Thrasymachus
-
Posts
118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Thrasymachus
-
-
And let that be a lesson to everyone here.
God forbid "they" don't like who you are and what your nature is.
Oh and I forgot
0/ Vox
Actually, the lesson here is one cannot exclusively rely on "gunboat" diplomacy. As much as I feel for FAN, they did bring this on themselves (as you seem to know now).
It is those now in ascendance who should be learning from this example that if your only "logical" weapon is the sword, your downfall is just a matter of time.
edit: to trotskysrevenge: read my words here to the FAN member very carefully
-
Oh? There were other reasons for the declaration? I myself had only seen the public ones, and disagreed with those. I was in TORN at the time though, and so, fought for my alliance.
I think it was pretty simple. Everyone knew that FAN was super angry and, by their very nature would try to rebuild and strike back, so some CB had to be divined.
-
You are mistaken. Peace comes at the end of a war; FAN jumped into peace mode to avoid the actual fighting of the war. So there can be no peace until the actual war is concluded.
While I understand and even agree that Pacifica would and should see FAN as a continuing and future threat, the CB that was made available to the public for the Second War on Fan was udderly horrendous.
This does not mean that I disagree with the actual reasons for that 2nd war, but, had I been a member of FAN and read just the public reasons for the the 2nd war, I would never surrender.
-
The Order of the Paradox has a cool alliance name.
The Order of Halsa makes me think of fresh salsa and that's just super nice.
-
Those with sense enough to know doing so = game over
Wow, does this mean good bye bill n ted?
-
Do you really think I expected this thread to help? No. I'm hoping to give them bad PR and prevent others from getting screwed over trying to surrender too.
And with that, you just discredited your entire case. You actually had a solid case in some parts, too, that chefjoe even said here he wanted to honor. :/
I'd still like to see you get peace some day on proper terms without needing to reroll, even if you do not.
Over and out.
-
Yes, just look at all the other democratic alliances maliciously infiltrated in such a manner...
Excellent point. Lacking popular inputs and control mechanisms, it is far easier for one or two aggressive individuals to infiltrate and change the fundamental nature of autocratic alliance systems, especially as they are structured on Planet Bob.
Also, impressive OP, even if they are the enemy.
-
Yep, I'm aware of that usage; however, interestingly Merriam-Webster doesn't cite it, and besides the previous poster I was remarking on claimed that socialistic is not a word, not that it was a pejorative word.
(Heck, even Mozilla recognizes socialistic as a word.)
Oh yes, it is a word, and an adjective at that, but it does not have the meaning the Socialistic Empire claims, which was the point of Madmonkey's post. So win-win?
I'm getting outta here now while I still can :lol:
Cheers again to NATO
-
First, on topic, good call NATO.
Now to one of the few times I will disagree with Haflinger on language use.
It sounds as if this discussion has occurred before so I'll be quick about this: It is proper to call an alliance of socialists a socialist alliance. In political language use, calling an alliance socialistic is a mocking or pejorative label, meaning that organization is not really socialist.
-
And pray tell, how would you go about fighting an overwhelming force?
Intelligence on Planet Bob tends to be measured in terms of the smoothness with which one can cancel treaties.
-
How about we don't talk about current CN, and talk about the past instead?
What's past is prologue.
-
Well, ok, but there's been a trend where more alliances have been banning these practices, not less.
As we often tell Vox & FAN, be careful not to confuse rhetoric and lies with action and truth.
-
REC recruits off site (I've brought in 5 RL friends and 2 from my forums)
REC contributes with one of the web treaty
We've got over 7 months behind us, I'm there will be 7 more
People shouldn't be too stereotypical when it comes down to how alliances act. This is just like the Vox opinion on the Continuum alliances (they are all evil) and the other way around (all of Vox is evil and irrational). Not all alliances are the same and I'm sure, given the opportunity, they all have something to contribute.
I agree with what cowman says here. In fact, I would argue that there is a very, very small number of alliances with players who have the game goal of wanting "to rule the world." Not every player wants to be a Napoleon or Metternich or Garibaldi, just as not every alliance is created to someday take down the alliances with the "better" stats.
We all find fun here in our own ways. If you ever get the chance, wander into the thread called "My goal in CN" or something like that from time to time. It shows how absolutely varied the player motivations for fun are here.
What one player finds boring, I find fascinating. What I find boring and contrary to how I'd like to see the game played, others find to be the coolest part of the game. So we learn to compromise on a few things and coexist. Or at least that's my little cybernations fantasy.
-
...it is the circumstances that should dictate our course of action or reaction.
Without principles, circumstances have no meaning on their own.
Adherence to principles, like those which guide our alliance charters and treaties, is the reason Planet Bob is not in mass anarchy.
Cheers
-
Don't forget the mod staff. :jihad:
whoops
I won't be updating this thread in the future since the content nature of the blog posts queue started balancing out, but I will add those shortly here as blog links.
edit: added links to the Admin and Mod blogs
-
Congrats, Grämlins, on your continuing fine tradition of leading through excellence and reason.
-
Look at the image in your signature. If that's not trying to discredit through mockery, well, then I'm not a Global Despot.
Both of you would set a better example for all of us if you'd remove the personal attacks from your signatures.
We are playing a game of nations here, not who can be the meanest to the other on an out of character and personal level.
-
Or maybe they don't want to feel left out
Ah yes, Dr. Uaciat,
You seem to have seized upon the heart of this question.
Seeing that we are still IC but in an OOC area, we can refer to the case of the ever cuddly despot Kim Jong Il for guidance.
Had he not lost his mother as a wee lad,* would he still have followed his father's path?
Or would he have been a leader at all?
*edit: and his brother, the first Kim Jung-il, in the year prior
-
I fail to see the funny in this really
The funny here is of the sociopathic kind.
Some call it Schadenfreude, others might call it a Roman Holiday.
Some appreciate this level of humor, some don't.
-
...Just stop it, your 'argument' is getting no where and even I think it's terrible.
Stockholm Syndrome already?
I think you can relax
TrotskysRevenge has made a new announcement wherein he states that he agrees with Mobius.
His denying the obvious, and a few of his supporters towing that absurd line, was all done in fun.
Good times here B)
-
Now that almost all of the blogs appearing in the Blogs queue seem to be of readily discernible interest to all players, this thread really no longer needs updating.
Some great blogs popping up still and great entries continue to appear, so be sure to check them out via the tab at the top of this Forums page.
-
please tell me you're joking?
Please stop insulting our intelligence.
-
This kind of thing isn't new from NPO, they are doing it with MK right now.
PS even if you think you've agreed to one thing on surrender terms, don't expect NPO to keep their word and not try to change things later when they weren't competent enough to put what they really "meant" in the original terms.
Even if you are truthful here, what point is there in sharing this here?
Looking at the status quo on Planet Bob, it appears that most of the nations and alliances of Planet Bob accept the premise that anything is permissible in the interest of self-preservation.
This means ascendant nations and alliances can be as arbitrary as they please in defining their self-interests, and changing those definitions as they see fit.
Whether this was the case with the Mushroom Kingdom or not I have no idea, I am just stating the obvious.
-
Bob, I've apologized for misreading or misunderstanding, if that is what I did.
From the start, this alliance injected some things here that I oppose, primarily the impression that they were a "hater" alliance, from their merge with another religious alliance to their use of "kuffar" to describe all others. I only wish I would not have jumped so fast on the nordland thing (which began when I saw their top nation named Deutschlands) since that was only circumstantial.
OOC: All IC here I think
Vox Populi Announcement
in Alliance Politics
Posted · Edited by Thrasymachus
Good point. Personally speaking, their charter needs a lot of work, but I am just so happy to see them come up with a charter I did not want to be a buzzkill.
edit: i really am waiting for the manifesto that they say is forthcoming XD