Declaration from Vox Populi

[Stonewall Jaxon]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1345131913' post='3022437']
If you're going to make analogies, you need to have the relevant pieces of logic line up. In this case, we are discussing the mental inclination of felons to stick with the same behavior before and after prison. This doesn't hold true for an alliance because alliances are constantly changing personalities and inclinations. It's more apt, in this case, to compare an alliance with a corporation or a nation. [/quote]

Nobody was discussing the mental inclination of felons to stick to the same behavior. The original analogy pertained to society's treatment of formerly incarcerated felons to make it impossible for them to take advantage of their status as free men to commit the same crimes over again. Also, when you're posting alone in a thread, you can't invoke mob psychology and use terms like "the rest of us." It just seems a bit delusional.

[Starfox101]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1345087031' post='3022327']
No offense Starry, but I wouldn't classify you as an "insider"
[/quote]
True, haha. Never will be. But, the point stands. Trust me.

[quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1345089032' post='3022335']
By the time the Pacifican power structure began to crumble upon itself, it had for the most part ceded the airways completely over to the opposition. I recall there being a year-long radio silence where members of NPO were prohibited from posting on the forums so as to prevent any further degrading of their PR standing on the OWF and by the time that was lifted the PR war was already well out of their reach.

So this romanticized idea of glorious debates being put forward from around that period is misleading. Walls of text were being posted in opposition to the Hegemony but there simply was not much credible opposition defending against those stances at that point. Vox and other opposition for the most part had the keys to the city and posted without much opposition. At one point Pacifica made a desperate attempt to reclaim some of the lost grounds by having Vladimir and some other less notable Pacificans actively debating on behalf of the Hegemony. But for the most part the arguments they made were easily discredited as propaganda pieces or diluted to the point where they fell on deaf ears as rambling texts of rubbish.

The real glory days of debates and political discussion came about in 2006-2007 ...not the time period of Vox. So while many of you are enjoying the nostalgic trip to the Voxian era let's not get too ahead of ourselves in proclaiming it the golden era of discussion.
[/quote]
I guess you just remember history differently than the rest of us.

I find it funny your side continually downplays the role of Vox, while NPO's side has since only praised us. Perhaps there are some political motivators there.

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1345103044' post='3022371']
Those of us interested in another war against XX/SF--note that this desire was caused by the fact that Sparta, GOD, and RnR escaped major damage in the war previous--were going to find a CB. And because nobody is stupid enough to provide a strong CB these days, it would have been one that some people would have disagreed with. As such, what happened to be the CB used in the actual event is rather unimportant. Such are our times. Nothing would ever happen in CN anymore if we all sat around waiting for watertight CBs.

Would you have preferred that it be a "We don't think you took enough damage in the last war" CB? I suppose that could have been used also. I'm sure you get the point either way: political CBs are a thing of the past.
[/quote]
Then why lie? Show your true colors and don't play games.

There's a reason people have always seen you as a snake. Guess you haven't shed your skin yet.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345111871' post='3022385']
I guess it's a matter of perspective. I admit my "theory" is probably biased and I never said our side had the best posters (although I do think, comparatively, we are largly superior). I just think the opposition against NPO was better than the one vs MK. You're free to disagree. If the general level of political discourse was higher, as opposed to the cheap shots, half truthes, lack of logic and blattant lies those I mentionned spread, then you'd find less of a troll squad and more of a political discourse.
I'll give you it probably goes both ways but look at it from my perspective: we make an announcement (whatever it is), the opposition comes in, hinges on every word and goes 'omg ur eeveel!1!!" and you expect us to answer in a polite and intelligent manner? Come to us with some sort of response and you'll get a proper counter.
[/quote]
The thing is your comparing your entire side to a group of about 5 people. Of course you're going to think you are superior when all you do is send the troll squad out to make fun of them. When confronted with intelligent posts, you've swarmed with numbers and attempted to drown out opinions, using tired arguments such as "you take this too seriously", "you're irrelevant", etc. You sit on your high horse while everyone on the outside laughs at you. The last time I remember a situation like this, well, you know what followed. I can tell you, the opposition will only keep improving.

[quote name='Mergerberger II' timestamp='1345130913' post='3022430']
[font=arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=2]


I remember when MK took gargantuan reps from TOP. I remember when bros spied on the alliances he ran websites for. I remember the ghostbust of Kait and Hoo. I remember when they trolled Assarax. I remember the support of alliance-level tech raids. I remember the use of the same CB that started the Karma War. I remember when they accepted someone on a ZI list so that they could start a war. I remember when they declared on Pacifica without reason. I remember when they trolled a good friend of mine into deletion. I remember the support of OOC attacks. I remember the wars declared for no reason. I remember the enormous reps levied on alliances that were merely defending themselves. I remember the undying support of the recklessness of their allies. [/size][/font]

I remember when MK promised to create a brave new world, then turned around and became worse than NPO.

In what way is this world better than the one Pacifica ruled?
[/quote]
Good post.

[Mergerberger II]

[font=arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=2][quote name='potato' timestamp='1345132900' post='3022438']
I don't think I ever said we weren't at fault. As I said, I'm probably biased in saying that but I do find the current opposition to be dumber than the former one. There's a reason why people like Archon and Denial (and even myself if I may be as bold as to put myself up in that list alongside them) have pretty much left the OWF. Trolls (from both sides) are running the place and I have my hand in it since I am one of the biggest culprits around here.
What I am saying is political discourse is dead these days. But if you really want it to come back, both sides will have to work hand in hand (lol :sissies:). And I do think if it's one thing the opposition can do, it's start an intelligent discourse (see Vox to an extend). Don't let the usual dumb loudmouthes represent you, speak up if you can. Someone's got to start somewhere. And you'll see we'll respond in kind.

Schatt, you know well I am long retired and have very little interest in the affairs of this world. And you know me well enough to know that if someone is worthy of respect, he'll get it from me, regardless of sides. But you can't fault me for what my allies say. Contrary to popular beliefs, MK doesn't control what GOONS, Umbrella, TOP or ODN say. I certainly wouldn't mind if we did sometimes but the fact remains, we don't.
[/quote]
So what you are saying is that if we start up intelligent discussion, MK, GOONS, and NG will follow with more intelligent discussion? With the current status of the OWF, as well as its status for the past three years in mind, I will go ahead and disagree with you there.


[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1345144974' post='3022470']
The simple fact is that there is no other alliance that has ever had the level of power and influence that NPO had in the pre-Karma days, and there isn't likely to ever again be one during the remaining lifespan of CN. NPO was a huge alliance that possessed a large, powerful, and (mostly) very loyal group of allies. The latter quality was what allowed the NPO to act as it did. And the gradual alienation of those allies was a major factor in the NPO's eventual defeat. Whatever the case, neither MK nor any other alliance in the game has that sort of loyal sphere willing to follow them in all things. I'm sure that many find it convenient to believe that one party is responsible for all of the large-scale actions in CN that they find distasteful--your alliance, for example, blamed the occurrence of the War of the Coalition exclusively on TOP--but such is generally an insensible belief. Where this particular instance of it is concerned, MK does not wield nearly so much influence as you and others amongst MK's detractors believe. I understand that you cannot see what goes on behind the scenes in certain areas and that this naturally limits your ability to know exactly how things go down, so to speak, and this is of course the case for many others as well (Alterego amongst them). What it comes down to, as such, is whether or not you choose to believe what those who do know tell you, or if you instead choose to believe what you wish to believe regardless of what information is presented to you.

I do, of course, agree that the doctrine preached by the Karma coalition during the war of that name was not borne out in reality. This is hardly surprising, given that it was PR-based propaganda and given the nature of CN. That said, the list of alliances in the Karma coalition that did not abide by said doctrine is very long. Of course--as noted--it's always tempting to simplify such affairs down to one party in order to provide a defined focus.
[/quote]
You will be hard-pressed to find anyone in Polaris who blames the War of the Coalition exclusively on TOP. Pacifica, MCXA (later TSO), and VE all took a lovely part of that blame.

Regardless, my point stands, as the instability of MK's sphere is no reason why it could not have stopped any of the things I listed from occurring. The argument that you are making I cannot dispute with facts so I will make no attempt to. However in regards to the original argument I made in counter to kwell's post, what you have said does not change anything.[/size][/font]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1345146053' post='3022480']
Good examples, but I think if anything though they are a testament to a job well done. At least in my opinion it is the responsibility of those with power to act with it and cause wars and drama around here. Would you really prefer a benevolent hegemon, enforcing peace throughout the land, completely reasonable and fair, never prosecuting a grudge or political agenda. A true Pax Pacifica where we all grew our nations in peace and sang kumbaya? Of course not, you need someone to play the villain. Side note though, whatever happened to Assarax? Haven't heard that name in years, such a nice chap.
[/quote]
I am not going to disagree with you because again you are correct. But once again this is not the argument that I made. kwell insisted that MK did the world a service, that now there are no such thing as reps, as wars for bad reasons, as injustice. I pointed out that he was absolutely incorrect.


I am not positive but I think Assarax departed our world.

[Ogaden]

I can't tell if MK actually believe the BS their members spew on the OWF, or if they are just really good about circulating their talking points.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Ogaden

[potato]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345149093' post='3022497']
The thing is your comparing your entire side to a group of about 5 people. Of course you're going to think you are superior when all you do is send the troll squad out to make fun of them. When confronted with intelligent posts, you've swarmed with numbers and attempted to drown out opinions, using tired arguments such as "you take this too seriously", "you're irrelevant", etc. You sit on your high horse while everyone on the outside laughs at you. The last time I remember a situation like this, well, you know what followed. I can tell you, the opposition will only keep improving.
[/quote]

Those "5" people are the most vocal of our opposition: show me an intelligent post that opposed us that isn't Schatt's (yours don't count). The problem is that because those "5" people spam the !@#$ out of us, any form of political discourse -if that only exists here- will be overtaken. You, the opposition, need proficient leaders. Both in terms of words and of political knowledge. People like Roq, Xiphosis or Delta could have taken that role but they seem to have taken a step back if not faded away completely. I am sorry to tell you this but the face of the anti-hegemony crowd is a moron.

As for your prediction, one can only hope so.

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1345148625' post='3022493']
Nobody was discussing the mental inclination of felons to stick to the same behavior. The original analogy pertained to society's treatment of formerly incarcerated felons to make it impossible for them to take advantage of their status as free men to commit the same crimes over again. Also, when you're posting alone in a thread, you can't invoke mob psychology and use terms like "the rest of us." It just seems a bit delusional.
[/quote]
What? The dude was saying that we are basically felons and how we are the boogeyman and how we [b]should[/b] be repressed because otherwise we would come back with a vengeance. Thereby implying that felons have a inclination to come back with a vengeance, just like NPO would. There was no social commentary. This is stupid and you know it's stupid and you even said it doesn't hold up. It's much more apt to use nations or corporations to compare to alliance in this case.

And when I said "rest of us" I was clearly saying how most people aren't going to listen to you on this matter until you have something to back it up. I don't know why I had to explain that to you.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Jrenster

[Stonewall Jaxon]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1345153143' post='3022515']
What? The dude was saying that we are basically felons and how we are the boogeyman and how we [b]should[/b] be repressed because otherwise we would come back with a vengeance. Thereby implying that felons have a inclination to come back with a vengeance, just like NPO would. There was no social commentary. This is stupid and you know it's stupid and you even said it doesn't hold up. It's much more apt to use nations or corporations to compare to alliance in this case.

And when I said "rest of us" I was clearly saying how most people aren't going to listen to you on this matter until you have something to back it up. I don't know why I had to explain that to you.
[/quote]

Why is it you and I always seem to end up speaking a different language? It's like we can take the same English words and read something completely different. Anyway, I don't think this is worth pursuing any further in this topic, and I can tell you don't either, but I didn't make any assertion on this matter, so there's nothing that I need to prove (unless you can find some sort of hypothesis or assumption I brought forward, in which case I'd gladly explain it to you). I simply entered to correct you on your unimpressive rebuttal to the point that "everyone can agree that their past behavior influences how others should treat them in the present and future," which was made by kwell. Nobody said that NPO is the same as before, but rather that they can't be trusted with the same power again lest they become what they were before. Please, for the love of admin, read what somebody is saying instead of spinning other's posts into the points you'd like to argue.

Also, if you could kindly tell me what you think it is I said so that you can tell me what you're refuting, that'd be great because as it stands now, you're making no sense

Edited August 16, 2012 by Stonewall Jaxon

[Stonewall Jaxon]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345151307' post='3022512']
Those "5" people are the most vocal of our opposition: show me an intelligent post that opposed us that isn't Schatt's (yours don't count). The problem is that because those "5" people spam the !@#$ out of us, any form of political discourse -if that only exists here- will be overtaken. You, the opposition, need proficient leaders. Both in terms of words and of political knowledge. People like Roq, Xiphosis or Delta could have taken that role but they seem to have taken a step back if not faded away completely. I am sorry to tell you this but the face of the anti-hegemony crowd is a moron.

As for your prediction, one can only hope so.
[/quote]

1. Please don't tell me you're lamenting the drop in Roquentin's activity on the grounds that his posts were of such a great standard.

2. Show you an intelligent post? Care to define the search parameters a bit more here? Once I know what I'm looking for I'm certain I can find many examples of attempts at intelligent discourse from people who are not Schattenmann and Starfox. To say that such posts don't exist is a bit of an over exaggeration.

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1345155008' post='3022524']
Why is it you and I always seem to end up speaking a different language? It's like we can take the same English words and read something completely different. Anyway, I don't think this is worth pursuing any further in this topic, and I can tell you don't either, but I didn't make any assertion on this matter, so there's nothing that I need to prove (unless you can find some sort of hypothesis or assumption I brought forward, in which case I'd gladly explain it to you). I simply entered to correct you on your unimpressive rebuttal to the point that "everyone can agree that their past behavior influences how others should treat them in the present and future," which was made by kwell. Nobody said that NPO is the same as before, but rather that they can't be trusted with the same power again lest they become what they were before. Please, for the love of admin, read what somebody is saying instead of spinning other's posts into the points you'd like to argue.

Also, if you could kindly tell me what you think it is I said so that you can tell me what you're refuting, that'd be great because as it stands now, you're making no sense
[/quote]
Uh, no, this is actually what he said:

[quote]Never trust a convicted felon. They may pay their dues, but their past should never be forgotten. We may forgive, and we may work together, but your past has shown us what you are capable of. Pacifica may not be in her prime, but she is hungry for vengeance. She is an aging beauty queen turned cougar by time. The men she lured in see her as the desperate whore she really is; she will always sell out to the highest bidder. [/quote]

He said that we should never be trusted because of our past and that we are hungry for vengeance because we are felons. It's as simple as that. I'm not going into anything about your dumb social commentary about "how society treats felons". I'm discussing his bad analogy on our current behavior. If you read all of my posts, you will see that I have been talking about this single point that he made about how everyone [b]should[/b] treat us because he thinks something is categorically true based off a terrible analogy (that we're untrustworthy because we're out for vengeance because we're felons).

And this is what I'm talking about:
[quote]The analogy of NPO to a felon might not hold up, but the idea that Pacifica exists today on a probationary status definitely does. You were released from MK's custody on good behavior, and now as long as you toe the line, you won't get rolled again. It's pretty straightforward really.[/quote]

This implication that we changed our ways to appease MK is hilariously false, considering how we've even denied a treaty with them before. And even more hilariously false when looking at Brehon's stance posted at the beginning of the war. And even more false considering if you were slightly aware of a few incidents that we ran into with DH (MK and Umbrella) during the last war. Oh yeah, we're definitely "toeing the line".

Hint: The reason you think we're talking in different languages is because you're not actually reading my posts. And if you are, you're not reading them within any context whatsoever.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Jrenster

[D34th]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345151307' post='3022512']
Those "5" people are the most vocal of our opposition: show me an intelligent post that opposed us that isn't Schatt's (yours don't count). The problem is that because those "5" people spam the !@#$ out of us, any form of political discourse -if that only exists here- will be overtaken. You, the opposition, need proficient leaders. Both in terms of words and of political knowledge. People like Roq, Xiphosis or Delta could have taken that role but they seem to have taken a step back if not faded away completely. I am sorry to tell you this but the face of the anti-hegemony crowd is a moron.

As for your prediction, one can only hope so.
[/quote]

Example of MK lunacy: They expended the last year attacking both Roq and Xiphosis characters in every post they made and on irc and now complain they faded away.

Edited August 16, 2012 by D34th

[SirWilliam]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1345131755' post='3022434']
Plus a 1.5-page diversion on the topic of GOONS persecution complex after people started reacting to GOONS own goal of making people hate them.
[/quote]

No, no feelings of persecution here (that would imply the infliction of fear, pain, etc). Obsession though, absolutely. You remember how you started a thread about Vox Populi which was diverted 3 pages in with talk, by non-Goons, about GOONS and our Mercy Board? Remember how treaty announcements, peace agreements, etc all often inevitably deviate to discussion about GOONS and our Mercy Board? That would be obsession.

[In context I did earlier refer to us as the bogeyman, a term which I don't think some *cough*Starfox101*cough* quite got. Simply put we're an imaginary evil (derision of the Mercy Board is constant but as both Merrie Melodies and D34th illustrated foreign understanding of it is often substantially lacking). I won't go into much more detail here - it's perhaps more fitting for a blog entry - but it certainly speaks volumes about others' fixations.]

Now on to the equally factually-deficient second half of the quote above, since I don't take you for the dense type I'll assume you're simply willfully misrepresenting details here. I'm not sure what about GOONS, other than glaring misconceptions you and others hold, leads you to believe that our goal is to make people hate us. If in reference to the Mercy Board as I'm sure you're aware its intended purpose is actually mutual entertainment. I won't deny that our actions, both those previously mentioned and others, often result in hate, but that doesn't mean that's our goal any more than it's yours (after all, do your actions not often result in the same?)

Edited August 16, 2012 by SirWilliam

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1345155973' post='3022532']
Example of MK lunacy: Their expended the last year attacking both Roq and Xiphosis characters in every post they made and on irc and now complain they faded away.
[/quote]

That's by design. Defamation is the only tool of the toothless bullies. Only one they've ever had, to be honest.

[potato]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1345155973' post='3022532']
Example of MK lunacy: Their expended the last year attacking both Roq and Xiphosis characters in every post they made and on irc and now complain they faded away.
[/quote]

They? I speak for MK now? Sweet. I hope that means I can make announcements again.


[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1345155238' post='3022526']
1. Please don't tell me you're lamenting the drop in Roquentin's activity on the grounds that his posts were of such a great standard.

2. Show you an intelligent post? Care to define the search parameters a bit more here? Once I know what I'm looking for I'm certain I can find many examples of attempts at intelligent discourse from people who are not Schattenmann and Starfox. To say that such posts don't exist is a bit of an over exaggeration.
[/quote]

1. No, that's not what I said. I think Roq's recent phase wasn't his brightest moment but he has proven in the past he had what it takes to make a great leader.
2. You show me an intelligent and we can discuss it. I excluded Schatt because we both know he's being a contrarian for the sake of it and Starfox because, tbh, it's easy to say "look what an intelligent post of mine!" before getting either personnal or dirty.

Edited August 16, 2012 by potato

[Starfox101]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345151307' post='3022512']
Those "5" people are the most vocal of our opposition: show me an intelligent post that opposed us that isn't Schatt's (yours don't count). The problem is that because those "5" people spam the !@#$ out of us, any form of political discourse -if that only exists here- will be overtaken. You, the opposition, need proficient leaders. Both in terms of words and of political knowledge. People like Roq, Xiphosis or Delta could have taken that role but they seem to have taken a step back if not faded away completely. I am sorry to tell you this but the face of the anti-hegemony crowd is a moron.

As for your prediction, one can only hope so.
[/quote]
Roquentin has not faded. He was simply trolled to oblivion by you guys, and as a result tends to stick around in backchannels. You know, those people you claim are intelligent that you will debate if they do? Yeah, well, he tried and got exactly what I said happens. I'm not inclined to believe you guys have it in you to really take things serious anymore. There are two crowds, not hegemony and the other side, but the lulz crowd, and the rest of us. Xiphosis has also been the victim of a well played character assassination and as a result has faded to the background as well.

Anyway, there is no face of the anti-Hegemony crowd right now. There are just a few members. The leadership spot is up for grabs, as nobody with the influence, or desire, has stepped up. It tends to happen like that. Outright opposition to the ruling powers has consequences and they are better off biding their time. Which, they are. You really can't expect everything to continue like this. You are on the edge of a cliff, all it takes is a push. History repeats itself and it surely will again.

Also, to call me the opposition is wrong. I strongly consider The Combine to be independent. We have no set enemies, and we will judge as we see fit. We belong to no side. How we land when the next war comes is all up to our membership, and nothing else. I personally, will side with the side willing to play politics, rather than have laughs at the expense of others. Does that sound like you?

Edited August 16, 2012 by Starfox101

[potato]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345156716' post='3022539']
Also, to call me the opposition is wrong. I strongly consider The Combine to be independent. We have no set enemies, and we will judge as we see fit. We belong to no side. How we land when the next war comes is all up to our membership, and nothing else. I personally, will side with the side willing to play politics, rather than have laughs at the expense of others. Does that sound like you?
[/quote]

I ditched the first and second part because I feel I've answered that already. I guess we're just going to agree to disagree and go on our merry ways.

As for your last part, apologizes for putting you into that group. However, who says both playing politics and having laughs at the expense of others are mutually exclusive? Also, does this sound like the other side?

[Stonewall Jaxon]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345156439' post='3022537']
1. No, that's not what I said. I think Roq's recent phase wasn't his brightest moment but he has proven in the past he had what it takes to make a great leader.
2. You show me an intelligent and we can discuss it. I excluded Schatt because we both know he's being a contrarian for the sake of it and Starfox because, tbh, it's easy to say "look what an intelligent post of mine!" before getting either personnal or dirty.
[/quote]

1. I can see that; I know of him primarily as his recent persona, so I never really encountered a Roquentin capable of leading people. Perhaps it's that his management and analytical skills are perfect for leading the oppression but he lacks the power of persuasion to be the revolutionary?
2. I'm still wondering what kind of post you're looking for. So far this thread hasn't gone so badly for either side. Would the post have to be in the Schattenmann style- a long OP detailing an elaborately well thought-out "gotcha," or as he has termed it, ~The Callout~? I'll be the first to admit that is a special skill of his that really can't be found anywhere else but maybe a Doitzel post. Is the definition of "intelligent" that the wording has to have adequate diction, that the point contain historical examples and conform to proper structure depending on the proper way one should make such a point, or simply be something above a simple, vitriolic and nonsensical insult? To me, an intelligent post for this public arena does not necessarily have to be a masterpiece; all I expect is civility. If a post makes any type of point, good or bad, with honest intent of discourse rather than an attempt to insult or debase someone else in the forum, then it's acceptable to me.

As a sidenote, the writer in me tells me that the only truly talented poster these days is jerdge. His posts should be the model for all of ours, though admittedly his GPA membership allows him to post without the partisanship the rest of us often require.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Stonewall Jaxon

[Owned-You]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345149093' post='3022497']
I find it funny your side continually downplays the role of Vox, while NPO's side has since only praised us. Perhaps there are some political motivators there.
[/quote]
Perhaps if you stopped viewing my posts in such narrow terms you would realize my post wasn't motivated by politics at all. I mean what sense is there in trying to score points against an organization that has been disbanded for years now? Obviously, there isn't any.

I was simply presenting my version of events as I saw them from the neutral shores of NV, nothing more and nothing less.

[kwell]

[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1345155008' post='3022524']
Why is it you and I always seem to end up speaking a different language? It's like we can take the same English words and read something completely different. Anyway, I don't think this is worth pursuing any further in this topic, and I can tell you don't either, but I didn't make any assertion on this matter, so there's nothing that I need to prove (unless you can find some sort of hypothesis or assumption I brought forward, in which case I'd gladly explain it to you). I simply entered to correct you on your unimpressive rebuttal to the point that "everyone can agree that their past behavior influences how others should treat them in the present and future," which was made by kwell. Nobody said that NPO is the same as before, but rather that they can't be trusted with the same power again lest they become what they were before. Please, for the love of admin, read what somebody is saying instead of spinning other's posts into the points you'd like to argue.

Also, if you could kindly tell me what you think it is I said so that you can tell me what you're refuting, that'd be great because as it stands now, you're making no sense
[/quote]

My response was regarding Schat man's opening commentary and implication about the current global setting and advocating that others take a stand regarding MK and NPO. I look forward to this. NPO is a recently released prisoner on probation who has made clear where she stands when it comes to MK. The community still remembers the crimes of NPO's past and, as in real life, they can't trust her. She is a mistress who will sell to the highest bidder, just ask NpO.

NPO's membership had the freedom to choose which alliance to be in if they disagreed with policies put forth by NPO. Their non-action implies that they understood and supported their leaders action. Was NPO's membership supportive of NPO's actions? Not all of them; the silent minority stood by their leaders as policies were put forth such as the Modavi doctrine and eternal warfare with FAN. These policies were carried out by the membership of NPO. NPO's membership was just as guilty as those writing their policies.

What about those who joined NPO after Karma? Those individuals do not deserve the probationary period that is NPO's present. However, these members have the information available to them about the history of NPO. They can easily seek the information out. I do feel bad for them, but ignorance isn't an excuse.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345149093' post='3022497']
I find it funny your side continually downplays the role of Vox, while NPO's side has since only praised us. Perhaps there are some political motivators there.
[/quote]

Some on NPO's side give you credit. Whatever the case, I find it funny that the old Vox types react so strongly to allegations that their efforts weren't so significant. For many of them, yourself included, Vox was, in large part, about gaining recognition and relevance. Suggesting that Vox wasn't very relevant tends to provoke long-winded, impassioned protestations to the contrary.

[quote]
Then why lie? Show your true colors and don't play games.

There's a reason people have always seen you as a snake. Guess you haven't shed your skin yet.[/quote]

I feel like I'm lowering myself by even responding to you, truth be told. But I'll bite, because it'll allow me to make a point about what you're trying to do here, so here goes. First off, you know as well as I that this makes no sense at all unless you're implying that I was responsible for the entire war; indeed, it makes even less sense in light of the fact that you're accusing me of initially lying when you haven't a clue what I've said about the war's purpose all along (hint: I've always been very open about it). This brings me to my main point: you've been away for a long period, you don't know what has gone on, and the statements you're making in this thread exist for the sole purpose of being contrary and provocative. This is very similar to how Schattenman acts in his quest for attention: find something to argue about, take a contrary position. You've openly said that you don't know what went on when you were gone; you're just latching onto whatever random tidbits you can. For example, this:

[quote=Starfox101]Xiphosis has also been the victim of a well played character assassination and as a result has faded to the background as well. [/quote]

That came from a few bits of dialogue that were uttered in Anarchy Inc's IRC channel:

[quote]
[21:04] <Starfox101> I must have missed the period that made everyone hate Xiphosis lol
[21:05] <Xiphosis[GOD]> Starfox101: A well run character assassination campaign is a hell of a thing bud.
[/quote]

That was the entirety of the exchange. I doubt you even believe it. You certainly don't know if it's true or not, nor what actually happened. You most certainly not done any research on the matter, nor, probably, on what happened while you were gone (though I think you'll lie and say that's wrong).

If you're just trying to establish heated discourse, then good for you (though I doubt that's the case, and it seems silly anyway). But let's not pretend that your words have any substance.

Thus ends my time wasted upon Starfox101.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Crymson

[Starfox101]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1345157026' post='3022543']
I ditched the first and second part because I feel I've answered that already. I guess we're just going to agree to disagree and go on our merry ways.

As for your last part, apologizes for putting you into that group. However, who says both playing politics and having laughs at the expense of others are mutually exclusive? Also, does this sound like the other side?
[/quote]
Out of the available choices, yes it does.

[quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1345161865' post='3022576']
Perhaps if you stopped viewing my posts in such narrow terms you would realize my post wasn't motivated by politics at all. I mean what sense is there in trying to score points against an organization that has been disbanded for years now? Obviously, there isn't any.

I was simply presenting my version of events as I saw them from the neutral shores of NV, nothing more and nothing less.
[/quote]
Suspended, not disbanded. Remember that.

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1345168641' post='3022620']
Some on NPO's side give you credit. Whatever the case, I find it funny that the old Vox types react so strongly to allegations that their efforts weren't so significant. For many of them, yourself included, Vox was, in large part, about gaining recognition and relevance. Suggesting that Vox wasn't very relevant tends to provoke long-winded, impassioned protestations to the contrary.

I feel like I'm lowering myself by even responding to you, truth be told. But I'll bite, because it'll allow me to make a point about what you're trying to do here. You know as well as I that this makes no sense at all unless you're implying that I was responsible for the entire war; indeed, it makes even less sense in light of the fact that you're accusing me of initially lying when you haven't a clue what I've said about the war's purpose all along (hint: I've always been very open about it). This brings me to my next point: you've been away for a long period, you don't know what has gone on, and the statements you're making in this thread exist for the sole purpose of being contrary and provocative. This is very similar to how Schattenman acts in his quest for attention: find something to argue about, take a contrary position. You've openly said that you don't know what went on when you're gone, so you're just latching onto whatever random tidbits you can. For example, this:

You got this entirely from a few lines of dialogue in Anarchy Inc's IRC channel:



I doubt you even believe it. Whatever the case may be, you don't know if it's true or not; you haven't done any research on the matter (though I think you'll lie and say that's wrong).

If you're just trying to establish heated discourse, then good for you (though it seems silly, and attention is almost certainly your aim). But let's not pretend that your words have any substance.

Thus ends my time wasted upon Starfox101.
[/quote]
Recognition and relevance? Yes, because I was never recognized before Vox. You're right! Relevance, oh you're right. I left for a year, came back for like two months, and left for another year. When I came back, I joined an alliance with 1 mil NS. Yep, I've always sought power and relevance. You got me. Leave it to Crymson to completely make up false facts. That you think this is attention whoring is completely dodging the point. You and your crew have admittedly made up a CB to stomp a bloc. Actions like that always have a reaction. I will leave it at that and guarantee it.

Anyway, I'll trust my old friend Xiphosis. Pulling logs of a casual conversation doesn't prove anything. If I was going for attention, it would be on a larger scale than talking to you, Crymson. But don't worry, I'll be there to call you out when you act like a jerk, every time.

This entire post just proves my entire point about your side. You brush everything off as attention whoring, and claim to have lowered yourself by responding to me. Hey, you can't get any lower than ground zero. You've got nowhere to go but up.

[Owned-You]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345170480' post='3022634']
Suspended, not disbanded. Remember that.


Recognition and relevance? Yes, because I was never recognized before Vox. You're right! Relevance, oh you're right. I left for a year, came back for like two months, and left for another year. When I came back, I joined an alliance with 1 mil NS. Yep, I've always sought power and relevance. You got me. Leave it to Crymson to completely make up false facts. That you think this is attention whoring is completely dodging the point. You and your crew have admittedly made up a CB to stomp a bloc. Actions like that always have a reaction. I will leave it at that and guarantee it.

Anyway, I'll trust my old friend Xiphosis. Pulling logs of a casual conversation doesn't prove anything. If I was going for attention, it would be on a larger scale than talking to you, Crymson. But don't worry, I'll be there to call you out when you act like a jerk, every time.

This entire post just proves my entire point about your side. You brush everything off as attention whoring, and claim to have lowered yourself by responding to me. Hey, you can't get any lower than ground zero. You've got nowhere to go but up.
[/quote]
All of this flamboyance and hostility on your part is unnecessary. Your post is mainly chest beating and overreactions to valid criticisms. Obviously you have fundamental disagreements with our "side" and that is fine.

If you want to debate them you'll have to do a better job of framing your arguments then what you've done so far.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Owned-You

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Starfox101' timestamp='1345170480' post='3022634']
Anyway, I'll trust my old friend Xiphosis. Pulling logs of a casual conversation doesn't prove anything. If I was going for attention, it would be on a larger scale than talking to you, Crymson. But don't worry, I'll be there to call you out when you act like a jerk, every time.

This entire post just proves my entire point about your side. You brush everything off as attention whoring, and claim to have lowered yourself by responding to me. Hey, you can't get any lower than ground zero. You've got nowhere to go but up.
[/quote]
Yeah sorry bro, the one who did the most damage to xiphosis' character was xiphosis.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1345156063' post='3022533']
No, no feelings of persecution her...
[/quote]
Actually, I noticed my error and edited my post, but it looks like I missed that one sentence.

[Tasuki]

[quote name='kwell' timestamp='1345161981' post='3022577']
My response was regarding Schat man's opening commentary and implication about the current global setting and advocating that others take a stand regarding MK and NPO. I look forward to this. NPO is a recently released prisoner on probation who has made clear where she stands when it comes to MK. The community still remembers the crimes of NPO's past and, as in real life, they can't trust her. She is a mistress who will sell to the highest bidder, just ask NpO.

NPO's membership had the freedom to choose which alliance to be in if they disagreed with policies put forth by NPO. Their non-action implies that they understood and supported their leaders action. Was NPO's membership supportive of NPO's actions? Not all of them; the silent minority stood by their leaders as policies were put forth such as the Modavi doctrine and eternal warfare with FAN. These policies were carried out by the membership of NPO. NPO's membership was just as guilty as those writing their policies.

What about those who joined NPO after Karma? Those individuals do not deserve the probationary period that is NPO's present. However, these members have the information available to them about the history of NPO. They can easily seek the information out. I do feel bad for them, but ignorance isn't an excuse.
[/quote]

Thank you for enlightening me about the past crimes of Pacifica. I will submit my resignation soon. Do you guys accept lower-tier nations?

[kwell]

[quote name='Tasuki' timestamp='1345180436' post='3022697']
Thank you for enlightening me about the past crimes of Pacifica. I will submit my resignation soon. Do you guys accept lower-tier nations?
[/quote]

Depends, will you whore yourself out every ten days? 3 mil for 100 tech is the standard rate and is expected in a timely manner. Failure to do so may result in a dismissal of your application.