Sephiroth Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Your wars will definitely sway those ratios in your favor in the short term. I'm interested to see what the long term brings. The Libertarian Empire can fight forever if needed, so maybe me and you will get to exchange some blows if this lasts long enough. Wouldn't that be an interesting spectacle? Although I doubt its in either sides interest to keep this war going that long, but we'll see what the future brings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Layton Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Congrats on the 12 million. I can respect casualties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 The Libertarian Empire can fight forever Let's see how long it takes sigrun to blow through her 15bil :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Yeah, back to news about stats that count. Pulisher has broken 10 million! And I am only one or two updates behind. :awesome: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 And just because this is a propaganda thread, here are some of those stats in action: This is pretty off track considering the damage ratio is equal and sra is resorting to ghosts. But hey, nice try Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 This is pretty off track considering the damage ratio is equal and sra is resorting to ghosts. But hey, nice try Aww come on, give him credit. It's a nice pic and we wouldnt expect him to generate one showing his planes destroyed on the ground. Both have surely happened many times now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walshington Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 This is pretty off track considering the damage ratio is equal and sra is resorting to ghosts. But hey, nice try Really? Let me help you out here: prop·a·gan·da ˌpräpəˈɡandə/ noun 1. derogatory information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. "he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda" synonyms: information, promotion, advertising, publicity, spin; More More help: fuss·pot ˈfəsˌpät/ noun informal a fussy person. TL;DR: We could have been behind by a million and you'd have gotten the same picture. Just enjoy the damn picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 This is pretty off track considering the damage ratio is equal and sra is resorting to ghosts. But hey, nice try Resorting to ghosts? Certainly not something Monsters, Inc. has done in the past. Certainly not something your ally CA is doing in the present. Nope! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Resorting to ghosts? Certainly not something Monsters, Inc. has done in the past. Certainly not something your ally CA is doing in the present. Nope! I never thought 'resorting to ghosts' in and of itself is all that objectionable, but that said I do want to clarify a couple of points of fact here. A significant number of the actively warring SRA nations have joined the AA after this started. It's my understanding most of them are 'mercenaries' on loan from certain other alliances. Just from the 22nd to the 23rd alone SRA absorbed new nations amounting to more NS than CA had at the start. Are those ghosts? It seems quite likely that most or all are. It's no big deal but it's what's happening, and it doesnt even really bother me anymore - I've gotten used to the idea that my opponents will usually 'cheat' in any way they can and I will even do a little back at them at times. Being that I care so little about them doing it I really dont have any reason to deny doing it myself either - except that to the best of my knowledge we have no ghosts on the AA, and I am in a position to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 (edited) I never thought 'resorting to ghosts' in and of itself is all that objectionable On this point we both agree. Are those ghosts? It seems quite likely that most or all are. It's no big deal but it's what's happening, and it doesnt even really bother me anymore - I've gotten used to the idea that my opponents will usually 'cheat' in any way they can and I will even do a little back at them at times. On this point - that your opponents are "cheat[ing]" - we don't, especially if, as you acknowledged, the practice in question is not objectionable. Being that I care so little about them doing it I really dont have any reason to deny doing it myself either - except that to the best of my knowledge we have no ghosts on the AA, and I am in a position to know. If both you and L_H are going to presume the "mercenaries" on SRA's AA are "ghosts", I'm sure you can understand how we may interpret this mercenary as also being a ghost. Edited June 23, 2015 by SirWilliam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 On this point - that your opponents are "cheat[ing]" - we don't, especially if, as you acknowledged, the practice in question is not objectionable. If both you and L_H are going to presume the "mercenaries" on SRA's AA are "ghosts", I'm sure you can understand how we may interpret this mercenary as also being a ghost. I do think it's useful to keep the distinction, but you are of course always free to disagree. Also I think if you read what I said I actually did not call any of SRAs adds ghosts. Given the substantial number of them and information I have from presumptively reliable sources, it seems very likely that many are, but I cant go beyond that hunch without investigating individual cases. Which just is not all that interesting to me, given how meh I am about the issue to begin with. On the other hand I did investigate ub3rdude as I investigate every applicant. His forum mask at his prior alliance has been revoked, and the notion that they encouraged or condoned his move and intend to welcome him back after seems pretty wildly improbable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Also I think if you read what I said I actually did not call any of SRAs adds ghosts. Did I say you "said" they were? If you read what I said I actually stated you "presume[d]", which is factually accurate given the following: Are those ghosts? It seems quite likely that most or all are. Semantics are a !@#$%*, I had hoped we were intelligent enough to avoid going there. Oh wells. On the other hand I did investigate ub3rdude as I investigate every applicant. His forum mask at his prior alliance has been revoked, and the notion that they encouraged or condoned his move and intend to welcome him back after seems pretty wildly improbable. Can you verify that SRA hasn't done the same, that the nations' prior forum masks haven't been revoked, and that they will all be welcomed back when war is over? In other words, can you verify that SRA's "ghosts" are any different than yours?Until such time as you can, my original point - that L_H is critical of something Monsters, Inc. and CA has done - remains. :)(For the record, I've never stated NoR encouraged or condoned your newest member's actions as that's irrelevant to what constitutes wartime ghosting. For that matter I see no reason why he wouldn't be welcomed back since he committed no offense or faux pas while on NoR's AA.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 I'm sure there are some on the SRA AA for no other reason than despising MI. It's why I'm there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Sra holds the gums,money and lawyers doctrain. As I've said before to sigrun and hitchcock in the last few days. Read the wiki. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Sra holds the gums,money and lawyers doctrain. As I've said before to sigrun and hitchcock in the last few days. Read the wiki. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOLO SWAG Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 SRA is an illuminati puppet state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 All hail the doom/kashmir/sra Illuminati Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 All hail the doom/kashmir/sra Illuminati Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 (edited) Did I say you "said" they were? If you read what I said I actually stated you "presume[d]", which is factually accurate given the following: Semantics are a !@#$%*, I had hoped we were intelligent enough to avoid going there. Oh wells. Can you verify that SRA hasn't done the same, that the nations' prior forum masks haven't been revoked, and that they will all be welcomed back when war is over? In other words, can you verify that SRA's "ghosts" are any different than yours? Until such time as you can, my original point - that L_H is critical of something Monsters, Inc. and CA has done - remains. :) (For the record, I've never stated NoR encouraged or condoned your newest member's actions as that's irrelevant to what constitutes wartime ghosting. For that matter I see no reason why he wouldn't be welcomed back since he committed no offense or faux pas while on NoR's AA.) The semantic point I was making is valid, and I dont want to flog a dead horse, but you still do not quite seem to get it. I never said I know for a fact any of them are ghosts. I said given the sheer numbers, and other information given to me, it seems likely many are. And no, this is still not something CA has done. CA has exactly ONE add, and the specifics of that one are known. He's no ghost. NoR's encouragement or at least tolerance is far from irrelevant to the question of wartime ghosting. A wartime ghost is someone that fights under one banner while continuing to maintain membership in another, ostensibly uninvolved, alliance. Someone who resigns from their alliance and joins the new one properly is not a 'ghost' but a 'member'. Edited June 23, 2015 by Sigrun Vapneir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 The semantic point I was making is valid, and I dont want to flog a dead horse, but you still do not quite seem to get it. I never said I know for a fact any of them are ghosts. I said given the sheer numbers, and other information given to me, it seems likely many are. And no, this is still not something CA has done. CA has exactly ONE add, and the specifics of that one are known. He's no ghost. NoR's encouragement or at least tolerance is far from irrelevant to the question of wartime ghosting. A wartime ghost is someone that fights under one banner while continuing to maintain membership in another, ostensibly uninvolved, alliance. Someone who resigns from their alliance and joins the new one properly is not a 'ghost' but a 'member'. Did you not even read what you quoted? I literally refuted your first and second points (I never said what you said I said you said, but you did very much imply as much, there's no indication SRA's "adds" are any less members and any more "ghosts" than yours, etc etc etc).And no, that's not what wartime ghosting inherently entails (at least in the context it's been used). Membership in the original alliance is sometimes retained but there's no greater understanding amongst the masses that it's required.Must we continue to go in circles? Was this a propaganda thread once upon a time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Layton Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 LH says "resorting to ghosts" as if it's a bad thing but was himself requesting ghosts to enter his alliance. I was one of those ghosts. Sigrun says ghosting in a warring alliance "isn't objectionable", but considers it a form of cheating. Therefore, Sigrun believes cheating is not objectionable. Both of you can keep barking all you'd like. It's not going to help your cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 As a husband of three, I also don't believe cheating is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solarchos Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 If both you and L_H are going to presume the "mercenaries" on SRA's AA are "ghosts", I'm sure you can understand how we may interpret this mercenary as also being a ghost. Looking at Uberlandia's activity record, I'd say he fits the bill of a "Private Military Contractor" country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 [B]LH says "resorting to ghosts" as if it's a bad thing but was himself requesting ghosts to enter his alliance[/b]. I was one of those ghosts. Sigrun says ghosting in a warring alliance "isn't objectionable", but considers it a form of cheating. Therefore, Sigrun believes cheating is not objectionable. Both of you can keep barking all you'd like. It's not going to help your cause. I keep thinking this every time they say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 [B]LH says "resorting to ghosts" as if it's a bad thing but was himself requesting ghosts to enter his alliance[/b]. I was one of those ghosts. Sigrun says ghosting in a warring alliance "isn't objectionable", but considers it a form of cheating. Therefore, Sigrun believes cheating is not objectionable. Both of you can keep barking all you'd like. It's not going to help your cause. I keep thinking this every time they say it. 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.