Tygaland Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) Your sarcasm highlights your lack of understanding proper scientific analysis of reality. Scientists, by nature, are skeptical and seek to test and poke holes in currently held theories rather than vacuously fobbing off criticism with ad hominem and empty clichés. You, sir, are no scientist. You are a sycophant. By howling down any criticism of your dearly held theories you are attempting to prevent scientific analysis of "reality". Edited March 4, 2009 by Tygaland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Fortunately for Vox, they have you to gather support for their movement whenever their own efforts fail... I love you alden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Scientists, by nature, are skeptical and seek to test and poke holes in currently held theories rather than vacuously fobbing off criticism with ad hominem and empty clichés.You, sir, are no scientist. You are a sycophant. By howling down any criticism of your dearly held theories you are attempting to prevent scientific analysis of "reality". But, but... scientific materialism and methodological materialism are interchangable dysphemisms for methodological naturalism... wait, what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 They have a certain relevance in the court of public opinion, although the relevance of PO is limited. You have learned nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 The next war can happen without The Continuum breaking up. It's entirely possible it acts as a NAP bloc between signatories as non-tC alliances are used to attack rivals within tC as proxies. The public communications of tC alliances make it clear to anyone with experience with signals that tensions are high and conflict is imminent. Not immediate, but imminent. If you have to ask how that conclusion can be drawn, then you'll never understand the explanation. But the fact that there are so many people talking about tC splitting up leads nearly everyone to overlook the possibility that the opposing factions might find it in their mutual best interests to preserve tC, even though they are all but at war with each other. I'm not criticizing the alliances in The Continuum, and they're free to protest their togetherness all they want, but they'll have to do more than just that to demonstrate an actual condition of unity and amicability between all members of that bloc. If there was genuine harmony in tC, their public comments would be much different than they are now. Like I said, if you have to ask how that conclusion can be drawn, then you'll never understand the explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandrivia_2 Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Schatt, before doing these, did you consider that all the poking around your alliance does is counter-productive to your alliance's stated long-term goals? A good read nevertheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Schatt, before doing these, did you consider that all the poking around your alliance does is counter-productive to your alliance's stated long-term goals?A good read nevertheless. Is there any argument against our activities other than "you're ruining everything!" The lot of you can't make up your minds whether we're sabotaging every unhatched plan in the egg or if we're all that keeps you from falling into a permanent coma of boredom. We bring things to public for discussion because there are more than 50 elite leaders playing this game. Our revelations are for your benefit, not ours. You all say "private channels ftw" and this is our responce. Public channels ftw, *****es! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 We bring things to public for discussion because there are more than 50 elite leaders playing this game. Our revelations are for your benefit, not ours Why are you doing things that aren't for your benefit again? I mean it isn't like you're up against a well established powerful group of enemies or anything... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anu Drake Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Count da Silva: This global tyrant hegemonistic* dictator requests that you not play with Vox members anymore. *not a real word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unko Kalaikz Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Yes sir right away sir :jihad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sanders Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Doh. I could have sworn he was in leadership. Meh. Thats because he was MoD at the time of his little incident with Valhalla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Taking and revealing screenshots is not equivalent to relevance, that's just journalism. And journalists are irrelevant too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Taking and revealing screenshots is not equivalent to relevance, that's just journalism. I was referring to the actual content of the screen shots (didn't know I had to be that brutally blunt with you) where Vox and Sponge are mentioned many times and in particular when one person says no to underestimate them. That hardly sounds like something you'd say about someone/something that is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) Taking and revealing screenshots is not equivalent to relevance, that's just journalism. Why does it being journalism make it irrelevant? OOC: I can think of several examples of mere "journalism" having a very significant impact, most notably in the Nixon era. Vox's goal at least from my analysis of it isn't primarily to gain converts but more subtlety, to create an atmosphere of tension. Edited March 4, 2009 by Azaghul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Valentine Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Vox's goal at least from my analysis of it isn't primarily to gain converts but more subtlety, to create an atmosphere of tension. Ding ding ding, we have a winner. In a nutshell, we want the collective alliances of Bob to grow some balls and start thinking for themselves, instead of flocking to the biggest power and asking them what to do. If that means creating tension in the ranks of the continuum, then so be it. Plus, it's good fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 You have learned nothing. You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Count da Silva.· View this post · Un-ignore Count da Silva Those people who blather on about relevance need to find a new horse to beat on because that one's stone dead. Vox Populi is for real. We are no longer a gaggle of anarchists bent on destruction and nothing else. We are the sole realistic hope for meaningful change and the only ones free enough to undertake the necessary actions in order to bring it about. Losing all your infrastructure sets you free and ends all your worries. There is nothing anyone can do to stop what we have begun and someday soon we'll have victory. We're not stopping until we have it so you might as well just give us what we want and make it easier on yourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Principe Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 In a nutshell, we want the collective alliances of Bob to grow some balls and start thinking for themselves, instead of flocking to the biggest power and asking them what to do. If that means creating tension in the ranks of the continuum, then so be it. I must say I like your strategy much more than FAN's, but I'm not sure if it will work. In the end its succes will completely depend on the ability of the Continuum-leaders to keep their head cool and keep tensions in check. So if there are no real tension besides some minor issues your strategy will fail. Your strategy could only work if there would be great tensions in the Continuum to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agnews Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Those people who blather on about relevance need to find a new horse to beat on because that one's stone dead.Vox Populi is for real. We are no longer a gaggle of anarchists bent on destruction and nothing else. We are the sole realistic hope for meaningful change and the only ones free enough to undertake the necessary actions in order to bring it about. Losing all your infrastructure sets you free and ends all your worries. There is nothing anyone can do to stop what we have begun and someday soon we'll have victory. We're not stopping until we have it so you might as well just give us what we want and make it easier on yourselves. vox seems to have changed ownership from starfox to electron sponge probably a better move in the interests of your alliance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 vox seems to have changed ownershipfrom starfox to electron sponge probably a better move in the interests of your alliance Vox Populi is owned by the people of the alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 @da Silva: If the court of public opinion is so irrelevant, please stop making representations to it by posting here! @Anu: thanks for finally relieving us of his blatherings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 "Tiny flaw", I believe I answered this here. I guess to a heavily biased person, its a "tiny flaw", to others, not so much. Before you say anything, you were the one to bring that up here,...I just cant leave nonsense like this not put to its place. Clearly your post is not one of the ones I was referencing then. For the first issue of TWiP there were numerous Pacifican posts about how Schattenman had mistakenly identified the title, or position of one of your members. I don't know which, I neither know nor care about the internal structure of your alliance, but it sure as hell didn't change the message contained within. I don't care to go back and find quotes (there must be nigh on 100 pages over the 3 issues now) but it's there for all to see. Although since you bring your post up, after you get past the first paragraph, it's just pure speculation about trusting the rest of the information based on the opening story. I think the hordes of Pacificans arguing the toss about whether he did or didn't take an entrance exam, was or wasn't accepted, and so on, rather than arguing about the far more damning issues relating to the GATO situation, speaks volumes about whether that information is correct and can be trusted. Surely if it isn't you'd be concentrating on that issue instead seeing how the first article can be summed up with 'lol FAN stole your money' and not a lot else. Moving on, I don't quite understand your second paragraph, and I know you're not a native speaker so I'm not trying to get in cheap shots at you, but it seemed you're implying I'm heavily biased. If that is the case it'd be great to know what gives you that impression, if anything. Or perhaps you just wanted to pass my comments off as those from someone who is 'heavily biased' and thus they should be ignored without really providing any substance to your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Valdez Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Count da Silva. · View this post · Un-ignore Count da Silva This thread finally convinced me to do this. Thank you, Vox. Edited March 4, 2009 by Juan Valdez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Count da Silva.· View this post · Un-ignore Count da Silva Why did I not do this months ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 And THIS, my friends, is why they said not to underestimate us. As a courtesy, it's important for you to know who the people are that you're following. They're not that great. They know this, and do everything they can to keep YOU from knowing this. Another excellent TWiP imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Ding ding ding, we have a winner. In a nutshell, we want the collective alliances of Bob to grow some balls and start thinking for themselves, instead of flocking to the biggest power and asking them what to do. If that means creating tension in the ranks of the continuum, then so be it. Plus, it's good fun I certainly wouldn't believe that you're openly saying how and why you're doing what you're doing... But that was a darn nice try! 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.