Grurk and I were just talking about this, and I came up with another small point I wanted to throw out there.

Playing a goodie Rager is HARD. The cabal just doesn't lend itself to being good. The current makeup of the Battle cabal: 20+ neutral and evils for every 1 goodie. If you're going to play a goodie Rager that isn't in danger of skirting the "neutral" line, there should probably be some major inner conflict going on, and some very hard choices to be made.

Keep in mind I'm not a Battle imm, so I'm viewing this as a goodie god not a Battle god. Maybe Kasty will chime in more.

For more examples, Outlander is currently a 1-to-10 ratio for goodies-vs-non-goodies. Of the alignment-blind cabals, only Tribunal is currently running a roughly even 1-3 ratio between goodies and non-goodies. A lot of the roles that people come up with for these cabals ARE alignment-blind, and hence they should be, at best, neutral.

In CF land, you have to act good in order to be good. It's not enough to just decide that you're good, then go off and kill goodies. Go back to the test Drok likes to bring up: "If a well-roleplayed paladin should want to wrath your ass, you should probably be evil." You can apply a similar logic to neutrality.