CaptainImpavid Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 mayhaps you want to re-read a little more closely, especially the parts where the governments of both sides say that the issues brought up were resolved already, in most cases before this thread was even made, and that anything else is a combination of some random dude trying to take it upon himself to both hijack the diplomatic processes of his own alliance while at the same time smearing the reputation of ours. Without actually knowing what was going on. etc, I had more but Arouet addressed most of it nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morey 2k7 Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 I go out of my way to say that this discussion is great! While I (obviously) don't know about the facts I can read the speeches here, and thus develop an opinion over the character and the attitude of those that make them.Now what do we have (with a few notable exceptions, of course): General mockery of the opponent - done! «Private Channels FTW» - done! "Veiled" threats in response to criticism - done! Asking for evidence, or more evidence, or even more evidence, all the while claiming that it's false, twisted etc. - and all the while refusing to provide any evidence whatsoever - done! Contemptuous remarks over the opponent's "competence" - done! Condescending attitude when giving any sort of information - done! I fear we will have again to wait for the next "revolution"?... A bit off topic isn't it jerdge? It's usually you telling everyone to be on topic, posting IC/OOC in the right forums etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 (edited) I go out of my way to say that this discussion is great! While I (obviously) don't know about the facts I can read the speeches here, and thus develop an opinion over the character and the attitude of those that make them. Seems you never passed your basic English courses since you apparently read everything. Try re-reading everything and try again. Both governments agree on everything. Raijinstan is the only one who is in disagreement... who also, I must add, not a member of either government. Go figure. Edited May 20, 2009 by SpacingOutMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 I honestly don't know who jerdge was even referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allied_Threat Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 I honestly don't know who jerdge was even referring to. But I'll take it personal either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 As I already said I am not talking of the facts that happened between GDA, CSN and Rajistani, but of the attitude I see here. I am actually happy that the GDA and CSN governments get along so well: congrats, well done etc. The conflict involving Rajistani will also hopefully be solved. I intentionally avoided giving precise references because I haven't the time, the will and the knowledge to go through a detailed examination of every single comma and period that were used in this discussion. It would be pointless, anyway. My aim is this: if you feel that my remarks can be useful in thinking a bit critically over your own behaviour - again, I am not addressing anybody in particular - so be it, I will be happier. Otherwise you're (as always) completely free to ignore my comment: you'll be fine, as I will, and everybody will be happy. Now, I know that some will find this a bit poor... Maybe I could do better (probably not!), but luckily you don't have to rely on me only, to have someone that says nay from time to time. Finally, Morey, I think that commenting on some discussion and trying to broad it a bit, to draw conclusions - or rather, to provide suggestions - about the global political situation, can't be outright classified as "going off-topic". In fact, most of the (meaningful) political discussion has blurred borders. (What is that "ic/ooc" thing you were mentioning, anyway?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Arouet Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 As I already said I am not talking of the facts that happened between GDA, CSN and Rajistani, but of the attitude I see here. I am actually happy that the GDA and CSN governments get along so well: congrats, well done etc.The conflict involving Rajistani will also hopefully be solved. I intentionally avoided giving precise references because I haven't the time, the will and the knowledge to go through a detailed examination of every single comma and period that were used in this discussion. It would be pointless, anyway. My aim is this: if you feel that my remarks can be useful in thinking a bit critically over your own behaviour - again, I am not addressing anybody in particular - so be it, I will be happier. Otherwise you're (as always) completely free to ignore my comment: you'll be fine, as I will, and everybody will be happy. Now, I know that some will find this a bit poor... Maybe I could do better (probably not!), but luckily you don't have to rely on me only, to have someone that says nay from time to time. Finally, Morey, I think that commenting on some discussion and trying to broad it a bit, to draw conclusions - or rather, to provide suggestions - about the global political situation, can't be outright classified as "going off-topic". In fact, most of the (meaningful) political discussion has blurred borders. (What is that "ic/ooc" thing you were mentioning, anyway?) I understand what you're saying, however I feel that an alliance that has been unjustly called out on the main boards by a single nation without any consultation with their government has a right to be a bit miffed at the person if all of their accusations turn out be flatly inaccurate. Threads like this, if they are taken seriously (which fortunately this one was not) tend to do significant damage to reputations, and should not be made after one glib conversation with another alliances government and none with your own. Such action amounts to no less than libel. While there's nothing to particularly stop libelous accusations on Planet Bob, I believe any alliance has the right to confront such accusations defensively, and to point out all the flaws in their verbal assailants arguments. Also, we don't make serious threats, while I haven't seen anything that could be construed as a threat in this thread, if it was uttered I'm sure it was in jest. CSN has been to war 3 times in 3 years, we're not exactly looking for an excuse to go pound on any little guy, our own personal joking around aside. As someone whose been with us for quite a long time, I take comparisons to the "Hegemony" personally, and will do whatever I can to assure you that you have misinterpreted our behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 As I already said I am not talking of the facts that happened between GDA, CSN and Rajistani, but of the attitude I see here. I am actually happy that the GDA and CSN governments get along so well: congrats, well done etc.The conflict involving Rajistani will also hopefully be solved. The attitude? When someone calls you out in public and completely ignoring something that could easily be handled in private channels... that tends to be a little irritating. I intentionally avoided giving precise references because I haven't the time, the will and the knowledge to go through a detailed examination of every single comma and period that were used in this discussion. It would be pointless, anyway. Then your opinion is, by fact, useless. Since you didn't read the facts of this case, you would realize that it is quite natural for us to be a little annoyed in this situation. When you have to repeat yourself over and over and over again to someone, the tone you display gradually becomes more and more impatient. It's a natural thing, and moreover it's like trying to teach common sense to a brick wall. My aim is this: if you feel that my remarks can be useful in thinking a bit critically over your own behaviour - again, I am not addressing anybody in particular - so be it, I will be happier. Otherwise you're (as always) completely free to ignore my comment: you'll be fine, as I will, and everybody will be happy. Our behavior is quite fine, thank you, but we appreciate your sound advice. However, as previously stated, when someone attempts to slander your name in poor taste with perverted facts, it leaves a tasteless remnant in your mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allied_Threat Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 The attitude? When someone calls you out in public and completely ignoring something that could easily be handled in private channels... that tends to be a little irritating.Then your opinion is, by fact, useless. Since you didn't read the facts of this case, you would realize that it is quite natural for us to be a little annoyed in this situation. When you have to repeat yourself over and over and over again to someone, the tone you display gradually becomes more and more impatient. It's a natural thing, and moreover it's like trying to teach common sense to a brick wall. Our behavior is quite fine, thank you, but we appreciate your sound advice. However, as previously stated, when someone attempts to slander your name in poor taste with perverted facts, it leaves a tasteless remnant in your mouth. Bitter and oily actually.... *Savors the similar taste of madness* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) Jerdge, I am definitely worried about your subtle accusatory assessment of CSN. You have definitely invoked the history of CSN as an oppressive alliance bent on siding with the powers-that-be to flex its muscles over the little guys of the cyberverse. You have totally called us out. Have you heard of the "failure to state" fallacy? It's also known as "having your cake". It's where you make some vague reference to a point in the hopes that your audience will pick up where you're going with it but leaves your opposition powerless to address what you have said because then all you have to do is say "I didn't say that, you're putting words in my mouth". It pisses people off. Even despite the image that you've come in as some peaceful commentator in this thread, you're going to leave people staring at you in quiet anger. Edited May 21, 2009 by deja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vyper Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 you guys are really having fun with this thread now are you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainImpavid Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 i will contribute, if i may, a pictorial representation of this thread: at first he was like and we were like and he was like and we were like and he was like and us and them were like and then some other dude was like at which point we were like and now we're like also at several points various people were like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botha Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) I think what he is implying is it is coerced recruiting. If they don't join they will be attacked while on pow. Interesting. Two and a half years ago when I had a different nation (Talhata) and played under a different user name (Nimrod the Great), I was a neutral minding my own business and some guy from CSN attacked me and then tried to recruit me, saying that if I didn't join CSN then I was making myself open for attacks. ("This *could* happen to you..."). It was like a public service announcement tech raid. As a result of this, I ended up joining an alliance for protection. Just not CSN. Edited May 21, 2009 by Botha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Arouet Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Interesting. Two and a half years ago when I had a different nation (Talhata) and played under a different user name (Nimrod the Great), I was a neutral minding my own business and some guy from CSN attacked me and then tried to recruit me, saying that if I didn't join CSN then I was making myself open for attacks. ("This *could* happen to you..."). It was like a public service announcement tech raid. As a result of this, I ended up joining an alliance for protection. Just not CSN. My sincere apologies... That is obviously not permitted, as attacking anyone without permission from the government is absolutely forbidden, but everyone gets their share of overeager idiots from time to time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) My sincere apologies... That is obviously not permitted, as attacking anyone without permission from the government is absolutely forbidden, but everyone gets their share of overeager idiots from time to time. Considering he said it happened two and a half years ago I would say it's not something you should be worrying about at the present time, heh. I think it has little if any relevance to the topic at hand considering the timeframe and all, but eh. Edited May 21, 2009 by Aurion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Arouet Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Considering he said it happened two and a half years ago, I would say it's not something you should be worrying about.I think it has little if any relevance to the topic at hand considering the timeframe and all, but eh. Wouldn't want people getting the wrong impression is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) Wouldn't want people getting the wrong impression is all. Or is it the right impression? Edited May 21, 2009 by Aurion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurthwaite Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) AT is actually the nicest person in CSN; he's just the best actor we have. Edit: The above statement is in reply to the part of Aurion's post that he has since editted away. Edited May 21, 2009 by smurthwaite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 AT is actually the nicest person in CSN; he's just the best actor we have.Edit: The above statement is in reply to the part of Aurion's post that he has since editted away. You may be brainwashed, do you have large gaps in your memory? And I edited it seven minutes before you posted Wasn't sure if someone would take it too seriously or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botha Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 My sincere apologies... That is obviously not permitted, as attacking anyone without permission from the government is absolutely forbidden, but everyone gets their share of overeager idiots from time to time. No need to apologise. Besides after all it was like years and years and another nation ago. The guy who did is probably not even around anymore. I was just making an observation. I actually gained a lot of respect for CSN after we fought them last year. One of the most classiest alliances I've fought against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I actually think I might know who that was that did that to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allied_Threat Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I actually think I might know who that was that did that to you. Are you sure... That's going back before my time almost.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Yeah, he continued doing that for a while. I'm not going to say who it was though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 This is hilarious, good job revealing this to the world Raja. Bad form CSN, no cookies for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) Ha. Even NPO is laying the sarcasm on nice and thick. Rajamahooistanation, that's when you know it's bad. Edited May 21, 2009 by deja 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.