Mr Director
-
Posts
1,636 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Mr Director
-
-
Buckaroo should recruit him for his second in command...
Tolwyn should come back and recruit both of them + Rota. -
I hear that GJO is recruiting. Their membership took a bit of a hit after their great leader left them.
-
Just keep damaged away from your FA and you should do ok.
-
At the end of the day, the only victors are the neutrals and the GRL. Everyone else is just wasting infra.
-
It's still there. No reply.
As for whether I committed "treason" or not, who cares. The bourgeois norms of bob were not exactly ever formulated for anything but complete slaves. When you have been persecuted and oppressed, treason is logically a rational response. Anyone who is actually a communist knows this. I don't think there are any communists in INT, just posturing, and "war time now so we can't propose a motion that might recall our gensec!" Yeah, well hang the Gensec and send his family to the gulag if he isn't following the constitution, even IF they wrote it. Its power doesn't come from the author, but those who agree with it.
Hereno double-crossed me and advised and guided me in my treason too, which I wouldn't have been able to do without his advise and guidance. Because I came to him in a quandary and he promised "to handle it". So Hereno, working with the people in INT who are against my ideas and my radical style, not only laid a trap for me, but actively advised me on how to walk into the trap. Hereno assured me that INT couldn't hit me if I followed his advice to the letter, which was all backwards advice and involved me just putting myself in the most vulnerable position possible so that the people in INT against me could attack me and shout "See! Traitor!" etc, and then have these inane orgies of self-congratulation and "We were right all along" - and the more irritating and patronizing - "If you stayed and learned the ways of bob, you would not be in this predicament, young padawan." I have been on bob longer than my nation.
NoR and INT coming together - that is my biggest triumph. There's nothing I could say against INT more than this.
So let me get this straight. You made an application to join WTF. And then, shortly afterwards, you went of and formed your own alliance and posted a DOE, while still hoping to join WTF. :facepalm:
-
"We are a small alliance"
Aka one man micro. At least GJO broke 20.
Ps. What happened to your app to WTF? -
Ps. Looking at you aid screen, you have been doing 6/100s with a nation from GLoF. :(
Oh, and you are currently residing in a one man alliance. I'll wait for those raiders to show up. -
Well, you do have to admit that the upper tier is the most important. It can shower lower tiers with cash and soldiers, which are generally limitless for such large nations. Any weakening of the upper tier could be disastrous to an alliance, especially in times of war.If buyers (Gerontocrats) were not moved to take action against the union, it would confute my entire thesis of Gerontocracy as an effective power structure.
The most strongly worded (standard alliance politics) objections raised against my thesis comes from my good comrades in The International, CN's leading communist alliance. They have argued - successfully I believe - that a strong top/upper tier - a Gerontocratic Elite - is necessary for the alliance. This is because the strength of the Gerontocratic layer is decisive during war. Thus it is a priority for younger nations to sustain this elite as they are protected by it, rebuilt by it after war, and so on. Furthermore, in order to be successful at all in alliance wars (and here there is little room for argument it seems), the current exploitative regime must be maintained, otherwise The International will lose its ability to effectively compete during war with the uppers tiers, great treasure chests and repositories of wealth, tech, etc. that must be destroyed or attacked in wars in order to be victorious over other alliances, otherwise their continuance will maintain the lower-tier you are fighting against.
My answer to this may seem quite radically pacificist to my comrades. I answer them that the International would be better served, in the interest of Communism, to stay out of the inane bourgeois power struggles of the World Gerontocracy and to cultivate an egalitarian society that is, like GPA etc. neutral, or rather, positively disengaged from all the idiocy of the Gerontocratic power struggle. As I have demonstrated above, such power can never be possessed, it will only possess those who strive after it - like Tolkien's magical Ring.
Thus the argument against collective action for a reduction in exploitative and reform of the the tech market is "NO! You can't reform the tech market! Because reforming the tech market will harm ability of the Gerontocratic system to wage countless and endless wars against each other." Wars which are, like the genteel wars of the 18C before Napoleon, managed and directed by a small elite, and dependent upon the sacrifice, humiliation and exploitation of the masses.
The attitude identified here is thus the fallacy of alliancism, which goes against a truly internationalist attitude to digiteria.
And I highly doubt the international will go neutral. -
Buckaroo said nothing severe enough to be booted from this world. Also I never implied that you guys weren't mixed. You're pulling the "I can't be racist, my friend is X card." That's used way too often and only makes minorities irritated. It's mainly people like you who make the jokes and the X friend you have doesn't hear about it. Also I never meant to imply you back down for a fight but you literally worked for almost a year to make sure you had a victory in this war. When it wasn't certain and IRON said they weren't attacking polar to bully them around or as you would say, "The fun of it", you backed down to save your infra. Instead they stood up like men and risked the chance of being rolled to defend themselves. That was my point in their courage.Take this exact post for example. He just stated his opinion, which I know is wrong, but am I going to attack him for it? Nope.
In response to Mr. director, rarely is someone "Dumb" so to say. I think ignorant is a better word to describe you. Unless you fully understand someone's point of their statements and why they say it, you can't really call them dumb. All too often people are called dumb for not understanding what people are saying. It often is due to it going over there heads. Many shows make a satire of this with an ignorant person stating an ignorant opinion and then a goofy laugh, followed with "he so dumb, hue hue". That is my perspective when people call me dumb. Especially when they have no idea where I'm coming from.
Well, you couldn't attack me anyways, unless I lost some weight. And as for calling you dumb, I had called you an idiot, as I think most would agree with me on that count. But hey, keep on talking. Maybe you'll say something intelligent. Maybe. -
Congrats Rota. You have officially reached a whole new level of idiocy.
-
You make a lot of good points, but I don't think that the ideology itself is flawed to the extent of dismissal by them explicitly.
No, but it certainly needs to be cut back a little bit. The current prices being suggested by La Marx are high enough to scare buyers into action against such a union.
I feel strongly that a large part of the problem with our society is the impatience it presents the younger generation. This is in part caused by tech dealing and the surrounding factors associated with it, such as small or young nations who take to raiding dealers.
Agreed. It has taken me 117 days to get to 13k NS, and I've been selling tech nonstop since day one.
It would be interesting to see an alliance named e.g. the "Syndicate of Tech Sellers" formed of (very) small nations, who deliberately choose to always stay (very) small by putting their money from tech selling in wonders instead of infra, whose political objective would be to protect, support and advise all the new/small nations on Bob of their rights to sell tech at the best possible rates.
To make it possible, I think they should fight for imposing the 6/100 (and later 9/100), and not the 12/100 rates, as the former are the point of equilibrium between making lots of money (from the seller's perspective) and keeping the buyers' usage of slots at a still reasonable level (20 slot-days for getting 100 tech).
However, they should throw away the marxist speech, or else they are going to scare away most of the new small nations they'll be trying to help. :)
6/100s are already in place. 9/100s are a possible compromise, but only if both the seller and the buyer have FACs. Otherwise the estra aid slot would scare the buyer away.
However, this still doesn't help the underlying problem of organizing a varied and constantly changing group such as tech sellers.
I encourage all alliances other than my own to pursue this, for great justice.
This will probably be the reaction of most people to this idea.
-
WHAT IS DBDC?!
The stupid is strong in this one. -
You are forgetting a few things.While true that there are many complexities in the cause of equality and the struggle against gerontocracy, more than hitherto realised, apart from concerted efforts in the tech market, I cannot yet identify any alternative for smaller nations as a way out of the exploitation and oppression guaranteed under the status quo. The raising of tech prices is only one scale here - lowering them is another, and all as part of an active and co-operative politicisation of the tech market.
The absence of politics identified in my thesis is premised on pure parapolitics: the depoliticisation of every sphere, the policing of the world by different sets of Gerontocratic gangs, and the illusion of politics produced by a world-treaty system, regular announcements and so on, which create zero political change for the exploited and the oppressed, and zero changes are imagined under this sytem. The Gerontocratic Leviathan is sustained by an ideology that assures us there are no possible or practicable changes, that the mechanics of the world, its laws, inhibit any possible alternatives - that people are acting in a necessary manner. This is the lie of Gerontocracy. Only by exposing this lie can any nation, buyer or seller, be allowed to posit the question of its own freedom in the Gerontocratic world system - the beginning.
Therefore the critics of world gerontocracy repeat this Truth which will set us free: the scheme of raising prices is not impossible. The idea that it is impossible is a product of the daily murder of the imagination produced by the system Gerontocracy which crushes all thought under the steamroller of repression, alluded to above in the remark about insubordination.
An alternative: raising prices may be made out selectively in order to reduce the power of the Gerontocrats. This is just one way of politicising tech selling. Of course there would be a reaction from many gerontocrats against this scheme, possibly including repression, but that is because politicising is the arch-enemy of policing, the maintenance of the status-quo. Tech sellers must demand their full democratic rights to set whatever price they deem acceptable. The alternative, direct price fixing by gerontocrats and repression for insubordination, will only expose the hypocrisy of those who maintain that the current system is not slavery.
The reliance of all established nations on the tech sellers gives them what is perhaps the greatest unrealised political power in the game, and yet they have no political representation, are misled by the different ideologies of nationalism, alliancism, and so on, which mystify their own interests. The interests of tech sellers as a class, however fluid, is the greatest threat to World Gerontocracy.
1. There will always be fewer buyers than sellers, therefore they will always have the upper hand.
2. There is no way you would be able to bring every seller into your union, as there are constantly new sellers enterin the market, and older ones leaving.
3. In the long run, what you are doing would hurt the sellers when they become buyers. The knowledge that eventually you too will become a bbuyer would probably lower the enthusiasm for such A venture.
4. Alliances would fight against this sort of thing to keep their upper tiers safe. -
Right... Anyways Shaka Zula I am the one that many make threads after in these parts. I've also started several global wars personally. When people give me attention, I sarcastically thank them for it. The very uneducated (Above) take it seriously and believe I like it. Most places I post in, turn all of their attention to me instead of the topic.
Backwards elevator has entered its amusing state! Lets hope this lasts. -
This, Shaka Zulu, is an example of a coward. This is called an Ex-MKer. They only worked in groups. Rumour also has it they can't handle losing a war. Seeing by the way he has to use a teapot instead of say what he has to say, it implies he still hasn't come over his cowardliness. The type that use words like this lack the ... Stuff... To come out and say what they have to say.
This is an example of a deserter. Once GOONS fell, the main guy who was doing the things that got GOONS it's bad reputation, deserted and left his alliance mates to try and repair it's reputation. This guy was scurrying around and tried to hide in the daggerfall covenant and several other alliances after GOONS was going to be/got rolled.
So this is why you have no worry. They're all way too weak to do anything. The most they will try to do is kiss up to you enough and ask you to join them.
This is Mastabadey and he can be legit funny sometimes.This, Shaka Zulu, is the backwards elevator. It is a very strange machine. It begs for attention, but whines when people give it just that. It struggles to form coherent thoughts, but has the nerve to insult others. It can be rather amusing, but oftentimes it grows to be very annoying, Just ignore it, and it will fade away into the background.
-
-
Negotiating is primarily about leverage. If I have the leverage, I can determine which direction the price moves. If you have the leverage, you can determine which direction the price moves. I think you're absolutely wrong when you say "no one would buy at such rates". No one will ever pay that rate, but it's not because 100 tech isn't worth 12 million to a larger nation. For the most part, 12 million is an inconsequential amount. If sellers could pool their leverage, people would absolutely pay 12/100. No one will ever pay 12/100 because the sellers don't have the leverage to demand it. There will always be a ready pool of younger nations willing to sell it for less. But nations would absolutely pay more if market forces moved the price in that direction.
I agree that its not the money that matters for buyers. But the extra aid slots that do. If one could send 12mil in one slot, and sellers suddenly decided to unionize and demand for 12m/100s, then I agree, the buyers would comply. However, as things currently stand, no one wants to waste an extra aid slot. The buyers could prevent an increase in prices and necessary aid slots if they had to, simply because there are less buyers than sellers, and the buyers have had more time to form relationships and integrate with the community than the sellers have, and therefore would be able organize much better than the sellers could ever hope to, and essentially force the sellers to keep the price where it is at.
"Horrible?" well, I don't know about all that...
Once again, its not the cash, it the aid slots. 6/200s cost an extra slot while giving you much less money, and therefore, yes, could be described as horrible.
-
"So,despite the fact that I claim my analysis of the factual situation to be correct,my critics should bear in mind that this is not so much an argument of facts as an argument of values,and they are gravely misled if they think that arguing,for instance,that buyers would never pay 12/100 (which is a gross exaggeration and a presumption) is a refutation. Were tech sellers to unite into a single organic whole across all political divisions and to refuse anything less than 12/100,then of course buyers would capitulate, even if some would not pay that,because for the majority even at 12/100 the use-value still would far exceed the exchange-value of 12/100."
No one would buy at such rates. Even if you could somehow get all of the sellers to unit (not possible, due to alliance politics and the constatnt addition of new nations to the game), such a union couuld easily be broken apart. No alliance wants to see its upper tier suffer. As a seller, I wouldn't mind a wage increase, but I won't scare of potential buyers by joining a movement that is likely to fall apart. As someone who is VERY close to switch over to buying, I would never give up an extra six mil of profit just so they a new nation could switch from selling to buying faster and mess up the tech market. I would fight to squeeze sellers as much as possible for that extra profit. The tech must flow! -
La Marx. While I agree with you on the point that politics on CN are stagnated, tech deals really have nothing to do with it. In fact, it is quite the opposite, as tech deals are a smaller nation's way to becoming larger. Tech deals are just that. Deals. You are looking at it numerically(i.e., the amount of money made by buyers vs. sellers), however there is also a proportional way to look at it. A buyer saves much more money then he would by buying the tech otherwise, and the seller earns many times more than he would by just collecting taxes/paying bills.
P.S. Nobody is going to buy tech 12m/100
You speak of harvesting surplus value from smaller nations. What about the surplus value lavished on them by buyers? $3m (or, now, $6m) for 200 tech? That is like hitting the lottery. Each side makes out, which is why the market for this exchange of consideration remains to this day.
$6m/200 is a horrible deal for a seller.
-
Step 1. Open mouth
Step 2. Remove foot
Step 3. Close mouth
Step 4. See 3.
Keep talking. Who knows, one day you might even say something intelligent. -
Well, for the sake of clarity, spell it out.
I'll start:
I'm going to attack TTE warrunners currently in ROMA. Just as soon as I'm capable of declaring. I'll also attack TTE warrunners I find in other Alliances.
Then there is a chance that NEAT and SC, which ROMA claims to be protected by, will attack UOKMB if ROMA chooses to protect the runners. ROMA is also protected by TTE, but you are already at war with them. That was what I was trying to say.
-
@Director - TTE are listed as protectors of ROMA. It may just be my own opinion but I reckon they've done a very very poor job of that - trying to hide their warrunners in a Protectorate with the result that the Protectorate suddenly finds itself in the trenches.
To be fair to ROMA, we realise this isn't a situation of their own making. TTE are trying to use them as sandbags. So, the best they can do is just let us at the runners. To try to defend them is to fall into a trap that their "Protector" has set them up in.
"About Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia: ROMA means "root of all evil is greed." It was founded by NEAT on 23 October 2010 through the Treaty of the "Union of the Free." ROMA is protected by NEAT, SC, and the Terran Empire alliances. ROMA by design has no government. Membership is open, but nations are prohibited from making wars."
I know TTE is protecting them, but so is NEAT and SC, at least according to this. My point was that NEAT and SC could also get dragged into this, but that was somehow misinterpreted by thekirbyfake into me saying that TTE runners had also gone to NEAT and SC. That was not the message I was trying to convey.
-
Thanks for confirming that they are runners and fully legitimising their target status.
Not very good at this are you?
Step 1. Open mouth
Step 2. Remove foot
Step 3. Close mouth
Step 4. See 3.You seriously can't read can you?
-
It's OK. Don't cry yourself to sleep over your blunder.
You're actually quite funny, you know. Tell me, did you ever stop to look up exactly who is protecting ROMA? Did you ever stop to consider just how I would know where there are runners, or that there were runners in the first place?
OOC: As for blunders, you aren't one who should be talking. You did after all, let slip that you were planning on breaking the ToS
Indignados DoE
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
And how, pray tell, do you expect anyone to take your thesis seriously if it damages the military stregnth of any AA that implements it. Even commies need guns.