Williambonney Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 Are we really quibbling over what white peace is now :| This is cn. People can even argue about the shades of white here. :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 This is cn. People can even argue about the shades of white here. :P Are we talking Irish white or Scandinavian white? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williambonney Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 Are we talking Irish white or Scandinavian white? That's up to the "mob" really, me I'd go with AliceBlue. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoppistan Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Are we talking Irish white or Scandinavian white? That's up to the "mob" really, me I'd go with AliceBlue. :) Your wobbling relativism disgusts me. There's only one kind of white. It's the white kind. No other. If there is any sort of noun, verb, adverb, or adjective attempting to appropriate whiteness by proximity, implication, or suggested relation to the word white, it is a farce of imitation, as they are only those objects as they are, and the whiteness they so attempt to associate themselves with is its own catogory of color. Period. Edited January 11, 2015 by Kzoppistan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 Your wobbling relativism disgusts me. There's only one kind of white. It's the white kind. No other. If there is any sort of noun, verb, adverb, or adjective attempting to appropriate whiteness by proximity, implication, or suggested relation to the word white, it is a farce of imitation, as they are only those objects as they are, and the whiteness they so attempt to associate themselves with is its own catogory of color. Period. Well played, well played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoppistan Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Well played, well played. Thank you. I like your avatar. As for the dispute in question, evey time I've had to sign non-victory papers, I generally have prefered to refer to it as "...being forced from the field." I find the martial tone helps ease the pain of, y'know, losing. That said, congrats to the participants on peace again. Edited January 11, 2015 by Kzoppistan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 Your wobbling relativism disgusts me. There's only one kind of white. It's the white kind. No other. If there is any sort of noun, verb, adverb, or adjective attempting to appropriate whiteness by proximity, implication, or suggested relation to the word white, it is a farce of imitation, as they are only those objects as they are, and the whiteness they so attempt to associate themselves with is its own catogory of color. Period. Several of my citizens are expressing an interest over suing you for colorism, good sir. :ehm: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted January 11, 2015 Report Share Posted January 11, 2015 Gray peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Congratulations Valhalla! You earned it. Also hint: I needed only the terms on NPO to perpetuate my grudge with Polar. I have no grudge whatsoever with the rest of XX. The "friends on both sides" argument is really cute. 2 must be the magic number to sit out. You are aware of the history of who was really pushing for those terms, correct? Your grudge may be a little misplaced. Perhaps you do not understand that you reap what you sow. Seems to be a common problem in Polaris. Which is hilarious for an alliance sporting so damn many pseudo-moralists. You are perpetuating a cycle, then, and becoming what you despise. There is quite a bit of hypocrisy in this statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 You are aware of the history of who was really pushing for those terms, correct? Your grudge may be a little misplaced. You are perpetuating a cycle, then, and becoming what you despise. There is quite a bit of hypocrisy in this statement. Of course I am. I even promised that I would in the thread announcing NPOs terms. I am okay with all of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Of course I am. I even promised that I would in the thread announcing NPOs terms. I am okay with all of this. Your alliance has six active wars, and a negative damage ratio against us. If this grudge is so profound, why is there a distinct lack of urgency? At this point, you're better off simply joining NPO. Your grudge is misplaced, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Your alliance has six active wars, and a negative damage ratio against us. If this grudge is so profound, why is there a distinct lack of urgency? At this point, you're better off simply joining NPO. Your grudge is misplaced, though. I don't think Rush's words reflect TLR's stance, but his own. This is shown by the fact that TLR never raised any of the concerns he did during the entirety of the peace process with Aftermath (as far as I'm aware anyway). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Your alliance has six active wars, and a negative damage ratio against us. If this grudge is so profound, why is there a distinct lack of urgency? At this point, you're better off simply joining NPO. Your grudge is misplaced, though. The grudge is mine. Also, lets be honest... 95% of that damage ratio is taking place between 0 and 30K... which makes it almost negligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Do we even have any nations above 30k left? Haha... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jgoods45 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't think Rush's words reflect TLR's stance, but his own. This is shown by the fact that TLR never raised any of the concerns he did during the entirety of the peace process with Aftermath (as far as I'm aware anyway). Pretty much this. Was a kinda "meh, whatever" kinda deal to me anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Pretty much this. Was a kinda "meh, whatever" kinda deal to me anyways. It was that way for most of us at war with Aftermath. It just was how the cards fell in this war, there wasn't real animosity there... Other than the fact I didn't get stomped like usual! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daimos Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Personally, I am against reps but I understand it is sometimes necessary. This is not one them and am glad it ended the way it did. Congratulations to all involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurthwaite Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Signed for The Last Remnants, Kestral, Triumvir Jgoods45, Triumvir Hombre de Murcielago, TriumvirRushSykes, Minister of Foreign Affairs I don't think Rush's words reflect TLR's stance, but his own. This is shown by the fact that TLR never raised any of the concerns he did during the entirety of the peace process with Aftermath (as far as I'm aware anyway). OP says otherwise. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 OP says otherwise. Just saying. How exactly does my sig being on this contradict what James said? TLR raised no concerns during the peace talks or whatever it is they were. My sig being on this document does not change that one iota. What a silly silly post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 OP says otherwise. Just saying. One man in a multiperson gov't. You act as if what he believes holds bearing for the whole of TLR. That would be like saying my opinion, as a lowly officer in Inquisition (or even if I were say the head of Inquisition [our war department]) would hold a high level of bearing for NSO as a whole. It doesn't and your attempts to insinuate it does in Rush's case merely shows your grasping at straws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 One man in a multiperson gov't. You act as if what he believes holds bearing for the whole of TLR. That would be like saying my opinion, as a lowly officer in Inquisition (or even if I were say the head of Inquisition [our war department]) would hold a high level of bearing for NSO as a whole. It doesn't and your attempts to insinuate it does in Rush's case merely shows your grasping at straws. The funny thing is, I have no say and really had no idea my sig was on this, since I was not part of the process in any fashion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 And yet everyone says I represent Polar despite being only a common member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prodigal Moon Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 The funny thing is, I have no say and really had no idea my sig was on this, since I was not part of the process in any fashion. Now you're MoFA and you still don't represent the AA that you, you know, represent? What would it take for your words to actually mean something about your AA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Now you're MoFA and you still don't represent the AA that you, you know, represent? What would it take for your words to actually mean something about your AA? That pretty much sums it up. I have been trying to tell everyone its an almost 100% ceremonial position for the entire 4 months I have had the title. If that concept is so foreign to everyone, the fault lies with those who dont get it, not with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 That pretty much sums it up. I have been trying to tell everyone its an almost 100% ceremonial position for the entire 4 months I have had the title. If that concept is so foreign to everyone, the fault lies with those who dont get it, not with me. Considering you are one of the people who argued my opinions while Head of Econ of RIA held more weight due to my gov spot, I'm pretty amused by this stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.