Schad
-
Posts
1,298 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Schad
-
-
Might as well wait a few more days and throw specify other in too :awesome:
Yeah, we have a few more nukes, but that's what Eddy threw out so I went with it.
So, it's settled: Citadel versus Specify Other, Warriors, OP and TPC...'fraid that the world has spoken Citadel, anything less and you will be judged harshly by history.
-
Citadel got left in an odd spot. If they hit TPC/OP or some such in the next couple days, they're assholes because both are less than a week out of their last war and they've had the full round to build. If they don't, they're assholes for going the first month without fighting.
-
Let it be known that House Lannister sought peace, and The Flying Kiwis denied it.
This is TE. No one cares.
-
The blocalypse is at hand.
A shade under seven years is quite the run. Good luck etc., and the peanut gallery thanks you for spicing up the political climate a little.
Edit: as that's ambiguous, I mean to say that you're spicing things up now in disbanding; obviously, you've had a rather significant impact beyond that o'er these many years.
-
Set Alliance rank to 1-1 and watch GPA go buck wild upon your screen.
In doing this and then attempting to revert back to the top 100, I ended up with nothing but the bubble for WTF, static and in the middle of the screen, unable to change anything no matter the settings.
That was appropriate.
-
No, but I loves me some oranges
Edit: Besides, there are more important things than Sengoku signing with DoD now, didn't you know Alchemy and NPL are still at war? Hostilities could break out at any moment :DThat there are more important things than Sengoku signing with DoD is at any time one of those statements that really doesn't need any elaboration.
-
I blame Pansy for the fact that I'm back in the game. Randomly checked the OWF the night that the war broke out, and decided to create a nation just to see where various alliances stood. Messaged Pansy and a couple others to see whether they had need of a tech deal so that I could get enough money to bite some ankles while watching it unfold...instead, he had $15m in war aid shipped to me within an hour. I wasn't even in an alliance.
-
Mostly disappointed with Aesis' opinion of Sengoku. Really sells short the fact that we're all jackoffs, not just the ex-TIO members.
-
$%&@ Terrence Ross, I mean really.
-
[quote name='Emperor Whimsical' timestamp='1331287869' post='2935886']
(BN refused to move their lower tier out of peace mode
)
[/quote]
If not for the fact that we pretty much randomly discovered that peace talks were happening (and close to completion) you would've gotten me; I had dropped enough NS to get into range and cleared nuke anarchy, and had been planning to go in shortly before update. Then peace talks kinda happened, and I wasn't in a position to pretend that I hadn't heard that they were happening so that I could declare on you anyway. -
Yikes, that's about the lowest I've ever seen our slot usage.
-
If it gets to 150 no votes first, will you shave it into a skullet?
-
Going with 148.
-
[quote name='Gopherbashi' timestamp='1330644311' post='2931541']
Looks like it's stayed relatively stable for the last month and a bit.
[/quote]
And it seems to be largely because the retention rate has been good...new registrations are way down of late. -
[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1330406217' post='2929761']
Yet, the definition of "war" it what the entire issue hinged on. GOONS see a raid as an alliance war as far as I can ascertain while saying the generally won't help a raider if they get into trouble. This seems a little contradictory as if the raid is an alliance war then you'd assume assistance would be forthcoming at all times.
[/quote]
It's only contradictory if one assumes that it actually hinges on the definition of "war", rather than the fact that GOONS has the ability to do what they desire these days, and thus can define just about anything as just about anything else.
[quote]
You say all commentary on issues like these has no practical bearing on the aituation yet say you aren't calling for people to shut up? You bemoan the "bizarre little dance routine" that occurs when these topics are argued and yet you aren't calling for people to shut up? I'm a little confused. Is the solution to this conundrum that you don't read these discussions and save yourselve the angst?
[/quote]
Point being that there's a central issue in this and other like threads, and it ain't about consistent exercise of one's internal policies. So why does it inevitably become an argument about such things? -
[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1330404567' post='2929743']
I don't recall passing comment on the NG/AGW issue s onot sure how I am now on the "opposite side of the coin". That aside, I think the glaring difference in your comment here is what defines any difference people may have perceived. That is, a mass raid on an alliance as opposed to a generic raid on a single nation.
[/quote]
Point being that the definition of "war" isn't the relevant thing here, nor which half of the argument the parties involved take, because there'll be parties willing to choose either tack...the argument itself remains the same, because fundamentally it has $%&@ all to do with any of the things being argued over.
[quote]
I'm unaware of anyone claiming to be capable of changing GOONS' mind or policy on these issues. However, as this is a political forum that only exists based on the back and forth you are now condemning I find it a little puzzling that you want this sort of discussion cut out because it resolves nothing?
Yeah, shut up everyone! Let's close the forum except for a few announcements and "worst leader ever" topics and close comments on those to prevent anyone discussing anything at all. Then the Cyberverse will thrive and all will be well.
[/quote]
That's actually not at all what I'm saying. Rather, it's that this situation is about power, who has it, and how they use it, yet every time the situation comes up, it devolves into these bizarre little dance routines about charters and the definitions of various terms and the disingenuous nature of one's opponent. That's the pointless bit, because the underlying reality is that nobody actually cares whether GOONS or whoever else is following their charter, and nobody including GOONS really cares whether they are consistent in their application of such, so nailing them on inconsistencies (or GOONS doing the same to their opposition) has no practical bearing on the situation. -
[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1330396970' post='2929661']
Historically, when has GOONs made a distinction between a raid and a war?
[/quote]
Two weeks ago, when NG mass-raided AGW. Here's [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=109064&view=findpost&p=2919109]Sardonic[/url] distinguishing between the two. Of course, people arguing against NG were doing so from the position that raiding equals war before, and are now on the opposite side of the coin.
I don't have a problem with considering raids as wars, far from it; raids [i]are[/i] wars. But it's largely irrelevant here, and there's a singular pointlessness to this whole debate because by this point everyone knows that the arguments on both sides are entirely malleable...raiding is war except when it isn't, depending on the particulars of the matter at hand. Everyone involved does a little dance in order to expose the hypocrisy of the other side, which isn't difficult given the walks away satisfied that they've won the debate, and a few weeks later the whole process repeats itself. No minds will be changed, because those predisposed to agreeing with GOONS will agree with GOONS, and those predisposed to disagree with GOONS will indeed disagree with GOONS.
And all of it is window-dressing because, really, GOONS is in a position of strength, and that means that they can and generally will define the rules however they wish, just as previous alliances in their position have, and future alliances will. No other variable really matters here, and no major political shifts will be spawned based upon this incident or the arguments made herein.
Why then do we have to keep seeing this bit of political theatre? Forget the e-lawyering of charters or political philosophies or other assorted !@#$%^&*...it's all totally meaningless, and everyone involved knows it. Let's get back to basics; GOONS, tell your opposition that if they don't like what you're doing, they should do something about it. GOONS' opposition, tell GOONS that you cannot wait until you have the opportunity to see them destroyed for their crimes. Simplify, people. -
A lawn in the Midwest just got far more treacherous for wayward whippersnappers. Rusty will make a fine Emperor, but losing Janax entirely really, really blows.
The Curse of the PF Autocrat marches on...Janax, Jed and Jack led their respective alliances for a combined thirty-odd years, give or take, but six months of our !@#$%^&* has chased them all away. -
[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1330206499' post='2928264']
This is the problem with that line of logic.
[/quote]
Well, if they cannot find effective leadership, the problem isn't that they're a pariah...it's that they're being undone from within. That's something that no one outside the alliance can fix for them. -
[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1330163078' post='2928058']
I want to know how on purely pragmatic grounds it make sense in the way people are suggesting. Is Polaris to remain a pariah forever?
[/quote]
Polar won't remain a pariah forever, no. If led effectively, they'll return to relevance sooner or later.
As for how it makes sense on pragmatic grounds...STA is well-respected in pretty much every corner, so I have little doubt that they will find their way. Polar will likely benefit in the long-term with an FA reset, even if it has been kicked off by another party. -
Welcome to the first day of the rest of your life, STA. Can't have been an easy decision, but I'm glad to see you have a chance to go a year or more without burning for Polar; you've more than earned the chance for a fresh start.
-
Letting in Ishibad is bad. Letting in at least three people who would vouch for Ishibad? Considerably worse.
-
[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1329685151' post='2924183']
No kidding. And since MK was one of the alliances spying on SuperFriends with TOP, we're right back on-topic. Yes, I know, MK's spying is only dastardly when it didn't involve TOP.
[/quote]
You truly are one of the more special snowflakes. If someone screws up, and something ends up publicly-accessible that should not be publicly-accessible, that's [i]not spying[/i]. Something similar happened with our forums a while back, and if people used the mistakenly-given access, that wasn't spying either; our error, our problem. -
[quote name='steodonn' timestamp='1329581102' post='2923392']
Thats not that long ago
[/quote]
But Londo was arguing that the problem is inactive/scared leaders, and I wouldn't consider the period immediately following Karma to have fit that bill.
Topic - Citadel DoW
in Tournament Edition Open World Forum
Posted
Not really, no; they'll boost your GAs/air attacks a bit, though not to an otherworldly degree, and they certainly don't have an effect that approaches a 4:1 nuke natio.