Of Integrity.. character.. and friendships.

[Locke]

o/ Maelstrom

Way to stick to your guns, in the real and figurative sense.

[Sal Paradise]

You must be very bored Sal. Now you're picking apart my engrish.

It's not your English. It's your failed attempt to paint Karma as an coalition that seeks to treat you as badly as you've treated us. It's your dishonesty on this that you would use one person to represent the whole with "they".

While there are a lot of people that would love to see the NPO turned into the next FAN, I can guarantee you that it is not on the agenda of Karma leadership, and should any Karma leadership attempt to do this, you'll see this coalition fall apart as quickly as the Continuum did.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Dishonesty? How much of a clear painted picture do your bifocals need than the brackets around.. (they being rick?). Or me stating,

"I call YOU.. (singular).. a hypocrite."

in referring to Rick and Rick only/directly in the OP?

Or how about this in a later post:

I wonder if the rest of his alliance shares his stance on this issue. It'd be interesting to know. I only hold the words of the speaker against the one who speaks it until others take up the reigns of policy from them.

Or do you have a mental process of selective reading? There is no dishonesty here.. you just didn't read everything and I suggest you go back and do so again. One grammar error doesn't a misunderstanding a make unless you've a reading problem. You are the one with excess protests and seeming attempts at spin. I will accept an apology if you care to give one. I do not lie often and avoid it at all cost. I do not say that I am not a liar.. because at some point in my life I have to had said something deceitful.. but not this time.

I cannot speak to where the leadership of Karma stands on this issue. All I will say is that if they are seeking true change, I hope it is not Rick's.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sal Paradise]

Your motives are transparent. "They" being your Freudian slip. You didn't originally have "(They being Rick)" in your post.

Emperor Rick never mentioned his position on PZI, so how can you call him a hypocrite for threatening you with it? But you do know that Karma claims to be against it and that's why you called him a hypocrite. Just like Richard Rahl has above.

It is unnecessary for you to say "I wonder if the rest of his alliance shares his stance on this issue," or "I cannot speak to where the leadership of Karma stands on this issue. All I will say is that if they are seeking true change, I hope it is not Rick's," if you're only attacking the one man. It's your sneaky way of getting a jab in at Karma.

It's nice to see you attacking me for having a supposed reading problem in the same paragraph in which you try to vindicate your character from an allegation of deceit. Do you often make fun of people with reading problems?

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Your motives are transparent. "They" being your Freudian slip. You didn't originally have "(They being Rick)" in your post.

Emperor Rick never mentioned his position on PZI, so how can you call him a hypocrite for threatening you with it? But you do know that Karma claims to be against it and that's why you called him a hypocrite. Just like Richard Rahl has above.

It is unnecessary for you to say "I wonder if the rest of his alliance shares his stance on this issue," or "I cannot speak to where the leadership of Karma stands on this issue. All I will say is that if they are seeking true change, I hope it is not Rick's," if you're only attacking the one man. It's your sneaky way of getting a jab in at Karma.

It's nice to see you attacking me for having a supposed reading problem in the same paragraph in which you try to vindicate your character from an allegation of deceit. Do you often make fun of people with reading problems?

Only the ones that assert I'm a liar when my point is clear, and reiterated multiple times. That shoe, you fit. I can tell you have a brilliant mind, why do you handicap yourself by skewing the very words you read and not taking them for face value? I am going to be honest though, the commentary was inspired by the massively huge glasses on your avatar. I don't actually believe you have a reading problem.

I will allow you to read into my motives what you will. But you are lieing yourself when you attempt to assert to know them (my motives) and you are not myself to know them.

There are going to be many who are like Rick. They are also hypocrites. They may or may not be part of Karma. You have no idea who they may be (nor do I). You're guessing at my intentions when it is clear you have no idea of what they may have been. So you assigned one. Then you called me a liar, not knowing my intent making yourself into one. Congratulations.

What is very clear about my posts.. without any attempt to smear the purity of the words or to assign me motive, is that I had been referring to rick the entire time.. and those like him.. whoever they may be.

Freudian slip? It's clear now you're over analyzing and don't know me.

Calling him a hypocrite was extremely easy for me. He threatened me with something he detests.. a clear character flaw.

It is unnecessary for you to say "I wonder if the rest of his alliance shares his stance on this issue," or "I cannot speak to where the leadership of Karma stands on this issue. All I will say is that if they are seeking true change, I hope it is not Rick's," if you're only attacking the one man. It's your sneaky way of getting a jab in at Karma.

No, this is my way of getting my jab in at those like him.. clarifying my intent since you're putting it under scrutiny and have made false assumptions. I wait to see if this is intentional, but your persistent and dogged defense of knowing that which you could not possibly know when it has not been explicitly communicated leads me to believe you are attempting to smear me.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sal Paradise]

Are you done editing now?

I've already stopped and started twice. Stepped away for ten minutes only to find your post changed again.

[Sal Paradise]

*double post*

When attempting to determine your motives I cannot take everything you say at face value. Of course I didn't come in here looking for motives, but despite my reading problem, when I read things I unconsciously do an activity called "reading between the lines." I have laid out why I believe you are attempting to smear Karma with this thread and your only response is "I'm not, because I'm not like that and you don't know me." Basically I'm being asked to take your word for it. Unfortunately in the same breath you attempted to smear me by claiming I had a reading problem. Inspired by my avatar or not, it's still an attempt to belittle.

And then:

What is very clear about my posts.. without any attempt to smear the purity of the words or to assign me motive, is that I had been referring to rick the entire time.. and those like him.. whoever they may be.

You once again provide me with evidence of your true intentions.

Freudian slip? It's clear now you're over analyzing and don't know me.

Over analyzing? I thought I had a reading problem. Oh woe is me.

Calling him a hypocrite was extremely easy for me. He threatened me with something he detests.. a clear character flaw.

Where has he said he detests PZI? I haven't seen it. Perhaps he does. But you don't know that, so you cannot call him a hypocrite. The only thing I've seen him say on the subject of PZI is the PM he sent you. From that PM he's obviously for it. And now apparently calling him a hypocrite was easy for you. It's easy for you to insult someone without ever knowing whether the insult is true or not?

Do you still want me to take your word for it over this? I don't think I can trust you much anymore.

I wait to see if this is intentional, but your persistent and dogged defense of knowing that which you could not possibly know leads me to believe you are attempting to smear me.

I am not attempting to smear you. You tried to use the argument that I should take everything at face value on your word and made this about your character. It's hardly my fault that you are providing amble ammunition for me to defeat that argument. You could have easily gotten away with it.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Sal Paradise

[Gruthenia]

Good lord, thank you Sal Paradise for wading through this sort of !@#$%^&* so nobody else has to.

[kingzog]

I will fight and die for them like the family they are.

Hello and welcome to the OOC section of the forum, where sentiments like that come across as being rather creepy.

(But the PM you were sent was a bit over the top.)

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Oi vey. I give up continuing this discussion with you Sal. He proves his hypocrisy by claiming Francoism is as bad as Facism.... calls it evil.

Then in the same post he turns around and endorses the very same behavior.

I am not responding after this so say whatever you will say. Bend the words as you see fit, ignore the clear implications of the words spoken selectively as you have. I just won't give you the courtesy of additional response.

Apparently you failed to see what was obvious to many others. And finally, yes, over analyzing and under analyzing simultaneously. You're being selective about the grounds for your dissent without taking the discussion in context, a clear and easy way to avoid the true nature of the argument.

And yes, my thoughts come in a flurry instead of all at once, so I'm often editing instead of adding new posts.. which would make for a ridiculously long thread. Anything else you want to nitpick?

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Hello and welcome to the OOC section of the forum, where sentiments like that come across as being rather creepy.

(But the PM you were sent was a bit over the top.)

That's how I perceive them(NPO) in the context of the game. If you can be born into the game, then I would say NPO adopted me and raised me from the start.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Good lord, thank you Sal Paradise for wading through this sort of !@#$%^&* so nobody else has to.

Thanks for affirming you have nothing truly significant to contribute to this discussion besides your biased support (spiced with some mild derision) my foe. ^..^

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sal Paradise]

I am not responding after this so say whatever you will say. Bend the words as you see fit, ignore the clear implications of the words spoken selectively as you have. I just won't give you the courtesy of additional response.

Thank you. I love having the last word. Rage quitting like that is an excellent indication that I've defeated you in this argument.

Now watch this drive:

Oi vey. I give up Sal. He proves his hypocrisy by claiming Francoism is as bad as Facism.... calls it evil.

Then in the same post he turns around and endorses the very same behavior.

No. He says Francoism is Fascism and therefore evil, and then he endorses PZI.

If he said Francoism was evil and then endorsed Francoism, I could see your point. If he said PZI was evil and then endorsed it, I'd see your point. But the only way your point could possibly stand is if you believed that Francoism was Fascism and evil, and PZI was an inherent part of Francoism. But that wouldn't prove he's a hypocrite. Only that because of your interpretation of Francoism, you mistook him for a hypocrite. If he felt otherwise, he himself wouldn't be a hypocrite.

Apparently you failed to see what was obvious to many others. And finally, yes, over analyzing and under analyzing simultaneously. You're being selective about the grounds for your dissent without taking the discussion in context, a clear and easy way to avoid the true nature of the argument.

Without taking it in context? You mean the context of this war where your side is moaning constantly about how Karma is unfair and just as bad as you are? You're the one demanding I take it all at face value. That's out of context.

And yes, my thoughts come in a flurry instead of all at once, so I'm often editing instead of adding new posts.. which would make for a ridiculously long thread. Anything else you want to nitpick?

I was attempting to lighten the mood. Expressing my frustration in trying to respond to you. I laughed at my situation while I was trying to keep up. You may have noticed the smiley.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Sal Paradise

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Tone is lost in text and I missed the smiley. Part of my ineffectiveness is that it is 5:05 am and I have yet to sleep I hate sleeping. I should sleep, but I hate sleep.

Fine, I'll try one more time. But after that I go under duress of migraine and rebellious eyelids.

But the only way your point could possibly stand is if you believed that Francoism was Fascism and evil, and PZI was an inherent part of Francoism. But that would only show that in your interpretation of Francoism is he a hypocrite. If he felt otherwise, he himself wouldn't be a hypocrite.

Not exactly. I was referring to the hypocrisy from his stated perspective. He stated Francoism was evil. He compared it to Facism. He stated Francoists/NPO had coined the term PZI. Given the tactics used in the 1940s by Facists.. and the similarity to PZI, one could extrapolate the writer thinks that Francoism is evil in part because of this policy. If this is true, and it appears to be, then the writer commits hypocrisy when he makes the very same tactic/attrocity a form of retaliation. He is perpetrating an evil for which he himself holds a distaste. Make more sense I hope?

As for whether or not Karma is good or bad. I am not the others in my order. I can only speak for myself. I have no idea whether Karma will behave similarly to the NPO if/when they are in power. That has yet to be seen. This threat however concerns me and I believe it naturally should given that it comes from a member of the opposing alliance. Is it an official Karma position or that of an extremist? Again.. no idea. I don't read minds. I just know that if the doctrine espoused in this document prevails, then they will not be any "better". This letter is all I have to go on and right now it only speaks for Rick, but Rick isn't a small fry either.

*Thinks he got it all this time...*.... .... .... Yes, I'm that tired.

*Begins the long treck to bed and on the way the words echo back through cyberspace...* My eyes! They burn! Staring at pixels for far to long!!

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sal Paradise]

Not exactly. I was referring to the hypocrisy from his stated perspective. He stated Francoism was evil. He compared it to Facism. He stated Francoists/NPO had coined the term PZI. Given the tactics used in the 1940s by Facists.. and the similarity to PZI, one could extrapolate the writer thinks that Francoism is evil in part because of this policy.

Based on what? Your agenda to smear Karma. All he's saying is that it's fitting that you should be punished by the very tactic you created. And it is. There's no indication that he thinks it's evil. At best his position is ambiguous and because he's railing against evil in the same PM he's promoting PZI, the only reasonable conclusion is that he doesn't think PZI is evil. You know, I'd suspect he does. He probably is a hypocrite. But as I've said repeatedly you're basing your accusation of his hypocrisy on nothing. And while you may be right, the way you've done it is revealing of your character and your agenda.

As for whether or not Karma is good or bad.

But according to you, this isn't about that. So why do you insist on bringing it up? It's a great propaganda tactic. Is Obama a secret Muslim? I don't know... but is he?

This letter is all I have to go on

Bull, you have this whole forum. If you don't pay attention to it, that's your own problem. But I can tell from your posts that you know what our public position on this is and I've even stated it in this thread. Despite that you continue to feign ignorance. And I think it's pretty obvious why and I've laid out my reasons for it here.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Based on what? Your agenda to smear Karma. All he's saying is that it's fitting that you should be punished by the very tactic you created. And it is. There's no indication that he thinks it's evil. At best his position is ambiguous and because he's railing against evil in the same PM he's promoting PZI, the only reasonable conclusion is that he doesn't think PZI is evil. You know, I'd suspect he does. He probably is a hypocrite. But as I've said repeatedly you're basing your accusation of his hypocrisy on nothing. And while you may be right, the way you've done it is revealing of your character and your agenda.

I could seriously care less about Karma. I am not even a member of the Pacifica Press or diplo corps. This is a very entertaining war. I am enjoying the renewed activity. You are totally missing my motives. The only person this reflects on thus far is Rick. If you wish to assign this to Karma you may, but I've not said that anywhere and I think this is perhaps my.. oh.. 6th, 7th time re-iterating myself.

But according to you, this isn't about that. So why do you insist on bringing it up? It's a great propaganda tactic. Is Obama a secret Muslim? I don't know... but is he?

It's a logical concern given the origination of this message. That is all. It'd be very easy for a Karma leader to come forward and present their view on this issue any time they wanted to and I welcome them to.

Bull, you have this whole forum. If you don't pay attention to it, that's your own problem. But I can tell from your posts that you know what our public position on this is and I've even stated it in this thread. Despite that you continue to feign ignorance. And I think it's pretty obvious why and I've laid out my reasons for it here.

Actually, from what I have seen on this forum is that there is a lot of indecision on what actual terms when they come.. if any.. should be. Some favor it, some do not, It's a mixed bag and I don't believe a final decision has been reached on any one's part.. at least, there sure haven't been any joint-official announcements to this nature. Perhaps you should encourage them to do one renouncing this policy if you think people having this concern is something that is bad for them?

If you can speak for all of Karma, I can accept your statement that Karma doesn't favor the policies they are fighting. And yes, I am awake now.. *chuckles*

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sequoia Throne]

Honor > Infra

o/

[Sal Paradise]

I could seriously care less about Karma. I am not even a member of the Pacifica Press or diplo corps. This is a very entertaining war. I am enjoying the renewed activity. You are totally missing my motives. The only person this reflects on thus far is Rick. If you wish to assign this to Karma you may, but I've not said that anywhere and I think this is perhaps my.. oh.. 6th, 7th time re-iterating myself.

Yeah, and you're lying. That's my point. You keep bringing it up. I've only responded to you bringing it up. If you can make a single reply in this thread without passive aggressively asking whether or not Karma supports PZI, this issue will be put to rest. I still won't believe you, but we can both at least move on.

It's a logical concern given the origination of this message.

What? Taking one message from a single member of Karma and hypothesizing that all of Karma feels the way he does is logical? Well, I'm obviously wasting my time here. It's impossible to argue with someone that has no sense of what is logical.

If you can speak for all of Karma, I can accept your statement that Karma doesn't favor the policies they are fighting.

No one officially speaks for all of Karma, though Archon did during NPO surrender talks, and he's man of great class and principle. But I am GR government, and while I don't know more than some people, I do know a lot more than you. And I know that PZIing "loyalists" is not the plan.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

But I am GR government, and while I don't know more than some people, I do know a lot more than you. And I know that PZIing "loyalists" is not the plan.

Well it's at least good to know this is something GR isn't planning. Perhaps you could get the other members (of karma) to weigh in on this also?

Yeah, and you're lying.

There's a difference between lying, which I have not done because I've never at one point said that Karma endorses this policy.. and raising a concern about policy, which I have done. You've taken the first step in clarifying this issue.. which is noting you are someone with part authority over the issue in relation to your particular alliance and noting your intent.

What? Taking one message from a single member of Karma and hypothesizing that all of Karma feels the way he does is logical?

Typically coalitions march to the same drummer, isn't always true, but usually they do. So yes, this is a very logical concern. Besides, it is a threat. Would you not be concerned if threatened in like fashion?

Edited April 25, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Sal Paradise]

Well it's at least good to know this is something GR isn't planning. Perhaps you could get the other members (of karma) to weigh in on this also?

I wasn't speaking of GR. I was speaking of Karma. I'm a government member of GR and GR is in Karma (hell, we were one of the first to defend OV). So I know something about Karma's plans and I'm telling you PZI for loyalists (or anybody) is not in it.

Typically coalitions march to the same drummer, isn't always true, but usually they do. So yes, this is a very logical concern.

Ha!

CoaLUEtion

League

Initiative (GW2,3)

Aegis

BLEU (UJW)

UJP

Continuum (NoCB)

More than half of those could be easily described as not having a unified vision. Only BLEU managed to stay cohesive long enough to survive well past its great war. All those seemingly unified were easily fractured during their war (secretly) and after.

But it's not illogical because coalitions are unified (and they aren't). It's illogical because a single member of one coalition can not be an accurate gauge of the entire coalition. Basing an opinion on a sample of 1, is illogical.

Besides, it is a threat. Would you not be concerned if threatened in like fashion?

By Emperor Rick? :lol:

[Tulafaras]

honestly if someone sent me such a message, i'd forward it to the relevant goverment members of his alliance and be done with it.

Frankly what individual members say/think of me doesn't bother me. If an alliance policy was similar i'd probably argue it on a board, but empty threats aren't worth the effort.

Ps: I have nothing but respect for my opponents, but that doesn't mean i won't bomb them until i can't throw anymore bombs, because that is the game we are playing here. What it does mean is that i don't send useless spam mail either threatening, coercing or whatever else you may want to include. Let your military speak for your nation (that is primarily adressed at some people in the Karma Coalition since i've yet to see someone in NPO send out similar mails)