Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Posts posted by jerdge

  1. Thanks Dajobo for all the professional, respectful and interesting interactions. I'm sure there will be others again.

    Congratulations to Emperor EaTeMuP.
    If we are to trust Dajobo you have all the necessary energy and wisdom, and others already wished you to enjoy the fortune that will also be needed to make your success.
    My hope is instead that your imperium is completed by the same grace of the reign of your predecessor.

  2. Woodstock "united" a lot of people at the time, but now there are probably more people that criticize it than people that approve of it (at least, judging from those that talk openly on the subject). It probably doesn't qualify anymore.

    A moment that united us was when the community stood against EZI. Initially it was just a few brave souls, but it quickly got traction and after some time - well before Karma - EZI had become unacceptable.

  3. As an outside observer I have the impression that there's now basically no more enmity between the two sides of this last front. This final battle having been fought honorably and by the rules is a strong indication that wounds can be mended, bridges can be rebuilt.

    Especially for these reasons, and being me the hippy I am, I congratulate all parties on this peace. Have fun building your nations and alliances back to peace and prosperity.

  4. I have always admired the design behind the Bubblegum War, but I could do so only because your plans were uncovered.

    I still remember fondly our verbal skirmishes when you were posting leaks from the MHA forums, back in Vox's times... You are one of those that it's really hard to take on, absolutely a valiant opponent. You know that you have my respect.

    It's now some time that we don't really chat on IRC, but I know that we will again, sooner or later.

    Congratulations on your eight years, My Dear Shantamantan(tm). I look forward to your next feats.

  5. Hopefully by this time next year your alliance will have realized that you have no entitlement to post your rubbish here without constant observation of your worth.  If you want to be above the politics of this world, you should also do everyone the courtesy of staying out of the public eye.  I am curious as to why people who are too scared to take a part in what makes Bob tick think anyone besides them cares about what they are doing.  Surely you could confine all future GPA notices to your own realm where people who consider you worth more than a pinch of poop might choose to visit you for their own edification.
    Filthy neutrals.

    I am not an official spokesperson for the GPA, but nonetheless I think I can be confident in saying that we don't expect to post information without being subject to criticism. Criticism is good, there's always something to learn. It also provides the occasion to communicate better, and hopefully to clear misunderstandings.
    For example, I know for a fact that the GPA can't be above CN's politics. Everyone in this world is part of politics, as this last isn't just war, and especially it's not just the explicit structure of the treaty web (today even less than in the past).

    Another misunderstanding is about the GPA being scared by war. As far as I can tell, the people of the GPA are just not interested in causing harm to others, and they certainly don't want to be dragged into the fights of others. This second is basically the only reason almost always cited by people applying to the GPA. Alliances with other people are avoided because they're considered a problem, not a solution.

    Part of our distaste for war is also probably because we disagree that it's "what makes this world tick" - at least, I strongly disagree. Some like fighting, others like peace, others like discussion, or conquering, or plotting, or joking, or creating order despite chaos, or sowing chaos in order... What "makes this world tick" is that there's room for a lot of different people, which at times cooperate, at times ignore each other, at times clash.
    So, we try to stay out of war because we have other plans and desires for our time here. To each their own: ignoring our notices is always possible for those that find them worthless.

    Finally: poop. :) the word for joy and happiness in an ancient language has the same origin of manure. If you want to grow crops and to build your future you can make a very good user of "poop".
    If I had to find an image for "worthlessness" I'd probably try think of something that doesn't build anything, and that just tries to get a living by exploiting those that they deride. Only human beings that put themselves over the others, and that try oppress them from their pedestal, probably fit the description.

  6. [...] When I I join an alliance at war is that an act of war on the other alliance? Why yes it is [...]

    Unlike basically everyone else in this thread I will continue to consider it OOC. Which allows me to say that this is (I believe) quite a new idea for CN.
    While joining an alliance at war surely and naturally means that one becomes a fully legitimate target for the other alliance, calling it "an act of war" by itself and even calling that one a "rogue" is rather a new concept.

    I am all for new ideas in the political game and this has the potential to cause a lot of drama: good for whoever thought of it first.
    Hopefully it won't be just another "we decide it's that because we have the power to make it so" thing that is used just once when convenient, and then gets discarded in the room of the lost and forgotten tools. Gaming patterns need to be at least somewhat consistent for the game to continue to have any meaning.

  7. The saddest part of all of this is that some of you people are flinging insults one to the other in an OOC thread because of IC actions. Get over yourselves.

    That said, one would think that switching to Peace Mode while your application is processed can avoid you a lot of trouble down the road.

  8. Anatomy of a post by Neo Uruk

    Introduction: Begin with an ironic (usually heavily sarcastic) statement of congratulations to the poster being quoted.


    Good questions, all around! Gold star!


    Body: *Always* ignore the basic premise of quoted post (VERY IMPORTANT). Extract one minor, often insignificant part of the post and mock it. It is crucial to surround one word or phrase with tildes, thereby presenting it as being the most ludicrous idea conceived in the history of mankind. In general, there should be little to no reason for mocking the post or author of said post. Typically there will be no apparent cause or reason.


    So, Margrave, do you think user Blade 619 getting so worked up that he comes onto the OWF to divulge that, oh my, he ~has a girlfriend~ will work in protecting him from such acts in the future?


    Conclusion: There will rarely be need for a conclusion of any sort, as (see above) there will generally not be a point to the post or reason for posting it. A conclusion for nonsense is unnecessary and a waste of time.


    Additional notes:


    A) Excessive use of hyperbole is helpful and sometimes necessary.

    B) There will always be AA's and users whose asses need to be kissed. This list changes monthly so be sure to post accordingly.

    C) Always remember Neo Uruk posts are the most important in their respective threads.

    D) The length of the post/argument being responded to is irrelevant. One or two sentences will suffice in any and every Neo Uruk posting situation.

    Thank you, now this thread has a meaning.


    (I don't always agree with you or even just tolerate your posts, Hakai, but every now and then you pull out something really spectacular! I'll also note that this being about Rey is irrelevant: the style is admirable by itself. I tip my hat to you good Sir.)

  9. I start by saying that with "political impact" I mean to have shaped the political rules of inter-alliance dealings and the political dynamics that "determine" where CN politics go.


    With that in mind my list should be pretty self-explanatory:

    1. New Pacific Order

    2. Vox Populi (2nd)

    3. (vacant)

    4. (vacant)

    5. (vacant)


    In other words, we only saw two paradigms at work (edit for clarity: 1. material force and 2. idealism). The third and so on are yet to be seen.

  10. Security is a lie. And freedom is just another word for not afraid to lose stuff.

    I agree on the first thing.


    The second one is rather a narrow description of freedom... But I won't go into discussing semantics/labels! Let's just say (condensing) that wanting what you do, being aware that you're subject to many influences and nonetheless choosing to question such influences as your permanent method, brings you happiness and makes you the master of your actions. Having thus secured yourself, you're also safe where it matters.

    But I must stress that it's more about choosing a method rather than setting a goal: stuff indeed becomes irrelevant, unless protecting it is what you want to be doing, in which case it's important.

  11. for the longest time, the neutrals were considered one of the safest places in the game, with many of them not even bothering to learn how to fight. the woodstock massacre became a page in the CN wiki that many of the people playing had only ever read about.

    now their safety is being called into question once again.

    but if the neutrals are no longer safe, what is the new safest place to be in the cyberverse?

    could it be in alliances who skip wars or limit their engagement to grow mostly interrupted?

    or maybe it is in the dominant sphere in the CN upper tier, who pick their battles and effectively rule the roost

    of course, it is also possible that the neutrals are still the safest place for your normal CN player.


    The nation that trades freedom for security does not deserve, nor will it ever receive either.

    I can't say about other neutrals, but I have been telling my mates since 2010 that war is coming, by now you can bet that they know. Applicants that don't sign up for ZI if need be are usually denied admittance.

    Stats are transient... To be frank not knowing how far and how long we'll be able to play this gamble is the excitement that keeps me going.



    safety is overrated.  If you want to be entirely safe, just enter peace mode and never leave

    Peace Mode is nice only if you don't lose money and if you wouldn't be doing tech deals, anyway.

    My nation entered it for strategic reasons and it was then ordered to remain there, but I still find it acceptable. It helps me save a lot of my time, and the cherry on the cake is that there's always the ignorant fool trying to sick burn with some completely unoriginal jab about cowardice or fear. Hopefully at least some will miss this post and I'll continue to get their posts coming.


    Peace Mode isn't for everybody, anyway.



    War is very over rated in this game. It takes me all of 5minutes to run all my ga's and air attacks on my phone at work. More if my planes keep getting shot down. And since I'll likely never be able to grow to over 50k ns I'm more than content to stay in the !@#$%* tier and just run rampant for a month or so a year and then go back to tech farming

    War Is a Lie(tm).



    The clicking of the buttons of war is over rated, the tears and moans of the people being blown up is gold.

    Only if you are a self-complacent sadist with a sense of superiority. Incidentally, the former attitude excludes that the latter belief is founded (the more you know...)

  12. While I have no doubt a full blown out war against GPA would be fun, I highly doubt we'd be the ones starting it.

    I am no prophet but I am strongly convinced of two things: a full blown out war against GPA would be boring and annoying as hell and the GPA won't start any war.


    Not only we signed a NAP (with you too as you are a DBDC member, dual membership etc), but at the GPA we have a DoN that we have been honouring since the early eras of this world.

    I know my people, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is taken seriously by enough people.

  13. The real reason was because the self-appointed lords of Order, having invited the hordes of Chaos to our world, having nurtured and built them into a powerful army to be used against their enemies... needed something to keep them busy after all their real enemies had been dealt with, lest they turn on their handlers.

    Like it's in most cases, there were several "real reasons".

    None of them turned up to be good enough, considering that that aggression contributed to convince a lot of people to turn against them, and seven years later their attack is still cited as one of the worst thing they made. Their relatively modest gains on the ground have long been overcome by a multitude of negative consequences, at least in my opinion.


    It was ages and ages ago, anyway: probably we should have all moved on, by now.


    (The alternative is to debate it with Tywin until you're tired and annoyed, and he will never give up. You have been warned. :) )

  14. No alliance these days has clean hands that I know of. Perhaps the Green Protection Agency. [Hello, Jerdge] [...]

    Hello Morgaine. It's a pleasure to see you post again. I remember you from those very ancient times. :)
    Of course, while the GPA's hands are definitely clean, the Agency isn't the only alliance to never have undertaken aggression and plunder.

    I'll take this opportunity to also thank Margrave for his comments. Regardless of the stance one may have about their content or his side, the rhetoric is beautiful. :)

  15. Casus Belli usually implies a philosophically, morally justified reason for war. I say reason INSTEAD of Casus Belli because the reason for the war is either entirely justifiable or utterly condemnable depending on your philosophical bent, and the space between the two competing ideals is so extreme that you can't honestly label it a CB and expect it to stand.
    Basically: Casus Belli has alot of baggage associated with morality, and more specifically with "moralism". Reason just implies having a purpose and an intent.

    I think that your terminology can be confusing, but I now understand what you meant. Thank you.

  16. Pardon me for not clarifying; I should have used Reason instead of CB.

    Doesn't Casus Belli mean "reason/cause for war"?

    Note: I am not really interested in the discussion, just in your logic. I know you as a logical and thinking poster and I would be curious to learn whether you just slipped, e.g. you just worded it badly, or you are actually making an original point that I couldn't follow.
    If you can explain, thank you. :)
  • Create New...