Skipping the bits about Saurfang, since I agree that we've veered off-topic from comparing his relationship to Anduin with Calia's and the difference between the two to instead rehashing his being or not being an Alliance patsy.
Calia is an outsider to the Horde, yes. This stands in contrast to the original Forsaken who were outsiders away from the Horde and joined because they were rejected elsewhere. That's the difference between the two. It's her status as an outsider in the same sense as them, the blood elves, Darkspear, etc. that I am disputing, that she's outside the Horde is I think self-evident and agreed upon by both of us at that point. As for what other values I'm looking for to make her viable to the Horde, I've already gone over this, but given your final paragraph I might as well cover it there, not that I didn't multiple times already.
While I appreciate you ditching this argument and almost appreciate the brass balls of trying this spin after agreeing with my assessment on the Forsaken's belonging in the Horde in the very previous page, it simply doesn't fly. This radical, difficult to grasp concept that I am proposing and that you are unable to assemble, let me do it for you again in one sentence: Races and characters that have more in common with the Alliance than the Horde should be in the Alliance. Far from an insular version of the Horde, my very first answer on this point was to gauge Calia with the descriptions of the factions in Mists of Pandaria and then go down the list of all broadly agreed upon traits in the topic about the values of the Horde. I then went over every single incarnation of the Horde, and she has less in common with any of them than with any of the Alliance. At the end of that I broaden my definition of being Horde to essentially amount to not having as one's purpose to brings its people in line with what they were in the Alliance, and she fails even that test. In lieu of belabouring this again, I'll just copy the bits over:You have a very strange notion of what constitutes a nation-state, and the idea that an organization cannot contain cultural diversity seems both wrongheaded and almost comically insular to me. As for "failing to answer time and again," that would be because I find your argument nonsensical and thus impossible to answer in any cogent fashion considering I think you're entirely wrong about Calia's character and general purpose within the narrative, wrong about the nature of the Horde, wrong about what the Horde values, and wrong about the narrative's ultimate trajectory. Your views don't square in any way with my understanding of the narrative, and I can't assemble the things you claim into anything approaching a cohesive argument on their own. Given your repeated attempts to re-frame the argument into something entirely else I'm assuming you're aware of this and trying in vain to move the goalposts into something easier to argue, but I can't be sure. Either way, I think we're at "agree to disagree" territory once more and I'll just leave it at that.
@Zulkhan @NymrohdCompare the Mists of Pandaria blurbs and do you think "struggling to keep aggression in check" "monstrous" and "values strength (and honor)" fits Calia better or maybe "nobility, faith, honor and sacrifice". Or to go over the list of the traits mentioned in the other thread - Calia is not militaristic in any sense, she's never been in a fight and dislikes it, she's not evil, she's honorable, but so is literally everyone on both factions so that's not a qualifier for anything, she's not monstrous, but beyond human perfection and she's never been rejected by anyone but is loved by every character who encounters her who isn't Satan incarnate. Add that to being the hereditary princess of the pre-WoW Alliance kingdom, with all the trappings thereof and explicitly aiming to restore its identity in contradiction with what it was for its entire tenure in the Horde. She is neither a noble, shamanistic and tribal character, nor a reject joining out of convenience. There is absolutely nothing about her that's Horde.
I'm arguing that she doesn't fit with the Horde operating from the standpoint that she's already taken over the Forsaken and that her rewriting their identity is a non-issue that's already taken place. I.e, the Forsaken are already like Calia for the purposes of her not fitting the Horde.
When the Forsaken joined the Horde they had jack to do with the WC3 Horde, and instead had the different uniting trait of being monstrous rejects, overlapping on no other point with the Horde. But they overlapped on basically no point with the Alliance and were indeed explicitly refused by the Alliance. Ditto the blood elves were explicitly set up against the Alliance, and had things like fel use, a mind-controlling autocracy and a light god in a basement. They stood to gain from being in the Horde, but had no opportunity/motive to join the Alliance. This is no longer the situation for the blood elves since TBC, was never the situation for the nightborne and is especially not the case for Calia-led undead. That's what that point for point comparison with the worgen was about - that there's already a race exactly like the new undead on the Alliance and they fit in well. Previously, the Forsaken may not have had much to do with the Kalimdor-Horde, but they had little in common with the Alliance. Now, from their character roster to their ethos, they have some traits in common with the Horde, but far more in common with extant Alliance races. Ergo, the only reason they don't just go to the Alliance is gameplay contrivance.