Jump to content

TehChron

Members
  • Posts

    5,851
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Blog Comments posted by TehChron

  1. That kind of stuff goes for millions to the right buyer. Doesn't matter what the non-buyer thinks.

    People fall for scams all the time. Or just buy stuff out of sheer boredom.

    There are instances of rich people that were dumb enough to buy deeds to land on the moon, Im sure that it wouldnt be too much of a stretch that other rich folks could be convinced that a metaphorical turd wrapped in tin foil was also worth millions coming from the right "artist".

    If you value something by however much someone else is willing to pay for it, then you have some seriously messed up criteria for what constitutes quality.

  2. oh of course my apologies. I was just trying to keep it secret that you owned GATO. I didn't know you wanted it out in the open master.

    Youre too naive.

    It doesnt matter whether its out in the open or not, for it shall be unimpeded by the treacherous claims of those who would be my enemies. Sometimes boldness is a virtue. You have much to learn.

  3. Blackmail. Tell him you'll sue the !@#$ out of him if he does X,Y,Z. The noise stuff would probably work. Quite frankly you don't even have to be able to win, just afford a lawyer. Trample him with legal fees or, better yet, the threat of massive legal fees. Pretend like you're willing to go the distance.

    Also, threaten to call child services. If he's as much of a drunk as you are implying you may have at least enough of a case to make his life hell.

    I think you keep a guy like that contained by MAD, just like the good old days :)

    No, that'll make him escalate it.

    And then zog becomes the person who provoked the !@#$%^&. At least, thats how the argument would go in an American court, no clue about Canadians.

  4. Corinan: Sorry if I unfairly called out your entire alliance, I took it from those who posted here that it was a generally-held idea within the alliance.

    Chron: Isn't that what PIATs are for? Or just being on good terms with an alliance without a treaty?

    We don't sign PIATs. And we frankly had no reason to assume GATO government would be hesitant to fulfill their part of the arrangement until long after the treaty had been signed.

  5. To NSO members: If you had such little trust for GATO, why the $%&@ did you hold a treaty with them? Nothing more retarded than seeing people trashing those they were allied to not even 24 hours ago and saying !@#$ like "we knew you weren't going to activate your treaty". Why the hell would anyone keep a treaty with someone if that's how they felt? You guys boggle the mind.

    We're friends with them, that doesn't necessarily mean that we expected them to fight with us. I mean, to be frankly honest, who counts on GATO's support that isnt IAA?

  6. Hello guys, GATO here, thought a response would be due, i speak for myself in this.

    Yesterday I was glued to IRC in the hopes that this boring as S**t summer was going to turn into something. NSO had accepted and was supporting a member who was attacking RoK. RoK responded with a quad attack. We watched all this unfold and waited. Surely this would mean war, large scale war. It would seem logical that someone from NSO would contact us, to stratigize, to plan a response, even just to say "So...this is a bit of a clusterf**k,huh?". But no, Omni, DragonsPhyre, Me (I am Deputy AC) didnt get anything. We watched over 200 people in the NSO public chat talking trash, escalating, making everyone in the room absolutly certain of there intentions not to back down.

    I looked forward to a fight, flex the muscles, have some fun. But if were were going to go to the unconditional aid of an ally, we do expect the common courtesy to say "Hey, we are gonna start a war". Yes we cancelled, was it the right thing? Good people can differ. But now this cancellation is being used as a political tool by NSO, you can all see that, "GATO are !@#$%*^, and NSO is a poor, helpless victim" is the new narrative being pushed. That is horses**t and you would be foolish to buy that snake oil that some on OWF are trying to sell

    $%&@ off, the people chatting in the public channel were the ones who were gonna attack and you damn well know it. Your entire argument is based on the fact that you all saw an imminent threat to our alliance several days before we had an inkling and decided to not inform us that it may lead to war.

    Which is actually a pretty blatant violation of the clause you say we voided.

  7. Please read what I said... if you mean Lewin then you are still wrong because I merely pointed out that there are objective bases in CN because of its nature as a game. These bases do not require real life examples, which was his claim.

    You're applying morality, a subjective viewpoint (at best), to an utterly unsentimental construct (the ToA), and arguing that it defines morality within CN. Which simply isn't true.

    Word of God is not a moral imperative, its an absolute directive.

  8. Within the context of the game, yes he is and they are at least a potential basis for ethics. The objective truth in CN is that which is written into the world and game universe. The subjective is the laws created by the players that govern only 1 AA or Bloc etc.

    Thus multi's are inherently immoral in CN, they are cheating, abuse of the game. Tech raiding against one's own charter is immoral as they are breaking laws they themselves signed on to. But to raid in general is not necessarily immoral as it is within the game rules.

    A penal code is a means of enforcing social stability, rather than an objective form of morality.

    The terms of Service are the former, not the latter, so your argument kind of falls flat.

×
×
  • Create New...