Top 10 most historically significant regions/orgs? [Split]

[North East Somerset]

As for the author's original question, I note it is "historically significant" not just "influential" which is going to favour the more bold action-focussed regions. And also regions/orgs not just regions, which is going to favour orgs because then we can just lump regions into them and do multiple ones at once.

I don't think we'll ever get a satisfactory answer to this question because the general public are so reliant on secondary sources retelling history which is often hugely biased. I can analyse back to 2004, but I'm hesitant to include things from 2003, just because of their notoriety. I simply don't know whether their claims are true and/or reasonable, or whether it's just some well written history telling an exaggerated story of power. Something like AA for instance may or may not have been significant, but they certainly didn't last very long, nor did they have any kind of substantive offsite community. So I'm rather reliant on story-telling regarding their significance. Everyone else on my list I have first hand experience of and have talked first hand to people involved. Likewise, I reject Unibot's notion that 10KI aren't significant because they are isolationist. I can tell you right now that they've been very significant in influencing the actions of many from my generation.

Rather than approach this by talking about regions/orgs directly, I have approached this from the view of what have these regions/orgs given us that has been "historically significant". What legacy have regions/orgs given us? We can sit down now and attribute them having contributed to an ideology of significance, or having taken actions which have had such significance they've been a turning point in the game. When you actually start thinking like that, the list soon starts to whittle down. TNM for instance were very influential, but I can't see them as significant. They didn't stand for anything collectively, they were just an elitist group of top gameplayers who wielded a lot of power for a relatively short period of time. I can't see them leaving a legacy in terms of elitism being a philosophy in the modern day, so I can't see a need to include them despite their influence.

I'd say these 16 regions/orgs cover a lot of the historically significant developments in NS, I'm obviously bagging a few significant regions in with some of those orgs too, to save listing them separately. I don't think I can list them in any particular order though.

Ideological defenderism: 10KI, RLA & UDL.
Political defenderism: ADN & FRA.
Raiderism: "Farkers", DEN, LWU & TBH.
Imperialism: Atlantic Alliance, Gatesville & the UIAF.
Independence: GB&I, Equilism & Europeia.
Francoism: NPO.

[Anime Daisuki]

104 participated in the 2009 survey which is a fairly decent number. Kogvuron and CSP attempted to carry out another influence survey in 2013, but the results were never released due to lack of participation. Let that be a lesson that any survey should be *simple* to fill out and not take more than a couple of minutes to do!

Aye. I remember that one. It was a valiant attempt but a lot of us, me included, decided not to participate once it became clear that it required us to visit a website which could have our IPs logged. Also like you said, the survey form was far too long and complicated.

Suggestion for future reference:
1. Make it simple.
2. Address people's security /privacy concerns. If you must create some kind of rule to prevent puppeteering, use a simple rule like: Submissions are only accepted via main nations with WA.
3. Be inclusive and accept TG submissions, don't force people to visit *your* forum to vote. Take a page off FRA's Defender Awards - Submissions for the awards are taken via FRA forum, TG, as well as PMs in selected non-FRA regional forums.

-GRO/AD

[Cormac A Stark]

If anyone wants to see the results of the 2013 influence survey, feel free to TG me and I can send you a link to the GDocs. I've given it out to a couple people.

You should stop doing this, by the way, as the raw GDocs not only show how people voted but who. Nobody signed up for all of Gameplay knowing who they thought was influential.

[Unibot III]

Ideological defenderism: 10KI, RLA & UDL.
Political defenderism: ADN & FRA.
Raiderism: "Farkers", DEN, LWU & TBH.
Imperialism: Atlantic Alliance, Gatesville & the UIAF.
Independence: GB&I, Equilism & Europeia.
Francoism: NPO.

I think NES's list is pretty solid. The Met might be extended to say it was independentist (anachronistically), especially looking at major figures like Thomasia, while other times it also seemed to just be snuggling up to the ADN. It's self-serving political flexibility is something that The Empire took to heart, but in an entirely different direction.

10KI's influence is difficult to point down for me. It's not a well documented historical region and the era where it was least politically isolationist and most active interregionally, between Grub's absence and prior to Improving Wordiness, was an era of the game that is least documented. 07-09.

I don't know if I agree with the ideological/political distinction anymore in regards to defenderdom. All of the organizations have been and are political. RLA often made political decisions, so does 10KI and UDL, while ADN and FRA has made more idealistic decisions. It's a matter of who is in power at particular times and who pulls the faders up or down on the idealism or the realism - and often the people who you think are more idealistic are actually more political and vice versa. It's a tension though that plays out in every election in defenderdom - promise "back to defending", practice "I before politics, except after defending". This is a good thing though: any organization has to know how to play hardball to survive, they just need to make sure what they do doesn't affect their delivery of security to native communities, but enhances it.

The best defender leaders, in my opinion, are both extremely idealistic and extremely political. You've got to be able to pull a gymnastics routine on a tight-rope in two opposite extremes, while sipping a cup of tea.

[Zybodia]

I think NES's list is pretty solid.

I somehow completely missed that list after reading the paragraphs above it, but I agree that it is quite good. As Unibot was saying, the categories themselves could be poked, but I can't find myself disagreeing with the impact of any of the groups named.

10KI's influence is difficult to point down for me. It's not a well documented historical region and the era where it was least politically isolationist and most active interregionally, between Grub's absence and prior to Improving Wordiness, was an era of the game that is least documented. 07-09.

I thought that was their most isolationist time. Isn't that the era when XKI had no embassies?

[Unibot III]

I think NES's list is pretty solid.

I somehow completely missed that list after reading the paragraphs above it, but I agree that it is quite good. As Unibot was saying, the categories themselves could be poked, but I can't find myself disagreeing with the impact of any of the groups named.

10KI's influence is difficult to point down for me. It's not a well documented historical region and the era where it was least politically isolationist and most active interregionally, between Grub's absence and prior to Improving Wordiness, was an era of the game that is least documented. 07-09.

I thought that was their most isolationist time. Isn't that the era when XKI had no embassies?

I believe they cancelled the Triumvirate (between Heartland and Texas) at that time unexpectedly. I was more meaning militarily, TITO, in the absence of the RLA and the DSA, became quite influential and was at loggerheads with Sedgistan in the FRA.

[DEC-LAND]

there should be at least one raiding region

[Mekhet]

there should be at least one raiding region

There is...

[Zybodia]

I believe they cancelled the Triumvirate (between Heartland and Texas) at that time unexpectedly. I was more meaning militarily, TITO, in the absence of the RLA and the DSA, became quite influential and was at loggerheads with Sedgistan in the FRA.

The Triumvirate was/is actually Texas, Wysteria, and The Heartland.

But the point about TITO and the FRA being the only real names in defending at that time is well taken.

[Mekhet]

I believe they cancelled the Triumvirate (between Heartland and Texas) at that time unexpectedly. I was more meaning militarily, TITO, in the absence of the RLA and the DSA, became quite influential and was at loggerheads with Sedgistan in the FRA.

The Triumvirate was/is actually Texas, Wysteria, and The Heartland.

But the point about TITO and the FRA being the only real names in defending at that time is well taken.

I'm not sure if I can trust your word, after all that happened to Jahka. Poor guy, ;_;

[Unibot III]

I believe they cancelled the Triumvirate (between Heartland and Texas) at that time unexpectedly. I was more meaning militarily, TITO, in the absence of the RLA and the DSA, became quite influential and was at loggerheads with Sedgistan in the FRA.

The Triumvirate was/is actually Texas, Wysteria, and The Heartland.

Right. I meant 10ki's closing of a treaty with Texas, not The Triumvirate, I guess.

[Wordy]

Treaty with Texas was not closed as far as I know.

[Lavan Tiri]

Lately, Haven.

[Goddess Relief Office]

Right. I meant 10ki's closing of a treaty with Texas, not The Triumvirate, I guess.

Treaty with Texas was not closed as far as I know.

Neither of you were correct. 10KI's treaty with Texas was closed, but not in the time frame that Unibot stated (i.e. 2007-2009).

The Texas-10KI treaty was signed back in Aug 2003 and was retired in May 2004. This occurred under the administration of the first and second generation TITO commanders so for details like "why" you'll have to ask people like Fleeb, Yavanna, Gluland. (I consider myself 4th generation, just to give you a sense of history) While civilian (forum embassy updates) contacts stopped, military cooperation continued.

Zybodia's characterization of 10KI as "isolationalist" between 2007-2009 is off the mark by a year or two. From 2006-2008, we were working with all sorts of regions ranging from Peaceian, RLA, RRA, GRA, E-Army, ADN/DSA, FRA, COFR, Zurich, Sweetest Arrow, Liberty Alliance, AWP, Texas, TYW, and various feeder armies (when their delegates were pro-defender) just to name a few that sprung to mind. The turning point, if there was one, was Sedge/Marijuana Militia's affair in 2008. The internationalists among TITO were also burned by E-Army's decision to assist Lewis & Clark's coup in TNP, also in 2008. I think after these two events there's a realization that we can only depend on a very small circle of regions whose founders we know very well and could trust implicitly. Texas and AWP were two of those regions. The Texas-10KI treaty was re-activated in Jan 2009.


~GRO/AD

[Sichuan Pepper]

Thanks GRO
I started playing in 2009 so that explains why I thought the treaty was in effect. In my game lifetime it has always been there.

[Blackbird]

The best defender leaders, in my opinion, are both extremely idealistic and extremely political. You've got to be able to pull a gymnastics routine on a tight-rope in two opposite extremes, while sipping a cup of tea.

It wasn't very fun. Trying to deal with my comrades in both RLA and ADN mostly made both of them dislike me. *chuckles*

[Unibot III]

The turning point, if there was one, was Sedge/Marijuana Militia's affair in 2008. The internationalists among TITO were also burned by E-Army's decision to assist Lewis & Clark's coup in TNP, also in 2008. I think after these two events there's a realization that we can only depend on a very small circle of regions whose founders we know very well and could trust implicitly. Texas and AWP were two of those regions. The Texas-10KI treaty was re-activated in Jan 2009.

But those events are vastly different from each other, the Marijuana Military affair was a legitimate disagreement over the ethical limits of defenderism - should the people trying to stop invasions, become invaders themselves? Lewis and Clark's Coup was a coup, plain and simple.

The fact that Sedge was one of the most vocal critics of the coup and had his neck on the chopping block in FRA for trying to stand against the coup, should at the very least show how TITO's message interregionally is confused. Often TITO has shaped their rhetoric as "Against the leader, not the Organization" to put pressure on these organizations to burn a leader which you don't like, but your rhetoric has almost always been misplaced on the wrong people - you target public figures whose ideals don't always match up to your own, instead of targeting the dirty backroom boys who might be lingering in an organization (a.k.a. the people who put pressure on Sedge to retract his stance on Lewis and Clark, the people who put pressure on UDL to accept bigameplayers, the people who put pressure on FRA to back off TSP's coup).

Not all defender organizations have the same autonomy as TITO - which is led by a consistent voice that isn't necessarily forced to do anything. In the FRA's parliamentary democracy and UDL's horizontal meritocracy, the leader has to make concessions. I, for one, would have been happy if TITO had put out a document saying they wanted to see The Empire gone from UDL - nay, I would have loved that. I would have used it to justify removing them. Instead you went after me and called me an invader of all things. Your statement lacked political legitimacy and sounded like the mechanical rantings of someone kept in a time capsule since 2003. I told you off and personally chipped away at each member of The Empire individually, removing them for various reasons as they arose - it was like cleaning up a virus on a computer and every defender organization has had to go through it.

The best defender leaders, in my opinion, are both extremely idealistic and extremely political. You've got to be able to pull a gymnastics routine on a tight-rope in two opposite extremes, while sipping a cup of tea.

It wasn't very fun. Trying to deal with my comrades in both RLA and ADN mostly made both of them dislike me. *chuckles*

You were one of the best at it, mate!

[Blackbird]

You were one of the bests at it, mate!

Eh, I don't know. I mean, I tried really hard to keep ADN and RLA together rather than fighting each other, and I spent a lot of time with it. On the ground, things were always fine: defenders helped defenders. But it became politically untenable for the higherups to continue hobknobbing with each other, and that's really when things fell apart. It was sad: people I'd worked with for years became enemies on both sides.

[Sichuan Pepper]

Once again Unibot you twist events to suit yourself. TITO did in fact try very hard to work with UDL. The relationship withered over time while you were the leader and grew worse when you made the call to allow invaders into UDL and gave them leave to invade as long as they continued to support UDL. Hell on more than one occasion I saw them switch during update having invaded one region to then defend with UDL.
I could name numerous other factors that soured any chance of working with UDL but I fail to see why airing your dirty laundry here is beneficial.
You attacked TITO at every single chance and continue to do so now. It is beyond me why you do it other than ego on your part.

[Mekhet]

Once again Unibot you twist events to suit yourself. TITO did in fact try very hard to work with UDL. The relationship withered over time while you were the leader and grew worse when you made the call to allow invaders into UDL and gave them leave to invade as long as they continued to support UDL. Hell on more than one occasion I saw them switch during update having invaded one region to then defend with UDL.
I could name numerous other factors that soured any chance of working with UDL but I fail to see why airing your dirty laundry here is beneficial.
You attacked TITO at every single chance and continue to do so now. It is beyond me why you do it other than ego on your part.

Image

YOU FINALLY DID IT! I'M SO HAPPY RIGHT NOW. <3

[Unibot III]

The relationship withered over time while you were the leader and grew worse when you made the call to allow invaders into UDL and gave them leave to invade as long as they continued to support UDL.

A decision which was made by the Chiefs of Staff to try to ease the void of liberators left behind from the utter self-isolation of TITO. A decision which I personally sought to revoke less than a month later. A decision which reflects so poorly on you that invaders served as more active and cooperative defenders.

We didn't give anyone "leave" to invade, you gave people leave all of the time, however, in refusing to liberate most regions. Furthermore, you were very uncooperative well before your final statement, which declared the UDL an "invader" organization. At one point, you required all communication to go solely to Grub and had given us a blanket "no" to all requests for assistance.

Out of desperation to fill a pressing need for liberators (in the wake of your sheer stubbornness), we simply acted pragmatically and opened the organisation to more people to help liberate on a provisional basis, which is a lot different than not defending against them. You're accusing us of not defending against these invaders, but if anyone had not defended against them and refused to liberate against them it would have been you, out of some misguided idea that only "particular" regions matter and others can continue to rot under occupation with the hope that their suffering will help others.

I'm very proud of the UDL, the work we accomplished given the lack of cooperation in defenderdom and the people that made it all possible. Every region is important and every decision --no matter how small-- has consequences.

[Mekhet]

The relationship withered over time while you were the leader and grew worse when you made the call to allow invaders into UDL and gave them leave to invade as long as they continued to support UDL.

A decision which was made by the Chiefs of Staff to try to ease the void of liberators left behind from the utter self-isolation of TITO. A decision which I personally sought to revoke less than a month later. A decision which reflects so poorly on you that invaders served as more active and cooperative defenders.

We didn't give anyone "leave" to invade, you gave people leave all of the time, however, in refusing to liberate most regions. Furthermore, you were very uncooperative well before your final statement, which declared the UDL an "invader" organization. At one point, you required all communication to go solely to Grub and had given us a blanket "no" to all requests for assistance.

Out of desperation to fill a pressing need for liberators (in the wake of your sheer stubbornness), we simply acted pragmatically and opened the organisation to more people to help liberate on a provisional basis, which is a lot different than not defending against them. You're accusing us of not defending against these invaders, but if anyone had not defended against them and refused to liberate against them it would have been you, out of some misguided idea that only "particular" regions matter and others can continue to rot under occupation with the hope that their suffering will help others.

I'm very proud of the UDL, the work we accomplished given the lack of cooperation in defenderdom and the people that made it all possible. Every region is important and every decision --no matter how small-- has consequences.

I can assure you Unibot, despite seeing a few minor conflicts and uneasy relations at times between TITO and the FRA, nothing was any way bridge burned as the UDL did with FRA and TITO. For the most part that was initiated from your side. I don't have access to all that stuff anymore due to changing sides but plenty still do. I remember the latest bullshit was when you freaked out over fendas not using #udl but another channel that UDL/LLA/Spiritus/FRA/RRA and other groups used. I could be incorrect on which fenda groups, so forgive any mistakes there. Shit like that doesn't win you "solidarity".

There's also plenty that's been stated by former UDL members that criticize many things. Of course you won't hear none of that from those like Mahaj, that just fall in line and lick the boots.

[Unibot III]

I remember the latest bullshit was when you freaked out over fendas not using #udl but another channel that UDL/LLA/Spiritus/FRA/RRA and other groups used. I could be incorrect on which fenda groups, so forgive any mistakes there. Shit like that doesn't win you "solidarity".

And TITO doesn't use IRC, so that wasn't a problem in this case. I wasn't a fan of a holistic #defender channel and liked to try keep UDL activity in #udl.

I believe TITO is actually very smart for keeping their internal communication on a separate site off of IRC - it gives them room to build a tighter community and atmosphere which I tried to reinforce with #udl.

There's also plenty that's been stated by former UDL members that criticize many things. Of course you won't hear none of that from those like Mahaj, that just fall in line and lick the boots.

I've heard plenty of this criticism from "former UDL members", much of it was openly said in #udl. The caricature of UDL as being some sort of mind hive that censored and removed members that didn't fall into line is very inaccurate. UDL was starved for liberators and never had the opportunity to remove anyone, despite the fact that sadly, some of them were just awful - some of our recruits would have been the spammers, trolls and troublemakers of other regions and organizations. We had to rely on them for numbers and I was never at liberty to just say "well go then, if that's how you feel...". I took a lot of crap from people, where most other leaders would have just removed those "critics".

There were a number of common criticisms I had during my era from various voices (some of them I respect and others who I think are dimwits or hacks) and it was a matter of filtering that information and finding what criticism was useful and what criticism was out of depth with the circumstances that UDL faced (from a command perspective, outsiders and even insiders weren't always aware of the limitations in terms of resources and time that the organization faced for decision-making).

[South Pacific Belschaft]

grew worse when you made the call to allow invaders into UDL and gave them leave to invade as long as they continued to support UDL. Hell on more than one occasion I saw them switch during update having invaded one region to then defend with UDL.

I still can't believe I was able to get Unibot to agree to that. Catburglar for life.

[Andacantra]

Hell on more than one occasion I saw them switch during update having invaded one region to then defend with UDL.

I will just do a public fact-check on this one, I can remember only one occasion when at least I personally did both a raid-related action (attempting to hold an already captured region) and a defending-related action (attempting to lib against a pile) in the same update. As a general rule I steered clear of it because it had the potential to cause trust issues, would be difficult to handle logistically and all the rest of it. I only did it on that one occasion because iirc the region that there was to be a liberation attempt against was being griefed/was highly likely to be griefed and thus I felt fairly strongly about helping with the lib.

This, however is not the topic of this thread. I think if this was say a top 20 then UDL would probably slide on, simply for having been the dominant defender force (not for particularly good reasons, mind) for quite a while. It's very forgettable though, which make it difficult to put into an "influential" regions list. I don't know enough about the history but I'd say that those regions that have been mentioned are still more influential now than the UDL is.