Jump to content

smurthwaite

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,959

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by smurthwaite

  5. I have a question about EQ

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    So, if I am following these objections, the look something like this:

    .

    1) EQ is mean because they attacked us with superior numbers.  (Pretty much like DH has done in every war since Karma?)

    2) Umb is a victim. (They did slot fill.  They claim they had the right to do so, and they may believe it to be so; however, AI didn't.  Maybe Umb should have said, "sorry.")

    3) AI dodges wars. (Pretty sure this is the first major conflict since the inception of AI).

    4) Superfriends is bandwagoning. (Superfriends have been on the recieving end of DH wars of agression for the last two wars.  We aren't making any sort of power grabs, and are really unconcerned about whether anybody else is.  We just enjoy punching bullies in the nose.  I personally like it when DH whine about how unfair it is.)

    5) Logical Fallacy

    6) LOGICAL FALLACY

    7) Irrelevant statements

     

    Yeah 5-7 just really don't need responses.

     

    Here's my insignificant 2 cents.  People got are going to whine about being fed their own medicine.  It's pretty much the cycle of CN.  Deal with it.  Shut up and put your infra where your mouth is.

  6. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    You are right.  I become irritable and act rashly; if only the rest of your coalition was as cordial as ODN seems to be (at least in the interactions I have had with them); however, we get these people who skew ideas and words so far beyond ideas or intentions....

     

    Anyway, my ODN wars have been nearly as fun as my INT wars were - full of witty banter and good humor  rather than anguish filled tears and angry rants (like every PM I have had from my GOONs targets the entire war...this one and the last time we were engaged with them).

  7. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    So we are dropping logs then?  I was simply going to allude to them, because they aren't my logs to drop, but here you go.

     

    From March 10

     

     

    [13:23] Session Ident: Sardonic (Coldfront, Gofast2006) (Sardonic@coldfront-82925324.dsl.austtx.sbcglobal.net)
    [13:23] <Sardonic> I have to admit, I'm pretty impressed at how much you guys have stuck with this war
    01[13:23] <Gofast2006> same with you guys
    01[13:24] <Gofast2006> you guys got taken out really fast around your 15k-30k NS range
    [13:24] <Sardonic> lol why? This isn't even the most we've ever faced in a war
    01[13:24] <Gofast2006> now all of them have it easy
    [13:24] <Sardonic> pretty much, we have a very good defensive position

     

    [13:27] <Sardonic> Anyway,
    [13:27] <Sardonic> I'd be interested to know if you guys are just about ready to wrap it up and peace out with us ? I'd rather be fighting the core aggressors of this conflict, and you guys arn't really in a position to keep fighting us effectivley.
    [13:27] <Sardonic> Just thought I'd float the offer
    01[13:27] <Gofast2006> but to me its more fun and satisfying if i use my own money to fight :p
    01[13:28] <Gofast2006> so basically you want to wrap up our front and go hit someone else?
    01[13:28] <Gofast2006> is that what you are saying?
    [13:28] <Sardonic> Sure 
    [13:28] <Sardonic> I'm not going to lie and say we wouldn't
    01[13:28] <Gofast2006> wont happen
    [13:28] <Sardonic> shucks
    [13:29] <Sardonic> I don't see why you guys are burning for DR
    [13:29] <Sardonic> it's not like you'll be getting anything from this war
    01[13:29] <Gofast2006> if you guys are going to get out of the war it will probably be permenantly

     

    There you go, bro.  All hail the mighty GOONs.

     

    :facepalm:

     

    Yep, we in NPL are SO close to surrender.

     

    (for those too obtuse to understand, the above sentence is sarcasm)

     

    So.  Still believe Sardonic's spew?

     

    Because I don't, and neither does anybody in NPL, or from the entire coalition, for that matter.

  8. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    That "attack" last night was supposed to be your big NPL-saving push? The 21 new wars declared today and yesterday ain't gonna cut it.

     

    I'm sorry my friends, but you're going to have to do a lot better than that, unless your intent was to kill us with laughter.

     

    Props to the one guy from Sparta who actually declared.

    Always with you talking.  NPL neither asked for nor needed saving.  NPL is exactly where we expected to be and are getting to nuke GOONS....when they will come out and fight....at will.  Do YOU even believe this dribble you spew?  The logs and PMs I saw came from you, Sardonic, pursuing peace.  Not us.  Your rhetoric is so old and used up that I can't believe you are still using it.  Sheesh.  It's just sad how pathetic you and your alliance really is.

  9. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Word up dogs, Beets in the house.

    You caught me, I was actually using the wrong definition of mixed metaphor. The proper definiton for this case would have been "when two unlike clichés are used in a single statement." It's still called a mixed metaphor rather than a mixed cliché for reasons unknown to mortals, so while my original use is still correct, my explanation was not.

    I apologize for any confusion I may have caused. I don't mean to mislead my homies.

    My friend, you are again confused.  What you are describing is not (again) inf fact metaphor, and claiming that a cliche is a metaphor is also a logical fallacy.  While I did concede the possibility of calling the "fisherman" phrase a metaphor, it really more of a dead metaphor than a cliche. 

     

    That said, it is poor nomenclature to call a cliche a metaphor, unless, it is a a cliche metaphor, which neither of these two are.  According to my copy of The Handbook of Literary Terms (which I had to dig up to from my undergrad years just to prove you wrong), a mixed metaphor mixes metaphors.

     

    So, in the immortal words of the wise Apu, "Thank you; come again."

  10. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Yo yo yo dog, Beets in the hizzle.

    A mixed metaphor is when two or more unlike metaphors are given in close proximity. An example of this would be "It's time to take the bull by the horns and reap what you sow".

    In Wally's post, he asked the question "what is Marx smoking" and answered that question with the phrase "a fisherman's tale". It's jarring in the least.

    If you need further explanations on mixed metaphors, gimme a holla. Word.

     

    Beets, your sorry attempt at schooling me just shows your ignorance.  "What is Marx smoking" is in fact, not a metaphor.  It is figurative, true, but a metaphor it isn't.  You might claim that "a fisherman's tale" is a metaphor, yet again, technically it is not.  If anything, they are two figures of speech within close proximity, however, just because a metaphor is a figure of speech, doesn't mean all figures of speech are metaphors.  Please take your grade school logical fallacies out of the big boy conversation.  If you wish to do a further analysis of the style of this reply, the tone is condescending.

  12. EQ warmap

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    Seriously, nice work.  I understand that it is filled up, but as I was looking back through the timeline, why did you change the colors of the lines?

     

    (Also, not a big deal, but it is NPL, not NpL).

     

    I like it.

  13. EQ Coalition stages another intervention-- Because we care

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Tears are harvested every day.  This ultralow tier conflict has some of the best we've ever collected in a war.

    They are being harvested.  When I couldn't find anybody to declare on because they were all hanging out in PM, I sold off all my military to down declare.  Your guys were shedding tears then.  I have had several angry and entertaining messages full of their tears.  Either that or they are terrible at their attempts at witty banter.  Either way, tears are tears.

     

    If they ever come out of PM, here's my link:  http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=170471

  15. I have a question about EQ

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    Your from Alchemy you say.... hello you probably remember me... I was in that Alliance you oportunisticly dogpiled without a CB a little over a year ago. Great to hear your keeping well and still about. Have a nice day. :)

     

    I love how they have selectively ignored this post, and more importantly, its implication.

  24. TALVISOTA

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    5)      S’up, GOD?      (No, this is not a declaration against GOD – I have nothing whatsoever against GOD and this war has nothing to do with GOD. 

    I’ve just never DoW’ed an SF member before, and it seems like anytime there is a declaration of war on an SF alliance, somebody somewhere feels the need to add “S’up GOD” to the proceedings. I’m not sure for what reason GOD gets s’upped, or what the s’uppage of GOD  accomplishes, exactly.  Pretty sure that Tom Riddle could rogue NPL and the s’upping of GOD would commence. However, if the s’upping  of GOD is some sort of prerequisite for declaring on an SF alliance, well, by admin let’s consider them s’upped and get on with it.)


     

     

    I don't have anything to add to this thread, but this was so clever and funny I thought I should give you an accolade, even though you have declared on my allies in R&R.
     

  25. Hello, Non Grata, how are you? We are fine.

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

     I fail to see your point, but considering the source, I am not shocked.

    Argument Ad hominem is a logical fallacy.  Logical fallacies, by definition, are illogical.  If they are illogical, they cannot be used to effect in an argument (to which I must believe you are trying to contribute based on where the comment was made).  The blatant use such dribble in the way quoted above is also a non sequitur.  Man, you have seem to be in need of a course in argumentation.

     

    Next.

×
×
  • Create New...