Edited February 25, 2011 by Balbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Balbo' timestamp='1298662347' post='2644862'] Despite what you've been spoon-fed to believe, those who oppose Pacifican "Order" aren't saying that there should be chaos in the world, merely that personal freedom and individual free will should be protected. While you may have imposed your order in the past, the NPO's boot heels will never be able to march across Planet Bob again and eliminate free will, and that's what Doomhouse, Karma, and their allies are standing for. [/quote] HAH! What a load of garbage. That's why they pre-empted us when we weren't doing a thing to bother them? They are what they hate if that's the case and they need to be culled. Just as we were. They need to learn their own lesson before they try to play teacher. [quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1298644230' post='2644728'] And it might as well by you, eh Meh [/quote] We are obviously thought to have quite a bit of experience in this area. *chuckles* Edited February 25, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaGneT Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 By posting this, you have asserted yourself as the leader and founder of "anti-rankism". A rank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 [quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1298696943' post='2645223'] By posting this, you have asserted yourself as the leader and founder of "anti-rankism". A rank. [/quote] Don't ask them to use logic man.. their heads will implode by the weight of gravity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyriq Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 The anti-rankism meme will centralize the behaviors of the community leading to what exactly? By what qualities would I identify this hypothetical community? Also, inherent in centralizing a community via a meme is the formation of a centralized brain trust; a top down system. It is the nature of the varying degrees of activity withing the community that such a top down state is unavoidable. The only real way to avoid diversity is to implement a ruling structure based on a codified set of parameters dictating every behavior and leaving this set abstract from the community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted February 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) I hate multi-quotes cause while they are intended to display common courtesy by answering to everyone they actually break a post in multiple pieces, making the post less coherent and resulting in answers that do not answer to anyone. So instead of answering to everyone individually, I will try to make one coherent post answering most of the interesting points raised above. Because I made a reference to leftism and because of the inherently "revolutionary" character of this document, many people seem to think that this is an utopia trying to make Digiterra a perfect place. May I repeat once more that my intent was not to find a perfect solution for everyone. Such solutions disregard the fundamental anthropological element of diversity and end up totalitarian as eyriq has implied. For instance, trying to ban raiding all over as Bordiga and White Chocolate suggested, would only result in far worse oppression, the necessary means beating the purpose. My intent was on the contrary to provide a practical solution for these alliances and rulers that do not wish to face the dilemma "oppress or be oppressed". What DogeWilliam said is indeed a way to put it. There are many alliances or leaders which are or would wish to remain both neutral and independent. A blanket defensive treaty between these alliances is I believe a way to give them more independence and security. How feasible this is, is something that remains to be seen. I would also like to stress one final point : I'm not a leader or a founder. I merely tend to share what observation and experience of things has taught me in the long struggle that has been my existence on this realm, from the years when it was called Bob to this era that it is called Digiterra. My desire is not to lead but to find comfort and strength in the existence of like minded people. Edited February 26, 2011 by Trikoupis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 [quote name='Trikoupis' timestamp='1298711751' post='2645361'] I hate multi-quotes cause while they are intended to display common courtesy by answering to everyone they actually break a post in multiple pieces, making the post less coherent and resulting in answers that do not answer to anyone. So instead of answering to everyone individually, I will try to make one coherent post answering most of the interesting points raised above. Because I made a reference to leftism and because of the inherently "revolutionary" character of this document, many people seem to think that this is an utopia trying to make Digiterra a perfect place. May I repeat once more that my intent was not to find a perfect solution for everyone. Such solutions disregard the fundamental anthropological element of diversity and end up totalitarian as eyriq has implied. For instance, trying to ban raiding all over as Bordiga and White Chocolate suggested, would only result in far worse oppression, the necessary means beating the purpose. My intent was on the contrary to provide a practical solution for these alliances and rulers that do not wish to face the dilemma "oppress or be oppressed". What DogeWilliam said is indeed a way to put it. There are many alliances or leaders which are or would wish to remain neutral. A blanket defensive treaty between these alliances is I believe a way to give them more independence and security. How feasible this is, is something that remains to be seen. I would also like to stress one final point : I'm not a leader or a founder. I merely tend to share what observation and experience of things has taught me in the long struggle that has been my existence on this realm, from the years when it was called Bob to this era that it is called Digiterra. My desire is not to lead but to find comfort and strength in the existence of like minded people. [/quote] I appreciate your ideas, the only problem is.. they are far from practical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted February 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298711835' post='2645362'] I appreciate your ideas, the only problem is.. they are far from practical. [/quote] It is not something easy and it certainly is a long term project, however, this a materialist theory and the basis is objective. If you take the time to look around at how many are the alliances which could be tempted by something like this, you will notice that these ideas do have a chance to be realised. Not to mention that the more the people who appreciate these ideas become, the more close to practical they come to be . Edited February 26, 2011 by Trikoupis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 All I have to say is that when the community changes people will be forced to adapt. I wait to see results delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 I actually didn't suggest banning tech raiding, I merely pointed out that you don't even mention it. However I am for the destruction of tech raiders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steodonn Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Grand_Union_of_Alliances_for_Rapport_and_Defense Sounds like GUARD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted February 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 [quote name='steodonn' timestamp='1298730239' post='2645421'] http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Grand_Union_of_Alliances_for_Rapport_and_Defense Sounds like GUARD [/quote] Interesting. It seems however that, despite being an outwardly neutral power bloc, GUARD remained a power bloc and even had an article for offensive activation, which kinda beats the whole concept of neutrality. From this point of view, it looks like a normal bloc to me, which was neutral only in regards to other blocs. The blanket treaty I'm talking about would rather result in something like the equivalent of GPA on inter-alliance level (the term "bloc" doesn't even apply I think, as long as there is no bloc charter or internal procedures of any kind). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Balbo' timestamp='1298662347' post='2644862'] Despite what you've been spoon-fed to believe, those who oppose Pacifican "Order" aren't saying that there should be chaos in the world, merely that personal freedom and individual free will should be protected. While you may have imposed your order in the past, the NPO's boot heels will never be able to march across Planet Bob again and eliminate free will, and that's what Doomhouse, Karma, and their allies are standing for. [/quote] Karma doesn't exist. Doomhouse wants to wage war for the purpose of waging war, and you sure as hell do not speak for their allies. Each alliance has their own opinion and their own way of going about their opinion. Edited February 26, 2011 by Voodoo Nova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Horror Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 Every world-dominating alliance in CN has been built around a foundation of autocratic socialism, and the [s]game has been coded[/s] world exists in such a way that redistribution beyond what is already being achieved in Doomhouse is not possible. The [s]game is also coded[/s] world also exists in such a way that you physically can't have war between [s]classes[/s] ranks, but wars between [s]nations[/s] alliances are possible, and even fun. There is literally no way to harm the upper ranks from the lower ranks. Some alliances are fine with this, and would send their low ranks to fight and die while they sit sipping whisky in PM. That's the kind of rank injustice that the left in CN ought to rail against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) Yup.. and given Doom House started this war.. and has put the rank and file beneath their upper tiers.. namely Umbrella.. at risk.. it really shows they care for their proletariat. Aren't they so benevolent.... *golf claps* Nice try Rocky.. if it weren't a blatant lie. Edited February 26, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Zeke+ Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 [quote name='Trikoupis' timestamp='1298711751' post='2645361'].....from the years when it was called Bob to this era that it is called Digiterra.[/quote] Nope, still Bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) We are so not letting you change the name of the planet. It has been and always will be Bob. I was with you there for a second Trikoupis but you're starting to sound like some rogue cult leader/hippy. Edited February 27, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Planet Bob has always been termed Digiterra. Typically the term Digiterra is used when making an argument and one wishes to give a sense of dignity to their statements rather than using the slang "bob". Please report to the feet of Schattenman for historical education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 *outlaws the use of Digiterra in his country to save on diplomatic ink* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threefingeredguy Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 [quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1298747269' post='2645510'] Yup.. and given Doom House started this war.. and has put the rank and file beneath their upper tiers.. namely Umbrella.. at risk.. it really shows they care for their proletariat. Aren't they so benevolent.... *golf claps* Nice try Rocky.. if it weren't a blatant lie. [/quote] Hahaha I guess the difference is that our upper tier is taking every opportunity to fight alongside our lower tier while your upper tier is exploiting your lower tier to save their pixels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) [quote name='threefingeredguy' timestamp='1298792490' post='2646002'] Hahaha I guess the difference is that our upper tier is taking every opportunity to fight alongside our lower tier while your upper tier is exploiting your lower tier to save their pixels. [/quote] If that were truly their plan, I'd not be among them. So the only people you can be speaking to are outside of our community who do not understand how our system works. Your higher end guys are just fortunate enough to be out of range of many who can fight and engage them. Giving you the ability to sit in open war status without real threat.. More lies on your part, to be expected. Many of our highest ranking gov are in the trenches, fighting along side of our troops. Wouldn't it seem more likely, that if this were our strategy.. as you have claimed.. that they would be the ones being preserved? Edited February 27, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threefingeredguy Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 I never mentioned gov. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) [quote name='threefingeredguy' timestamp='1298793314' post='2646012'] I never mentioned gov. [/quote] [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ-2J0b1uS0&feature=related"]You didn't have to. You insinuated that those that govern us had a plan to preserve themselves at the cost of those who are of the lower rank and file. Well.. I hate to displease you, but you are grossly wrong.. and grossly ignorant. Your propaganda fails at my feet again.[/url] It is your peers who should fear your exploitation. For while most of your nations sit out of the fight in this war due their strength, those around them burn for you. And that is the truth. Of course, you'll shove them millions, if not billions, to try to sustain them.. but you can't possibly keep pace. You only have so much bandwidth to pump that aid through.. and that my friend.. is why you are destined to lose. Blowing all that money, only to know it will inevitably be destroyed. Edited February 27, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex 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.