TehChron
-
Posts
5,851 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by TehChron
-
-
You may need to go over the quotes once again, Raga. Im afraid you are either misunderstanding fundamentally what was said in the quotes, or you are being intentionally obtuse. I doubt it's the latter.
How does that revolve around the issue you named in the first place? Which was not NPO, rather it was:I would say those terms are high. But the reasoning (apart from the 'recovery' of 10,000 MK tech) is twofold:- as members of One Vision, Echelon shares responsibility for 1V's aggressive actions and enforcement of monopolarity
- having stayed in the war so long, they have done a lot of damage to the alliances fighting them
Personally I'd say that they've always been a craven follower of an alliance (as well as a cut-and-run alliance in the past) and assigning responsibility to them is giving them too much credit.
Turning into:Meh, despite my better judgement of time management (as in needing sleep) I reread the op and wasn't pleased. The whole op comes off reading like a disgruntled attack on Bob Janova mixed with anger directed at those who once supported the NPO but now oppose them... or something.
I recommend reviewing your previous posts when making claims on what you said or did not say. It's easy to lose track of your arguments in a heated debate like this.Bob Janova was talking about the NPO by name four out of the six times you quoted him. You mentioned the NPO at least four times in direct response to the Bob Janova quotes. The NPO came up, again by name, at least three times in your op before you even started quoting Bob.
You showed a preconceived bias in that single post. And I called you out on it. Mind explaining the leap of reasoning it took to conclude how calling you out on that preconceived bias is pretending anything?Oh please. I skimmed it at 2am last night and made a single post. I then read it throughly multiple times and made more post. You can stop pretending I'm arguing with you after only skimming your op.Did you misquote or something? I have no idea what you were talking about there... I mean you quoted yourself then said disproven...?A rebuttal supported by evidence of what I said...regarding your erroneous claims of what I was saying...In light of the previous point I just made, I guess keeping track of one's own arguments is something new.
Are you even trying to honestly debate here?
I said as much. I also know from hindsight that we were wrong in our choice back then. Our actions allowed the NPO to dominate the game for the next two plus years. But we weren't willing to trade our positions of power for the betterment of all.I can respect integrity and candor. Even if it is just realistic hindsight.
I find it interesting that the folks who wanted complete disbandment apparently had no power to force a compromise in the final terms.Large reps were certainly discussed during the multiple CoaLUEtion / NPO peace talks. As were other harsh punishments including disbanding entire alliances. And again it was no simple thing. There were some who wanted nothing less than disbandment and (obviously) some who were willing to accept a simple apology. Sure political and military concerns played a huge role in the ending of the war, but again, mercy had its part and it was not an insignificant one.Which kinda makes them irrelevant.
I'm not the one claiming I made arguments I actually did not. And at least I showed why theres a foundation to my reached conclusion...Thats kind of...Dare I say it?Not if you're wrong about it all.Honest.
Read lower down in your own op silly:Thats what I was referring to. Hardly baseless of me to refer to your own words, even going so far as to maintain their proper context while using them in this debate.
Dude, you made a list of things a "REAL Pacifican" did then with your next sentence you proudly said you would do those same things. If you don't want your proposed actions to be linked with the New Pacific Order then I'd suggest you don't refer to them as being a "Real Pacifican" like you originally did.Eh....Mind showing how the quoted bit actually lines up with that assessment? Im afraid Im not following you.
@Ejayrazz, you're points are much more serious and thoughtful and should be replied to in kind. However, since I recall double-posting being frowned upon, and since I want to give your response its own post, Im gonna need to save it for later.
-
Sethb, you're right. I don't know you very well. I never did, and I doubt I ever will.
I only know what you write and what you say. And what you've been saying is that you "know" why this war started, and moreover you've boasted on more than one occasion that you and you alone are the thing that brought down the New Pacific Order.
You are a tool. And I don't mean in the obscene sense, but simply the functional sense. You were convenient. You were everything those who controlled you and continue to control you wanted. A mid-level government official of a small alliance accepts spied information. Not a big enough alliance that they would be accused of knowing better. Not even high-enough in your small alliance that you should know better. But in an alliance that was connected in precisely the way that mattered to activate the treaty web.
I know you're a tool because I understand alliances and alliance growth. This war isn't good for you. You have no reason to hate the NPO. Before this war, we never heard of OV and we never cared. I don't mean that in the callous sense, merely in the sense that our paths never crossed until you decided to cross them.
I know you're a tool because in every negotiation session I've been part during this war, you have been present as well and you barely speak. And I admit, I was curious. I know and knew nothing of you, beyond the events that began this conflict. We spoke briefly on IRC in query, but I wanted to hear your opinions during these peace negotiations on the record, and you did not speak, though I asked your opinions officially. You let the others do the talking for you. Perhaps it's because you value their opinions so much. Perhaps it's because they protect you. But in reality, I suspect it's because they control your destiny, and they do so because you let them.
I think that's sad.
Good god...Thats brutal.
I have to say that is one of the most cutting things I have ever read in my life, and frankly speaking; I approve of this post.
-
Actually those quotes were chosen because they provided a readily available set of posts showcasing Janova's unequivocal apathy towards self-consistency.Your choice of quotes all revolved around the punishment the NPO is getting, and how it is being given by those who you see as by no means innocent.Perhaps had you legitimately read the OP rather than skimmed it looking for evidence to support your preconceptions, you'd have noticed that, rather than trying to waste time on attempting to strawman me?
Here our good friend Bob points out his feelings on the qualifications of how guilt is assigned to alliances involved in the Hegemony’s Pax Pacifica. Perfectly reasonable, after all, CoC-esque alliances are hardly worth the effort and time to force out large reps. After all, they were really too inconsequential to be all that involved anyway. At least, that’s his view. So by that logic, shouldn’t the larger and more important players of One Vision therefore logically also play a larger role in the oppression, and by extension, be more to blame?Disproven by the OP.
You mean the Legion withdrawing after using the Coven doctored logs as a terrible and opportunistic excuse to grab the #1 spot before trying to go for the moral high ground afterward?Well it wasn't the intent of some of us. For some it was. The war against the NPO would not have stalled if two major CoaLUEtion players hadn't given the NPO peace. The rest of us were then left with a tough choice. Do we fight the NPO down removing them as a threat to the world but also removing ourselves as world powers, or do we take them up on their requests for peace and hope we can keep them contained? Ultimately it seems we choose wrong.I remember them trying to act as a more benevolent "world police" than the NPO ever was, and the likes of GATO and the remnants of the actual CoaLUEtion protesting over it during the meantime. Im not trying to judge here, just calling a spade a spade. Let's be blunt here: You all decided the Orders weren't worth the effort it would cost to keep them down.
That's pragmatism. Not second chances or mercy. It's pragmatism and self-interest. And at least you're honest enough to admit it as someone who knew what happened.
Im...Sorry? IGC surrendering a couple of days into the war and getting near white peace in the time before reps is hardly merciful. You all just had bigger fish to fry, considering how the CoaLUEtion couldnt gain a decisive advantage until after the Legion stepped in.The end of the Great War was not some simply event. Was there bungeling involved? Absolutely. But there was also mercy involved, in humongous quantities.
I established in the OP why Im confident he deserves it. The fact Im calling out someone I think needs to be called out, damned be the consequences, damn near qualifies as a dictionary definition of integrity.You're verbally pounding on someone who doesn't deserve it. Clearly integrity isn't one of your top priorities.Dude, you made a list of things a "REAL Pacifican" did then with your next sentence you proudly said you would do those same things. If you don't want your proposed actions to be linked with the New Pacific Order then I'd suggest you don't refer to them as being a "Real Pacifican" like you originally did.I never said "REAL" Pacifican. I said "Old Guard", which is a statement of fact.
Is this what you were referring to?
Now then, as an Old Guard Pacifican, and one fairly high up the food chain at that before my nonsensical ouster, I was privy to a lot of discussions, and I will not claim to be some kind of hippy moralist. I’m not. I have my lines that I draw, and I can and will stand by them. I supported the Green Civil War. Why? Because VE and CIS annoyed the hell out of me, and I thought “Well, why not?” It ultimately was fun to watch the nincompoops in charge of those alliances fall so blatantly. For those of us around at the time, I don’t think anyone will deny the hilarity of them thinking they were safe from taking potshots at the core alliances of the Initiative just because they had signed treaties with us.So...What exactly does that make your attempt at an ad hominem just now?
Baseless.
Edit: Grammatical clarity...Or just clarity.
-
Hope you get better moo and congratulations to you Empress Mary.
Now Im worried Moo lives in my area.....
OOC: At least you didnt have to go after a package with Bleach-mixed tile cleaner to sterilize your home from the possibility of infection.
IC:...Sexism.
Clearly reverse sexism in choice of replacement.
-
Well I guess NPO didn't need to worry about a rival on the red sphere if FIRE is self destructing under Carter's leadership already.
Well...They still have the Red Cross to worry abou-...
Oh, who am I kidding? Im sure that at the very least they wont go down like FIRE seems to be.
-
"No attention whoring" then publicly calls out Bob - someone not known for blatantly lying. You may not agree with his opinions, but he doesn't purposely lie. Anyone who is a veteran in this game understands Bob gives it straight to you - whether you love him or not.
/me facepalms
Good display.
To be frank, I wouldnt be making as effective a point for calling out someone who obviously lies. Then they wouldn't be so good at it, and therefore wouldn't actually represent what Im trying to call attention to.
If he's such an honest and trustworthy person, how do you explain the blatant hypocrisy I called out in the OP?
-
And FIRE loses yet another government member.
Must be humiliating.
I know I would be.
But considering the general description of his attitude, Im gonna say Carter isnt so much humiliated as annoyed with how things didnt go the way he wanted them to.
But such is life, I guess.
-
I don't make stuff up.
Bob Janova was talking about the NPO by name four out of the six times you quoted him. You mentioned the NPO at least four times in direct response to the Bob Janova quotes. The NPO came up, again by name, at least three times in your op before you even started quoting Bob.
Meh, despite my better judgement of time management (as in needing sleep) I reread the op and wasn't pleased. The whole op comes off reading like a disgruntled attack on Bob Janova mixed with anger directed at those who once supported the NPO but now oppose them... or something.Ok...So how do references to NPO suddenly come across as hating on the CoC? I'm mildly curious how this connecting thread was drawn.
If it wasn't intentional, it wasn't a second chance. "Giving" something generally requires some intent of purpose...Therefore, saying it was a second chance given out of mercy (which is what Janova was implying) is wildly off-base, when the more accurate term would be the CoaLUEtion bungled their opportunity to contain the NPO long-term. I'm not saying he can't form an argument about generally held-knowledge...But presenting a basically erroneous assumption as a logical argument is something I feel should be called out on.You mean the NPO's second chance in 2006? Just because he wasn't there doesn't mean he can't form an argument around generally held knowledge of the event. This world would be far less interesting if each of us could only talk about events we were present for. Plus he's right. The NPO did get a second chance back then. It just wasn't an intentional one.Because it's erroneous and disingenuous to present as fact. Kind of like how you are presenting my OP.
Ah. But he *does* waste his talents on useless spin.Not quite. I feel you were wrong, sans quotation marks, because you were. Bob Janova and those like him are the best, highest quality posters in this community. They aren't mindless trolls who just insult or post hails. They aren't the kind of poster that argues away with no knowledge of the facts. And they aren't the rare but highly annoying kind of poster who can write and reason with the best of them but wastes their talents on playing devil's advocate.If anything, I'd compare Janova to Zhadum as a poster, but frankly, Zha wouldnt make the mistake of leaving evidence of dishonesty in his posts. And to be honest, I was hoping to take him on, too.
Integrity.What do you look for in a quality poster if not the absence of those things?
Oh, I see. So because I reference the fact that I was a member of the NPO before they became the gamekilling hegemony of classless jerks that they are today, suddenly Im trying to be a "REAL Pacifican". As Ive said elsewhere, so that that petty attempt at an ad hominem can be put to rest here;Yes, it is some kind of threat. It's the same kind of threat you made towards the type of posters I like. If you're intent on being a "REAL Pacifican" and dragging the kind of posters I like out into the open so you can mock them then I'll be a few posts behind you to point out how you are dead wrong. If you want to pick on someone go after mindless trolls, or the no knowledge sheep, or the annoying devil's advocates.Im not a "REAL Pacifican". Im a "REAL Chron". Being in the NPO back then suited me as I was me. The NPO did not make me who I am, so to assume that somehow I still hold allegiance to that is disingenuous at best, and a lie on it's face at worst. I'm still banned on their forums...Did you know that? So even if I wanted one, I could not have an OOC or IC relationship with that community. And Im not looking for it, either.
Insinuations are fail
Allies =/= friends. I believe your good friend Janova has said that quite extensively in this thread already thus far.Beyond that, we're allies in the same powerful and awesome bloc. I'd like to call you a friend, but I won't be able to if you do what you have threatened to do. You'll just be someone in my bloc that I happen to disagree with.If you feel that somehow my acting on my personal beliefs somehow makes me distasteful to you as an individual, sorry.
But I ain't doing this for your approval.
-
I suspect I'll have more to say when I reread the op at a decent hour this afternoon but I'd just like to voice my support for Bob Janova and his style of debating. He's one of the short list of people I really enjoy reading for the points he makes and the positions he takes. If what he does is fake debating then I wish we had more fakes around here.
And thats something I feel is a problem. Enabling this kind of stuff by considering it the only worthwhile alternative to "lulz treaty is sexy"-type posts is pretty damaging to legitimate debate on these forums. That being said...How do you know what my criteria for "fake debating" is without reading the OP? Isn't that kind of prejudgment kind of...Uncalled for?
I'd love to know how you came to draw that conclusion, as frankly speaking I don't recall naming any alliances at all in the OP. At all. My analysis were based on Janova's somewhat hypocritical stances on alliance culpability over the past month. If you feel that somehow this reflects on my view on them, then feel free to clarify.Meh, despite my better judgement of time management (as in needing sleep) I reread the op and wasn't pleased. The whole op comes off reading like a disgruntled attack on Bob Janova mixed with anger directed at those who once supported the NPO but now oppose them... or something.Otherwise you're just making stuff up. Which is somewhat unfair to the people posting in the thread. At least Ender took the effort to find stuff in the OP to disagree with.
I disagree with your definition of "quality poster"...I suppose it's a difference of semantics, then. However, in the case of Janova, I actually made reference in the OP to one glaring instance of him talking about something he would have no idea about, and then attempting to spin that over time, consciously, intentionally, into some kind of logical argument...Where frankly there wasn't one to begin with.Thats just absurd. Bob Janova is nothing like those old names you named. Those people rarely had a clue of what they were talking about or were lost in their own fantasies that had nothing to do with current CN events of their times. Dragging quality posters like Bob Janova out into the open and mocking them will not fly, I personally guarantee you that.If you feel my points are "wrong" based on misconceptions you carried with you into the thread, and are not even bothering to address the points I bring up, then that is simply just wrong. And what's with the "will not fly, I personally guarantee you that."? Is that some kind of a threat?
-
If you went by the books I wouldn't be so pissed off.
This isnt like the NSO's challenge system where there are codified coups.
To be fair, I dont think there really *are* books for this kind of thing.
-
What's a cloak of embodiment?
Verbage.
Or as Hawk likes to call it "Artistic-y"
(Uncultured hick)
-
What for?
You are going to drop another "Inference =/= fact unless it's my inference" statement and claim to have refuted my points, so it is not worth my time to put effort into something that you won't bother to address properly.
After calling out Bob for making statements about the events of GW1 I do not think you should be making comments as to why different Hegemony alliances received different peace terms. Considering you are not privy to most of those discussions I find this rather hypocritical of you to make such a claim after specifically calling out BobJanova for the same sort of thing.I based it on Janova's cited definition of justice. Hence the fact I kept the term 'justice' within quotation marks to illustrate that point. I suppose you didn't notice that. I also note that the bold is yours, which is nice. I dont recall putting any heavy emphasis on that part of the statement...So mind my asking why you think I did?You're right. I apologize for not bothering to respond to any of your points with anything more than "inference =/= fact". Silly me, for not bothering to clearly identify which points of yours actually merited honest discussion, rather than simple dismissal.
Or perhaps this one would be a better example of the "merit" of your non-inference "points"?
Classy, what are you, 10 years old? Intentionally misspelling someone's name (multiple times) after spelling it correctly for the rest of the thread? If that is your "preferred" style of "arguing" I see no reason to even want it on these forums....You're saying I lack class just because of a proof-reading error? Do you realize the staggering irony of that statement?
So...Which of those two is me saying "inference =/= fact" rather than a legitimate rebuttal? If you feel that I didn't rebutt your comments properly, that would be a mistake I would be happy to rectify.
Edit:
I didn't say or imply anything about NSO. I don't know where you got that idea. I'm saying that Heft expects us to do all kinds stupid !@#$ in the name of integrity, or whatever.There something wrong with integrity now?
-
So when do we get to see Volume I?
I 'unno.
Depends on if theres enough interest, gravedigging on our forums takes time, after all.
-
Welcome to the Second Edition of Sith Holocrons. For those of you who dont know what the hell Im talking about, no this is not a joke. There was a volume one, but that was on the NSO's private forums found here. Basically, as a Primer, the Sith Holocrons are an omnibus of various writings and musings of Sith on the Order itself, various newspieces, and other things.
---------------------------------------------
Freedom and Victory
By Cheyenne
“To be a Sith is to taste freedom and to know victory.”
-Yuthura Ban
As a Sith, you possess the greatest gifts the universe has to offer. You have tasted freedom, and you have known victory, and will certainly enjoy even greater victory in the days to come. However, nobody gave you these gifts. You did not wait for someone with more power to toss you their scraps, to give you some token freedoms, to allow you to experience victory as part of their own quest.
That freedom you have tasted, that victory you know and hold dear, was not given, but taken. You stood up and shouted to the powers that be that you would no longer abide by their abstracts, or forego true power in order to align with the so called "Light Side". By entering into the Order, you threw off the shackles of their oppression, and will never have to feel them again.
You are free, my brothers. Free to speak out, free to unleash the powers within you, free to dedicate your talents and abilities to any cause you deem worthy. You have pledged those powers to the New Sith Order, a noble cause worthy of your gifts. For unlike the powers that be, we are in the business of enabling our members, not spoon-feeding them.
The Order stands alone in the world as an institution dedicated to never stopping, never slowing. Where others would be content to rest on their laurels and beat their swords into ploughshares, we strive to attain true power through whatever means necessary. As an Acolyte of the Order, you will share in that power. Not as a servant, basking in reflected glory like the puppets and meatshields of other alliances, but as a Master of the Dark Side, wielding power that few can even comprehend.
We are the potters, the world our clay. The power we have taken has granted us the authority to recreate the world in our image. Those that resist will either be converted or be destroyed, for the struggle, revolution and challenge that is displayed in the Order is what you see happening in the world at large. The strong survive, and the Sith are strong.
You may take pride in this, for you have earned it. The passion that flows through your veins for the continued dominance of the Order is not only healthy; it is the sign of one that is truly powerful. And with these emotions comes discipline; the discipline to master your emotions, to submit to those above you until such a time as you are prepared to destroy them.
The Challenge system of the Order is in fact her lifeblood. Once an apprentice has learned all they can from their master, they must indeed become the master. Anything less would be a disservice to the Order, and a disservice to the Force. Never be content to rest within the Brotherhood, for without constant struggle, revolution and recreation, we Sith would be no better than the Jedi, content to remain apart from the world.
Seize power whenever it reveals itself, for it is yours to take.
-------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure there are many who would take umbrage to some of the things mentioned in this piece. Bully for you folk.
-------------------------------------------------------
Pride, Passion, and Discipline: A Primer
By Heft
Introduction
The Sith are a strange people, simultaneously simple and complex. They submit to their emotions, yet seek to master themselves. They bow to their masters, yet seek to dominate others. Their personalities, actions and histories are remarkably varied and display a culture regularly in flux. We strive to learn from the past, so that we can be better than those that came before us. We seek to understand their actions, so that we can emulate and surpass their successes and avoid repeating their failures. What can we draw from the muddled, complicated, and sometimes contradictory lessons of so many antecedents? Concrete lessons are difficult to draw, but we can begin to observe similar themes, consistent throughout most stories. Those who were successful tended to be primarily based in three fundamental elements: Pride, Passion, and Discipline.
Pride
Sith are superior. Sith are the best, and believe it wholeheartedly and without reservation. They have confidence in themselves to perform and accomplish great feats, and though they do not make foolish moves, they are not afraid of risks. Sith project this confidence, and even arrogance, outward. It will surely result in some jealously and resentment, but it will also result in respect and a following. Those who seek to mask their own inadequacies will lash out recklessly at the calmly composed Pride and confidence of the Sith, while those who have no such hang-ups will recognize the competence and ability of the Sith and align themselves accordingly. Sith have no need to boast or brag, they simply allow their existence and manifest successes to display their ability.
Passion
From this superiority arises ambition and hunger for power. Sith allow their emotions and feelings to guide them, and they do not resist their dark side, their hate and anger and rage. They allow these, and all their other emotions, to push them forward on their path towards greatness, as their pride and confidence allows them to know they will succeed. Sith do not enter a battle they cannot win, but neither do they shy away from a battle of any sort. They embrace conflict, and the growth that accompanies it. They embrace loss, and the knowledge it brings. They embrace their doubt and fear and anguish, for from that they gain awareness and perception.
Discipline
The most powerful Sith, the strongest Sith, are disciplined. They embrace their emotions and their passions and they have full confidence in their abilities and ambitions, but they do not allow these things to drive them to stupidity or recklessness. They will develop patience, cunning, and restraint as they move towards their goals. They will obey the orders and commands of those above them, in the knowledge that such discipline and respect will serve them one day. They will not enter into foolhardy or unwinnable situations simply to satisfy some carnal desire, nor will they flippantly dismiss superiors out of a blind lust for power.
Conclusion
For the Order to be strong and to thrive, those in it must embrace these principles and acknowledge their shared cultural unity, their commonality of purpose, and their uniqueness in a vapid world. These are the principles upon which a powerful Order may be built and forged, the foundation upon which we may build our fortress, and the hilltop upon which our city will shine.
-------------------------------------------
An excellent analysis of the cultural foundations of the Order. Contrary to the ignorant stereotype, we possess incredibly strong senses of purpose and discipline. Those who seek only random carnage due to a misguided bloodlust are not allowed anywhere near the top.
-------------------------------------------
The Question of Loyalty
By Chron
The Sith do not know Loyalty. Our very culture and way of living is based off the tenet that we should not hold a blind adherence to those greater than our station, but should only strive to surpass them and take their place on the totem pole. This is undisputed. However, those above our station are still given authority to deliver orders onto us. To set policy, tell us what to do, and rightfully expect obedience. But what is that authority based upon? Well, my fellow Sith, we do not respect Orders due to loyalty to those above us in station. No. Nor do we hold them as being the embodiment of the Sith Order. No…The reason we are expected, and do, respect the chain of command is due to our RESPECT of the individual holding the station. Respect is, unlike loyalty, personal, earned. It is dependent upon being kept up by an individual, worked for, and a trust is built from it. Respect is quite unlike the submission that is mere loyalty, where we are encouraged to act subservient, to surrender ourselves to those who would drape themselves in a cloak of embodiment and hubris, who would not work for our respect but merely demand we heed their bidding. No, we Sith do not know Loyalty, only respect. The respect for the meaning of a station, respect for the accomplishments of our betters, and respect for the endless possibility that their status represents. For we Sith do not merely allow others to dictate unto us without proving their worth, should an individual of higher station prove inferior, then they shall be challenged and overcome by one more worthy than they. Respect is something only given to the worthy, and that is why we obey, because our respect has been earned; if it were not, then those giving orders would not be *in* a position to give them.
Respect for the Stations which our Marauders, Sith Lords, Prophets and even the Dark Lord hold is there not because they simply took the office for themselves and left those beneath them the merest scraps. Rather, they have EARNED our respect through the efforts and accomplishments they have worked for, for the sake of our Sith order. The Challenge system is the crystallization of our belief that no one Sith is above the Order by any right, but rather only holds power until someone more capable comes along to unseat them. This is as true for our Dark Lord as it is for any Marauder. If we considered ourselves more capable than those in office, we would challenge them, and if we were, then that guard would be relieved of their duty by the Brotherhood of Darkness at large. But, since such bedlam is not an everyday occurrence in the BoD, than we must accept the fact that we commonly do not all consider ourselves more qualified, and with that admission, comes also the realization that we respect the position they hold. We respect it because we do not believe that just anyone can take it. Respect brought on by recognition of the fact that it takes a certain level of talent and competence to hold office here within the New Sith Order. If we did not respect our Orders government, challenges would run rampant by the ambitious who consider themselves capable of taking a position without putting any work into it.
We hold respect for those hold higher rank solely for the fact that they have earned it. For the work they have done to advance the Order. We give our leaders respect not because they merely ask for it, but by virtue of the fact that they have demonstrated being worthy of it. We look to our leaders in the Order to accomplish goals, to perform necessary tasks, to do what is best for the sake of the Order and they do it. They do far more to further our cause than the average member, and that is why they hold office. That is why when they speak and order us below them to act, we comply. Because they have earned the right to do so by virtue of their service. And the reality of those accomplishments is that they are what brought our leaders to their positions of power. So too, can our accomplishments propel ourselves to greatness. The promise of being rewarded for our advances and accomplishments is what drives us to have respect for those who put in the work before us, and appreciate the awards waiting for us when we, too, give our all.
Unlike many alliances which claim to have a meritocracy whereby the best are given the respect and prestige they have earned, our Sith Order, through its Challenge system dispenses with petty political posturing and lays out a broad claim; “If you are capable, step forth”. As Sith, it is common knowledge that the strongest members shall ascend to higher rank, and those lacking in ambition, drive, and effort shall not. Ambition, drive and effort, interestingly, are traits, which when expressed, also can earn respect if properly utilized, your fellow members observe you, bear witness to your accomplishments, and hold you in higher esteem. They believe you when you demonstrate aptitude, and give you the respect you’ve earned. If a Sith who does this is capable enough, they will surely also choose to challenge another Sith for supremacy and obtain higher rank; for with that rank, they shall also obtain the right to utilize the respect they’ve engendered to accomplish even greater feats for the Order, and through those feats, earn greater respect from their peers. When leading, respect and fear are the only two tools to engender obedience from subordinates. Of the two, fear is easier and less reliable, whereas respect is the stronger foundation of authority, but more difficult to obtain. As a leader, you must earn the respect of those below you, as it is the only certain way to obtain their definite subservience. An army shall not follow a weak master, and the Order shall not tolerate a weak and ineffective member holding a position of any power.
We Sith do not know Loyalty to any one man, regardless of what he has done in the past, or what he may do in the future. That is not how we serve. The New Sith Order follows only the one most worthy to lead it, and that right is earned through respect of that man, for what he does for the Order at this moment. The day that respect is lost, a greater, more capable Sith shall take his place, and so on and so forth throughout the chain of command, down to the lowest Marauders. Respect is the foundation of discipline in the New Sith Order, by allowing a government member to go unchallenged is our own approval of the job they are doing. It is our respecting of the office they hold, and of the one in power. That respect we give them is not to be discarded idly when we disagree with a decision or action they may make, but should be acknowledged until the day our better is unworthy of his post, and therefore loses it to one more deserving than he.
But if it is not that day, we shall acknowledge and respect the positions of our superiors. Until such time as we have overthrown them, and taken their place.
---------------------------------
A truly remarkable and well-written piece. Personally I feel that this is the best out of them all.
This is only one portion of future "Dark Side Media" releases, look forward to our take on news of the day as well.
Or don't.
*ignite lightsaber smilie*
-
We do actually have to play like a real alliance. You know where you do what you can to make sure your alliance doesn't get !@#$%*^? We can't all be vox populi.
...I dont quite know what you mean by that. The NSO is a real alliance.
Do you think we're not, or something? Perhaps you have yet to see our charter?
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/New_Sith_Order
Feel free to take a look.
-
You were threatening to leak milcom info for something or other. I don't remember the exact reason, but it was a fairly solid one.
Other then that, you make a very good point.
Nope, I wasn't. And of course you dont remember the exact reason, the logs that lie was based upon were of the one and only time I have ever been drunk (while online).
And of course you didnt see the logs of my attempting to defend myself. Get over it, I have.
And frankly speaking you should have more important things to worry about than soul searching over the reason I was thrown out.
-
Gramlins left due to a sadly unstoppable, un-veto-able and overall messy public government sanctioned-vote to drop membership and run out of there.
The government did so only with great regret at being forced to follow their charter to the letter.
-
Oh I see, that's an insult. You must have been thinking up that one for hours.
Here's a few clues to buy:
1. Didn't say it was a bad thing, indeed Joe Stupid and I go back to the days when ARES was a Ragnarok protectorate.
2. This looks like a solid economic treaty with much win.
3. You want to turn this into a MADP, I honestly could care less.
There are undeniable similarities between this treaty and the economic portion of BLEU. If you are unable to handle someone bringing it up, then why even create an economic cooperation treaty on Blue at all? Live long, prosper. Whatever.
Maybe its just a purely economic treaty rather than a military bloc or something crazy like that?
Who knows?
...
(I doubt it's you)
-
Just make sure not to get involved in a war you said you'd be staying out of this time, alright?
Good luck.
-
This whole thread fails because it doesn't address the biggest problem on the OWF - 'lulz' speak in Alliance Announcements.
Posters should at least try to make the OP Announcement sound like a political leader. If you can't type out a short statement that roughly sounds like what you hear on the news, then get someone else in the alliance to do it for you, or maybe wait a few more birthdays before writing that DoE...
PS: Oh and then there's the "OMFG THIS TREATY LUB MAKES ME **** IN MY ****ING PANTIES!!!111" replies...
EDIT: Unless you're in the RIA, please be coherent.
What you dont realize is that the intellectual degradation of the forums is encouraged by the sorts of folks who dont actually support coherent posting and generally honest/eloquent debate.
What you're complaining about is just a posting style and a falling of accepted standards. Thats just a rant. What im pointing out is a deliberate and calculated style that is meant to bring down the level of posting you seem to prefer.
Of course, you're more than welcome to use my thread as a soapbox for whatever crusade you like...Just make sure to know exactly what you're crusading against in the first place.
-
Congratulations!
o/ BLEUnification!
Now we on Brown need to step up our game!
-
For clarity, I did read the OP.
I have read your posts with interest for a long time, and I am surprised that you would not forsee that outcome when you decided to single one person out. One could infer, though that does not equal fact, that if an attack on Bob was not the main thrust of the thread, then it was at least a secondary one.
One question though, do you disagree I am lazy, disagree I am on a crusade, or disagree that lazy people should not go on crusades in the first place.
Edited because while I was replying you clarified that it was me not Ender you were talking to
I disagree with all three assertions. The first being due to the fact I believe your motivation behind abstaining from comments is apathy rather than laziness, the second because I frankly dont see anything you could be crusading on, and the latter I disagree with because seeing lazy folks rise up only to not do anything is unintentionally hilarious.
And I was responding to both you and Ender...I should probably clarify that via edit.
-
That directed at me? Hard to tell, because I never said anything about it. For the record, I don't care about Bob.
Sorry, should have said Machiabelly. I guess I really need to start paying attention more to what I say in these replies.
/facepalm
-
Or one of my several replies that has reiterated that fact.You would think that me knowing you admitted to being lazy would let you know that I read the OP.
Well, I guess thats a difference of opinion then.I mentioned spin in particualr because you mention it in a few of your replies to people.I may be a lazy debater, and person in general, that is why I am not on a crusade.
And Sal, thanks for the thought
But I think ive got things covered.inference=/= fact.To Machiabelly: As far as this being about Bob...it really isn't. But if you feel so strongly that my analysis of him is incorrect, you're free to show how I could, in fact, be incorrect...Evidence is really nice, after all.
Ender, feel free to respond to my actual points.
Edit: Spelling. Edit 2.0: Clarification of whom im addressing.
NPO - A Suggestion
in Open World RP
Posted
To be fair, you did quote yourself saying "fascist" in the first place.