Orbis on Planet Bob?

[Roquentin]

Can confirm.

 

I take it you don't interact with Partisan much. :>

[LordRahl2]

I'm guilty of bringing (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics into PnW?...okay.

" You, in the general sense, are guilty of precisely what you are accusing tS of. "

 

Would it be more clear if i added "crossing game lines"? Or are you confused by: "in a general sense"? By that I mean that your alliance friends since I have zero idea of your involvement over there tbh. So yes... You, in the general sense, are guilty of precisely what you are accusing tS of: crossing game lines.

Edited June 12, 2016 by LordRahl2

[Zoot]

God all you people are so full of it.

Since this is an OOC area I'm gonna try not to be biased against either side, despite the fact that you are all clearly arguing your various party lines...

Most importantly, regardless of what the actual CB of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is, the fact that a rallying cry of "For Steve" went up ties the war to the one in PnW. Whether joking or not it creates a connection. When I first heard of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) what I heard was (more or less direct quote): "Alpha's allies have finally come to their aid, they just did it in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) rather than PnW". Now this wasn't part of some party line or someone trying to spin, this was just a guy I was talking to on irc. So regardless of whether the two wars are actually linked, they are linked in the minds of people. 

 

Now some of you are saying "Who cares about what happens in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)?". The problem with that is that the people that still play (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) obviously cares and the idea that actions in PnW can have an influence on them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) will obviously effect how people act in PnW. Now just to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of actually punishing people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) for their actions in PnW, what I'm saying is that the second the cry of "For Steve" started the uncertainty was created in peoples' minds. Could actions taken in PnW have consequences in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)? Just the fact that people think that means that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics are influencing PnW.

 

Moving on, the idea that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW aren't linked is ridicules. Several of you have brought your alliances here from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), several of you use the same name as you do in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Now you can claim that you can keep it separate all you want, but really, who are you trying to fool? You bring your alliances to PnW because you want to bring your community to PnW, thus you are linking the two. You are bringing your name with you because you want people from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) to recognize you, thus you are linking the two.

 

I've seen several NPO members say that they shouldn't be judged based on the actions of their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) counterparts and then in the same breath say that they are trying to bring their community here. If you are the same community then how do you expect people to not use their experience with your community as a base for their interactions with you here? And just so it's clear, I'm not trying to single NPO out, several other alliances are doing the same. I just used NPO because they have been at the center of this whole thing.

 

Furthermore if people truly wanted to keep things separate, they wouldn't have used the same name here as they did in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). They use the same name so they can use their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) contacts to further their PnW politics. It's obvious in this topic. When people bring up something Chimera has said it has more weight because he is who he is in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), despite the fact that he hasn't really done anything of note in PnW. When people talk to IC or Hans or Roq they do it full knowing what they've done and accomplished in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (unless they've never played (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) and thus it influences the interaction. Denying that fact is simply silly.

 

(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW are connected, by the communities that have crossed over, by the people and relationships that have been brought over. We can't do anything against that, but as PnW grows older (and hopefully larger) the influence will decrease as alliances and people in PnW will create new relationships and have past actions in PnW to be judged by.

[Jodo]

(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is for gheys

[Dalinar]

At least it's not personal and you're not crossing OOC/IC-(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)/PnW boundaries in this assessment.

Azaghul's been in alliances stabbed in the back by Roq on different occasions. It'd be a misstep to trust him for a second even if this is a different realm. It's common sense not to trust someone given their history.

[Kastor]

God all you people are so full of it.

Since this is an OOC area I'm gonna try not to be biased against either side, despite the fact that you are all clearly arguing your various party lines...

Most importantly, regardless of what the actual CB of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is, the fact that a rallying cry of "For Steve" went up ties the war to the one in PnW. Whether joking or not it creates a connection. When I first heard of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) what I heard was (more or less direct quote): "Alpha's allies have finally come to their aid, they just did it in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) rather than PnW". Now this wasn't part of some party line or someone trying to spin, this was just a guy I was talking to on irc. So regardless of whether the two wars are actually linked, they are linked in the minds of people. 

 

Now some of you are saying "Who cares about what happens in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)?". The problem with that is that the people that still play (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) obviously cares and the idea that actions in PnW can have an influence on them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) will obviously effect how people act in PnW. Now just to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of actually punishing people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) for their actions in PnW, what I'm saying is that the second the cry of "For Steve" started the uncertainty was created in peoples' minds. Could actions taken in PnW have consequences in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)? Just the fact that people think that means that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics are influencing PnW.

 

Moving on, the idea that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW aren't linked is ridicules. Several of you have brought your alliances here from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), several of you use the same name as you do in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Now you can claim that you can keep it separate all you want, but really, who are you trying to fool? You bring your alliances to PnW because you want to bring your community to PnW, thus you are linking the two. You are bringing your name with you because you want people from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) to recognize you, thus you are linking the two.

 

I've seen several NPO members say that they shouldn't be judged based on the actions of their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) counterparts and then in the same breath say that they are trying to bring their community here. If you are the same community then how do you expect people to not use their experience with your community as a base for their interactions with you here? And just so it's clear, I'm not trying to single NPO out, several other alliances are doing the same. I just used NPO because they have been at the center of this whole thing.

 

Furthermore if people truly wanted to keep things separate, they wouldn't have used the same name here as they did in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). They use the same name so they can use their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) contacts to further their PnW politics. It's obvious in this topic. When people bring up something Chimera has said it has more weight because he is who he is in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), despite the fact that he hasn't really done anything of note in PnW. When people talk to IC or Hans or Roq they do it full knowing what they've done and accomplished in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (unless they've never played (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) and thus it influences the interaction. Denying that fact is simply silly.

 

(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW are connected, by the communities that have crossed over, by the people and relationships that have been brought over. We can't do anything against that, but as PnW grows older (and hopefully larger) the influence will decrease as alliances and people in PnW will create new relationships and have past actions in PnW to be judged by.

No one is reading this.

[Buorhann]

I did, Kastor. It was well said.

[Auctor]

Azaghul's been in alliances stabbed in the back by Roq on different occasions. It'd be a misstep to trust him for a second even if this is a different realm. It's common sense not to trust someone given their history.

haha, okay. Good to know.

[Roquentin]

Good to know Mushroom Kingdom's position on the matter if we're going this route.

[Guest Curufinwe]

No one is reading this.

You should consider doing so - Zoot's rants are usually worth checking out.

[Prefonteen]

I take it you don't interact with Partisan much. :>

 

Your interactions with me are limited to:

 

1) debating on the OWF over just this particular issue.

 

and

 

2) playing telephone through MrHat

 

I'm glad you were able to formulate an opinion this quickly

[Roquentin]

Your interactions with me are limited to:

 

1) debating on the OWF over just this particular issue.

 

and

 

2) playing telephone through MrHat

 

I'm glad you were able to formulate an opinion this quickly

 

idk from what I've seen it's definitely been on your radar. I'm not going to get further into it since it was stuff you discussed with MrHat privately.

[Dalinar]

Good to know Mushroom Kingdom's position on the matter if we're going this route.

4 of our 91 members were in Mushroom Kingdom. If you want to claim TKR is MK due to the 4.4% of my membership that was formally MK, feel free to, we have more (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) TOP and (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) ODN members than MK. We are a strictly PnW alliance and have no formal connections to any alliances in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

[Yosodog]

4 of our 91 members were in Mushroom Kingdom. If you want to claim TKR is MK due to the 4.4% of my membership that was formally MK, feel free to, we have more (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) TOP and (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) ODN members than MK. We are a strictly PnW alliance and have no formal connections to any alliances in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

 

TKR is GPA confirmed.

[Auctor]

4 of our 91 members were in Mushroom Kingdom. If you want to claim TKR is MK due to the 4.4% of my membership that was formally MK, feel free to, we have more (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) TOP and (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) ODN members than MK. We are a strictly PnW alliance and have no formal connections to any alliances in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

Yall merely make judgment calls based on their grudges from another world. Got it.

[Kastor]

4 of our 91 members were in Mushroom Kingdom. If you want to claim TKR is MK due to the 4.4% of my membership that was formally MK, feel free to, we have more (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) TOP and (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) ODN members than MK. We are a strictly PnW alliance and have no formal connections to any alliances in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

When the second in command of NPO and the leader of TkR have beef >>>>

 

"Allies" tho

[Kid Winchell]

God all you people are so full of it.

 

Since this is an OOC area I'm gonna try not to be biased against either side, despite the fact that you are all clearly arguing your various party lines...

 

Most importantly, regardless of what the actual CB of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is, the fact that a rallying cry of "For Steve" went up ties the war to the one in PnW. Whether joking or not it creates a connection. When I first heard of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) what I heard was (more or less direct quote): "Alpha's allies have finally come to their aid, they just did it in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) rather than PnW". Now this wasn't part of some party line or someone trying to spin, this was just a guy I was talking to on irc. So regardless of whether the two wars are actually linked, they are linked in the minds of people. 

 

Now some of you are saying "Who cares about what happens in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)?". The problem with that is that the people that still play (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) obviously cares and the idea that actions in PnW can have an influence on them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) will obviously effect how people act in PnW. Now just to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of actually punishing people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) for their actions in PnW, what I'm saying is that the second the cry of "For Steve" started the uncertainty was created in peoples' minds. Could actions taken in PnW have consequences in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)? Just the fact that people think that means that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics are influencing PnW.

 

Moving on, the idea that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW aren't linked is ridicules. Several of you have brought your alliances here from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), several of you use the same name as you do in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Now you can claim that you can keep it separate all you want, but really, who are you trying to fool? You bring your alliances to PnW because you want to bring your community to PnW, thus you are linking the two. You are bringing your name with you because you want people from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) to recognize you, thus you are linking the two.

 

I've seen several NPO members say that they shouldn't be judged based on the actions of their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) counterparts and then in the same breath say that they are trying to bring their community here. If you are the same community then how do you expect people to not use their experience with your community as a base for their interactions with you here? And just so it's clear, I'm not trying to single NPO out, several other alliances are doing the same. I just used NPO because they have been at the center of this whole thing.

 

Furthermore if people truly wanted to keep things separate, they wouldn't have used the same name here as they did in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). They use the same name so they can use their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) contacts to further their PnW politics. It's obvious in this topic. When people bring up something Chimera has said it has more weight because he is who he is in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), despite the fact that he hasn't really done anything of note in PnW. When people talk to IC or Hans or Roq they do it full knowing what they've done and accomplished in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (unless they've never played (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) and thus it influences the interaction. Denying that fact is simply silly.

 

(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW are connected, by the communities that have crossed over, by the people and relationships that have been brought over. We can't do anything against that, but as PnW grows older (and hopefully larger) the influence will decrease as alliances and people in PnW will create new relationships and have past actions in PnW to be judged by.

 

 

No one is reading this.

Anyone who is genuinely interested in civil, intelligent discussion would have. It sums up the situation quite eloquently.

[Roquentin]

God all you people are so full of it.

 

Since this is an OOC area I'm gonna try not to be biased against either side, despite the fact that you are all clearly arguing your various party lines...

 

Most importantly, regardless of what the actual CB of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is, the fact that a rallying cry of "For Steve" went up ties the war to the one in PnW. Whether joking or not it creates a connection. When I first heard of the war in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) what I heard was (more or less direct quote): "Alpha's allies have finally come to their aid, they just did it in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) rather than PnW". Now this wasn't part of some party line or someone trying to spin, this was just a guy I was talking to on irc. So regardless of whether the two wars are actually linked, they are linked in the minds of people. 

 

Now some of you are saying "Who cares about what happens in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)?". The problem with that is that the people that still play (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) obviously cares and the idea that actions in PnW can have an influence on them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) will obviously effect how people act in PnW. Now just to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of actually punishing people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) for their actions in PnW, what I'm saying is that the second the cry of "For Steve" started the uncertainty was created in peoples' minds. Could actions taken in PnW have consequences in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)? Just the fact that people think that means that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics are influencing PnW.

 

Moving on, the idea that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW aren't linked is ridicules. Several of you have brought your alliances here from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), several of you use the same name as you do in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Now you can claim that you can keep it separate all you want, but really, who are you trying to fool? You bring your alliances to PnW because you want to bring your community to PnW, thus you are linking the two. You are bringing your name with you because you want people from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) to recognize you, thus you are linking the two.

 

I've seen several NPO members say that they shouldn't be judged based on the actions of their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) counterparts and then in the same breath say that they are trying to bring their community here. If you are the same community then how do you expect people to not use their experience with your community as a base for their interactions with you here? And just so it's clear, I'm not trying to single NPO out, several other alliances are doing the same. I just used NPO because they have been at the center of this whole thing.

 

Furthermore if people truly wanted to keep things separate, they wouldn't have used the same name here as they did in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). They use the same name so they can use their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) contacts to further their PnW politics. It's obvious in this topic. When people bring up something Chimera has said it has more weight because he is who he is in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), despite the fact that he hasn't really done anything of note in PnW. When people talk to IC or Hans or Roq they do it full knowing what they've done and accomplished in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (unless they've never played (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) and thus it influences the interaction. Denying that fact is simply silly.

 

(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and PnW are connected, by the communities that have crossed over, by the people and relationships that have been brought over. We can't do anything against that, but as PnW grows older (and hopefully larger) the influence will decrease as alliances and people in PnW will create new relationships and have past actions in PnW to be judged by.

 

I don't see how being linked in the minds of people makes it an absolute. That's my problem there. Was the For Steve joke probably ill-advised? yes, but as mentioned before MI6 was previously rolled while Alpha was aligned with tS, so there is no strict parallel in terms of relations between the two.

 

I can't think of a time where they were the sole influencing factor. I would say (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) impacts P&W far more since a lot of the people who have risen to prominence here seem to have chips on their shoulder about certain things that transpired there and let it influence their FA. I would hate to push it too far, but it seems like there's been an attempt to recreate a historical version of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) but with themselves on top. 

 

I think this ends up becoming a double standard because a lot of these alliances won't have (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) names but will have (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) roots but will receive light treatment ie. the tS/MI6 comparison attracts a lot of ire despite an equal amount of crossover while NPO/NPO is seen as acceptable. I'm not in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) NPO and was historically opposed to it until maybe 2 years ago and several high gov are non-(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) NPO. A lot of the members are not either. We were going to draw more upon the community but it wouldn't be exactly the same as other iterations.

 

People are bringing over relationships but complain about certain crossfeuds.  It really seems all to be side-based. If you're the same side side it's cool to hold grudges with people from other games, if not you're a monster for making such comparisons. With Chimaera, it's more he's seen it fit to brandish tS's power at certain points and given he is a bedrock of the MI6 community, he also provides weight to the tS one. A few months back he had considered making his own alliance but realized it would cause further member losses for tS so he decided to direct more MI6 to tS.

 

I've personally had the pleasure of being able to interact with people who didn't know me before and it's great since I can just do straight talk with no historical baggage and get along on a solid basis. I also have always tried to bury the hatchet with people I had problems with in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), like Steve regardless of the circumstances because I just see hating people across games on a personal level as incredibly immature and limiting.

[Azaghul]

At least it's not personal and you're not crossing OOC/IC-(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)/PnW boundaries in this assessment.

It is personal yes. I try not to bring over grudges from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), and I definitely don't for any alliances. There are a small handful of people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (less than five) who act in such a way that it reflects on their RL personality in a bad way to me and I can reasonably expect them to act in a similar way here. If I can't trust them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), regardless of politics, I'm not going to trust them here. Roquentin is one. I don't think any others currently play P&W.

 

There are more people (a few dozen) who I have a positive opinion of from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and that carries over here as well. Not in the sense of whom I am allied too (some aren't allies) or feel like I owe favors to. But I might trust their judgement or ability or honesty more because they have shown those positive qualities in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

 

Also Zoot: I used my (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) name here because I like it and use it for a lot of things. When I first started playing this game I didn't take it too seriously or think about it that much. I did not intend to link myself with my (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) personal.

[Roquentin]

At this point, Azaghul is mainly known for pot shots in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and sudden launching into others,. with his leadership usually having to disavow his opinions(It seems like he is given more free reign here) so I hope he realizes he can expect to be treated in kind and that it isn't solely my opinion.

[Auctor]

It is personal yes. I try not to bring over grudges from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), and I definitely don't for any alliances. There are a small handful of people in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) (less than five) who act in such a way that it reflects on their RL personality in a bad way to me and I can reasonably expect them to act in a similar way here. If I can't trust them in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), regardless of politics, I'm not going to trust them here. Roquentin is one. I don't think any others currently play P&W.

 

There are more people (a few dozen) who I have a positive opinion of from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and that carries over here as well. Not in the sense of whom I am allied too (some aren't allies) or feel like I owe favors to. But I might trust their judgement or ability or honesty more because they have shown those positive qualities in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

 

Also Zoot: I used my (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) name here because I like it and use it for a lot of things. When I first started playing this game I didn't take it too seriously or think about it that much. I did not intend to link myself with my (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) personal.

[Chunky Monkey]

 

Eh, I think you have a point here, but think the wording of it "inactive farm nation" is a bit dehumanizing. Pacifica in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is able to utilize a model where they can have a large casual player base that can still contribute to the well-being of the alliance even if they don't have the time. To some degree it has proven a lot more successful long-term than the elite alliance model I subscribe to over there. P&W isn't as friendly to casual players, but we've been looking for ways to make it be so people can still be part of a community when they have the time without being a drain on limited resources.

I do agree with the idea that directly calling them that would be dehumanizing. The problem is that the model that allows members to join but not actually contribute much in terms of organization or governmental efforts works far far better here than it does in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) when you can simply collect 100% tax on what they create and redistribute it to players that will actually use it. Thus the suggestion that they are, in fact, "inactive farm nations", even if that was not your original intent.

[Auctor]

I do agree with the idea that directly calling them that would be dehumanizing. The problem is that the model that allows members to join but not actually contribute much in terms of organization or governmental efforts works far far better here than it does in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) when you can simply collect 100% tax on what they create and redistribute it to players that will actually use it. Thus the suggestion that they are, in fact, "inactive farm nations", even if that was not your original intent.

On an OOC level, I would think it should be everyone's goal to bring more people in. On an IC level, I don't see what the problem would be with having them prove activity before being given large amounts of building funds. I suspect other alliances have similar policies.

[Charles Bolivar]

 

I think this ends up becoming a double standard because a lot of these alliances won't have (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) names but will have (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) roots but will receive light treatment ie. the tS/MI6 comparison attracts a lot of ire despite an equal amount of crossover while NPO/NPO is seen as acceptable. I'm not in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) NPO and was historically opposed to it until maybe 2 years ago and several high gov are non-(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) NPO. A lot of the members are not either. We were going to draw more upon the community but it wouldn't be exactly the same as other iterations.

 

 

An equal amount of crossover? Kidding me? I responded to something similar within the NPO embassy on tS' boards so I will just paste my response here since it is essentially the same but to say tS has as much crossover with MI6 as the two branches of NPO share is blatantly ridiculous and you really are just repeating it over and over to suit your own twisted and warped narrative. Which is nothing new.

 

 

The ironic thing is that we are being labelled as being similar to a (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) alliance despite the differences manny listed by members of an alliance who are nearly cloned upon their (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) progenitor. Same emperor, a few members in both governments, a substantially similar membership, same flag, same name, same alliance theme, same alliance structure, same treaties and so on including repeating the same statements about certain individuals in both games. I am too lazy to check but I presume even the charters are even similar.

 

What makes it even more ironic is that's few of these cloned concepts, particularly the alliance theme were actually brought into (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) from nation states in an invasion more than ten years ago by the pacific nations in NS.

 

Compare tS and besides a few members you won't find a single thing in common with MI6. How much proof does PnW NPO actually need? 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Charles the Tyrant

[Roquentin]

An equal amount of crossover? Kidding me? I responded to something similar within the NPO embassy on tS' boards so I will just paste my response here since it is essentially the same but to say tS has as much crossover with MI6 as the two branches of NPO share is blatantly ridiculous and you really are just repeating it over and over to suit your own twisted and warped narrative. Which is nothing new.

 

 

It's not. You have a similar flag. Similar members. If anyone believes you when you say a few members, they're gullible as hell.  You came over to tS from MI6 originally. Roy did and he was gov of MI6 by January. Manthrax did. Cynic did. List goes on.You're one of the biggest peddlers of warped narratives. It really isn't. The parallels  with it and PW NPO are actually pretty close since tS is basically mainly comprised of MI6's closest allies at the time it was formed along with MI6. The whole "we have Sparta/TOP people" argument is funny for that reason.

 

You just refuse to accept arguments that don't fit your closed mindset.

Edited June 13, 2016 by Roquentin