Mr Crumpets Response to Ranger Bob
Day 1,948, 02:24
•
Published in Australia 
•
by
•
by Mr Crumpets
Good Evening eAustralia,
Well, by now most of you would have read this article by Ranger Bob...
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/time-to-be-honest-mr-crumpet--2231609/1/20
My first thoughts are regretting deciding to go to bed early last night, instead of putting up that positive article praising the current PM on his decision to seek, then support an MPP with the eCzech Republic.
More on that later, but first, I need to respond to Ranger Bob.
Ranger's first point was I fail to see substantive policy.
It is impossible for any candidate to have substantive policy. Those who have been in the role have the advantage (sometimes disadvantage) of showing what they have done in the past, a track record if you like.
Candidates who have not been the PM before, can only put their aspirations before the public to decide, then judge once elected.
I remind Ranger Bob of the first DocterDry Government, that was successfully impeached. On the surface, there seemed to be substantive policy, but as history showed... he failed to deliver on those promises.
During that time, I did what I do now, I lead an 'opposition' of sorts and pointed out those promises that didn't come to bare. Ironically during that time Tim_Holtz (who I seem to have a feud with at the moment) where on the same side and ultimately held DD to account.
Then to back up the substantive policy, the installed H.Nelson Government - which I was Minister of Information for - ran a very successful administration over those 10 days in power.
I still regard that government as the blueprint for a successful administration (especially in communication) and any government I should lead in the future will follow that approach.
Ranger then said 2. Devisive politics and talked about how it can gain votes, but splits a nation and how we all need to work together.
Ranger Bob, I'm a realist. I've played this game long enough to no there will never be a fully united eAustralia.
This country has a lot of egos, some times they will get along, other times they will clash.
At the same time, I think this refers to the above, about my Opposition type articles.
Look I'll admit, a lot of the time that come out of frustration. Frustration of those being elected without a clear goal of what they want to do.
A frustration of all the small little jobs that will make our country work so much better, being missed.
The ultimate frustration of being in that successful H.Nelson Government, knowing what has to be done to get our nation back on the right track and the administration communicating effectively with the population... but not being given that top job to show once and for all how good government can work and boost active participation within our community.
Finally Ranger, you said 3. Being a leader is NOT about being popular.
I know that - one of the golden rules of life is "not everyone is going to like you".
You talk about caring for our country and not being elected. The only reasons I want the top job is...
1) Get eAustralia aligned with friendly nations and some of those that can tactically help our cause.
2) To have DAILY information from the Government, especially the Prime Minister, in articles to keep citizens advised of what's happening.
3) To set a successful blueprint, like the H.Nelson Government did, on how future administrations should operate.
I'm yet to see any candidates prior or after I ran propose that.
I will however offer praise where praise is due.
Draim Alexander has got cracking and is now moving on MPPs.
There's a number in the pipeline that I agree with, but will talk about after they have passed senate and voted on in-game.
I am thankful Ranger Bob (and too others) who are in essence agreeing with my points (but some of you with not the way I type).
However, as Louise Brooks pointed out, I feel Ranger's article was a mothering article without genuinely looking at and talking about the good things I've done and will continue to do.
Here's three examples, just to name a few.
1) The other day I read an article from a new player in another country that complained about RW fighst he couldn't take part in as he didn't have the money to move. I immediately friended the player and sent him 500cc to help him out - he was quite thankful
2) During the Tim_Holtz Government, there was the crucial RW of WA - needed to get senate. I could have easily sat back and done nothing and laughed if it failed. Instead, I did as much damage as I could for a low level fighter, then as some will acknowledge, I got onto IRC during the final hour of the fight and sent gold, food, weapons to whoever I could that was stronger than me, to help the fight. All of this stuff I had earned in game (not bought), saved up and gave away for the good of the cause.
3) Draim Alexander came to senate with the proposal of an 'unofficial' MPP with the eCzech Republic as they did not have the money to do an official one with us. As you should know Ranger Bob my campaigns have all been about making friends with nations that want to be nations with us, so I put my money where my mouth is, I gave the 10,000cc (that I could only just afford) to the Czechs, so they could enjoy that official MPP.
You'll find Ranger Bob whether you agree with the style I write or not, I'm one of the most honest players going around.
When on the rare occasions I don't deliver, there's no spin, I'm upfront and honest. For example, when four GGP senators missed out a couple of months ago - when the joint GGP/ARP senate ticket didn't happen cause the PTO got knocked out - I apologised publicly to those players and managed to make it up to some of them, but getting them elected in the following elections.
Also, in our GGP forums, I apologised to members for during my 2nd term I couldn't get the membership numbers up as I promised.
To be honest, I wish I wasn't writing this article tonight, because Ranger Bob we both have our own versions of the truth and i bet both of us will say each other skipped parts.
All I can say is, if you think I don't offer substance, let me prove you wrong. Put me for a term in the Prime Minister's chair and let me show you what my version of an effective government can do.
Mr Crumpets.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Docter(sic)Dry's first government failed because his cabinet didn't show up for work. I know. I was MoD and only ever saw infin who popped in daily to say hi and left. You cannot easily run a government without a cabinet. And to keep a cabinet, you need to listen, lead, and bite your tongue.
Ranger's critique is with your "I told you so" style. Not your generosity. Not your honesty. Not your transparency. Nobody needs to have a poor outcome rubbed in. Try extend your generosity to your rhetoric.
FYI: Clear goals people can rally behind wins you elections, not generosity.
Umm .. I remember talking to you in the DoD channel. Since I was dPM in that government and all. Just saying.
The 1st government. Not the 2nd.
Yes, I was Deputy Prime Minister in the first DocterDry government. I was Minister of Foreign Affairs in the second.
Then you were useless.
So first you can't remember, then you have an opinion? Cool mate, I'll have fries with that!
DoD channel is not Cabinet. And if it was in ADF then the fight was about the PM erroneously believing he had the right to fire soldiers he did not like.
The very fact that I cannot remember shows how totally insignificant it was. I stand by my statement.
On behalf of the Inconceivable Party...
Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
I think you read ranger's article wrong MC.
all this article did was prove the point that ranger bob was making, its all about looking good and not about providing useful points
you said in your point that you want to be CP so you can provide allies that "tactically" help us. yet you argue black and blue about an MPP with China which doesnt help us at all. multiple people have said multiple times why China is not a good idea but you ignore it again and again
why the hell would anyone support you if you cant even acknowledge other peoples points? you go mysteriously silent and then a few days later bang on about the same thing.
thats is your flaw and it is exactly why so many people get frustrated with you, you emulate the RL media which is crap and you dont even listen to those who have the experience.
Tim, there are MANY others that agree with the China MPP - for example, Ronny was in favour of it in the podcast, Henry has spoke in favour of it as well.
so why did you not make counter arguments in senate?
that suggests you dont have any counter points or benefits which outweigh the huge negatives that were commented on in the senate section
I've always made counter points Tim. I've explained how China is the best positioned to help us against Indonesia and has a proven track record of doing so. I've pointed out they want to be friends and we should be friends with those that want to be friends with us. I've just been blocked by the faction that keeps arguing 'oh, don't P*** off CoT - You'll P*** off CoT doing that. Well last I looked, CoT have occupied us!
no the point was made that China will do nothing because they have their own problems, you completely ignored it and still claim they will help us against Indonesia, once again you prove the point
Tim, I'm not expecting China to help us straight away (like you have in your mind). We sign the MPP, build the friendship and do the planning for an attack on Indonesia. BTW Tim, EVERY country has their own problems, so your point makes no sense.
MC, you read my point wrongly. I actually think, with a change in attitude, you could be one of the best politicians and players this game has known.
If you cannot accept my critique, then I suppose there was no point in my prior article.
I'm dissappointed you cannot see that, but accept really, you and I just cannot find a middle ground.
Good luck with your future endeavours, whatever these may be.
And I voted your article regardless. Everyone deserves their say.
In my opinion you both have some very good points, you just differ somewhere.
My only problem with you MC is that you have never been involved in FA and many of the things that were going on were being done for a reason. When you get told the reasons, you either ignore them, don't care (probably because you don't understand or maybe because you just don't care) and then put out public articles politicking about how the administration screwed up, when in actual fact it didn't, it achieved what it set out to do, you just seemed to miss the point.
In doing this, you tell the whole eWorld about what may or may not be happening, and that sets a string of BS that goes out to other countries, some allies, that just becomes detrimental. This sort of crap is exactly what was going on by people outside my own executive team, mainly by people that thought they were doing it in secret, except I KNOW who was doing and saying what, because I have people that told me or found out and then told me. I know who they were as well : )
Subjective, don't you think? It's not exactly the case that eAustralia's foreign position is flush in the custody of the current brains trust after all. Case in point, how much worse do you allege MC could do?
😁 very good point, I don't think it would be possible to bring Australia to a worse situation than it is now - there can be no justification for the actions that have brought Australia to its present sad situation.
XG, we all have different opinions on FA. The current way (until the recent MPP proposals) was not working. Classic example was your slip up in the conversation with the Indo CP, which triggered most of the problems. You even asked senate to impeach you, but in the tradition of a fair-go, we got behind you and supported you - Now I'm asking for that fair-go.
Impeaching me would have saved the nation a crap load of pain though : (
I don't think impeaching you would have made a difference. CoT would have found another reason/scapegoat to invade us 🙁
Your picture to text ratio is improving quite nicely, gj 🙂
if you think this game is deserving of more than a couple of minutes a day I feel sorry for you.
Well I just hope we have many people trying to get us overseas friends, too much short term thinking and not enough long term. I have a question about China and us, and it is this, who made the initial offer of friendship, China or us ?... I think it would matter very much if it was China that approached us, the simple idea of someone wanting to be on our side seems far better than me sittin here thinking that we will stay on our own, we are isolated down here and China is not that far away. Surely we are in no position to REJECT any offer, we can't break any treaties we are not a part of.
China did not approach us
Well that means we won't cause maximum offence. I really am waiting to see who Australia gets as a friend, having no friends out there concerns me.
China isnt really in a position to help us anyway, thats why China isnt really an option, thats not including the problems and new enemies we would make by allying them
And what would those new enemies take from us Tim_Holtz?🙂 regions that we don't even posses? MC is sometimes frustrating, and insist on things which he should have left already, but in my opinion he deserves a term. And I really look forward to see what he is capable of as a President. Sorry for my mistake if I made, English is not my mother tongue. 😉
At the present moment our issues are more just Chile and Indo (ok and NZ to a degree, but theirs is more opportunism than anything). Allying with China, who are still members of EDEN would make us full blown enemies of TWO and CoT as a full alliance. We still have friends in some of the smaller nations in both those groups and I would be surprised if either alliance sets their battle orders for the whole alliance as us, which they would do if we allied with China while they are still members of EDEN.
If they left he dying horse though, that would be a different story. I hope that clears yours and greg L's comments up.
There is no chance to be friends with any alliance where Indos are..so I'm not saying we should mpp with China, but I do saying we have to wait what the TWO and COT will do with each other, because they will soon.
This is what I don't get... we are worried about CoT are enemies of us (newsflash, 3 CoT countries has invaded us, in case you dind't know), yet we are worried about becoming friends with a EDEN country that wants to be friends and have never invaded us... ummm, logic people?
MC, its about those specific 3 CoT countries at this point, in comparison to the WHOLE OF CoT. You think CoT cares what we do in regard to RWs etc? Its the image of Siding with EDEN that would bring the WHOLE alliance down on us. Thats the FA bit you just don't seem to get, and quite frankly, without undestanding that basic concept, I don't think you would make a good CP for Australia. FA is a big part of things here. Its the image and who it affects.
My problem Csanat isn't so much that Mr Crumpets is wrong on a particular policy but the way he conducts himself. writing i told you so articles, not listening to very knowledgeable and experienced players about realities regarding our situation, and ignoring points that doesn't suit his view.
look at my comment earlier, crumpets said something, i pointed out he was wrong and now he is ignoring it because it doesn't fit in with his view, he knows he is wrong but ignores it, and in a few days will say the exact same thing and ignore my comment.
Mr Crumpets may have considered your arguments not worthy of a reply Tim. He may know that deep down you know that you are wrong.
Sorry to say that but after winning the CP elections by a few votes ( it was very-very close) u did the same to him... telling him "I told u so, U're s**k". At least I felt it like that.
I find it strange that I am slammed for the way I go about my articles, but Tim gets let off the hook for threatening to fight against Australia for not accepting the Chile deal in December.
i take it you dont understand irony Mr Crumpets, the point was that by fighting for Australia against the deal you were working against Australia (meaning it was ok for me to also fight against Australia if i chose to)
and BOUD1CCA i guess Mr Crumpets was also ignoring Valentyme and XG, personally ignoring me wasnt the issue and you are taking it to be.
Csanat not once have i ignored Mr Crumpets when he has said something, i spent hours posting counter arguments to him to show him my point of view, ill admit it wasnt overly civil but i didnt just ignore him.
This is fascinating. Props to both ranger and to Mr Crumpets for putting up the first HONEST AND DECENT campaign responses, I've ever seen (I'd like too say in eRep, but we won't go there). It's great too see a pair of people being honest and truthful about where they differ, without getting into the slander we're so accustomed too.
Sorta kinda not related but is ...
We could have 50 MPPs, but that will not free our country and keep us safe, truth is we only need a few MPPs to fulfill Daily Orders.
Government atm is trying to abolish the ADF, saying we need more MPPs, but as i have pointed out it doesn't matter how many MPPs we have as it will never be enough to keep our country safe, I'd prefer to see our tax dollars going to our OWN citizens to be able to fight, rank up & and feel important, rather than take weapons from our soldiers and blow it on useless MPPs, true strength comes from within and not relying on others (which i remind you have never been there to save us in 4+ years of history).
Most MUs in this country do not supply, therefore making ADF crucial to at least arm our citizens and get the Daily Order done at a minimum, I do think we need 2 or 3 MPPs but not every single tax dollar should be shipped overseas.
/me waits for the trolls to try and tell me I'm wrong 😛😛
An excellent post Henry.
Agreed. We win territory back via RW not War. MPP are good for DO, not defence.