Best bad posters

[Malik Shabazz]

Right, but I think the issue here is that, despite the unnecessary nature of the response, you're still making one. Either reading the whole post to respond in it's proper context, or not responding at all is probably the right way to go.

I guess this is a good idea but I feel like not responding to the other person is disrespectful and it makes you look weak.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Loki Laufeyson

[Master Holton]

Joe Stupid is the worst poster in CN, by far.

[Steve Buscemi]

I suppose you are one of the leading experts in hypocrisy.

umm, okay I'll bite.  How so?  Your hypocrisy stems from raging about something when not a few days earlier you did the exact same thing bro.  Honestly, I had no idea who you were up until that point.

[Tiagoroth]

umm, okay I'll bite.  How so?  Your hypocrisy stems from raging about something when not a few days earlier you did the exact same thing bro.  Honestly, I had no idea who you were up until that point.

 

If I recall correctly, you have your dates messed up too. But it seems that after this long, you are just an idiot or I have a terrible sense of humor. Quite possibly a mixture of both.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Tiagoroth

[jerdge]

When did this thread become a "make a best bad post"?

Although I have always loved how RV plays the megalomaniac and almost-idiot one and then burns his victims with fiery logic and good writing. I tip my hat to you, good Sir, and I only regret that you're finding less and less worthy opponents as the time goes by... Alas, the ranks are getting older and thinner. :)

[Unknown Smurf]

Fuck you guys.

 

I'm legitimately upset that I haven't been mentioned.

 

Vlad did it best, #caringboutgames #kardashianhasanicebooty #lovestripclubs #Fml...

[Ardus]

Fuck you guys.
 
I'm legitimately upset that I haven't been mentioned.
 
Vlad did it best, #caringboutgames #kardashianhasanicebooty #lovestripclubs #Fml...

This is a best bad poster thread, not a merely bad poster thread.

In a game of egregiously bad posters, you are merely mediocre.

dwi :P

[Steve Buscemi]

If I recall correctly, you have your dates messed up too. But it seems that after this long, you are just an idiot or I have a terrible sense of humor. Quite possibly a mixture of both.

Actually my date was correct.  And it wasn't really about dates, it was about calling out peace moders when all your upper tier was in peace mode and getting butthurt because they didn't notifying you before they attacked you. :lol1:

 

Big talker there bro, keep it coming.  Maybe you should find CharlesIV and learn how it's done though.

[Tiagoroth]

Actually my date was correct.  And it wasn't really about dates, it was about calling out peace moders when all your upper tier was in peace mode and getting butthurt because they didn't notifying you before they attacked you. :lol1:

 

Big talker there bro, keep it coming.  Maybe you should find CharlesIV and learn how it's done though.

 

Very few of our upper tier was in peace mode for the last war. Two of the top three nations lost quite a bit unfortunately.

 

We did find Charles recently, but we prefer not to interact with him.

[EgoFreaky]

If you do not read the entire argument, but only respond to parts you deem "important" (without accounting for context), you are not responding to what you think you are. In fact, you may as well attribute an entirely different argument to that person. If reading more than two paragraphs is too difficult for you, do yourself a favor and just don't post.

 

 

I'm gonna nominate Loki, just for making me agree with RV. 

 

Also, I tip my hat to all of you that can still separate the terrible  posters, for me they have become one big blob of combined fail easiest to just ignore. 

[Sunny Side King]

Rotavele.
 
Worst.

Couldn't agree with you more.

[Margrave]

Starfox.

 

 

 

 

 

But seriously,

 

That one guy from GATO who hated raiders. That guy.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Margrave

[jerdge]

Walford is not a bad poster at all. The most you can say against his posting style is that he used to be verbose (now he hardly posts more than very rare one-liners).

[Rush Sykes]

I just wanted to point out the between this good posters, and the bad posters thread, one fact (and this one is NOT a pink elephant)... is being overlooked. In these 2 threads, you have THIS community determining what is good and what is bad... THIS COMMUNITY... think about that.

[Rayvon]

I just wanted to point out the between this good posters, and the bad posters thread, one fact (and this one is NOT a pink elephant)... is being overlooked. In these 2 threads, you have THIS community determining what is good and what is bad... THIS COMMUNITY... think about that.

 

[Teddyyo]

What ever happened to him?

I killed him. Figuratively, of course, but still.

I can't believe I'm not bad enough to be remembered. Just bad enough to be disliked. sad. Edited August 31, 2013 by Teddyyo

[zoskia]

I just wanted to point out the between this good posters, and the bad posters thread, one fact (and this one is NOT a pink elephant)... is being overlooked. In these 2 threads, you have THIS community determining what is good and what is bad... THIS COMMUNITY... think about that.

 

Between the good posters and the bad posters thread... we have the "average posters thread":
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/118263-best-average-posters/

[Margrave]

Walford is not a bad poster at all. The most you can say against his posting style is that he used to be verbose (now he hardly posts more than very rare one-liners).

 

Walford's moral high ground was in Death Valley, so to speak; reading his posts was like being harangued by a particularly well spoken religious zealot.

[Rebel Virginia]

Walford's moral high ground was in Death Valley, so to speak; reading his posts was like being harangued by a particularly well spoken religious zealot.

Actually, Walford made incredibly astute points. It is unfortunate that he developed the reputation he did, however undeserved it may have been. Had it been someone else informing the world of how the act of simply defending oneself could earn a place on a PZI list perhaps more people might have listened.

[Margrave]

Actually, Walford made incredibly astute points. It is unfortunate that he developed the reputation he did, however undeserved it may have been. Had it been someone else informing the world of how the act of simply defending oneself could earn a place on a PZI list perhaps more people might have listened.

 

His moralistic platitudes drowned out anything other than his love of hearing himself speak. While there were abuses in that day and age of things like EZI lists by raiding alliances, it was not the prevailing policy of any raider alliance to EZI someone just for fighting back (after all, part of the fun was the war). He was grandiose at best and deluded at worst, especially with his notions of building an army of none to take on the raider-menace (that was worth a laugh back in the day) and his inability to separate IC from OOC. There were plenty of people outside of the Initiative, even in forgotten, unlamented AEGIS, that I could fight a war with during the working day and still be friendly to if we ran into each other elsewhere; Walford was not one of them. His inability to be politic with people he disagreed with is one of several reasons why his star no longer burns brightly in our hemisphere.

 

 

I should be specific though, it is the Walford of before, during, and just after GW3 I speak of; I did not interact with him much at all in the years following.

[Rebel Virginia]

His moralistic platitudes drowned out anything other than his love of hearing himself speak. While there were abuses in that day and age of things like EZI lists by raiding alliances, it was not the prevailing policy of any raider alliance to EZI someone just for fighting back (after all, part of the fun was the war). He was grandiose at best and deluded at worst, especially with his notions of building an army of none to take on the raider-menace (that was worth a laugh back in the day) and his inability to separate IC from OOC. There were plenty of people outside of the Initiative, even in forgotten, unlamented AEGIS, that I could fight a war with during the working day and still be friendly to if we ran into each other elsewhere; Walford was not one of them. His inability to be politic with people he disagreed with is one of several reasons why his star no longer burns brightly in our hemisphere.

 

 

I should be specific though, it is the Walford of before, during, and just after GW3 I speak of; I did not interact with him much at all in the years following.

I forget the names of some of the alliances involved, but a group of micros (well after GWIII) organized for common defense against raiders. They fought back with nukes (when attacked). GOD, VE, and Andromeda went all in. They were not granted peace. They were forced to disband and several of them PZIed. No one cared, because "lol Walford." You raiders certainly are big men.

[Margrave]

I forget the names of some of the alliances involved, but a group of micros (well after GWIII) organized for common defense against raiders. They fought back with nukes (when attacked). GOD, VE, and Andromeda went all in. They were not granted peace. They were forced to disband and several of them PZIed. No one cared, because "lol Walford." You raiders certainly are big men.

 

Ha, I've not been apart of an esteemed organization dedicated to tech-appropriation since \m/, and that was years and tears and beers ago. We're old men arguing over old men, it seems. 

 

I will say I never quite liked GOD or VE.

[jerdge]

Walford's moral high ground was in Death Valley, so to speak; reading his posts was like being harangued by a particularly well spoken religious zealot.

You are saying that Walford was a particularly well spoken bad speaker ("bad poster").

 

 

His moralistic platitudes drowned out anything other than his love of hearing himself speak. While there were abuses in that day and age of things like EZI lists by raiding alliances, it was not the prevailing policy of any raider alliance to EZI someone just for fighting back (after all, part of the fun was the war). He was grandiose at best and deluded at worst, especially with his notions of building an army of none to take on the raider-menace (that was worth a laugh back in the day) and his inability to separate IC from OOC. There were plenty of people outside of the Initiative, even in forgotten, unlamented AEGIS, that I could fight a war with during the working day and still be friendly to if we ran into each other elsewhere; Walford was not one of them. His inability to be politic with people he disagreed with is one of several reasons why his star no longer burns brightly in our hemisphere.
 
 
I should be specific though, it is the Walford of before, during, and just after GW3 I speak of; I did not interact with him much at all in the years following.

You're also saying that other characters should have showed in IC context their OOC enjoyment for "the fun of war", like you were doing, and that they should have been friendly with their in-game enemies in game-related matters and on game-related media during those "IC-is-anything-that-has-to-do-with-CN" and "OOC-is-when-you-talk-of-the-movies" days of NPO & Z'ha'dum* & Co.

If they didn't they would have been bad players, and especially bad at separating IC and OOC and to thus be friendly with those that were doing their best to ruin their gameplay, specifically refusing to separate IC and OOC.

What next, will you openly say (and not "just" suggest/imply) that opposing EZI was to be unable "to separate IC from OOC"?

 

Basically everything you're saying seems completely incoherent and absurd, to me.

 

 

* IIRC. It doesn't make that much of a difference who they were, anyway. Old man here too.

[andyt2k]

Everyone on my ignore list has been banned from CN, so generally not meant to talk about those guys

[Incitatus]

... and Andromeda went all in. 

 

Which leads me to my submission:

 

Ephriam Grey.