Open Invitation from the SuperFriends

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1312645709' post='2773533']
Sounds like how FARK hated PC (prior to the NEW war) for being some sort of TotalFARK! infested colony. Despite myself assuring them that there were only two ex-TF! in Poison Clan, both of which weren't even from FARK.com
[/quote]

Perception and assumptions tend to be absolute pricks. Much like how some groups have assured that "x, y, and z" don't exist in their ranks, it's hard to break a preconception nonetheless.

[KainIIIC]

Did it ever occur to you that making this thread would turn out to be a terrible idea reeking in desperation?

[Delta1212]

[quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1312646033' post='2773537']
Did it ever occur to you that making this thread would turn out to be a terrible idea reeking in desperation?
[/quote]
Sharks do so love the scent of blood in the water. Perhaps if we give them a whiff they'll like us.

[flak attack]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312643048' post='2773516']
There's probably two or three people left in their entire alliance who was around then. Maybe you should ask them.
[/quote]
Oh, we've tried. It would be easier for us to get an MADP bloc formed with NPO, TOP, GPA, GOD and NpO than getting a straight answer out of Fark.

[Thorgrum]

1. Do you find it funny or sad that out of the 17,299 nations that are apart of the world roughly only 2% have bothered to participate in the Q&A ?

2. Do you ever sit back and in your mind find humor at those who chose to invest a great deal of their time into our world?

3. How many people do you believe are sitting out in the world at large waiting for an opportunity to rogue you (anyone of the SF in general)and then delete after exhausting their nations?

4. For the thousands, or perhaps ten thousand who find you, and those who invest heavily into the theatre of politics in CN to be idiots will you oblige silly questions toward the end of the Q&A to maintain our entertainment? (this assumes of course the brilliance of those already posting have thumped their chests and got it out)

5. Final question for Xiph specifically, when GOD gets stomped how hard will you be laughing at your aggressors if they dont mandate in the peace agreement you step down from gov and leave the alliance?

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Thorgrum' timestamp='1312650134' post='2773558']
1. Do you find it funny or sad that out of the 17,299 nations that are apart of the world roughly only 2% have bothered to participate in the Q&A ?

2. Do you ever sit back and in your mind find humor at those who chose to invest a great deal of their time into our world?

3. How many people do you believe are sitting out in the world at large waiting for an opportunity to rogue you (anyone of the SF in general)and then delete after exhausting their nations?

4. For the thousands, or perhaps ten thousand who find you, and those who invest heavily into the theatre of politics in CN to be idiots will you oblige silly questions toward the end of the Q&A to maintain our entertainment? (this assumes of course the brilliance of those already posting have thumped their chests and got it out)

5. Final question for Xiph specifically, when GOD gets stomped how hard will you be laughing at your aggressors if they dont mandate in the peace agreement you step down from gov and leave the alliance?
[/quote]
1. CN's always been this way. I don't really worry about it anymore than I do about the fact that of the near 7 billion people on Earth, only a small fraction of a percentage even know what this game is let alone play it.

2. I find humor in the things pretty much everyone invests in. I don't think I know anybody without at least one pointless obsession. Thinking about it, I actually find the people who stick around without any investment to be strange. Most things don't hold my attention long if I'm not participating to some degree unless it's cleverly done and provides me with something to think about. CN hasn't had anything to really discover in years, so I can't imagine sticking around without being invested to some extent.

But I have an odd personality like that.

3. I think most of the people with the right mentality to go rogue have already done so, and there won't be a huge number of them until such time as the admin decides to shut the game down and gives everyone a few weeks or months to go crazy ahead of time.

4. Sure, though I'm not sure why you think people who play this game are idiots.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Thorgrum' timestamp='1312650134' post='2773558']
1. Do you find it funny or sad that out of the 17,299 nations that are apart of the world roughly only 2% have bothered to participate in the Q&A ?[/quote]

Seeing as how an infinitesimal percentage of the player base actually operates the OWF on a regular basis... no, not at all.

[quote]2. Do you ever sit back and in your mind find humor at those who chose to invest a great deal of their time into our world?[/quote]

It's no different dedicating the same number/amount of hours playing Call of Duty or World of Warcraft. In all game scenarios, we indulge a fantasy world.

[quote]3. How many people do you believe are sitting out in the world at large waiting for an opportunity to rogue you (anyone of the SF in general)and then delete after exhausting their nations?[/quote]

Probably a good number, though I can't really comprehend the number of personal grievances against individuals rather than entire alliances. Personally, I don't think [i]I've[/i] made personal enemies, but CSN definitely has a standing queue of to-be-rogues just waiting.

[quote]4. For the thousands, or perhaps ten thousand who find you, and those who invest heavily into the theatre of politics in CN to be idiots will you oblige silly questions toward the end of the Q&A to maintain our entertainment? (this assumes of course the brilliance of those already posting have thumped their chests and got it out)[/quote]

All threads die eventually.

[Alterego]

[quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1312495199' post='2772103']
I would hardly call it an obsession, Xiph is well everyone knows him well enough. He says what he feels. You can hate him for it or not.
[/quote]
There are 3 alliances that I know of, Im sure there are others I dont. His desire to disband UPN hurt SF & showed he puts his own obsession before his alliance and allies even during a major war. I would say repeatedly trying to force someone, anyone to disband even to the determent of his alliance and the welfare of his allies is an obsession. Now his allies in SF are suffering in part for that obsession.

[Unknown Smurf]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1312581212' post='2772879']
[color="#0000FF"]I have another question. Is the standard RIA post (a stupid meme) done intentionally to make people think less of your alliance, or do you honestly have no idea who obnoxious a lot of us find you and your "humor" to be?

Also, that didn't answer any of my questions. Am I making you uncomfortable pointing out the simple truths about your alliance?

So, let me ask you this, will RIA answer any of my questions, or will you instead try to find a way to skirt around the issues?[/color]


[color="#0000FF"]That might be my favorite memory of the war. But I'm not sure what exactly your point is, or why you're even bringing it up. Is this about SF or RV? Although I do not blame you for your obsession with me. It is true, I am pretty great.[/color]
[/quote]

To all in SF: Do you guys ever feel as though you will be able to pull off the level of hypocrisy RV has shown here? I feel as though preaching loyalty and then switching AAs to fight another alliance due to a personal vendetta is something that I cannot get behind, do you agree, or do agree with Xiphosis' mantra in the last war where when you (as an alliance) have enough NS on your coalition side, you can pick any target?

I mean why help your alliance mates in their war if they are going to win anyways?


[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1312605687' post='2773235']
I understand your suspicion, I'd share it in your shoes, so I won't try to talk you out of it. That being said, I can give you my word that I'm being genuine when I say that my settling of the conflict with CsN does not need to be violent. That's coming from DT's war guy. Bob is our FA guy, so I'd be inclined to think that he's being genuine as well. But, of course, this does not really reveal my motivation for being open-minded towards forgiveness. Back a few years ago, I was at the helm of an alliance called SOUL, which merged to create SOLID. Both were signatories of BLEU. As you'll recall, BLEU made some big mistakes as a bloc and ended up being destroyed. We never had the opportunity to make some things right, when we realized the gravity of our deeds, it was far too late. That bloc meant a lot, achieved a lot and frankly, it really sucked to lose that. Now, I know that there is a certain survival instinct in wanting to avoid being public enemy #1, but I have faith that there is some real desire among some of you to make things right. Whether I'm right or wrong, it's no skin off my back. I still expect you to take this with a pretty big grain of salt, because obviously you don't really know me, so to you, my word should not mean much, but it's the best I can do.
[/quote]

To all member-alliances of SF:
In the war mentioned above, BLEU (Hyperion specifically, an alliance protected by a BLEU alliance) was attacked by both GGA and Valhalla originally. Valhalla was a member of continuum then, and GGA was a member of the 1vision bloc. BLEU could have hypothetically won that war if they only counter declared on GGA and taken out 1vision.

Do you feel as though you can employ a strategy in this seemingly inevitable war to only go to war with MJ alliances instead of MJ/PB/DR alliances?

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1312653167' post='2773581']
To all member-alliances of SF:
In the war mentioned above, BLEU (Hyperion specifically, an alliance protected by a BLEU alliance) was attacked by both GGA and Valhalla originally. Valhalla was a member of continuum then, and GGA was a member of the 1vision bloc. BLEU could have hypothetically won that war if they only counter declared on GGA and taken out 1vision.

Do you feel as though you can employ a strategy in this seemingly inevitable war to only go to war with MJ alliances instead of MJ/PB/DR alliances?
[/quote]
That would not have worked in that war and is unlikely to work for many people of anyone in future wars. You can't realistically snatch victory from the jaws of defeat with battlefield maneuvers, you can only do the opposite.

Besides which, it's not Mj that I ever really worry about, no matter how incessantly I'm told by everyone else that it is.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1312645947' post='2773536']
Perception and assumptions tend to be absolute pricks. Much like how some groups have assured that "x, y, and z" don't exist in their ranks, it's hard to break a preconception nonetheless.
[/quote]

Irrelevant. In the time since TF! has existed, other bilateral relationships (MK-NpO and GOONS-VE come to mind) have developed and evolved from hatred to allegiance and everywhere in between more than once. There's remembering who has done you injustice and then there is just absurdity.

[Drai]

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1312653167' post='2773581']
To all member-alliances of SF:
In the war mentioned above, BLEU (Hyperion specifically, an alliance protected by a BLEU alliance) was attacked by both GGA and Valhalla originally. Valhalla was a member of continuum then, and GGA was a member of the 1vision bloc. BLEU could have hypothetically won that war if they only counter declared on GGA and taken out 1vision.

Do you feel as though you can employ a strategy in this seemingly inevitable war to only go to war with MJ alliances instead of MJ/PB/DR alliances?
[/quote]
Having been in Hyperion gov I can all but guarantee that the other alliances would have found a way in. Just like what will happen in the scenario you are mentioning for the future. Especially when so many treaties don't specifically state non-chaining. If you think there was any realistic chance that had BLEU only countered GGA they would have isolated it to a 1-vision war then you may as well draw up any scenario you want and hope it comes true because it's probably just as likely.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1312654860' post='2773595']
Irrelevant. In the time since TF! has existed, other bilateral relationships (MK-NpO and GOONS-VE come to mind) have developed and evolved from hatred to allegiance and everywhere in between more than once. There's remembering who has done you injustice and then there is just absurdity.
[/quote]

Well, obviously I am not Fark, nor have I ever been in Fark, so I never claimed to have first-hand knowledge. Nonetheless, it is hardly irrelevant; what you deem to be absurd can be deemed totally reasonable by another group, as is the way with perspective and, in some respects, general relativism. Admittedly, if a group is unwilling to accept what is contrary to their belief then there is generally a reason for that, even if you have knowledge stating otherwise. It is hardly absurd for a group to bear grudges as it is not only the face of this game, but also one of the many fun implicit traits enjoyed by most people. And bear in mind that some people are able to move on far easier than others, which is another factor in this scenario I'd imagine.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1312627042' post='2773457']
Oh hey, check it out. Xiphosis showed up but somehow missed my inquiry. Again. Clearly the question was not asked in a clear enough voice.
[/quote]

I have no doubt that it's deliberate; the theory many people hold is that Xiphosis was raging so hard in private that his some of allies` leaders told him told him to stop responding to certain people. His behavior in this thread has made very clear that his ability to even moderately tone down his normal, insensible personality is very limited and very shaky, even when he's trying his absolute hardest to do so.

Edited August 6, 2011 by Crymson

[Delta1212]

Really separated double post. My phone is weird.

Edited August 6, 2011 by Delta1212

[D34th]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1312657570' post='2773625']
His behavior in this thread has made very clear that his ability to even moderately tone down his normal, insensible personality is very limited and very shaky, even when he's trying his absolute hardest to do so.
[/quote]

Are you talking about Xiphosis or describing yourself?

[Krack]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1312647399' post='2773544']
Oh, we've tried. It would be easier for us to get an MADP bloc formed with NPO, TOP, GPA, GOD and NpO than getting a straight answer out of Fark.
[/quote]

Fine, then I'll give you a straight answer on their behalf. They don't trust you. At all. They think you're the type of alliance that would sign an MDP with TOP (and their group of anti-social friends) just to be able to take a second shot at NPO. They think every single thing that was said by your leadership prior to, during and after the Karma War was BS propaganda - that you didn't actually believe any of it; that it was just convenient things to [i]say[/i] in public.

They don't [i]dislike[/i] you.

And they certainly couldn't give a crap about anything that happened between current MK members (when they were a different alliance) and FARK, five years ago. They think you behave like a bunch of teenagers just trying to stir up crap because you're bored. They think you moralized for a year and then decided it was more fun to pick on the poor kid, so you did. They don't [i]trust[/i] you. And they don't want to be associated with you. Thinking they dislike you is the type of approach an 8 year old has towards the world: [i]They don't love me, so they must hate me.[/i]

CAVEAT: All of this was written without having spoken to a single member of FARK leadership. I don't even know who the current members of FARK's government are. So when I say I'm "answering on their behalf", I'm not. I'm answering on my own behalf and projecting my feelings on to them because we have shared similar sensibilities for a long time.


[quote]Sounds like how FARK hated PC (prior to the NEW war) for being some sort of TotalFARK! infested colony. Despite myself assuring them that there were only two ex-TF! in Poison Clan, both of which weren't even from FARK.com [/quote]

Also inaccurate. It might have been accurate four years ago, but certainly not today. If you have a problem with them (or perceive a similar problem in return) ... my advice is to go talk to them. There's nobody left in FARK (particularly government) who was there when any of these splits happened. Hell, there are barely any Greenlight 2 Farkers left and that happened two years later.

Edited August 6, 2011 by Krack

[Natan]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1312660127' post='2773665']
Are you talking about Xiphosis or describing yourself?
[/quote]

good one man

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1312660127' post='2773665']
Are you talking about Xiphosis or describing yourself?
[/quote]

I don't think Crymson is trying to "tone down" anything for this thread... I don't think I've ever seen him do that, actually. But it's nice to see you try and rehash the same joke over and over again with no regard for the actual circumstances in the thread... what's next, an Optional Defense Network joke?

[KainIIIC]

[quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1312646801' post='2773541']
Sharks do so love the scent of blood in the water. Perhaps if we give them a whiff they'll like us.
[/quote]

Shouldn't have bit yourself and others in the arm, then.

[Ryan Greenberg]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1312660467' post='2773670']
But it's nice to see you try and rehash the same joke over and over again with no regard for the actual circumstances in the thread... what's next, an Optional Defense Network joke?
[/quote]
You can't beat the classics.

Edited August 6, 2011 by Ryan Greenberg

[Striderwanabe]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1312645424' post='2773531']
If I'm not mistaken GOD took a pretty hard beating in UJW. All the crap talking about NoR all started from back then. If NoR would have tried to given me those terms I would have hated them forever too. You can probably go read their wiki about it. It's one of the most detailed ones out there. [/quote]

If you would check the DoW of GOD on NoV, you will see the mud-slinging began before those terms were issued. To be honest, as Kaiser of NoV at the time I had never heard of GOD prior to the declaration of war against us, yet they seemed to know enough about us to throw the first insult. We were treated with nothing but contempt by our opponents from Day 0, so those terms were fully justified. There is something to be said that those terms were not extraordinary given the spirit of the times, and given the fact that NoV itself had been pounded by the war (it was assaulted as the perceived weak link in the ~ coalition by somewhere around 11 alliances, similar to GOONS in the recent DH-NPO war).

And just for good measure:

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1312627042' post='2773457']
Oh hey, check it out. Xiphosis showed up but somehow missed my inquiry. Again. Clearly the question was not asked in a clear enough voice.

*ahem*

[size="6"][color="#FF0000"]XIPHOSIS: PLEASE TELL EVERYONE WHICH ALLIANCE NORDREICH BETRAYED. WE ARE HAVING TROUBLE FIGURING THAT OUT SINCE OUR ALLIES STILL SEEM TO LIKE US.

XIPHOSIS: PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR PREVIOUS CONTENTION THAT NORDREICH HAD A 'STRANGLEHOLD' ON THE BLACK TEAM. IS THIS STILL TRUE? IF SO, WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN BECAUSE WE HONESTLY HAVE NO CLUE. IF NOT, WHEN DID WE LOSE THIS 'STRANGLEHOLD'?[/color][/size]

This is the third time I've asked you to explain the thought processes (or whatever you choose to call them) that inform your little fantasy world. I expect it will be the third time you'll avoid answering. No worries, though. As long as the thread's open I'll be sure to keep asking until you give an actual response.

I must say that in the meantime your apparent refusal to answer a few very simple questions is earning us a few more friends, although I doubt that anything will draw us closer to our allies than your little stunt with Fark. Nevertheless, there are a number of your former allies (get used to that phrase) who recall your musings on Nordreich, its treachery and its 'stranglehold' on Black. (Sorry to keep using that word, but it's the one [u]you[/u] chose, after all.)

Are you afraid to look even more ridiculous than this thread has already accomplished?
[/quote]

Edited August 6, 2011 by Striderwanabe

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312660162' post='2773666']
Fine, then I'll give you a straight answer on their behalf. They don't trust you. At all. They think you're the type of alliance that would sign an MDP with TOP (and their group of anti-social friends) just to be able to take a second shot at NPO. They think every single thing that was said by your leadership prior to, during and after the Karma War was BS propaganda - that you didn't actually believe any of it; that it was just convenient things to [i]say[/i] in public.

They don't [i]dislike[/i] you.

And they certainly couldn't give a crap about anything that happened between current MK members (when they were a different alliance) and FARK, five years ago. They think you behave like a bunch of teenagers just trying to stir up crap because you're bored. They think you moralized for a year and then decided it was more fun to pick on the poor kid, so you did. They don't [i]trust[/i] you. And they don't want to be associated with you. Thinking they dislike you is the type of approach an 8 year old has towards the world: [i]They don't love me, so they must hate me.[/i]

CAVEAT: All of this was written without having spoken to a single member of FARK leadership. I don't even know who the current members of FARK's government are. So when I say I'm "answering on their behalf", I'm not. I'm answering on my own behalf and projecting my feelings on to them because we have shared similar sensibilities for a long time.




Also inaccurate. It might have been accurate four years ago, but certainly not today. If you have a problem with them (or perceive a similar problem in return) ... my advice is to go talk to them. There's nobody left in FARK (particularly government) who was there when any of these splits happened. Hell, there are barely any Greenlight 2 Farkers left and that happened two years later.
[/quote]

The word clueless comes to mind.

[Krack]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1312661931' post='2773686']
The word clueless comes to mind.
[/quote]

Oh well. You've changed my opinion.

[Unknown Smurf]

[quote name='Drai' timestamp='1312655355' post='2773599']
Having been in Hyperion gov I can all but guarantee that the other alliances would have found a way in. Just like what will happen in the scenario you are mentioning for the future. Especially when so many treaties don't specifically state non-chaining. If you think there was any realistic chance that had BLEU only countered GGA they would have isolated it to a 1-vision war then you may as well draw up any scenario you want and hope it comes true because it's probably just as likely.
[/quote]

If this tactic was only employed post declaration then I understand completely where you are coming from. Prior to the war though, I am sure something could have been arranged to take out 1V. There were plenty of alliances around that were in Q that did not like NPO/1Vs influence, and I'm sure one with a silver enough tongue could have arranged something.

Similar to this potential SF war, I think there are plenty who don't like the potential other side either. Members of MJ also have plenty of enemies, though to be fair, Xiph has more

EDIT: @CSN: What happened to Goose and A_T?

Edited August 6, 2011 by Unknown Smurf