Walford

I am aware of the official reason. The real reason was because it was GPA's turn.

I'm not buying your excuse for keeping this thread alive at all. So many piling on saying the same things over and over, hoping to bury the truth so that those who are lurking maybe won't see it. No, you're not laughing at all; I can almost see you balling up your little fists in anger. You and the others wouldn't be troubling yourselves posting this unimaginative drivel [variations of "nuh-uh" "you did too" etc.] if you didn't feel compelled to do so. If you didn't care what others thought of you, you wouldn't bother to keep shoveling...whatever it is you are shoveling.

The only ones who are whinging are those who fear what they actually stand for will be exposed. There is nothing more helpful than the suggestions from people with personality disorders, but I have already explained Why I Joined Polaris. I am quite happy where I am, thanks. If we're exchanging suggestions, maybe NONE would be a better fit for you. if you're looking for excitement, that's the place to be. And wasn't GPA attacked for "LOL I dunno" at one time?

That's the first time that has been brought up in this thread. Very insightful.

^ Thanks for bumping the thread.

"Prevail" is a matter of perspective. Our objectives are eminently doable regardless of the numbers. Our opponents' objective? Hard to say if they have one. Doesn't matter. Yea, roving gangs fighting over bones and rubble is fascinating. If he's forcing us to fight. Yea, it's like Stalingrad; the officers are pointing weapons at our backs and shooting us if we retreat.

If we've "lost" and are about to surrender why are we still fightin'?

We fight to defend ourselves or if we feel threatened. Our current opponents have not offered a reason, but it certainly is not for either of those reasons, so your pretense of moral equivalency is false. I maintain that wars out of boredom, lulz and plunder are harmful to everyone, including the "winnerz." Our former opponents are doing just fine. We did not conquer them, subjugate them or loot from them. What our opponents intend, we can only guess. We will have to see, but there are somethings that we will not be forced into doing and are prepared to resist as long as it takes. I would need to see a comparison of quotes from our leadership and theirs to justify that other moral equivalency. If you can only define success or failure in terms of numbers, i cannot argue that point. I am saying others define these differently. This I find bizarre. Without people breaking into houses, plundering and pillaging there would be no prosperity? Without people who might be interested in politics, international discourse, economics, culture, religion, ideology, etc. being forced to only do warz-n-stuff, we would be much worse off? Preposterous! These are people who have limited capacity for politics and rhetoric, so they and those like them are imposing their limitations on the rest of the world by force. They cannot persuade, so they destroy. As Morgaine rightly pointed out, that is not interesting; it is boring. By that I take it to mean that we are "beaten" we should just shut up and bend over. Too bad if you don't like it, but those who know me are aware that force does not silence me. And oh yea, I and Polaris is looking for the "easy way." That is our reputation. We fight now for the same reasons as has it has always been since I have been here: in self-defense or if we feel threatened. This is not due to any creativity on our opponents' part. We have gotten through worse with our integrity intact and will do the same again. We are not going anywhere and will not change no matter how small our nations get. We value other things more than pixels -- things that cannot be destroyed. Things that our opponents will never have. This is more complaining about not shutting up. I and others have just been kvetching and name-calling. Maybe you need to read these posts again and see if there is something else. Y'know, like Bob would be much better and more interesting if we had different approaches to functioning on Bob other than lulz-n-warz.

Bless your heart.

Straw Man constructed from my reaction to another Straw Man.

Tywin, I have been noticing your name being thrown around with the proviso that it is generally understood that everything you have to say is not worth considering because...well, they never say. They only offer characterizations rather than cite quotes that prove that nobody should listen to you. That is very familiar. I did not even suspect it at the time, but I was told later that years ago [before I had given up on the possibility of honest debate here on the OWF] that there were people who were either assigned or were waiting for any of my posts so they could pile on and flood the discussion with Straw Man, ad Hominem and Red Herring -- anything to disrupt the discussion and make it so the points being made are buried under "you are an idiot" "LOL" "what you are really saying is..." etc. so he actual point can be ignored. That is what people do when they know that they are wrong. The bitter irony is, this hurts people like authors they attempt to undermine the worst. The ones who are harmed the most are those who might otherwise consider your arguments and benefit from them, but are deprived because of the mountains of troll. Then as Morgaine pointed out, anyone else who expresses an opinion with which they disagree, they can dismiss it with "that's what Tywin [or walford] would say, and the entire line of dissent is quashed. When I kept seeing these comments about what you have to say, I have been reviewing your posts carefully and the characterizations thereof do not follow. They give no indication that they had actually read what you had to say in the first place. These are people who do not want any point of view but theirs to be available for others to see. If your PoV is so weak, it should be easy enough to discredit it using logic, reason and evidence. In that regard, your critics are bankrupt -- morally and intellectually. Those of you reading this and see someone being dismissed so arbitrarily and the attempt to make them into a meme, i ask that you use your own mind and consider what has been said on its own merits. Do not let others determine what you can consider by allowing them to succeed in making it so when you see somebody's name on a post, you will not even consider it. ---------------------------- What is being discussed here is vital to the future of our entire civilization -- friend and foe alike. We have to consider all points of view honestly as we move forward. However, those who are expressing the sentiment that the world is doomed anyway, so we might as well keep taking bites out of each other until there is nothing left, well, those are the thoughts of a quitter who has given up on the future. "Success" these days is measured by the ability to destroy. "Failure" is characterized by a determination to stop the destruction and get our population growing again and the potential for a wide variety of options as to how we can exist together to be expanded. Let those of us who want a future and are willing to work together to build one keep moving forward and let the harpies of what constitutes TRUE failure sink into the abyss w/o the rest of us. So I implore you to open your minds and listen to what people like Tywin have to say; they have a perspective that is worth considering and something valuable to contribute.

It is certainly not a Fact of Nature that Polaris "uses weak CB's, looks at PM as a crime to be punished, dogpiles and imposes it's will on others" so there is a moral equivalence as you are implying to us and the main alliance [and their meat-shields] attacking us . The CB for the Disorder War may not be one you might agree with, but we actually felt threatened enough to undertake military action in the manner we did. To imply that the CB was contrived questions our character unjustifiably. Before that war we were not rubbing our hands with glee about how we were going to trump up a reason to start a war and hoped that everybody would be fooled so they'd be cheering us on. Look at Roquentin's quote in my sig. Public opinion is not something we consider very much when acting. We do what we think is necessary and for good reason. War is a sacrifice for Polaris [whether winning or losing] and we do not undertake combat for entertainment, looting or conquest. AFAIK, we got no reparations from that war and certainly did not get any terms regarding destroying military assets or having anything like a Viceroy occupying the enemy post-war. I wish the Wiki about that war said something about the terms, because AFAIK, the Peace Mode aspect of the terms was about making sure that Pacifica would not get out of the war and immediately start making mischief again. You can disapprove of this, but I'm just giving you an idea of the mindset -- which was quite different from that of our current opponents. Also, if I recall correctly, that aspect of the terms did not originate from Polaris. We just wanted to end the war and cut them loose. If somebody has documentation rather than opinion on what the final terms are, I would be glad to see it. And all of this could be moot. Those of you bringing up a previous war might actually know that it is not relevant to the current one, but are flogging it as a Red Herring. I seriously doubt that The Birds are doing this for the sake of being Avenging Angels for Pacifica. The latter can take care of themselves. The terms of the war certainly were not harsh by the standards of the day. As stated earlier, it was not a war of conquest or profit. It was about dealing with a perceived threat. How valid that perception was is a matter of perspective -- which is most likely going to be colored by biases rather than fact. Playing it better? When we found ourselves being declared upon by this many alliances, when the Prime Movers behind all of this found it necessary to surround themselves with that many meat-shields, I can tell you we took this as a compliment and a gesture of respect. This was clear evidence that they know that Polaris is no pushover. Our nations may be smaller, but we are still standing tall. It also indicates that there is something more than boredom or lulz behind starting this war. To employ this many resources and to sacrifice so many millions of nation strength, there is something that our opponents want to accomplish with respect to Polaris very badly. But if it entails subjugation or destruction, I guarantee that the objective will fail. If it is to make our nations smaller, that was accomplished in the first few days. If it is to make us "feel" beaten, that will fail also. Our bonds and esprit are stronger than ever. Those who thump their chests about numbers cannot conceive of this, I know. Again, I am just a foot-soldier with no rank, but I can say that there are no discussions amongst us about "getting on top" or anything of the like. Get on top of what, a pile of rubble? That is not a Polar aspiration. We are military and not political. During peace time, we build our nations, mentor each other and mind our own business. We're always watching out of practical necessity, but not plotting some grand scheme to establish a Polar hegemony; we cannot be bothered. It would entail too much attention being paid to outsiders that would be better spent on each other. And this characterization about because we are "losing" I and others are "kvetching about civilization vs. barbarians" is completely false. By all means review what we have actually said. Post #289 of this thread gives a clear picture of what I think the problem is, how it affects us all -- including the "winnerz" -- and solutions that I offer that are for everyone's benefit -- and again, including for those on the opposing side. As I said before, if things keep going the way they are, we ALL lose. Perhaps some of you just think that the demise of Bob is inevitable, so we should not bother trying to save it and just keep eating our own until there is nothing left. No, we absolutely can stop the decline and get things thriving again, resulting in a more vibrant and interesting environment. This is another Orwellian twist: Those who have given up and just want to ride Bob down to oblivion are the cool, fun guys. Those who see a problem and want to fix it are just sore losers who are complaining. ------------------------------- Is that so hard to understand or are too many of us locked into the mindset of the world being divided between the sheep and the wolves that the notion that someone would actually be motivated by a concern for all of us is beyond comprehension?

That's about it. Any post after the above one is redundant.

Certainly not. Bless your heart. We love you guys! :wub:

Oh, that's all I'm doing, right? Do you even know how to read? Oh, wait, let me check your alliance. Oops, nevermind.

This is actually complaining on your part about us not keeping our mouths shut. We're "beaten" right? We should be cowering under our beds and hope we don't make the big bad [whatever your alliance is called] mad, so we will get leniency from perpetrators who do things that hurt everybody on Bob. The more my nation is beaten down, the louder I get. Why don't you spend more money on me and declare down on my nation again? Maybe that will shut me up. Bring it, tough guy! And who is complaining? It is more than valid to question the motives of those who declared war on us -- and those who are attacking w/o any declaration -- and to explore what implications that wars of this kind have for the greater community at large. Sociopaths don't like to be held accountable, I understand that.

Without any substantiation of this series of gratuitous assertions peppered with ad Hominem attacks, all of this can be just as gratuitously dismissed. But the anger is coming across. It's actually quite simple. Those who starting these kinds of wars are not just having fun and winning w/o consequence as they imply. They are doing damage to everybody on Bob. That is why most have left. I appreciate that. It is not really a philosophy and it actually does matter which side wins, which is implicit in yours and others' assertions. This isn't "just a game" in which it doesn't matter who wins. It is a situation in which if one side wins, everybody loses. Everybody. I know that the perpetrators cannot have their eyes opened to what is the logical conclusion of where things will go if this continues. But I am hoping that some will and maybe a change can be made before Bob dies. So many of my friends have been driven off Bob because other people who could have done quite nicely with us here decided instead to face us with the choice of being forced to do things their way or be wiped out. Who are the ones who are intolerant here? Why can't these people do their own thing with those who want to do things their way and leave those who are oriented toward other than warz-n-lulz-n-stuff can do that. That's how Orwellian, twisted and upside-down things have gotten. If you want to have people allowed the options of being at war all of the time or to be able focus on politics and economics, you are intolerant. If you use force to make it so everybody is playing a one-dimensional war-game and the rest can leave, you are an advocate for freedom. As I said, if things keep going as they are, we all lose. I don't want that. ------------------------------------ For starters, I will go back to a recommendation that I made years ago: The non-aligned need to be left alone unless they start something. These are mostly new rulers and their welcome should not consist of being swamped with incessant recruitment messages, battle reports and threats. They should not be threatened with ZI if they dare to fight back. If you are not a sociopath, try to think what it is like to be new and be confronted with this? Why can't people have the option to just be an independent nation and not be punished for it? Those are the seedlings of the next generation and we have to give them a chance to grow. How this can be accomplished can be discussed elsewhere once this war is over. But this is critical, because the non-aligned represent the future. That is why I undertook the "failed" experiment of organizing them for mutual protection. Perhaps some mutual agreement can be forged at some point to let our little babies have a chance to grow unmolested. Let them have a chance to browse the forums, get to know people and express themselves w/o fear. At one time, before NONE, we had a cadre of eccentrics who did not belong to any alliance. They were interesting and well-liked. There were even rogue alliances that hid in the ranks of the non-aligned who would suddenly post an AA on their nations, attack somebody and then disappear again. I remember dealing with them when I was a Platoon Commander at GATO. We had 300 wars declared on our little guys in the space of a month, all by non-aligned. It was exciting. Things could be so much more interesting here if we show some respect to each other and let people do their own thing. That is my ultimate goal. I want Bob to grow again and maybe even thrive. Some of us are doing things that are impinging upon that, so I am here to call them on it and offer some alternatives.

I don't care about how you feel. I'm just exposing your ilk for what you are. As sociopaths, I would expect you to be outraged at being called on it. Your purpose is obvious and your members have stated as such. To attack others to alleviate boredom and steal what they have. It is a pointless pursuit that will never be satisfied. What I would like to see is one of you explain to the world why you started this war and what would you see as a satisfactory end.

Straw Man. NONE did not fail. We were hounded from the Planet by thugs like you because they didn't like that the non-aligned organized mutual defense rather than being punching bags and tech-cows. The criminal alliances couldn't tell how many we were until they were counter-attacked. No, we didn't lose, the entire world did when the Might-Makes-Right paradigm that parasite alliances like yours held sway. That is why the world's population is about a quarter of what it was when NONE was created. You don't have any power, that's what you don't get. The ability to destroy is not power. It is the opposite of power. True power comes from integrity, virtue and honor -- which as I already said, your band utterly lacks. You have a horrible reputation as liars, betrayers, bullies and cowards -- which is well-deserved. Your meat-shields will learn this soon enough. No matter what you do, we will be the same and will retain what is really important and valuable. You as Polars? I may vomit.

I have an idea, given that you like warz n stuff, why don't you go non-aligned? You can do as we did and set your alliance affiliation as NONE (capitalized) and choose the same flag. That way some could figure out that there was a relationship and avoid you, but others might decide to take you on and see what happens. We didn't do diplomacy, we just fought -- and believe me, your defensive wars will keep you busy enough. Oh no, you wouldn't do that. You don't have the guts. Instead, you cravenly exploit the alliance system just as you exploit your [temporary] affiliated alliances. You hide behind the same AA to protect your precious pixels, then look for houses to break into and people to beat up. Prove me wrong and go out into the world as independents and see what courage and integrity is really made of.

I don't think you have a belief system other than Might Makes Right. It is the belief system of bullies and cowards. That thousands of nations have disappeared from Planet Bob once Might Makes Right replaced diplomacy, rhetoric and discourse is absolutely the case. As I noted earlier, at one point there were 45,000 nations -- 12,000 of which were non-aligned. They were left largely unmolested until general war was declared upon the independents and small alliances. Now there about 500 non-aligned left and so, small and then medium-sized alliances were then targeted once the non-aligned were flayed and then discarded. Now there really are no large alliances left. As I predicted at the time, we would eventually come to the point in which the ever-shrinking population would be left with roving gangs like yours fighting over bones, rags and rubble. But when destruction becomes a form of amusement and boredom becomes Casus Belli, the nihilism only grows and those on the target lists decide to leave rather than be beaten up and silenced on the OWF. Only boring people become bored. You and your coalition is pathetic if beating up people who did nothing to you is all you can come up with for amusement. How long does it take to fire some cruise missiles, send in a ground attack, etc. What do you do with yourselves the rest of the time? No, don't tell me. I'm sure it's disgusting.

You people are unbelievable. You start a war and are bleating that those you are attacking are actually going to have something to say about it other than LULz. You have been spending too much time with your toadies and sycophants. Win what, exactly? Things that you have robbed from others at the expense of your own virtue and honor [not to say you had any in the first place]. Ours is not only intact, it is stronger than ever. These are things that parasites lacking in values cannot loot. These "pies" you are referring to are people. Their nations that took a long time to build up and such a short time to destroy. In your twisted minds, destruction is the same thing as creation. As sociopaths, you look at others as a means to an end, so you refer to them as "pies" to be sliced up and divided amongst flukes, fleas and tapeworms. As I explained earlier, you are impinging upon the sovereignty of nations, alliances and entire coalitions that might want to concentrate their energies on other things than having to grapple the stench of your bodies. It is an imposition just to know your names. You are not worthy of knowing ours. So many instead have chosen to leave Planet Bob for good rather than exist in a world divided between the sheep and the wolves. Those who remain are cowed into silence -- except those few who realize they have nothing left to lose regarding their nations and are thus free to express themselves. :P Doing things that shrink the total population of the world and deprive our community of discourse, diplomacy and rhetoric that does not rise beyond the level of LULZ is bad for everyone -- including the victors. This world has gotten a lot more boring because your sick mentality rules the day. There are only so many ways to inflict damage upon a nation before it becomes old hat. No, I am not saying that my words have the power to do any such thing -- except to expose you as the vile, prevaricating, sociopathic looters that you are. The bonds that hold your coalition together are those of convenience only and therefore it will be you who are the ones who break them when you once again become bored or have wrenched all you could from your allies. Once these satellite alliances have served their purposes as meat-shields, they will be discarded like so much trash and set upon by the mindless, slavering mob that makes up your core constituency. Indeed your record does speak for itself. Your word isn't worth spit. Your loyalty only goes as far as what you can manipulate or intimidate your allies to do for you. And if the population of Planet Bob manages to survive your troupe of Troglodytes' existence, if you are remembered at all, it will be that of a cancer that grew at the expense of others.

I guess invoking Tywin is the Planet Bob equivalent of Godwin's Law in the thug circles. It certainly provides an intellectually dishonest means of slithering away from addressing any points that were raised -- namely that you are a criminal and a sociopath in an alliance of criminals and sociopaths. And Tywin has been around since Sept of '13. I have been around since Jun of '06. People who remember me from those days will tell you that what you are seeing is very very familiar. As I said before, congrats for bringing me back. I was perfectly content to manage my nation and participate in internal alliance affairs until you savages showed up and started pounding us for no good reason. Dry your little tears; you only have yourselves to blame.

You don't like vitriol? How about not starting wars for reasons you refuse to give. All we have to go by is "To incite a global war" as stated in the Wiki. You have the opportunity to change that and state your intentions, but instead all we can do is speculate. My speculation is based upon experience and the history of what has happened when wars like this were started in the past: Many nations left Planet Bob for good, people who are inclined toward other aspects other than war were driven off. Then finally, the aggressor coalition turned on its own member alliances. When I see this happening again -- only worse, because at least before the aggressors at least made an attempt at a pretense of CB -- I am alarmed enough to start posting again, because what you are doing and why is a threat to us all, friend and foe alike. Congratulations, you have succeeded in invoking walford into the OWF. Did you miss me? This I take as fear of exposure of you for what you are. You want me and others to be shut up before others start to question your motives and objectives. As I said before, you certainly aren't stating them. Who are you to talk about glass houses? There you are, the leader of an aggressive alliance that is attacking us offering "helpful" advice to our leader because you care? What do you take us for? The fact is, you attacked us and this is not the first time. Who are you to admonish anyone about reputation? Weren't there promises on your end of no further raiding? Didn't raids take place anyway after these promises? Didn't you blame these on some errant rogues within your own coalition, but still defended their unprovoked aggression anyway? Your actions most definitely speak louder than your words. And my interpretation of that is that your word means nothing. You want what you started to stop? That is completely in you hands.