TypoNinja

Only three? Get back to me when you hit five.

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1315003696' post='2793220'] The Canadian hegemony must be broken. Congratulations on elections and whatnot. [/quote] Everyone must face their Inner Canadian.

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1314210952' post='2787734'] This is what is amusing. Polaris finally has the capability of couping an Emperor and because some of ya'll don't like Random, you think that they should immediately use it to coup Random. If they don't it means nothing has changed... I would daresay that since Random is the one who helped make this change occur, why should the BR use it on him? [/quote] I think its pointless for different reasons, impeachment proceedings are never as neat and tidy as everybody seems to expect them to be, I've seen it happen several times both here and in other places. If it ever actually comes down to the vote you are already up a creek without a paddle.

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1313191643' post='2778932'] I'm still trying to figure out which bloc to join for those of us who hate everyone equally. [/quote] That's a private club I started when I realized I didn't like [i]anybody[/i]. I have t-shirts, because hey its summer you can't have too many t-shirts. No buttons though, buttons are lame, and no baseball caps either, themed baseball caps just make you look silly. There were almost beach towels but then I realized a beach towel would imply I actually spent time in proximity to many other people voluntarily, so that was killed because of the whole hating everybody thing.

[quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1313202778' post='2779042'] Who's responsible for Umbrella's slot usage again? [/quote] Best. Answer. Ever.

[quote name='Mixer' timestamp='1313001057' post='2776767'] reset CN [/quote] Would probably end the game, there's so many people who are only really around because we've been at it years. Take away the history and all your left with is an excessively dated browser game.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311261397' post='2760536'] You don't look ruined to me. Anyone that has been around long enough knows that VE would sign a treaty with /b/ if they thought it was the best way to save their own skin and/or give themselves a seat in the periphery of power. The Viridian Entente's words of honor and dignity have always been just that: Words. As Elysium used to say so often: Acta non verba. Anyone who wishes to know the true VE need only look at a timeline of Viridian actions, or a list of Viridian associates. It might be easy to poke fun at the VE-GOONS treaty, but I find a wry humor in Polaris' two biggest mistakes being aligned. When do we celebrate the anniversary of VE being able to choose its own color sphere? What's the anniversary of True VE Day, the day an illiterate drunkard brute took charge and stopped pretending VE is anything except what it is? What is the anniversary date of the VE-NPO treaty? I remember when the Viridian Entente empowered the madman Ephriam Grey to PZI people at will for fun. I remember when the Viridian Entente supported the disbandment of most of the alliances of the League of Free Nations based on falsified logs and photoshopped screencaps. I remember when the Viridian Entente heiled the New Pacific Order. I remember when the Viridian Entente fought against Vox Populi in support of GGA. I remember when the Viridian Entente assisted in the removal of Grämlins from Green. I remember when the Viridian Entente imposed a puppet government on Ordo Verde at the end of a gun. [/quote] I sense large amounts of butthurt my son, come embrace the Green in your heart.

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1308628803' post='2736636'] Poaching aside, how does one 'attempt' to spy? [/quote] Mr Magoo? Is that you?

[quote name='LegendoftheSkies' timestamp='1308626556' post='2736509'] I'm making the popcorn :3 [/quote] Easy on the salt, otherwise I'll end up downing all the Pepsi too.

[quote name='Lord Boris' timestamp='1308626075' post='2736461'] "We have proof but we're not going to show or say what proof we may or may not have." Classic. [/quote] No, they won't tell [i]you[/i], they will tell anybody with reason to know. There's a difference.

[quote name='REGHAR73' timestamp='1307406291' post='2725792'] Very unfair comments - The UINE has no need for Polaris to step in - it is our mess. Polaris are excellent allies and have always been there for us. So no whining has partaken. The conflict is unfortunate, however not totally undeserved. Stop trying to pick fights with something that is nothing to do with you. [/quote] I'd just like to take a moment to laugh at the double standard. When there is a war on, everybody is all gung ho, stand by your allies, letter of our treaties, ect ect. When somebody $%&@s up though, suddenly its all about not necessary to step in, diplomacy, ect ect. Please note I'm not criticizing anybody's specific actions here, just wanted to lampshade the hilarity of the prevalence of everybody's situational codes of ethics.

Actually the enslavement thing was done in the past just not explicitly called such. Legion was paying an undetermined amount for an unspecified duration to NPO at one point. Its harder to come up with original terms than you'd think, we've had years to get inventive, its covered a lot of ground.

[quote name='Facade' timestamp='1303278482' post='2694423'] Thriller requested the protection from TIO. That makes us involved in it. Here's an example of not knowing the situation you're talking about, which, admittedly, is not your fault, as you were not involved in it and thus are not expected to know the full details. [/quote] So what, you just protect people on a whim? No checking them out? Surely during the discussions of your prospective new protectorates long term goals, government structure, [i]policy on raiding[/i], or any of that other important stuff you'd have noticed you agreed to protect an AA that was planning on picking a fight?

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1302727163' post='2690164'] I like how you presume to speak for other alliances' relationship with their allies who you are fighting. Come on. I could talk about the VE-GOD relationship all day and it would make about as much sense as you guys accusing Legion of being bad allies. [/quote] Not really, you are objectively incompetent and barely qualified to comment on the time of day let along something with actual content like our relationship with GOD. On the other hand, if an alliance declares in defense of you and then throws 99% of its members into peace mode, yea that makes them bad allies who aren't actually fighting for you while trying to make it look like they are.

[quote name='KaitlinK' timestamp='1302656178' post='2689767'] Oh, the "why didn't you attack your own ally" argument? Seriously? Do you and Bob get together and compare notes? [/quote] What? no. You two are both just reading what you want to see. That's not even close to what I was saying.

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1302653862' post='2689747'] Ah, the "Ally A were actually the aggressors!" card that alliances use to avoid war. Sorry, I'd rather defend an ally. Having said that, VE were wronged by RoK when they were given the impression that RoK was going to stay out. However, had RoK been up front about defending Polar then they would have committed no wrongdoing and would not have been "disloyal" in doing so. [/quote] Well, my point was even if rok had sided with us you'd just swap the people who were upset with rok for the exact same reasons, as soon as Rok was in the position of choosing between allies they had to piss off [i]somebody[/i]. [quote name='KaitlinK' timestamp='1302654239' post='2689749'] You still seem bitter that we didnt take you to the prom... [/quote] Not really, See above in my reply to Hoo. [quote] The sad part is I am not even a little surprised to see you say something like that. Maybe where you're from neutrality while a close friend is being attacked is an example of morality. Over at RoK it's the action of a coward and nothing to be proud of. [/quote] Really? Cuase you know Rok's taken that road repeatedly in the past, when Polar was shooting at your allies. But your situational ethics are besides the point. I said 'claim' a moral high ground. I didn't say you have it just that you might be able to pretend you did. Maybe you missed the point where I actually bothered to elaborate that no matter who you picked Rok was going to dishonor one or more treaties. It didn't matter what course you took, as soon as too many treaties put you in a conflicting spot you must dishonor at least one.

[quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1302648053' post='2689688'] Is being faithful to an ally such an alien concept? [/quote] [quote name='D34th' timestamp='1302649311' post='2689698'] If you are in VE and your ally is in the losing end of a war, the answer is yes. [/quote] People keep bringing up that "faithful" to an ally line like its some shining beacon of conduct that Rok accomplished. They did nothing of the sort. They never could have. They had to choose between being faithful to one set of allies over another, but they were always going to dishonor one side or the other. That's what happens when you try and keep friends in too many places, you end up being forced to choose. Polar lauds their 'integrity' for choosing Polar over SF and PB, but really Rok's actions held no real integrity. As soon as they picked one side they were automatically dis-honoring the other, its just what happens when you try and keep friends in both places. Even had they sided with us the same would be true. The only action Rok could have taken and still claimed any kind of moral high ground would have been neutrality.

*blink blink blink* I'm genuinely at a loss for words.

[quote name='Indian Bob' timestamp='1302117631' post='2685613'] As a matter of fact what? [/quote] Wow, it took you that long to notice my post? Do yourself a favor, go back read your post that I quoted, and what post you quoted, then go look up the Green Civil War.

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1301958674' post='2684270'] Ok seriously, is my nation invisible or do I have really bad b.o.? Why won't dh declare on me!!!! stomps foot. Hey, I'm starting to sound like you guys now. [/quote] Sorry dude, we didn't DoW you, gotta take it up with somebody you at war with [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1301958743' post='2684272'] Okay, let me pre-empt this and just highlight how the rest of the argument is going to go. First, someone on your side is going to assert that you use peace mode less, therefore it is okay. Then, someone on our side will point out some statistic like the several times MK has had a much greater proportion of its nations at PM than NPO. Then, someone on your side is going to assert that it is not the number of peace moded nations that matter, but rather how long they have been at peace for, and will point at our banks who have not fought at all. Then, someone on our side will point at MK's various tech farms. Then, someone on your side is going to assert that you use peace mode on a long-term basis less, therefore it is okay. Then, everything will just repeat. Forever. [/quote] You forgot the point where somebody tells you that nobody's used dedicated banks for some time now, so your claims of 'bankers' is spurious.

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1301957838' post='2684260'] Are they not fighting on dh's side in this conflict? Or was it that they just [i]thought[/i] dh was going to attack and figured they should also join in, just incase? [/quote] Fighting would imply that there was anybody not in peace mode to declare on. We're more like a cheering section at this point.

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301887981' post='2683782'] I will try and be as coherent as you are. adjfhhajsdhfjkwhetwgerasndfjkansdfkjhasdthiuewhuiew That is about as coherent as you have been in this discussion. You have not refuted anything I have stated at all and in fact have only managed to support my argument. Thank you for this. If I was wrong, you would not be supporting my argument. [/quote] One final try. Is mrwuss gov? Is he in a position to set policy for GOONS? The answer to both would be no, this makes him about the same as you. A member with an opinion. He can't threaten you because he doesn't have the power too. I can threaten to eat the sun with a side of fries for lunch, that doesnt make it something anybody is gonna worry about me doing though. At which point I point you back to my point further up. You trash talk them, they trash talk you. [i]Shocking![/i] Edit: for fun and profit your ignorance here illustrates another point I've attempted to drive home repeatedly. You always !@#$%* and moan like its the end of the world over the smallest things, it just makes you look silly. A single member from a hundreds strong alliance things you can't back up your words. Oh no. Quick to the Drama-mobile! Its the end of civilization as we know it!

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301875196' post='2683657'] I am being thick headed when it is you who does not realize what, "The end of silence for fear of persecution." means. You are the one who posted, "Just as you may not indiscriminately shout "FIRE!" in a crowded place to incite a panic and claim your free speech shields you from all responsibly there is also a point where one can cross the line into words that are actionable. "Them's fightin' words" as it were." and "But for the love of your room temperature IQ stop acting surprised when it makes people decide rolling you...would give them a warm fuzzy feeling." ((took out the part in parenthesis)) and "It does mean you get to shoot your mouth off, but you also get to deal with the results of your words." So, no, I am not naturally thick headed, nor am I thick headed in the least. Apparently you are though. So, now that you actually know what is the topic of discussion, your posts are in complete contradiction to what is stated in the OP. The OP states that there would be no consequences simply for speaking one's mind whilst you state there would be. Thus, either you are lying or the OP is. Or it could be you just being thick headed and not know what is actually going on. [/quote] [quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1301875902' post='2683669'] If it comes naturally to anyone, it's you, you seem to be missing the argument here and that is the threats made against people for what they say, it's not trash talk back, I don't think anyone has a problem with that, it's getting responces like: "[i]The peanut gallery sure has gotten vocal, maybe the next tirade DH goes on should include every non involved AA who has told us how this war should be directed or what will come of it.[/i]" that is the sort of comment being argued about, not the trash talk, should get the basics of the argument before trying to argue back. [right][IMG]http://i52.tinypic.com/2ahbi1h.jpg[/IMG][/right] [/quote] Do either of you even try to be coherent? I really don't feel like repeating myself a 4th time so why don't you just read up and learn all the myriad ways you are wrong.

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1301868942' post='2683610'] Freedom of Speech is actually supposed to mean that you can say some things without some entity being able to enforce intensely negative consequences that would heavily discourage people from saying them. There is of course, a rationality element that comes into play; you cannot say absolutely anything you want without negative consequence - that would be one extreme. But what you are describing is the other extreme, that if you say something, you must accept the consequences other parties will impost for that, no matter what they are. Quite obviously, if people become very likely to roll you for criticizing them, that becomes a very real example of trying to limit "freedom of speech". Where the line between the two lies is never clearly established, varying according to political positions, beliefs and timing. [/quote] Well yes, but as I previously mentioned I think the WCE logs amply demonstrate our willingness to be pretty liberal about where that line is. It was a room full of government of various alliances trying to decide how to fabricate a war against us. If we didn't move on that I think it proves that an alliance is going to have to try pretty hard to actually provoke a DoW. [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301873279' post='2683644'] So then it is not freedom of speech without fear of persecution. It is instead freedom of speech with freedom of being attacked and rolled for speaking out against DH/PB? so you are now saying the OP is a lie? [/quote] Did you practice to become this thick headed, or does it come naturally? [quote]Also, this is not a discussion on watching someone get rolled for speaking out. This is a discussion on the alliances that would roll another alliance for speaking out. Those on the sidelines are free to do as they wish, as are those who would do the rolling. Though if DH/PB were the ones to do the rolling, then it is quite obvious that the OP is nothing more than a lie.[/quote] As I brought up before, many times, if we wanted to roll people for their words you'd have seen some WCE related DoW's instead of the collective point and laugh the incident did generate. [quote] The difference between what I am saying and what he is saying is that MrWuss is threatening people with being attacked for being vocal. I am only calling him out on doing that. I never once said he was not allowed to say what he said, I only said that it causes the OP to become a lie. But you are free to keep trying to make me look like I threatened mrwuss anywhere in my posts. [/quote] What a shocking experience, you aim trash talk at them, they aim trash talk back at you. Who could possibly have forseen this outcome!

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1301860863' post='2683546'] Right because saying that someone is writing a check he can't cash sounds nothing like a threat. Or that the next "tirade" DH goes on will include all those AAs who spoke out against them is not a threat. Sorry, but you are wrong. Those are specific threats due to people speaking freely. That is nothing like what you are trying to state whatsoever and the fact that you are attempting to spin it as anything other than the blatant threats they are is quite amusing. Do you really think everyone else is that stupid? [/quote] I think, we as an entire political 'side' proved our willingness to let people trash talk as much as they wanted by not acting on the WCE logs. But there is a line you miss. Just as you may not indiscriminately shout "FIRE!" in a crowded place to incite a panic and claim your free speech shields you from all responsibly there is also a point where one can cross the line into words that are actionable. "Them's fightin' words" as it were. Speak, Speak all you want. !@#$%*, whine, moan and complain, blow every minor incident from a paper cut to a stubbed twe up into a drama fest like it was the end of the world. Call us the next incarnation of Satan (some of you pretty much have already). But for the love of your room temperature IQ stop acting surprised when it makes people decide rolling you (or simply watching you get rolled, I'm sure IRON just grabbed a beer, kicked up their feet and turned the tivo onto record when we jumped Polar) would give them a warm fuzzy feeling. And while your at it learn the difference between what people want to do and what people are willing to do. Freedom of speech does not mean you can shoot your mouth of as much as you want with no consequences. It does mean you get to shoot your mouth off, but you also get to deal with the results of your words.