On Order

[bkphysics]

Freedom of thought? What ally of the NPO isn't allowed freedom of thought? Enemies of the NPO are allowed freedom of thought, the number of rants against them is proof enough of this.

You honestly think the NPO is 'allowing' anybody anything around here?

I think you vastly overestimate their ability to control any of the major alliances they are on the playground with. They 'allow' freedom of thought because they know if they even begin to express their will upon a major alliance, their position of power will fall from its lofty post.

People here express freedom of thought simply because no one has the cajoles to try and suppress it. You do that, you spell your doom, simple as that.

I had to comment on your thought there because it was absurd to me. As to the rest of your conjecture, I'll read it later

[Ogaden]

Bob Janova is the guy that created the current version of the MDP Web...

I know, which is why his question struck me as rather odd.

[Delta1212]

NPO has the most obvious gigantic treaty bloc, but it is not the strongest.

The last time I looked at the stats, NPO was in the three largest blocs by NS, followed by SF and Citadel. Who made the giant leap?

[bkphysics]

I know, which is why his question struck me as rather odd.

The NPO is part of the Continuum ... The Continuum is the largest planetary bloc.

What am I missing?

[Ogaden]

Oh nothing, don't mind me.

[Bob Janova]

Bloc stats thread

I think you'll note that the NPO is in the largest bloc, and if Continuum doesn't count for some reason, it is in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th strongest too.

So please, expand on your point because at the moment it doesn't make sense.

[Ogaden]

Well since by happy circumstance you guys don't see it I'd rather not say.

[D34th]

As we can begin to recognise, multi-polarity tends inevitably towards bi-polarity, and bi-polarity tends inevitably towards uni-polarity (usually due to a great war). We could go further and suggest that uni-polarity tends inevitably back towards bi-polarity (however briefly because it is again destroyed in favour of uni-polarity), but that isn't of concern to us today.

[OCC]Are you talking about CN or Real world?[/OCC]

[Xiphosis]

To expand on Bakunin's Dream's idea, those who present a threat to the unipolarity are cast out and destroyed by the remainder of the world, so no explosive situation is allowed to exist.

I try to avoid bringing up affiliations, but seriously, casting out the unpopular to preserve unipolarity is not an argument GGAers should be making.

Enemies of the NPO are allowed freedom of thought, the number of rants against them is proof enough of this.

(Xiphosis[GOD]) rofl

(Xiphosis[GOD]) what

(Xiphosis[GOD]) Where was this guy when KasMage got EZI'd for talking on IRC?

(Xiphosis[GOD]) Anyone?

Edited April 14, 2009 by Xiphosis

[Vilien]

Well since by happy circumstance you guys don't see it I'd rather not say.

And we're the ones wearing tinfoil hats? This is amusing.

[Delta1212]

Well since by happy circumstance you guys don't see it I'd rather not say.

Oh, I see now. Every othe bloc combined is bigger than Continuum. Yes, you are right.

[Orkules]

Damn! They've figured out that SF, Continuum and CnG are all in fact one giant Bloc!! We're undone! (I actually don't think that's even big enough but whatever)

[Delta1212]

Damn! They've figured out that SF, Continuum and CnG are all in fact one giant Bloc!! We're undone! (I actually don't think that's even big enough but whatever)

Continuum + SF + C&G < Continuum

I think you meant Citadel.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Delta1212

[Lennox]

Delta have you ever read "On Every Front, The Making of The Cold War" by Thomas G. Patterson?

Fakedit: This might count as an OOC post but I'm not too sure

[King DrunkWino]

Delta have you ever read "On Every Front, The Making of The Cold War" by Thomas G. Patterson?

Fakedit: This might count as an OOC post but I'm not too sure

Mr. Patterson is a well respected citizen of my nation.

/you're welcome

[Orkules]

Continuum + SF + C&G < Continuum

I think you meant Citadel.

Nope that's how I meant it. Behold the true evil of our plot!

[Byron Orpheus]

You honestly think the NPO is 'allowing' anybody anything around here?

I think you vastly overestimate their ability to control any of the major alliances they are on the playground with. They 'allow' freedom of thought because they know if they even begin to express their will upon a major alliance, their position of power will fall from its lofty post.

People here express freedom of thought simply because no one has the cajoles to try and suppress it. You do that, you spell your doom, simple as that.

I had to comment on your thought there because it was absurd to me. As to the rest of your conjecture, I'll read it later

Either way it reinforces my point that no freedom of expression is surpressed by the NPO.

[Byron Orpheus]

I try to avoid bringing up affiliations, but seriously, casting out the unpopular to preserve unipolarity is not an argument GGAers should be making.

Who said anything about unpopular viewpoints or the unpopular? Popularity does not factor in, only threatening and non-threatening behavior.

[Ogaden]

Who said anything about unpopular viewpoints or the unpopular? Popularity does not factor in, only threatening and non-threatening behavior.

I guess you didn't get the memo. Since you're affiliated with us you're not allowed to have an opinion.

That's what's called free speech on planet Bob. I've been illegally opinionated for months now.

Edited April 15, 2009 by James Dahl

[HeinousOne]

I guess you didn't get the memo. Since you're affiliated with us you're not allowed to have an opinion.

That's what's called free speech on planet Bob. I've been illegally opinionated for months now.

You will get the memo yourself sometime in the future, you will find out this statement will ring completely true but you will find your gaze was looking in the wrong direction.

[Delta1212]

Wow, my "breakdown of domination leads to increased clemency" thesis sure got validated fast.

[Lycurgus Rex]

Too much ideologies, doctrines and dogmatic discussion in this thread. I will say this..Peace is a lie and in the end there will be only chaos. That is the truth of the matter and 1971 words cannot change that.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Lycurgus Rex

[Byron Orpheus]

Too much ideologies, doctrines and dogmatic discussion in this thread. I will say this..Peace is a lie and in the end there will be only chaos. That is the truth of the matter and 1971 words cannot change that.

Peace is a lie and in the end there will be only chaos is a doctrine as well.

Not a particularly insightful one, either.

[Lycurgus Rex]

Peace is a lie and in the end there will be only chaos is a doctrine as well.

Not a particularly insightful one, either.

Doesnt need to be insightful to be true though does it?, I could write a 1971 word post trying to prove that Vox controls NPO. Either way someone will dispute it regardless if its right or wrong (maybe I should have said GGA ) , that brings up the question of what is right and what is wrong? Doctine is nothing without actions to back up the afore mentioned doctrine. Actions are what count. So a lengthy doctrine is nothing other than a feeble effort to cover up a lack of action.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Lycurgus Rex

[Byron Orpheus]

Doesnt need to be insightful to be true though does it?, I could write a 1971 word post trying to prove that Vox controls NPO. Either way someone will dispute it regardless if its right or wrong (maybe I should have said GGA ) , that brings up the question of what is right and what is wrong? Doctine is nothing without actions to back up the afore mentioned doctrine. Actions are what count. So a lengthy doctrine is nothing other than a feeble effort to cover up a lack of action.

There is no right and wrong, only the ability to do and the lack of that ability.

And no, true things are not always insightful; however, when this is the case they are typically not thrown around in a way that is supposed to have meaning.