Kurdanak

Between the alliances involved and Lambda's flag...

I will say now, however, that this is P&W's history we're talking about. Which may not seem all that important without a particular attachment to it, but for a game like P&W that's been here for over 6 years, I can assure you that it is taken quite seriously. Situations like edit wars, explicit bias, and general vandalism often result in editing suspension or permanent ban.

Howdy folks! (for reference, to those newer to P&W or unfamiliar with the wiki, I am Kurdanak - a wiki Admin/Bureaucrat) The neutrality of the wiki is, indeed, important - as is precedent - and we'll certainly maintain that. Unfortunately, I have a lot going on IRL at the moment so I can't look into everything here (in sufficient detail) at this exact moment, but I'll catch up and give my thoughts ASAP.

Rolling the game back is necessary in cases of significant exploits. If it turns out to be that, cool, seriously consider rolling it back. But if it's a result of an individual account being hacked, which doesn't put fault on the game itself (in terms of administration, not referring to community), it's not quite necessary. Naturally, I'd say the same if this happened to Rose or anyone else but of course, everyone's probably too antsy about the war to believe that.

Sucks that this happened, but with all the fancy tools everyone has that days I can't imagine it being too difficult to create a list of who got removed and invite them back. Besides that, at the very least never use the same password for your alliance forums and the game. That's a classic way to get your password stolen and your account hacked. Alex will investigate, I'm sure. Meanwhile we each put in our own preventative measures and move on, there's not much else we can do that would be productive.

And so the wiki page gets more confusing still. Welcome to the war! I have some old friends in TCW, it'll be nice to be on the same side again. So this makes how many alliances that have switched sides?

Gotta be honest, once upon a time I didn't expect Arrgh to survive past the first couple generations (Ogaden & Friends), but here you are! Props for that, it's no small accomplishment for an alliance to outlive its old guard. 😬 Arrgh!

I'm not typically one for holiday spirit, but boy is this exciting! Time to get drunk festive.

To answer your question - community, really. My time with the GPA in CN will always be some of, if not my most favourite memories in these games. You either need a thriving/active community or a really dedicated old guard to keep any alliance alive. At a time, we had both and therefore really organized and healthy ministries, even Defense (especially defense, despite the frequent jokes of "why do they even need that" - we really had to worry about defense lol). Being a truly democratic government also helped, too, as each department head had to individually campaign for their position and typically brought significant change their department.

P&W certainly makes it more difficult than it was in CN, but I believe a hard neutral alliance (that is, one that truly has no true allies) could still be possible. Pre is right on the money. When I lead FA for the GPA here, granted it was still beta and then early current release, we were never attacked by an alliance. Not once. We existed very cohesively with the community and through personalities like myself and Lambdadelta (you're truly old if you remember that name), actively worked in the community and built up a reputation, but still maintained no political or economic ties with any alliance in particular. Just a lot of friends who were likely enough to help us out to make us not worth attacking. That being said, while possible it is absolutely exhausting to keep up with. I'm talking active on every alliance's forums and channels, almost every day. Hence why the second the GPA's FA here began to slip and it strayed from its original path (CN philosophy), it got rolled again and again. I could dig up for you literal thesis paper level debates on the philosophy of neutrality from the original CN-based GPA's forums. There were soft-neutral and hard-neutral types (the latter is "true neutrality"). Looking back, I think part of what kept us alive was a constant tension over what the best interpretation of neutrality was. You have to take yourself far too seriously just to survive with that kind of play-style. (which is why I left to help form Rose in the first place)

You've been playing P&W for what, five years now? Certainly a long tenure where you've been able to witness a lot of wars and negotiations. If you're able to read over the OP and look at this war, which includes several players on both sides leaving the game for good, all while maintaining a clean conscious - that's honestly a pathetic outlook and an alliance with such a long and varied history like Acadia deserves far better leadership than what you're trying to pull here.

Partisan posting serious text walls? Fantastic post. What an unprecedented shitfest of a war. With that said, I am genuinely relieved to see some members of Coalition B seeing through the utter BS coming from their leadership.

I was just thinking this the other day and 100% approve. Like James said, it's best to be objective in a moderation context and there's obvious trends (from both "sides of the isle") of people down-voting actual rule violations simply because the report doesn't align with their IC and/or OOC ideology.

Call me a shill, but of course it's not true. Alex is far and beyond enough of a professional to avoid literally take bribes to ban players. EDIT: Turns out that first gif can now apply to several people lmfao

Congrats! Despite me spending most of my time during this war attacking USN for their juicy infra, they seem like good people.