Stonewall Jaxon

For the most part, it's because we've your reactions from the inside. It's always wildly entertaining

Wait, weren't you Athens at some point? I swear I'm starting to think I'm the only one who hasn't gone senile with CN age. Our new slogan should be "CoJ: Remember when you hailed us?"

Having been with NSO for a while I a can agree on the "loyal but problematic" bit (though I prefer the term "entertaining" to problematic), but I'd replace "ungrateful" with "castrated."

In their defense, they were a valuable friend until BiPolar castrated them completely

You never fail to deliver. I feel as if you now what GOONS' role in world affairs has been and always will be, and your posts are similar to a Napoleon complex about it

That may have been true long before the Sith one was even born, but seeing as the Orders' recent(ish) history has been defined by Polar's backstabbing of the Sith, the never-ending Pacifica-Polaris grudge (one of the largest impediments to the progresses of each Order in recent memory), and a general castration of both Sith and Polar, I'd have to say I feel sorry for all of the Orders in some way right now.

This is too long overdue. I wanted this back when I was in NSO, and that seems like ages ago. Back when Lennox was here, RV was still funny, and I was fairly convinced Jrenster and I had two highly contrasting ideas of the meanings of most English words.

I support this wholeheartedly. Who looks after the kitties in your park, though?

How disappointing. Until next time, I suppose

I now await excitedly the upcoming Neutricide

The sovereign alliance of Dixie mourns the loss of our secret treaty with FAN and hope to get to fixing our long-standing relationship soon.

If this turns out to be a new treaty I will be very unhappy

Where did all f your competent government members go?

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1345393220' post='3023487'] 4) He changes the subject by going into a generic "MK is bad" post. [/quote] You said yourself you'd gladly debate anyone who has issues with MK and doesn't just compare them to the NPO "hegemony." Schattenmann has done this. You asked for that "change of subject" and now you're complaining that he did so? In my opinion it'd be easier and more productive if you took him up on his offer.

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1345351868' post='3023394'] My point was about the staleness of "old hegemony" and "new hegemony" comparisons, which you failed to address by moving the goalposts. I was arguing against those stale comparisons, not against criticisms of MK in general (I'd obviously argue against those, but on different grounds). My whole point has been that if people want to criticize MK, it should be on the merits of our actions, not on stale equivocations to Karma era stuff. [/quote] You might want to read that post again. I mean really [i]read[/i] it. The way I read it, it came out like this: 1. Schattenmann lists the various foul behaviors of MK 2. Azaghul says "My point was about how if you want to attack MK, attack based on MK's merits, not its merits comparative to NPO's" The thing about it is, he did.