the damned Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Thank god we are no longer in first. That spot is cursed you know... You should really see what happened to the guys who had it before us But seriously, congrats TOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidMercury Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 lousy foreigners. i smell a conspiracy, a mass betrayal. you join, you appear to fit in, you gain our trust, and then you become great members. A great member? I'm just here to betray TOP for Gremlns. You actually expect me to do work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 I'm personally not over-delighted about this, but it's an impressive feat for an elitist alliance, as you tend to have small member numbers. Still, I hope you don't try and dominate the political situation, because an elitist hegemony would be rather scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Lightning Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Thank god we are no longer in first. That spot is cursed you know...You should really see what happened to the guys who had it before us But seriously, congrats TOP. I'd be proud as !@#$ if TOP could sustain the #1 spot for half as long as the NPO have. Being #1 is really not a staple part of our agenda though, it's simply a by-product of our general awesomeness coupled with recent events. I'm personally not over-delighted about this, but it's an impressive feat for an elitist alliance, as you tend to have small member numbers. Still, I hope you don't try and dominate the political situation, because an elitist hegemony would be rather scary. Operation: "ruin the game" is in full swing and there's nothing you can do to stop us. *insert evil laughter* Also, hello. Edited June 22, 2009 by Blue Lightning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyInc Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 I'm personally not over-delighted about this, but it's an impressive feat for an elitist alliance, as you tend to have small member numbers. Still, I hope you don't try and dominate the political situation, because an elitist hegemony would be rather scary. Theres a different between 'elistist' and 'elite'. Learn it. Also, I doubt TOP will suddently turn evil just because they have taken the number one spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Theres a different between 'elistist' and 'elite'. Learn it.Also, I doubt TOP will suddently turn evil just because they have taken the number one spot. You're a shining example of "elistism" SunnyInc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyInc Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 You're a shining example of "elistism" SunnyInc. Says the girl who was so arrogant she thought her vision for MCXA should take precedent over the very charter it was conceived under and the democractic process that it upheld. Anyhow, back on topic: 'elite' is a term that is used to describe a person or group of people who excel in a particular field of expertise whereas 'elitism' infers a certain level of arrogance that is sometimes associated with those who can be described as 'elite'. Now, anyone who has had the opportunity to get to know TOP as well as I have will tell you that "arrogant" is the very last word they would use to describe them and that the arrogance your use of the word "elitism" suggests is nothing short of slander. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Says the girl who was so arrogant she thought her vision for MCXA should take precedent over the very charter it was conceived under and the democractic process that it upheld. Anyhow, back on topic: 'elite' is a term that is used to describe a person or group of people who excel in a particular field of expertise whereas 'elitism' infers a certain level of arrogance that is sometimes associated with those who can be described as 'elite'. Now, anyone who has had the opportunity to get to know TOP as well as I have will tell you that "arrogant" is the very last word they would use to describe them and that the arrogance your use of the word "elitism" suggests is nothing short of slander. Elitism is a commonly used term to describe the system of accepting older, higher-NS nations rather than just anyone. This is something that I think everyone can accept TOP does. Stop trying to accuse me of slander at every turn. It's almost slanderous, if you get what I mean. Oh, and stop bringing up my past with MCXA when it isn't at all relevant. I've already thrashed it out with you. Edited June 22, 2009 by Francesca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Lightning Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 For the record, NS has nothing to do with our application process. We're just as likely to accept a 0 NS nation as a 200k NS nation. It's a common misconception. It's all about character, and it's just a natural correlation that the older nations are more likely to be able to prove their character (through previous deeds and/or character references) than a new player is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 For the record, NS has nothing to do with our application process. We're just as likely to accept a 0 NS nation as a 200k NS nation. It's a common misconception.It's all about character, and it's just a natural correlation that the older nations are more likely to be able to prove their character (through previous deeds and/or character references) than a new player is. My apologies, I was misinformed. However, your nations are largely at the high end of the NS scale, hence you are able to sustain #1 despite only having 200 odd nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireandthepassion Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 I'd be proud as !@#$ if TOP could sustain the #1 spot for half as long as the NPO have. Being #1 is really not a staple part of our agenda though, it's simply a by-product of our general awesomeness coupled with recent events.Operation: "ruin the game" is in full swing and there's nothing you can do to stop us. *insert evil laughter* Also, hello. Oh no TOP ruining the game at TOP SPEED! I'll await for the ruin to hit me. 6 months from now sound good? Congratulations on the feat. Although how many of those sub-20,000 strength nations are ghosts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Lightning Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Oh no TOP ruining the game at TOP SPEED! I'll await for the ruin to hit me. 6 months from now sound good? In TOP, we brew the grolsch ruin slowly. Congratulations on the feat. Although how many of those sub-20,000 strength nations are ghosts? 9/23 by my count, since you asked so nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyInc Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Elitism is a commonly used term to describe the system of accepting older, higher-NS nations rather than just anyone. This is something that I think everyone can accept TOP does. Stop trying to accuse me of slander at every turn. It's almost slanderous, if you get what I mean.Oh, and stop bringing up my past with MCXA when it isn't at all relevant. I've already thrashed it out with you. If I recall correctly, the conversation was originally derailed when you called me an elitest so I believe you brought the passing comment I made about the sheer hypocrisy of your comment on yourself. My apologies, I was misinformed. However, your nations are largely at the high end of the NS scale, hence you are able to sustain #1 despite only having 200 odd nations. Well, its certainly not the first time you've drawn your own conclusions when you know very little about what goes on and how things work. I would go on but I think Blue already made it abundantly clear that TOP's application process does not resemble any form of 'elitism'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Elitism is a commonly used term to describe the system of accepting older, higher-NS nations rather than just anyone. This is something that I think everyone can accept TOP does. Stop trying to accuse me of slander at every turn. It's almost slanderous, if you get what I mean.Oh, and stop bringing up my past with MCXA when it isn't at all relevant. I've already thrashed it out with you. We regularly accept rerolls of people we know and respect (former members for example) and we accepted many nations that were destroyed by wars and had little to no infrastructure or technology but at the same time were obviously good quality members which will improve and reinforce our community. It is all about the quality of the player behind their nation. Not their nation. My apologies, I was misinformed. However, your nations are largely at the high end of the NS scale, hence you are able to sustain #1 despite only having 200 odd nations. This is correct. I am not sure what your point is however, I doubt anyone thought we maintain #1 with 200 nations with average nations? Yes, we have high average NS. It does not make it easier to become #1, it makes it harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 If I recall correctly, the conversation was originally derailed when you called me an elitest so I believe you brought the passing comment I made about the sheer hypocrisy of your comment on yourself. Rather, I called you a shining example of "elistism" which was pointing out the irony of talking about elitism and making errors in the same sentence. But let us not quarrel, my former MCXA brother. We regularly accept rerolls of people we know and respect (former members for example) and we accepted many nations that were destroyed by wars and had little to no infrastructure or technology but at the same time were obviously good quality members which will improve and reinforce our community.It is all about the quality of the player behind their nation. Not their nation. Hails and such. This is correct. I am not sure what your point is however, I doubt anyone thought we maintain #1 with 200 nations with average nations? Yes, we have high average NS. It does not make it easier to become #1, it makes it harder. Yes, as I pointed out in one of my other posts, it makes it harder and therefore more of a feat. My point was to explain the slight error on my part.... as I said, mine apologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keresztes Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 I'll await for the ruin to hit me. 6 months from now sound good? It'll take us at least 2 years before the oppression really begins. Anyways, this is probably temporary. I imagine that alliances like Sparta will start to pass us by in total NS and score after the war wraps up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Yes, as I pointed out in one of my other posts, it makes it harder and therefore more of a feat. My point was to explain the slight error on my part.... as I said, mine apologies. By the power invested in me, you are forgiven. Thank you for noticing our progress. And it's not much of a feat when Sparta & NPO are at war and IRON just fought with Grä/FARK/RoK. All of our competition just fell below us, though, I will say we have had good gains the last month. Either way, this situation is brilliant solely for the pun and to show admin that arbitrary membership requirements are silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Stukov II Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Insert troll post hereLove, Sponge PS In lieu of trolling TOP I'll just say congratulations and enjoy your stay. We all know it will end badly. Now that's the sponge I know! Also being #1 sucks. So many ghosts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Congratulations on valuing your infrastructure over the health, safety, and security of your allies. Congratulations on trying to smear the good name of alliances that have more honour than you could ever hope to have, just for a little bit of good PR (it backfired on you, thankfully.) So, congratulations on plotting and scheming your way to the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Im an ally of TOP and i feel quite healthy, safe and secure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Congratulations on valuing your infrastructure over the health, safety, and security of your allies. Congratulations on trying to smear the good name of alliances that have more honour than you could ever hope to have, just for a little bit of good PR (it backfired on you, thankfully.)So, congratulations on plotting and scheming your way to the top. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Im an ally of TOP and i feel quite healthy, safe and secure. Good for you. I know there are a number of alliances in karma that TOP supposedly "helped out" and "fought beside" that do not share your same point of view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Good for you. I know there are a number of alliances in karma that TOP supposedly "helped out" and "fought beside" that do not share your same point of view. So what exactly are you complaining about? TOP not fighting for Hegemony? TOP not fighting enough for Karma? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Good for you. I know there are a number of alliances in karma that TOP supposedly "helped out" and "fought beside" that do not share your same point of view. Good for you. I know there are a number of alliances in Karma that TOP supposedly "helped out" and "fought beside" that do not share your point of view. Seriously, are you so bored as to troll every TOP thread? At least ES amuses me. Edit: Also, why the quotations? You do realize that those things are all verifiable? It's completely foolish to imply those things are false. You can complain about the way we did it, but not that we did or did not. Edited June 22, 2009 by Dr. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Good for you. I know there are a number of alliances in Karma that TOP supposedly "helped out" and "fought beside" that do not share your point of view.Seriously, are you so bored as to troll every TOP thread? At least ES amuses me. Edit: Also, why the quotations? You do realize that those things are all verifiable? It's completely foolish to imply those things are false. You can complain about the way we did it, but not that we did or did not. Are they verifiable? Have you talked to those alliances they supposedly helped? They're false. But you keep thinking that TOP did so much that they deserve congratulations. I hope it burns nicely when the time comes. And I hope you burn with 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.