Jump to content
  • entries
    24
  • comments
    385
  • views
    19,113

A Special Interview with Xiphosis


hawk11

1,075 views

I enjoy giving people a shot on the soap-box to speak. It's one of the reasons I got into this blog and this podcast: getting the full story; so when Chief Savage Man made the following request

is xiph a lunatic or savvy political operator

these are your only two options you cannot pick anything in between or anything else

I felt obliged to get the story. Below is an unaltered interview with Xiphosis. It's lengthy, but I encourage you to read the entire thing. Afterwards, Chief Savage Man and the community at large, can decide the answer. These logs are unabridged.

[21:39] <hawk_11> hello

[21:41] <Xiphosis[GOD]> hey

[21:42] <hawk_11> how are you?

[21:44] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'm good, you?

[21:44] <hawk_11> doing well

[21:45] <hawk_11> so I'd like to interview you for the cybernations talkshow blog

[21:46] <hawk_11> basically I'm going to publish this query verbtaim

[21:46] <hawk_11> *verbatim

[21:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> yep

[21:46] <hawk_11> so I encourage you not to use too many word-filtered words

[21:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> xD

[21:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> We'll see how that goes <_<

[21:46] <hawk_11> yeah I swear a lot also

[21:46] <hawk_11> but if we're both doing that, then we're going to end up with a giant post of asterisks

[21:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> yeah

[21:47] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I hear you

[21:47] <hawk_11> yep

[21:47] <hawk_11> also I encourage you to keep a copy of this query for future reference in case you feel I didn't accurately represent you

[21:47] <hawk_11> disclaimers and everything

[21:47] <Xiphosis[GOD]> always

[21:47] <hawk_11> ok then

[21:48] <hawk_11> now that we got that out of the way, let's get down to business

[21:48] <hawk_11> so basically our reader base has expressed interest in getting to know more about the CN alliance leader xiphosis

[21:49] <Xiphosis[GOD]> mhm

[21:49] <hawk_11> specifically, chief savage man wants to know if you're "a raving lunatic or a savvy political operator"

[21:49] <hawk_11> I'm not that cut and dry though

[21:49] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Hahaha

[21:50] <hawk_11> so first I've got the basic questions before we get into this

[21:50] <hawk_11> how did you come across CyberNations?

[21:50] <hawk_11> you don't have to answer any questions you don't want to, for reference

[21:51] <Xiphosis[GOD]> 'k

[21:51] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I had a friend who linked me CN

[21:51] <Xiphosis[GOD]> ..and then quit within a week.

[21:51] <hawk_11> nice.

[21:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> yeah :/

[21:52] <hawk_11> that's actually how I came about to this game too

[21:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I reckon a lot of us did <_<

[21:52] <hawk_11> he finds it moronic that I still play it at this level after five years

[21:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Lol.

[21:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> My mate actually quite because he had a break down OOC on some meds.

[21:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> :/

[21:53] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The rest that joined with me mostly stayed though [a lot of the GOD core are about that old]

[21:53] <Xiphosis[GOD]> quit*

[21:55] <hawk_11> So GOD is the alliance that you started with?

[21:56] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Nope. I originally applied to NPO [The commie names of the senators on Red were appealing] but had some issues with my application disappearing, so I joined the alliance my friend was in - Illuminati.

[21:57] <hawk_11> I see

[21:58] <hawk_11> Alright, I think we've got enough background, let's get into the nitty gritty

[21:58] <hawk_11> I take it the driving motivation behind our readers' interest in discussing you is the somewhat-recent going-ons between GOD and GOONS

[21:58] <Xiphosis[GOD]> mhm

[21:59] <hawk_11> You've already posted enough on that subject to fill a good amount of space, but I want to know a few things

[21:59] <Xiphosis[GOD]> sure

[22:00] <hawk_11> First question: I've felt it's often extremely important for alliance leaders to stand by their decisions. Do you still stand by your decision to cancel the treaty with GOONS?

[22:00] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I wouldn't have done it if I didn't.

[22:00] <Xiphosis[GOD]> [Yes]

[22:02] <hawk_11> sorry, distracted

[22:03] <Xiphosis[GOD]> No prob.

[22:04] <hawk_11> anyway

[22:05] <hawk_11> The treaty cancellation itself raised a lot of drama after GOONS went public saying you were trying to strong-arm them into influencing an ally's treaty with MK. Do you feel that they misconstrued your intentions or is that spot on?

[22:05] <hawk_11> I'm sorry, let me rephrase

[22:05] <hawk_11> MK's treaty with TOP

[22:05] <hawk_11> I'm correct now right?

[22:06] <Xiphosis[GOD]> yeah.

[22:06] <hawk_11> alright

[22:08] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yeah, it was misconstrued a bit. I think it hurt Sardonic's feelings a bit and I guess he needed to explain what had happened, but prior to the cancelation itself there was no "If MK does x I'll drop you - so you better make sure it doesn't happen." Our position regarding TOP being allowed within the side was made clear to... pretty much everyone including TOP and MK a long time before that treaty went up. I skipped the "Them or

[22:09] <hawk_11> you cut at "them or

[22:09] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Lot less messy and dramatic overall.

[22:09] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I skipped the "Them or us" phase with GOONS and simply canceled.

[22:09] <Xiphosis[GOD]> "Them" being MK.

[22:10] <hawk_11> I see

[22:10] <hawk_11> so GOD's position on TOP; what is the background of that relationship straight from the head of GOD?

[22:10] <hawk_11> I mean it's apparent you guys aren't fans

[22:11] * Xiphosis[GOD] shrugs

[22:13] <hawk_11> so I take it that it's a combination of many things?

[22:13] <Xiphosis[GOD]> We've had pretty bad interactions with them, both prior to Karma, during and after the fact. They proved rather unreliable in Karma, if not... completely untrustworthy, and just as a general rule I don't repeat mistakes; and fighting next to them was a mistake. A lot of the alliances we ended up friendly with [Kronos, etc] suffered a fair bit for their ties to TOP, as well, so I simply have no interest in repeating it.

[22:13] <Xiphosis[GOD]> If I cut again, let me know

[22:13] <hawk_11> will do

[22:14] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Quite ironically, many of the things I was accused of doing to GOONS in that thread were things TOP had actually done a great deal of in the past - and it was a decent portion of why I want nothing to do with them.

[22:15] <Xiphosis[GOD]> They've always had a high opinion of their influence and worth in the world, and whatever necessity I had for fighting with them in Karma is gone now. They chose IRON over us - over FOK, over Umbrella, over Kronos. That was their call; I'm content to let them live with it.

[22:16] <hawk_11> So basically you viewed aligning with TOP at all as an alliance of opportunity to take down the "bigger threat" of the time, which would be the alliances dubbed the hegemony

[22:16] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Actually, nope.

[22:17] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I just accepted it as part and parcel of how stuff chains.

[22:17] <hawk_11> so indifference

[22:18] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Basically.

[22:18] <Xiphosis[GOD]> There was a lot of that.

[22:18] <hawk_11> Sounds about right

[22:18] <hawk_11> I don't like asking speculative questions, but I feel that the line of questioning begs it: in the future, could you see TOP causing a split in what you've termed your "side?"

[22:19] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Nope.

[22:19] <hawk_11> for the record though, would you like to say what exactly your side is

[22:19] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Hah, that's... a harder question.

[22:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Well, I'll say it although I think a lot of people will disagree with it anyway.

[22:22] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'd consider the collective 'spheres' of PB, SF, CnG and Polaris to be my side, along with Maroon, Sparta, and Genesis/ARES.

[22:23] <hawk_11> and I take it the "other side" would be however is aligned with my alliance, the new pacific order

[22:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The other side is everyone not included in what I just listed.

[22:23] <hawk_11> pretty big side

[22:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I don't consider everyone outside of that by default "with NPO" - but I don't consider them on my side either.

[22:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Hm.

[22:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> It's hard to phrase that right.

[22:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I think NPO has it's own side, but I more generally it's part of a larger umbrella of alliances not on my side.

[22:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> People who share no interest and no stake in my well being and whom I have no consideration or duty to myself, basically.

[22:25] <hawk_11> So we've got your side, the disinterested (both you being disinterested in them and them being disinterested in general), and the other side which almost certainly has the NPO in it

[22:25] <hawk_11> but maybe not

[22:26] <Xiphosis[GOD]> That's more or less it

[22:27] <hawk_11> sounds about right

[22:27] <hawk_11> so that series brings us to this question: currently, as the world is, do you think there is one power bloc who is "in control"

[22:28] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Nope.

[22:28] <hawk_11> Personally I view the world as currently in a state of flux. Do you agree?

[22:28] <Xiphosis[GOD]> We've not had a world where one power bloc was in control since Q's time. The time prior to PB forming was SF/CnG keeping the peace within our side in tandem, now it's roughly PB/SF/CnG/Polar doing that.

[22:29] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Control basically is that - eliminating costly wars for bad or shallow reasons between allies or side-mates.

[22:29] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And you can't do that without several blocs cooperating.

[22:30] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The idea and capacity for central authority has been fairly thoroughly torn down.

[22:30] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The result is more close calls - NEW being a great example - but a lot more even share of the power pie rather than it being concentrated in, as with Q, an NPO-like alliance.

[22:31] <hawk_11> Ah

[22:31] <Xiphosis[GOD]> As for flux - I think FARK leaving SF, MK leaving CnG and then PB forming shortly afterwards threw it into chaos for a minute, but no, I'd say we've all settled back to normal roles.

[22:32] <hawk_11> hm

[22:33] <hawk_11> I believe we could probably go tit-for-tat on comparisons of the past and present power structures for a while, but we should reserve that for the on-air podcast if you're interested

[22:33] <hawk_11> continuing though

[22:33] <hawk_11> what would you currently view as the biggest "threat" to the current structure

[22:34] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Short sightedness

[22:34] <hawk_11> care to elaborate?

[22:34] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yeah, it'll take a minute to type out.

[22:34] <hawk_11> no problem

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Examples would be evident in different leadership approaches to the current peace. Some will want to hedge [adding TOP, and anyone else they can grab up, for example] but this is short sighted for a couple of reasons - it ignores the enormous NS already possesed by our side, and in the attempt to hedge bets weakens good will amongst the side. There are others who will want to isolationist it - and

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> simply focus on 'them' and their own affairs, and that similarly is short sighted.

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> When you remove yourself from the dialogues, you lose your say and the world will almost inevitably go down a path that you will hate and really not have much fun in - any leader worth his salt wouldn't do that, but isolationism has it's temptations so in the short term, that can sway someone who's not careful.

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> People simply have to think long-term, not what is fun or tempting in the short term.

[22:40] <hawk_11> cut somewhere between isolationist and simply

[22:40] <hawk_11> got the rest after that

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I cut it myself

[22:40] <hawk_11> oh

[22:40] <hawk_11> alright then

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> There are others who will want to isolationist it - and

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> then "simply"

[22:41] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And I don't mean this in a realpolitik way, either.

[22:41] <hawk_11> oh?

[22:42] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Our [leaderships] jobs, as far as we have them, is ensuring the integrity/security of our AA's.

[22:42] <Xiphosis[GOD]> That is, fundamentally, why alliances exist.

[22:42] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And why we appoint and designate people to guide them.

[22:43] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Which you know, but warrants repeating after... 5 or so years of CN.

[22:43] <Xiphosis[GOD]> You can only actually do that job by thinking long-term.

[22:43] <hawk_11> so what would you view the long term goals of your side to be then?

[22:43] <Xiphosis[GOD]> By choosing now who you want backing you up and who is likely to slip a knife in your back. By deciding what IA programs to run and what is best left for later.

[22:43] <Xiphosis[GOD]> That is the long term goal of my side, as far as I'm concerned.

[22:43] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Collective security.

[22:44] <hawk_11> I see

[22:44] <hawk_11> This begs the question though: how far exactly are you willing to go for this security?

[22:44] <Xiphosis[GOD]> In terms of what?

[22:44] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Morality?

[22:45] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Or specific actions?

[22:45] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'm not sure what you have in mind.

[22:45] <hawk_11> well, on a scale of one to hegemony

[22:45] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Haha.

[22:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> So in terms of world management?

[22:46] <hawk_11> yes

[22:46] <hawk_11> Some viewed your actions towards GOONS as a step in the "right" direction

[22:46] <Xiphosis[GOD]> From total anarchy to active intervention in everyones affairs, including situations my allies have no part in?

[22:46] <hawk_11> do you think these are just knee-jerk opinions?

[22:47] <Xiphosis[GOD]> They are, fundamentally because I have no interest in even attempting to run a hegemony. It's not possible.

[22:48] <Xiphosis[GOD]> It's really just managing my own affairs, something people are loathe to do nowadays.

[22:48] <Xiphosis[GOD]> It's more normal to let a treaty [including an MDP or higher] sit than take that step.

[22:48] <Xiphosis[GOD]> But I have no such constrictions [mental or charter-wise].

[22:49] <Xiphosis[GOD]> To answer the original question, if I see an action that will tangibly ensure the security of GOD or anyone else I've pledged to protect, I will take it, and I will sleep very soundly having done so.

[22:49] <hawk_11> I question I got asked to ask was whether or not you had the full support of GOD when you made this cancellation

[22:49] <hawk_11> care to comment?

[22:50] <hawk_11> *A question

[22:51] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Two part answer to that one. First of all, GOD is my alliance. We make it very clear from Day 1 you join the alliance that if you have an issue with how the alliance is run - including the decisions taken by myself or other Lords - you speak it, but you continue to follow orders. Dissent is allowed, but disobedience gets you marched out with extreme hostility.

[22:51] <Xiphosis[GOD]> That is how we are.

[22:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Specifically to the GOONS point, we had two members who were opposed to the cancelation.

[22:52] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And they voiced it internally.

[22:53] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Many of my members, and government, felt it was necessary - if not pleasant, or particularly a happy occassion - and this was voiced to me to encourage me to cancel the treaty before I did so.

[22:53] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Whatever love we have for GOONS does not override the lack of willingness in GOD to have military obligations to any sector of the world tainted by TOP, basically.

[22:53] <Xiphosis[GOD]> We've been there, we're smart enough not to go back.

[22:56] <hawk_11> I see

[22:57] <hawk_11> Though going back to the security thing there. You said that it's "not possible" to run a hegemony

[22:57] <hawk_11> this is in light of the shift in geopolitics since KARMA?

[22:57] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yeah.

[22:57] <hawk_11> makes sense

[22:58] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Well.

[22:58] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Hm.

[22:58] <Xiphosis[GOD]> More specifically

[22:58] <Xiphosis[GOD]> You can run a hegemony two ways.

[22:59] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Fear. Which is what Q did - you're either with us, or you're dead. WUT did the same as well, although it intervened and controlled a lot less of the world - I don't think it ever cared to.

[22:59] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Or universal respect to the point where a significant amount of alliances are willing to defer to you in all cases, and by default.

[22:59] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Which does not exist.

[23:00] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The amount of NS I've seen any one alliance capable of gathering simply by respect is far outweighed by the remainder of what's left in the world, and you're not a hegemony unless you're unchallengable.

[23:00] <Xiphosis[GOD]> So yeah, I don't think it's possible.

[23:04] <hawk_11> So do you think, given the explanations you've given me, that it is possible for any one alliance bloc to ever rise to the prominence that the NPO did with the World Unity Treaty and the Continuum?

[23:04] <Xiphosis[GOD]> No.

[23:04] <hawk_11> So, in effect, the NPO won CyberNations and we can all go home?

[23:05] <Xiphosis[GOD]> People have had a few years worth of independence and free speech [both in IRC and the forums], they won't surrender it without a sharp enough backlash to overrun anyone who attempted it.

[23:05] <Xiphosis[GOD]> In effect, NPO conditioned CN to never allow another NPO.

[23:05] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'm not sure that's a success.

[23:06] <hawk_11> I don't know, sounds good to me

[23:06] <hawk_11> Rise to the top and be the only ones to ever achieve that position

[23:06] * Xiphosis[GOD] shrugs.

[23:06] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Rise to the top surrounded by who you were with in Q?

[23:06] <Xiphosis[GOD]> That matters as much as the position, -shrug-.

[23:07] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'd take another 2 years at the bottom if I wasn't surrounded by TPF's and such.

[23:07] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Quality of life/play has to be weighed against ambition.

[23:07] <hawk_11> Well, I would like to point out that some of the guys in Q are now on your side

[23:07] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'm aware

[23:08] <hawk_11> I mean hell, remember the Ordinance of Order?

[23:08] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Very much so.

[23:08] <hawk_11> So, in effect, couldn't it be said that your side is trying to rise to the top while surrounding itself by who surrounded us in Q?

[23:09] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Nope.

[23:09] <hawk_11> How so?

[23:10] <Xiphosis[GOD]> For one thing, my side already is the top. For another, we're collectively at the top; not just GOD. NPO alone rose to the top on top of Q's power.

[23:10] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And to tie this back to the quality of life point, part of what makes our side stable is the ability to choose who's in your specific circle of friends without surrendering the overwhelming firepower the side brings behind you.

[23:11] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I can still be untouchable allied to only 5 alliances I like, if I so choose, by simply having a strong tie back to one of the core blocs. That was not the case with Q.

[23:11] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Because ultimately, if NPO wanted that one tie gone - it'd be gone.

[23:12] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And the individual interested in keeping that tie had no security whatsoever if they chose to dig in their feet, even if they were members of Q.

[23:13] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Essentially, my side is on top precisely for the opposite reason Q was.

[23:13] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Q rose to the top because of centralization, mine did so because of flexibility.

[23:14] <Xiphosis[GOD]> While not falling into the trap the LUEnited and AEGIS did - so much anarchy that a side and unity couldn't be mustered at will, and with ease.

[23:15] <hawk_11> well yeah, personally I find it extremely easy to say your side is "on top" when it almost includes everyone but the NPO

[23:15] <hawk_11> and their allies

[23:15] <Xiphosis[GOD]> So do I. :P

[23:16] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Easy points can be accurate. /shrug

[23:16] <hawk_11> so for those of us who don't really define your side as "everyone besides the NPO and their allies," I feel almost obligated to ask how you're so confident in that assertion

[23:17] <hawk_11> then I've got a few questions stormsend wired me and we're done

[23:19] <Xiphosis[GOD]> The alliances and groups I listed as part of my side have had each others back beforehand and backed up their promises, that is why I can be confident. Similarly, I don't want TOP around because quite unlike them, TOP didn't back up their words and I wouldn't be able to be so confident if alliances of their kind were to begin being assimilated into the side.

[23:19] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I can be confident because I'm careful. The alliances I trust, I trust for reasons that go beyond promises.

[23:19] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And fluffy words.

[23:20] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And private ass kissing, and all the other crap that comes with FA.

[23:20] <hawk_11> I noticed you said that alliances on your side have had each other's backs beforehand

[23:20] <hawk_11> and you listed Polar on your side

[23:20] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Indeed.

[23:20] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yup.

[23:20] <hawk_11> Even though Polar is known throughout a good amount of the Cyberverse as "backstabbing my idols"

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And yet, I gave them white peace in the same incident.

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I think that demonstrates that I don't share the opinion, lol.

[23:21] <hawk_11> I see.

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Certainly I don't trust Grub whatsoever.

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I do trust Penguin, Dajabo and Random.

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And for the past 12 months since BiPolar, they've run that show.

[23:21] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Not Grub.

[23:22] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I feel confident in them.

[23:23] <hawk_11> Yet TOP, who some can argue has pulled similar things, doesn't deserve the same treatment

[23:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yup.

[23:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I explained this in the GOONS thread.

[23:23] <hawk_11> No need to explain it again then

[23:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> TOP is a democracy, to the highest level.

[23:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Polaris is not, I can be confident that if I trust the current Emperor, I can trust the alliance.

[23:23] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Not so with TOP - therefore, different treatment.

[23:24] <hawk_11> Alright, let's get to some of stormsend's questions

[23:24] <Xiphosis[GOD]> k

[23:24] <hawk_11> "You and MK have had a roller-coaster relationship. When RoK and MA cancelled on them, you were on the front lines verbally attacking MK every chance you got. What changed that?"

[23:26] <Xiphosis[GOD]> At the time MK and RoK/MA were falling out I was very disillusioned with their government. It felt to me at the time that Trace and AirMe had all but hijacked the alliance for their own goals and dragged MK away from it's roots more towards their friends - Polaris, etc.

[23:26] <Xiphosis[GOD]> To MK's detriment [NoCB].

[23:26] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I was very, very vocal bashing those two individually for that.

[23:27] <Xiphosis[GOD]> On top of that, there was an incident between RIA and MK a few months prior to that which I felt wouldn't have been handled by MK the way they handled it

[23:27] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Had the generation of government that was there when MK-GOD were MADP'd still been in power

[23:27] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Tolk, Archon, etc.

[23:27] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Archon was around, but he had stepped back.

[23:27] <Xiphosis[GOD]> When it came down to it, MK had stopped treating us like friends or brothers.

[23:28] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And I felt zero obligation to be quiet about how I felt about the change - I'd just gone through an absolute !@#$storm on behalf of my tie to them, and it made me fairly raw about the change.

[23:29] <Xiphosis[GOD]> AirMe/Trace leaving in the year or so after the war and Archon becoming more active again changed it, as well as a lot more interaction between myself and MK's membership.

[23:29] <Xiphosis[GOD]> ..along with a hell of a lot of conversation about that RIA incident.

[23:30] <hawk_11> alright, looks good

[23:30] <hawk_11> last question is anonymous

[23:30] <hawk_11> "GOD has shown on multiple occassions that you plan to side with Polar in 90% of the possible war scenarios. Also within 90% of those scenarios, VE will likely be with Pandoras Box on the opposite side. What is GOD doing to prevent that scenario given your long term friendship and treaty obligations to VE?"

[23:31] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Essentially, we're ensuring PB and Polaris don't view themselves as inherent enemies.

[23:32] <Xiphosis[GOD]> As baffling or unrealistic as that sounds, knowing the individual leaders of PB and the leadership of Polaris as well as I do, I can say it's far from unrealistic.

[23:33] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Some walls got thrown up between the two because of some childishly short-sighted wishes on behalf of a few people ["fun" war] and I've spent a good deal of time, along with a number of PB alliances, Polaris itself and her allies tearing those walls back down.

[23:34] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Members of this side aren't isolated and thrown to the wolves without extremely good reasons. That is part of the flexibility.

[23:35] <Xiphosis[GOD]> And similarly, you will not see that done to NpO.

[23:36] <hawk_11> Ok

[23:36] <hawk_11> well that about wraps it up. Thank you for your time

[23:36] <Xiphosis[GOD]> No problem

[23:36] <hawk_11> And again I invite you to come onto the podcast some time for the round table

[23:37] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I'd be happy to discuss the finer points of difference between then and now, if you're interested, but I have to decline the invitation.

[23:37] <Xiphosis[GOD]> I don't use the voice-based things.

[23:37] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Too personal for my level of involvement in the game

[23:38] <hawk_11> Well that's disappointing. I'll take you up on the offer some time though

[23:38] <hawk_11> I forgot to ask at the beginning, but you're ok with me publishing this right?

[23:38] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Yeah.

[23:38] <hawk_11> Alright then

[23:38] <hawk_11> Take care

[23:38] <Xiphosis[GOD]> You too.

41 Comments


Recommended Comments



Xiph's 'NpO good TOP bad' always confuses me

I wouldn't say that at all. We got over our bad blood with Polar after the war. Bad blood that extended years, all the way back to UJW. We wanted no one dismantled more then Polar, not even NPO, because Polar wanted our head on a plate, Xiph and VE can attest to many conversations had over that topic.

There's a great deal more to it, but I'm not sure what I can say to make you believe that.

Link to comment

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> People simply have to think long-term, not what is fun or tempting in the short term.

Also this is hilarious.

Xiph, your stubbornness has put SF in bad situations in the past. You're one of the worst for thinking long-term and you would throw almost everything away for one little fight or diplomatic spat. It's who you are. Whether it's your fierce loyalty or hot-headedness, it really is in your nature to forget about the 'big picture'.

Unless you were always intending to give in in the end, I guess. *shrug*

Link to comment

I can't let your use of "begs the question" go without pointing out how wrongly you've misused the phrase wankwankwankwankwankwankwankwankwankwank

Thanks, I'll keep it in mind in the future.

Link to comment

[22:40] <Xiphosis[GOD]> People simply have to think long-term, not what is fun or tempting in the short term.

Also this is hilarious.

Xiph, your stubbornness has put SF in bad situations in the past. You're one of the worst for thinking long-term and you would throw almost everything away for one little fight or diplomatic spat. It's who you are. Whether it's your fierce loyalty or hot-headedness, it really is in your nature to forget about the 'big picture'.

Unless you were always intending to give in in the end, I guess. *shrug*

Fairly inaccurate statement Penkala. Every action we've ever taken has always been in full cognizance of the long term consequences, with the support of everyone else. But since you were never in high SF gov, I wouldn't expect you to know better.

Link to comment

I wouldn't say that at all. We got over our bad blood with Polar after the war. Bad blood that extended years, all the way back to UJW. We wanted no one dismantled more then Polar, not even NPO, because Polar wanted our head on a plate, Xiph and VE can attest to many conversations had over that topic.

There's a great deal more to it, but I'm not sure what I can say to make you believe that.

And that's basically what happened between TOP and us. They wanted to roll us, we wanted to roll them. We both did what we had to, game over, we're back to square one. During that fight, a lot of respect for the other side was gained. We started talking... And here we are. Why is it so difficult to grasp that MK could actually be right in this (as we were with ODN)?

Link to comment

Fairly inaccurate statement Penkala. Every action we've ever taken has always been in full cognizance of the long term consequences, with the support of everyone else. But since you were never in high SF gov, I wouldn't expect you to know better.

If you really think I don't 'know what's going on' after a couple of years in that bloc (and in CN in general) then you're insane. I don't pretend to know everything, because frankly, I'm not into politics that much. That's not the game I play. But it's not like I don't know anything ever.

My comments stand. Just because often times SF leaders agreed to support you doesn't mean that you were doing the right things or weren't being stupidly shortsighted.

Edit: And yes, you "realize" the long-term consequences of actions. Then proceed to ignore them in favor of short-term gain. I've never accused you of being incompetent or not knowing what was going on. Just of not 'practicing what you preach' re: shortsightedness.

I still love you guys and all. But it's really not debatable that you have (multiple times) put the outcome of things in jeopardy for a stupid, short-sighted reason. Please don't insult my intelligence, though.

Link to comment

And that's basically what happened between TOP and us. They wanted to roll us, we wanted to roll them. We both did what we had to, game over, we're back to square one. During that fight, a lot of respect for the other side was gained. We started talking... And here we are. Why is it so difficult to grasp that MK could actually be right in this (as we were with ODN)?

It's not. You guys are entitled to give whoever you want second, tenth, hundreth chances. TOP's just always going to be one of those that never gets redeemed with us. We can handle threats of disbandment, isolation, and a great many other things and get over it if we think the offending party has changed, but if we think you've stabbed us in the back, or pulled some really out and out BS, you don't ever get a pass from us.

Link to comment

I still love you guys and all. But it's really not debatable that you have (multiple times) put the outcome of things in jeopardy for a stupid, short-sighted reason. Please don't insult my intelligence, though.

You're right, or at least, it's a good observation and well called. The only thing I would say is that in situations where that seems to be the case, I always allow myself cool-down time. Sometimes we still do it; but it's never with a head full of steam, I always sleep on stuff because absolutely no one knows better than I do how irrationally angry I can get. I don't make the profound decisions in that state, and that's usually when I'll go spend some time elsewhere and play the scenarios out/cool down.

Link to comment

It's not. You guys are entitled to give whoever you want second, tenth, hundreth chances. TOP's just always going to be one of those that never gets redeemed with us. We can handle threats of disbandment, isolation, and a great many other things and get over it if we think the offending party has changed, but if we think you've stabbed us in the back, or pulled some really out and out BS, you don't ever get a pass from us.

And that's all fine and dandy. I'm not going to stop you from holding ridiculous grudges, God knows some members in MK do the same. I - personnally - tend to not hold grudges after I got my revenge.

For what it's worth, TOP apologized profusely over their mishaps (or backstabbing as you call it) and acknowledge their mistakes. What else do you want from them?

Link to comment
What else do you want from them?

I can accept getting past a feud [like Polar v. GOD for ages and ages] the difference when it comes to TOP is that they were on our side so saying 'sorry' and expecting trust is a pretty tall request.

Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...