Jump to content

Nick1a

Members
  • Posts

    99
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Nick1a

  1. Oh yes, because striking out and attempting to challenge the status quo and imaginary rules of "sovereignty" and proprietary hegemonic issues of national ownership is exactly the same as calling an entire group of people mentally challenged in an angry rage.

    Bravo.

    Nowhere in his post did he say the acts were equivalent, only that both were classless.

    Nice logic.

  2. You cannot have peace without war. It is as simple as that.

    And Duncan, MHA has decided to get involved because they say TAB is their ally. That's the official reason at least. The real reason though is because MHA feels a need to flex its muscle against a seven man alliance. You see, without the NPO on top, MHA needs to make sure that people take them seriously. And what better way to do that than by standing strong in the face of the BTA? Two thumbs up MHA!

    I just wish you could realize how wrong that last part is.

  3. I'm...sorry? You'll have to explain what you mean a bit better. How is referring to the individual accomplishments of folks from an OOC perspective IC?

    I was curious as to how you were badass in an ooc manner.

  4. And believe you me, we Old Guard folks were some pretty badass dudes back in the day.

    I thought this was an OOC post?

    But this whole thread seems a lot like a personal attack dressed up as a call for change. Funny that you should mention class in your post....

  5. Point out where I have advocated direct democracy? My alliance is non-democratic so why would I advocate it for other alliances? What I did say was IF an alliance was to use direct democracy (as raised by an Umbrella member, NOT me) to decide on how to use their 2 votes then the scenario I raised would be the best way to do so.

    I think people understand what you're saying, but don't agree with it. Assume an alliance like TOP votes with 100% turnout. 105 vote for something, and 104 (or whatever it'd be) vote against. Yes you have the majority, but by casting two votes for you're virtually ignoring half of the alliance. That's why some systems require percentiles to be reached, 66%, whatever before they would go all out.

  6. I don't remember being a member of the New Pacific Order then. Maybe you should check your facts. I had nothing to do with that.

    I wasn't a member when Harmlins was signed, does that mean I like Gramlins any less?

    By your logic, I wasn't a member when this treaty was signed, so I shouldn't have to honor it. I mean, I had nothing to do with it.....

    Think about that for a bit.

    And I am not really liking this fairy-tale where NPO was the good ally to MHA, only caring for their 'friends'. Secret Continuum meetings without MHA, that's how you treat your 'friends'?

  7. As you're clearly taking an Anti-Order bias on everything from what I've seen... yes, I wouldn't trust your explanation. I don't believe you could speak of it in a non-biased tone.

    The Sir Paul Accords do not restrict you from posting your opinion on the [OOC]forums[/OOC]. It restricts you from making a fool of yourself.

    And I'm sure that's elastic.

×
×
  • Create New...