Ryzom

moyaku wrote:Hi all,

Since this thread was first meant to express thoughts about the KA, I ll give mine !
I do not agree with the KA's position (guess everyone knowing me knows that already ), but still, I gotta admit that a few days before KA started their *conquest politic* I was rather looking for more MULTIPLAYER events of long last and they gave it to me and few friends .

So even if you guys think in a different way I wanted to say thanks for getting people together ! I owe you some good fun !

May the righteous side convince the other...

WOOT a post thats right on topic !

marct wrote:So, Since everyone else seems to know, Would someone care to enlighten me as to the KA's position. Because I actually didn't know we had one.

Well Noin it seems to me any organization without a clearly stated position, ( and a consistent one at that ) will suffer a huge loss of effectiveness. I also believe that if the KA truly has no position then the community will give it one and not necessarily the one that the members of the KA wish to convey.

I'm not saying that the KA is good or bad, or right or wrong, I'm saying that the actions of the KA along with the many interpretations of the community make the KA seem like a shadowy underground organization.

There will always be levels of politics and intrigue and thats a good thing because it keeps things interesting for those into that aspect of the community But until the KA appoint a "spokesperson" many homins will have no idea what the KA stands for, and depending on the personal reaction to different post by prominent and outstanding members of the KA will walk away with different ideas of what the KA is all about.

No offense intended Noin, but this as an example: the posts from you would make me think that the KA is a benign and confused bunch of people aimlessly wandering around as allies. DT's post would make me lean to the thought that the KA is a warmongering "gotta have it all" organization (depending on which posts i had read recently, since not every homin reads all posts), whereas Spriteh's postings are more middle of the road and probably more close to what the majority of the KA "stands for".

marct wrote:So, Since everyone else seems to know, Would someone care to enlighten me as to the KA's position. Because I actually didn't know we had one.

Well hon, if the KA doesn't have a position, maybe that's part of the problem. You see, because there are a number of guilds holding this "title" together (member of the Karavan Alliance) then whether it was intended or not, all guilds in that alliance are considered as one entity.

And the KA acts the same way with others. If just ONE Samsara (for example) shows up to a battle, I've heard those in the KA say things like "ooooh looks like Samsara has chosen a side". Well, you can't have it both ways. You (collectively, not "you" personally) can't treat the actions of one person as if they were part of a bigger entity, but then expect others to treat the actions of individuals in the KA as if they were only "one person's actions".

Don't you think it's just a tad interesting that folks like DT say things like "we'll be taking names at all battles" (meaning, if just one person from a guild attacks, DT intends to retaliate against the entire guild)....yet those in the KA say "Oh well, DT only speaks for DT". Even though I've personally heard others completely agree with DT on that stance.

It's just human nature, Noin. If people see a group of folks that carry one title (such as *member* of the Karavan Alliance), then they are going to assume those that carry that title have the same ideals (or at least generally do). If the KA hasn't bothered to organize itself enough to at least hold *some* kind of "position" in things, then no darn wonder things are so screwy right now. What's the point of being an organization, if everyone in it just does whatever they want to do?

lexi44 wrote:And the KA acts the same way with others. If just ONE Samsara (for example) shows up to a battle, I've heard those in the KA say things like "ooooh looks like Samsara has chosen a side". Well, you can't have it both ways. You (collectively, not "you" personally) can't treat the actions of one person as if they were part of a bigger entity, but then expect others to treat the actions of individuals in the KA as if they were only "one person's actions".

Have to agree with this. And it quite annoys me, since it seems the "KA" (or is it simply vocal members of it?) assumes we temporarily assimilate the religious beliefs of our employer of the day. In fact, it reached the point where I had to change my sig just to reflect this...

Hey, here's an idea, pay me to worship Jena! I'd do it too.

lexi44 wrote:It's just human nature, Noin. If people see a group of folks that carry one title (such as *member* of the Karavan Alliance), then they are going to assume those that carry that title have the same ideals (or at least generally do). If the KA hasn't bothered to organize itself enough to at least hold *some* kind of "position" in things, then no darn wonder things are so screwy right now. What's the point of being an organization, if everyone in it just does whatever they want to do?

I have extensively studied the organisation. From an external view, it appears it's primary purpose is to aquire all OPs on Atys for members of the KA through mutual defense, a systematic approach to selecting targets, doling out who gets what shares and internal trade benefits.

It is _not_ as the name would imply a religious alliance, though many of its more vocal members are religious, there are some (perhaps a significant proportion) are in it because (and I quote) "Lol its cos I love PvP, and we always attack ur OPs".

So yeah, its a war-party of guilds with a few trading benefits thrown in. Or at least thats where it looks from where a neutral bystander/previous target stands.

Zahan: I object to someone assuming I'm a Kamist just because I fight by their side in almost every OP battle. How rude.

Oud: Well sure, why would anyone assume that?

Zahan: And now for my next trick, I'm going to tell you everything you need to know about an organization I don't belong to and have no inside knowledge of except for the few things they've said in public and the hundreds of things that have been said about them by their enemies.

Oud: You're a funny blue man.

I was going to write up how I view the KA, but I'm having more fun watching people turn their speculation into facts right in front of my eyes. You're more talented than Penn and Teller with that magic trick.

oldmess wrote:Zahan: I object to someone assuming I'm a Kamist just because I fight by their side in almost every OP battle. How rude.

Ignoring the fact that OPs are not religious in nature, lets assume that it's true I fight on the side of Kamists in every OP battle. And how bout we proceed to examine the other similarities between my choices... oh look, I defend in almost every OP battle, I guess that means I am incapable of attacking! When multiple reasons for a situation exist, of course you pick the one that suits your propaganda purposes best

oldmess wrote:Zahan: And now for my next trick, I'm going to tell you everything you need to know about an organization I don't belong to and have no inside knowledge of except for the few things they've said in public and the hundreds of things that have been said about them by their enemies

Glad you are laughing too. Also glad you can rephrase exactly what I said into some kind of semi-humorous flame. Lets examine that shall we:

aardnebb wrote:From an external view,

Hmm... that clear enough for ya? Ok, lets take it a step further and actually read all the way to the bottom of the post! Contraversial I know, but I feel it may be necesary in this case!

aardnebb wrote:Or at least thats where it looks from where a neutral bystander/previous target stands.

aardnebb wrote:Glad you are laughing too. Also glad you can rephrase exactly what I said into some kind of semi-humorous flame.

*sigh* I was teasing you, not flaming you. If that's what you think is flaming, I'd hate to hear what you call it if I really did flame you.

Oh, and trying to make a point in a humorous way. Since that's not possible any more, here it is plainly: As much as you don't like it when people assume they know you based on assumptions about your behavior, I don't like being told who I am or who the group I'm part of is by people that don't know anything about it except what they assume:

I have extensively studied the organisation.

It comes off as arrogant and is exactly the same thing you're complaining about. That was my point. Please don't point you're little disclaimers at the end; it still comes off arrogant even if you didn't intend it that way.

and a flame right back, wooo hooo. Let's keep it going and we could have a barbaque, or maybe some smores.

*has turned super cycincal about the forums*

heh ok guys keep it calm we dun want the thread getting locked now do we? as it seems to be a place of discussion on more then one topic lets make use of it

aardnebb wrote:Ignoring the fact that OPs are not religious in nature

Just to correct you, I think some people need to close the game and restart it...must have been a long time.

There is a nice little paragraph on the loading screen that pretty much spells out that that is exactly what they are intended to be, 'religious in nature'.

(oh and I'm not trying to start something, just a simple correction)