A Question
Moderator: Staff
Re: A Question
Well, it’s beyond moot since I haven’t pursued it in close to 6 months and the prime moment has passed, but the general gist of it was to attempt to convince the MCS to relocate to Bastion with their entire staff and charters intact and still fully under their own jurisdiction. It would be sort of like having a new nation join Bastion. It would all be very open and civil. I talked to a number of council members and I got “well, I wouldn’t oppose this, but you’d have to convince X” type answers. If you can get everyone to say that, then everyone is convinced, there’s no drama, and it happens. I’m not saying it would be easy. I’m not saying it would have even worked. But I think it was the best way to try something like that.Maximos wrote:Which begs the questions 'what idea?', 'why?' and 'no, seriously, what would be the point?'.I'm a little annoyed that these twats took my MCS opposition idea and didn't even tell me
I stopped trying to do that largely because of an increasing feeling that “I was the problem” with Bastion. People weren’t quite so down with wide-sweeping reform and consolidation as I believed. I guess they said things privately but didn’t agree with them in public. So it goes.
But this little scheme seems to be a Natopian/Antican/Babkhan plan in secret forums that I don’t even have access to. I could just admin myself in since it’s on Bastion (I can see the existence of the forum, but can’t enter even as an admin without modifying user group settings), but it leaves a paper trail that other admins would see, and honestly I don’t have enough faith in the seriousness of the plot to want to deal with the arguments of admin abuse that sort of thing would invite. Regardless, if they feel they need to hide behind security, it means they’re saying things people won’t agree with. That’s fun for a bit of drama but it’s not the kind of thing that leads to stable, long term solutions, as Einhorn so pointedly pointed about regarding the fate of all other MCS challenger organizations. I mean, seriously, this plan involves Malliki. It’s already a sinking ship.
Re: A Question
As a side note, I'd oppose the MCS being part of the Bastion Union and if it succeeded, I would leave.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
Re: A Question
Yes, I had anticipated several diehards opposing on principle, but ultimately decided it wasn’t a big deal. No offense. Leaving would certainly be your prerogative and choice. But it would hurt smaller nations far more than it would hurt the MCS. Micronationalism has always required community to self-sustain; you can make a perfect little nation just the way you want it, but once you’re done, there’s nothing to do. And you can get done in a matter of months, maybe weeks. The internet is littered with these abandoned little countries. Nobody cares because it’s just someone else’s ideas. Why would anyone want to join those types of nations when they could easily create their own? There has to be interaction.
Look at poor Archipelago. The lights went out in more than half the nations before they even went on, and they’re dimming faster than they’re brightening. Because the focus was far more on individual states than state interaction. Most of us got bored of talking to ourselves pretty fast.
Isolationism is death. We’re all getting older and life takes free time and doesn’t give it back. It was the principle that Bastion was founded on; that we’re no longer large enough to go it alone. Politicing and rabble rousing aside, I still believe that theory is sound.
Look at poor Archipelago. The lights went out in more than half the nations before they even went on, and they’re dimming faster than they’re brightening. Because the focus was far more on individual states than state interaction. Most of us got bored of talking to ourselves pretty fast.
Isolationism is death. We’re all getting older and life takes free time and doesn’t give it back. It was the principle that Bastion was founded on; that we’re no longer large enough to go it alone. Politicing and rabble rousing aside, I still believe that theory is sound.
Re: A Question
*applauds*
That was very well said!
That was very well said!
Re: A Question
I cannot agree with you more, if there wasn't the Hub to share things with my enthusiasm to do things in Uantir would be severely diminished, but I think you're missing the key thing here: neutrality. The Hub, as I was lead to believe, is just a nexus for various Micronational things to meet up at, and happens to be where the MCS is hosted. Both the Hub and the MCS are completely neutral entities that are micronationally themed, but not an organization of Micronations. The MCS has rules for the map, but the Hub asserts no rules or requirements over its member nations. The Bastion Union however requires micronations to ally to it, and the Union is moderated by nations, not by micronational enthusiasts. Of course those who run the MCS and the Hub have their own micronations, but in the Bastion Union they are moderating as a representative of their nation, not as a representative of the hobby.
That's what I've been trying to get you guys to understand. You keep chocking up my resistance to the Union as some isolationist tripe, but I don't need to join some UN to interact with other nations.
That's what I've been trying to get you guys to understand. You keep chocking up my resistance to the Union as some isolationist tripe, but I don't need to join some UN to interact with other nations.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
Re: A Question
I think I resent the implications that organizations on the Bastion forums would be controlled and/or persecuted because the admins of those forums are also member states. Or something along those lines? You lost me a little. I'm not really sure where the disconnect is here - why is Craitman a "micronational enthusiast" even though he has a nation of his own and I’m not even though I have a nation of my own. The MCS being on the hub is neutral and an organization being on Bastion would be politicized? Even ignoring the why, by whom, I must ask? Despite your apparent belief, not all Bastion nations are buddy-buddy allies. There is no controlling body there. There isn’t anything even close. There’s not even a charter or anything – member nations signed nothing.
I think we want the same thing here – an active hub. I was trying to take the next step by putting nations directly ON the hub, which would allow people to interact on neutral ground right next to actual micronations. More interaction for everyone. Now, it didn’t go this way. Isolationism is a problem even on Bastion – it didn’t take long for people to retreat into their separate subforums and start sniping at eachother, and without any sort of pan-Bastion organization government (which would be HEAVILY opposed, probably by me as well) there’s nothing we can do about it. This whole discussion is all theory. Ah, but what a comforting theory it was when it looked like maybe it could have happened!
I think we want the same thing here – an active hub. I was trying to take the next step by putting nations directly ON the hub, which would allow people to interact on neutral ground right next to actual micronations. More interaction for everyone. Now, it didn’t go this way. Isolationism is a problem even on Bastion – it didn’t take long for people to retreat into their separate subforums and start sniping at eachother, and without any sort of pan-Bastion organization government (which would be HEAVILY opposed, probably by me as well) there’s nothing we can do about it. This whole discussion is all theory. Ah, but what a comforting theory it was when it looked like maybe it could have happened!
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:02 am
Re: A Question
Lots of people have opinions on Bastion, but they are rarely supported by anything else than mere speculation. The relationship between Bastion nations Antica and Shireroth are pretty frosty, and we've even entertained motions in our Assembly to declare war against Shireroth. Oh, and also, Bastion nations account for roughly 50% of all claimed land on Micras.
Malliki Tosha
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Re: A Question
I'm in the dark as you, I made the forum public originally but it was deleted. Natopia has no interest in rival mapping orgs, especially after the disaster of the GSO and Natopia being abandoned and betrayed by Alexandria, Gotzborg, and Anthelia.SaiKar wrote:But this little scheme seems to be a Natopian/Antican/Babkhan plan
That aside, I'd further support more forum consolidation in Bastion which is a hub into itself. Going off of Harvey's point, Bastion is more democratic and open than Hub since there are multiple admins who are checks on each other and everything is decided by consensus.
Currently playing:
Nathan, a person
Nathan, a person
Re: A Question
Isolationism maybe death, and the more I look around the community and the state of it at the moment the more inclined I am to agree with you, but that doesn't by extension mean that the only solution is joining the Bastion Union. The fact of the matter remains that the Bastion 'Sector' is not synonymous with the Micras Sector and any attempt to make it become so is to push decent, active members of the community out of the hobby, as Ailin has just said.
I may be wasting my breath here, but I'm not 'anti-Bastion' per se, a position which I have been accused of holding several times now. What I am opposed to is the isolationism the Bastion Union itself seems to propagate in viewing its own constituent nations as having more of a claim to the future of this hobby because of their age or their 'veteran' status. There's an extremely fine line between a community and a clique and part of the reason some Ashkenatzim- and perhaps other nations, I can't speak for them- don't want Bastion is because we are just different sorts of communities. Different personalities, different cultures, and a different way of looking at things. Bastion nations, on the other hand, share an extremely similar political stance on some issues and since the Union was founded the number of multiple citizenships seems to have increased exponentially. It seems now that every Antican is a citizen of Babkha, and so on and so forth- now, that degree of community strength is something to be congratulated but what it leads to in my humble opinion is a situation whereby although the Union may not be a merger, every nation within it consists simply of the same people in a different cultural context. Politically, that is incredibly powerful and given that a significant number of prominent Bastion members would go as far as to start a rival MCS, it speaks volumes to how the MCS could be influenced if hosted on the Bastion's forums. I know Harvey and I have our differences and I'm sure he has some very good reasons for his opinion on this matter but the MCS has to have complete independence- independence and hopefully by extension impartiality in its hosting the most important of all.
I hear what Nathan says about the Bastion being a hub in itself, but remember that Bastion was founded as a method of convenience for certain nations to share the same forum. The Hub, on the other hand, was founded for the entire Micras Sector. Let's face it, the Bastion is now more than just a few nations sharing a forum for convenience- a significant number of Bastion nations have extremely strong political ties and there are a huge number of multiple citizenships. Bastion is a Sector within the Micras Sector. Which many Micran nations aren't- and don't want to be- a part of. If there are problems with the Hub's administration, then they should be fixed, not ignored and moved over to a forum some would feel uncomfortable using as their 'Hub'.
The community cannot afford to lose anyone else- I know everyone has been going on about the death of the Sector presumably since it first began, but at the moment the only new nations we have are a trickle of MicroWiki ones who like the look of having land on Micras. It's all very well for Harvey to say 'very well, those nations who want to leave the MCS can do so', but that's entirely misses the point. I don't see any Bastion Nations legitimately complaining to the MCS about discrimination because it's not hosted on their forum, and rightly so. Likewise non-Bastion nations seem happy with the current arrangement. Why change it?
I may be wasting my breath here, but I'm not 'anti-Bastion' per se, a position which I have been accused of holding several times now. What I am opposed to is the isolationism the Bastion Union itself seems to propagate in viewing its own constituent nations as having more of a claim to the future of this hobby because of their age or their 'veteran' status. There's an extremely fine line between a community and a clique and part of the reason some Ashkenatzim- and perhaps other nations, I can't speak for them- don't want Bastion is because we are just different sorts of communities. Different personalities, different cultures, and a different way of looking at things. Bastion nations, on the other hand, share an extremely similar political stance on some issues and since the Union was founded the number of multiple citizenships seems to have increased exponentially. It seems now that every Antican is a citizen of Babkha, and so on and so forth- now, that degree of community strength is something to be congratulated but what it leads to in my humble opinion is a situation whereby although the Union may not be a merger, every nation within it consists simply of the same people in a different cultural context. Politically, that is incredibly powerful and given that a significant number of prominent Bastion members would go as far as to start a rival MCS, it speaks volumes to how the MCS could be influenced if hosted on the Bastion's forums. I know Harvey and I have our differences and I'm sure he has some very good reasons for his opinion on this matter but the MCS has to have complete independence- independence and hopefully by extension impartiality in its hosting the most important of all.
I hear what Nathan says about the Bastion being a hub in itself, but remember that Bastion was founded as a method of convenience for certain nations to share the same forum. The Hub, on the other hand, was founded for the entire Micras Sector. Let's face it, the Bastion is now more than just a few nations sharing a forum for convenience- a significant number of Bastion nations have extremely strong political ties and there are a huge number of multiple citizenships. Bastion is a Sector within the Micras Sector. Which many Micran nations aren't- and don't want to be- a part of. If there are problems with the Hub's administration, then they should be fixed, not ignored and moved over to a forum some would feel uncomfortable using as their 'Hub'.
The community cannot afford to lose anyone else- I know everyone has been going on about the death of the Sector presumably since it first began, but at the moment the only new nations we have are a trickle of MicroWiki ones who like the look of having land on Micras. It's all very well for Harvey to say 'very well, those nations who want to leave the MCS can do so', but that's entirely misses the point. I don't see any Bastion Nations legitimately complaining to the MCS about discrimination because it's not hosted on their forum, and rightly so. Likewise non-Bastion nations seem happy with the current arrangement. Why change it?
Re: A Question
Just a minor bit of trolling here, but I like that on the first page of comments there's cheeky little bits about nefarious plots of the Bastionados, and now we're hearing arguments for everyone to join up.
...Nefarious plot?
Seriously though, I'm willing to give the majority of Bastion leadership the benefit of the doubt on this one. Frosty relations or not, for the most vocal pro-Bastionado to denounce Bastion states for usurping his own admittedly moot idea and going about it entirely in the wrong way is a large pill to swallow.
That being said, I'm fairly certain 50% of land or not, Bastion hardly represents fifty percent of the population of micras, which means those who have not joined Bastion and are not entirely inclined to join Bastion aren't going to do so any time soon. The concerns about Bastion being more than the HUB are valid. HUB is neutral because it, in itself, does not represent a political entity. It doesn't even try to be a Micran UN. We come here, we talk, we bitch, we fight, Malliki makes totally ridiculous comments, and we love each other because in a weird way we are all pseudo-friends. Bastion is a much more tightly-knit political entity. Be it a political union or not on paper, in practice, up until recently, there wasn't much disagreement in public between its principle membership. This discussion of invading Shireroth took me entirely by surprise. Call it naive, but the general impression from the Bastionado population to the wider community was that it functioned as a rather cohesive bloc. Also, a while back, I seem to remember forum-trolling Antica and coming across discussion about appointing an official representative to Bastion, which would have de facto created precedent for recognizing it as a political entity in its own right. That's why people are leery about consolidating on Bastion. Whether it's officially a union is beside the point. What has up until recently been portrayed in the public is exactly what a political union should look like. PR, kids. PR.
...Nefarious plot?
Seriously though, I'm willing to give the majority of Bastion leadership the benefit of the doubt on this one. Frosty relations or not, for the most vocal pro-Bastionado to denounce Bastion states for usurping his own admittedly moot idea and going about it entirely in the wrong way is a large pill to swallow.
That being said, I'm fairly certain 50% of land or not, Bastion hardly represents fifty percent of the population of micras, which means those who have not joined Bastion and are not entirely inclined to join Bastion aren't going to do so any time soon. The concerns about Bastion being more than the HUB are valid. HUB is neutral because it, in itself, does not represent a political entity. It doesn't even try to be a Micran UN. We come here, we talk, we bitch, we fight, Malliki makes totally ridiculous comments, and we love each other because in a weird way we are all pseudo-friends. Bastion is a much more tightly-knit political entity. Be it a political union or not on paper, in practice, up until recently, there wasn't much disagreement in public between its principle membership. This discussion of invading Shireroth took me entirely by surprise. Call it naive, but the general impression from the Bastionado population to the wider community was that it functioned as a rather cohesive bloc. Also, a while back, I seem to remember forum-trolling Antica and coming across discussion about appointing an official representative to Bastion, which would have de facto created precedent for recognizing it as a political entity in its own right. That's why people are leery about consolidating on Bastion. Whether it's officially a union is beside the point. What has up until recently been portrayed in the public is exactly what a political union should look like. PR, kids. PR.
Deputy Foreign Minister of the Republic of Ashkenatza
General uppity Russophile.
Current Excitement-builder: Search For Atlantis on NatGeo tonight at 4.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:02 am
Re: A Question
Said again by a person that displays a complete lack of understanding of what Bastion is.
Malliki Tosha
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Re: A Question
Given that all resistance to the all-powerful Bastion is usually met with this kind of comment, my point about what you publicly display and what you "happen to be really for real" still stands. That discrepancy should be looked into so us peons know how to properly interpret the Holy Scripture of Bastion.Malliki Tosha wrote:Said again by a person that displays a complete lack of understanding of what Bastion is.
Deputy Foreign Minister of the Republic of Ashkenatza
General uppity Russophile.
Current Excitement-builder: Search For Atlantis on NatGeo tonight at 4.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:02 am
Re: A Question
The Ashkenatzis once again displays their fondness for conspiracy theories.
Malliki Tosha
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Owner, Newport City FC [ANT]
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC [IRS]
Re: A Question
I understand how it may appear like that. But it seems like everyone else's solution is either something along the lines of "my nation is so awesome so you should all join it" or "meh, don't care."Maximos wrote:Isolationism maybe death, and the more I look around the community and the state of it at the moment the more inclined I am to agree with you, but that doesn't by extension mean that the only solution is joining the Bastion Union.
If other people have ideas, real ideas that could involve everyone, we can talk about them. But nobody's willing to ante up.
Okay, that's fine, I understand. To an outsider it would seem that way. Certainly when Bastion was being set up, there was a lot more cross-country interaction, a lot more consensus-based decision making, and a lot more "let's take on the entire world!" types of menality. I did my best to encourage all of that.Henzelli wrote:Call it naive, but the general impression from the Bastionado population to the wider community was that it functioned as a rather cohesive bloc.
But it faded. People went back to their seperate nations. New alliances, like the Antica/Babkha one, were born. Old rivalries, like Antia/Shireroth, heated and cooled. Stuff happened, but it happened on the nationa level. The Voice of Bastion is metaphorically dead - for me to start talking the Voice again would probably be opposed by Bastion nations, and I wouldn't want to do it anyway since I can't even come close to speaking for a unified mentality that no longer exists.
We don't worry about our PR because there is "us." Nobody can speak for Bastion officially. I spoke for it unofficially for a while, which was amazingly fun, but I lost too much public support to keep doing that. Now I only speak for me.
Re: A Question
Wow, it’s been a while since I’ve needed to check so often before a thread runs away without me.
I am all for interaction on a neutral ground…but that already exists! That’s the whole reason the Micras site got upgraded to the Hub in the first place. Alliances and Unions are great, they are part of the game. The idea that your union is so much better than any other organizations of Micronations hitherto founded that every nation in the hobby by some manifest destiny should be part of your group is arrogance. It’s backwards thinking and condescending to think the Hub and Micras should go on the Bastion forums. If anything, once the Bastion Union got rolling and you wanted a more neutral international footing you should have put a Bastion Union forum on the Hub under Micronational Organizations just like the Fédération Micraise de Sport or Microwiki. Because that’s what you are, you’re not a Hub you’re a Micronational Organization. If you did that I would have been much more likely to get involved, or at least check it out. Joining the Hub would give, at least the ‘intermicronational sector of the Bastion Union,’ the perception of neutrality and impartiality. Attempting to assimilate the MCS and replace the Hub only solidifies my suspicions that the Bastion Union is a creeping attempt at an omniprescent regime by a cartel of nations. Yes, that borders at the edge of wacko conspiracy. And I may not ‘Know what the Bastion Union’s all about’ but I sure as hell know what it comes off as.
The reason I liked Micras, and now the Hub, so much is because to me it stands as a beacon of neutral ground on which I don’t have to worry about being part of another nation’s vassal organization. The Bastion Union doesn’t do that for me. Nothing I hear about the Union gives me the perception that it’s impartial or neutral. That’s not a bad thing, I’m not against the Union, because those who join in do so because what it does works for them. It doesn’t work for everyone. Honestly, how can it? By its very foundation an organization of nations, not nationalists.
The way the Hub is set up, namely a bunch of people from their own nation meeting up now and then to bitch about stuff, is the status quo that this hobby has always really reverted to. You said it yourself.
I’m not sure if I’m insulted that you’re ignoring the obvious or disappointed you’re incapable of seeing it. The idea that you believe an organization run by micronations, for micronations, is as inherently neutral as an organization run by micronationalists for micronationalism is rediculous. I have no qualms about joining unions and alliances that involve individuals for more general micronational goals such as the Hub and the very dead Keltian Alliance (or whatever that was called the Lewis set up.) But that’s not what the Bastion Union is. No matter how much you and Malliki may protest that we haveSaiKar wrote:I think I resent the implications that organizations on the Bastion forums would be controlled and/or persecuted because the admins of those forums are also member states. Or something along those lines? You lost me a little. I'm not really sure where the disconnect is here - why is Craitman a "micronational enthusiast" even though he has a nation of his own and I’m not even though I have a nation of my own.
It was designed as a place for a few like minded powerhouses to get together in a way that was easier than forum hopping from nation to nation for the betterment of themselves. Which is great, I applaud it! I just didn’t want to be a part of it once more people started to jump on the activity bandwagon like moths to a bug zapper.Malliki wrote: a complete lack of understanding of what Bastion is.
This here is an underlying issue that I never could quite wrap my head around. I am strongly of the ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ school of thought. First, you can’t tell me the Hub is broken because here we are, still hashing it out on the Hub. Did you ever think that all that effort you put into replacing the Hub might just have helped make it better? Not that you should stop working on the Union’s affairs, but all the effort put into turning the Union into a rival Hub both distracted from the Union’s original purpose, and could do no better than divide the community currently using the Hub.SaiKar wrote:I think we want the same thing here – an active hub. I was trying to take the next step by putting nations directly ON the hub, which would allow people to interact on neutral ground right next to actual micronations. More interaction for everyone.
I am all for interaction on a neutral ground…but that already exists! That’s the whole reason the Micras site got upgraded to the Hub in the first place. Alliances and Unions are great, they are part of the game. The idea that your union is so much better than any other organizations of Micronations hitherto founded that every nation in the hobby by some manifest destiny should be part of your group is arrogance. It’s backwards thinking and condescending to think the Hub and Micras should go on the Bastion forums. If anything, once the Bastion Union got rolling and you wanted a more neutral international footing you should have put a Bastion Union forum on the Hub under Micronational Organizations just like the Fédération Micraise de Sport or Microwiki. Because that’s what you are, you’re not a Hub you’re a Micronational Organization. If you did that I would have been much more likely to get involved, or at least check it out. Joining the Hub would give, at least the ‘intermicronational sector of the Bastion Union,’ the perception of neutrality and impartiality. Attempting to assimilate the MCS and replace the Hub only solidifies my suspicions that the Bastion Union is a creeping attempt at an omniprescent regime by a cartel of nations. Yes, that borders at the edge of wacko conspiracy. And I may not ‘Know what the Bastion Union’s all about’ but I sure as hell know what it comes off as.
The reason I liked Micras, and now the Hub, so much is because to me it stands as a beacon of neutral ground on which I don’t have to worry about being part of another nation’s vassal organization. The Bastion Union doesn’t do that for me. Nothing I hear about the Union gives me the perception that it’s impartial or neutral. That’s not a bad thing, I’m not against the Union, because those who join in do so because what it does works for them. It doesn’t work for everyone. Honestly, how can it? By its very foundation an organization of nations, not nationalists.
And it seems I’m not the only one who feels this way. It’s all about perception, and no matter what you wish the Bastion Union to be, it will never be an impartial Hub. It was started as a group of nations serving themselves. Remember, I’m not saying that’s a bad thing! I’m just saying that’s a bad thing for a Hub or as the moderators of any neutral intermicronational group. Unless it is completely stripped of its foundations it will always have that partiality ingrained in it. Again, that’s not a bad thing in and of itself, for the Bastion Union that’s just the Bastion Union. The question is, if you strip it of everything it was to make it the new Hub, what’s the point of replacing the Hub? We return to the ‘ain’t broke’ argument.Maximos wrote: the MCS has to have complete independence- independence and hopefully by extension impartiality in its hosting the most important of all.
Maximos wrote: I hear what Nathan says about the Bastion being a hub in itself, but remember that Bastion was founded as a method of convenience for certain nations to share the same forum. The Hub, on the other hand, was founded for the entire Micras Sector.
Again, I’m not alone in what I’m saying.Henzelli wrote: HUB is neutral because it, in itself, does not represent a political entity. It doesn't even try to be a Micran UN. We come here, we talk, we bitch, we fight, Malliki makes totally ridiculous comments, and we love each other because in a weird way we are all pseudo-friends. Bastion is a much more tightly-knit political entity.
Internally I have taken steps to address this issue, by redesigning Uantir as a nation that doesn’t really need citizens, but has the infrastructure to accommodate any that wish to join. That leaves me free to stop herding and hunting up people to play my game and focus on working with other micronations. Have I done a lot of that? Not really, but that’s mostly due to school and having a newborn since the remodeling. As to the micronational community as a whole I don’t have any great ideas, and so I do what I can to stay committed to being active on the Hub as much as I can. I’m not anti-Bastion, I think the Bastion Union’s great, for those who want to play that sector of the hobby. I’m anti-Bastion omni-presence. If you truly wanted to bring all that is great from the Bastion Union to an international, neutral playing field you’d integrate a part of the Bastion Union into the Hub. That doesn’t mean that you have to dissolve the Union, if the Bastion Union is so big and so awesome and can afford to assimilate the MCS and replace the Hub as the go to intermicronational hot spot, it can afford to create a Hub sector.SaiKar wrote:I understand how it may appear like that. But it seems like everyone else's solution is either something along the lines of "my nation is so awesome so you should all join it" or "meh, don't care."
If other people have ideas, real ideas that could involve everyone, we can talk about them. But nobody's willing to ante up.
The way the Hub is set up, namely a bunch of people from their own nation meeting up now and then to bitch about stuff, is the status quo that this hobby has always really reverted to. You said it yourself.
The Micronational community has trends, flurries of activity and progress, but always reverts to the same constant: a bunch of people in their paper crowns on lawns shouting at the other guy in paper crown across the street. The Hub is set up to handle that culture just fine.SaiKar wrote: Certainly when Bastion was being set up, there was a lot more cross-country interaction, a lot more consensus-based decision making, and a lot more "let's take on the entire world!" types of menality. I did my best to encourage all of that.
But it faded. People went back to their seperate nations.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir