Old Man Chron

[Haflinger]

Our security wasnt in danger at the time Continuum was founded. If you want to argue something, then at least go for it making us able to stomp polar. And that can hardly be accounted to Bob personally.

I think the discussion was of "personal benefits gained by Bob because he stayed in Grämlins despite allegedly objecting to their joining Continuum."

It's rather easy to say that had Bob left Grämlins in protest of your joining Continuum, his safety would not have been assured.

[Owned-You]

I'm on vacation, but I took the time to read the majority of this thread since I had some time to kill. With that said, I'm eating a bowl Chron Flakes and enjoying it.

Good subject of debate my friend.

[Trinite]

I was almost agreeing with you just reading your tl;dr, but then I read the rest. By using Bob Janova as an example you lose me completely. If I were to point out how debating should be done, he would be near the top of my list. It's not just that I like Janova. I like the way he argues. I'm sure he uses spin. Feel free to call it out when you see it. Chances are you'll just be spinning in the opposite direction. That's what happens here. Debates like those you point out are what make the OWF worth coming to. There are about a million problems with post quality on these forums. You addressed none of them in your OP.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Trinite

[Petrovich4]

While it's marvelous that Bob and the rest of Grämlins, along with a large part of the Cyberverse, have had their Damascene experience, it doesn't take away from the fact that they were, for a very long time, part of the problem.

+

other posts stating 'you (i.e. Gre, TOP, etc) were part of the problem'

I find it interesting that people are now shifting a World War against the immediate aggressors to a witch hunt of ALL the alliances who had some connection to the Continuum/1V. You better start bashing my alliance then - lets see how far you all get.

Be warned, it is a slippery slope.

Tungsten's quote is on the point regarding the OP and I would like to quote it for any future arguments:

@Chron/OP: I like your points, but using examples from a single player isn't going to get you anywhere. In all honestly, everyone thinks they're unbiased and free of hypocrisy unless they're doing so intentionally. I don't believe you intended this thread to come off the way it did, but it did none the less. Take a step back, take the time to pull enough examples to support your points, then maybe people will really listen.

[Tom Litler]

Our security wasnt in danger at the time Continuum was founded. If you want to argue something, then at least go for it making us able to stomp polar. And that can hardly be accounted to Bob personally.

I wonder how you would fare if you weren't all nice and secure in a coat of treaties and blocs when all those rumors started flying around of your subtle opposition to the "hegemony". I wonder how you would fare if you weren't aligned in part to the New Pacific Order and friends while people thought you were "opposed" to them. I wonder how safe you would have been.

And that is my point, exactly. You were allowed to survive because you appeared, for a time, to be "friendly". Then when the opportune moment came you flip flopped to the other side.

[enderland]

I wonder how you would fare if you weren't all nice and secure in a coat of treaties and blocs when all those rumors started flying around of your subtle opposition to the "hegemony". I wonder how you would fare if you weren't aligned in part to the New Pacific Order and friends while people thought you were "opposed" to them. I wonder how safe you would have been.

And that is my point, exactly. You were allowed to survive because you appeared, for a time, to be "friendly". Then when the opportune moment came you flip flopped to the other side.

You should read a post of Delta1212's where he detailed the past few months in a good, but amusing, format, in which all of "the other side" thought Gre was trying to get killed when they left tC if you honestly believe that.

If Gre "flip flopped" then literally all of Karma did, because they left the power structure months in advance and yet you still consider them flip floppers - pretty much all the other alliances in Karma were more integral to the power structure than Gre was at that point.

SF, FOK, Sparta, TOP, all were tied into the hegemony for far longer than Gre ever was. There is no way to "flip flop" as you speak when you "start" the other side, or however you would want that to be phrased.

Edited June 28, 2009 by ender land

[enderland]

Then they allowed themselves to be silenced. Im discussing intellectual dishonesty here. Feel free to air out your grievances and the fact you IC consider yourselves the moral betters of CN elsewhere.

I think our fundamental difference is that you feel that the ability to express one's self on these forums is independent of anything that can be done against that nation (a la Vox) which leads you to the conclusion that no one can force one to not say what they want.

I would contend that by threats or military action, etc, can be enough to "silence" people. That discussion is far more IC than this thread currently is, however I am more than willing to have it if you choose since while I disagree with your conclusions I do appreciate the fact that your posts are at least well thought out.

I saw quite enough of it in the Valhalla thread. If you honestly cared about responsibility for IC crimes in this game, you would not have supported the manner in which Valhalla was released from the war.

Kronos was about a month old at that time. We were not, and are not, nor will we ever be someone else's avengers.

Not commenting on anything I havnt seen. Just what ive observed over the past two months since I returned. Once again, note the fact that I pointed out Janova most likely was not around back then. Or if he was, then I can not recall it. Participation =/= observation.

Two things, first, he was, and second, trying to learn a language without speaking it is not exactly the best way to understand it.

You're saying I lack class just because of a proof-reading error? Do you realize the staggering irony of that statement?

Mispelling the person's name (multiple times) for whom you have devoted an entire post to bash lacks class yes. Either it's sloppy or downright disrespectful (in addition to the post itself). If I were to use "Chron" and "Kron" interchangably here I would expect, and want, people to think that I was a little off base becasue if I would spend this time responding to a post of yours with this much length and not even put the effort in to spell your name correctly it is quite clear that I do not really

I think the fact that you believe the NPO will be able to hold out for two years of war is more telling of the accuracy of my statement than any inference otherwise.

Considering FAN did, and the NPO has probably a stronger community (however they do not have the hate of a particular alliance to bind them together, they have been around far longer than FAN was in CN and have quite a strong community as a reuslt). I really doubt that the same situation will happen, however peace mode until the next large upset war appears to be what the participants have come to the conclusion that a perpetual state of war with NPO in peace mode is the outcome indefinitely.

As the NPO members can tell you, I actually screamed at them for their failure in that 200 page thread in #nsa, and in large part, that was one of the major tipping points leading me to decide on making this thread. Because theyre all pretty much guilty. I didnt post in that mess due to being banned a day or so before it went up.

See to me that is actually more frustrating, because people who go on and post when they have literally no idea what is going on and act like they should be taken seriously piss me off.

Mind expanding on this point? I dont quite get what you're referring to.

RV posts in a manner which you must detest, read the "RV vs Sparta" thread or whatever the title was as of late that went to quite a few pages.

Oh, no need to actually read the OP, none at all. Youve pretty much gotten a pure crystallization of my argument right there.

I am sure that you can make a good case against almost anyone who posts as much as Bob to show that they act in any manner you want. I disagree that your posts are a sort that lower the quality here, and in fact, if everyone posted as he does these forums would be far more intellectual and enjoyable.

tl;dr Ender from Kronos, who's claim to fame being it's ability to wash its collective group of any responsibility for it's members foot in mouth disease, is saying that a whole bunch of vague inferences are a rebuttal to my post.

Heh, I'm glad you think that highly of us.

Unless the definition of "rebuttal" was changed recently...Inferences are not a rebuttal, Im afraid. He can feel free to try again, though.

Your entire post is made using inferences as the strongest basis for your argument.

Edited June 28, 2009 by ender land

[Tom Litler]

If Gre "flip flopped" then literally all of Karma did,

Didn't they? You said it, not me.

I never said they didn't flip flop. We were only talking about the Gremlins but that doesn't mean this can't apply to Karma as well.

[Bob Janova]

And yet he remained, reaping the benefits of that association.

/

It's rather easy to say that had Bob left Grämlins in protest of your joining Continuum, his safety would not have been assured.

You think I should have left my alliance when it did one thing I disagreed with? Seriously? Have you agreed with every single thing that your alliance has ever done? That is so ridiculous I don't even know how to point it out.

No, obviously if I was unaligned I'd have got raided, and if I was unaligned and sticking two fingers up at the establishment, I'd have got ZId. (One reason I'm happy to have been part of Karma, since at least the second part of that is less likely now.) Equally obviously, it has no relevance to reality. If you know me (which you should, if you're commenting about me ) you'll know that I was never comfortable with Continuum, and accusing me of double standards for being in an alliance that was in it is either silly or malicious.

I am usually hair-trigger quick to jump on them, cause I generally think he is full of crap, but the posts, while slanted to an extreme imo, do have a basis in logic.

I think you're full of crap and slanted to the extreme too . But politics is only fun because of the different viewpoints. I might argue with you and those like you like crazy in the IC areas but that's what makes the game .

I wonder what conclusion I am arguing for now.

Bob's in Karma therefore I must take things out of context to make him look bad, even though this is an OOC forum. As shown again by you taking quotes from the OP which was not the post I was responding to when talking about 2007, as I requoted in my last post.

And that is my point, exactly. You were allowed to survive because you appeared, for a time, to be "friendly". Then when the opportune moment came you flip flopped to the other side.

You are too new to know this, but we entered GW3 on the Aegis side, were persistently disliked by GOONS and Initiative in general, and bound to the MDP web only through MHA, for a long time (several months). During the Continuum time we were members of Citadel (which predated it). Our security was never solely reliant on the group of treaties around NPO – something which perhaps is difficult to understand for a player who has only seen the NPO-centric world, although it should be clear to an NSO member.

[enderland]

Didn't they? You said it, not me.

I never said they didn't flip flop. We were only talking about the Gremlins but that doesn't mean this can't apply to Karma as well.

...

If Gre "flip flopped" then literally all of Karma did, because they left the power structure months in advance and yet you still consider them flip floppers - pretty much all the other alliances in Karma were more integral to the power structure than Gre was at that point.

[Haflinger]

You think I should have left my alliance when it did one thing I disagreed with?

Actually, that's not what I think.

I was merely answering the question.

[Sal Paradise]

Our security wasnt in danger at the time Continuum was founded.

I'm starting to like this thread.

[Bob Janova]

Actually, that's not what I think.

I was merely answering the question.

Fair play. I wish people would allow me to do that without calling me a hypocrite

[Haflinger]

Fair play. I wish people would allow me to do that without calling me a hypocrite

Nah, this isn't the TWiP (errr, Citadel ejecting OG) thread.

[HellAngel]

I'm starting to like this thread.

I dont think you are in a position to make a valid judgement about that. Or maybe... you're not some long lost gov member of us, are you?

[Tom Litler]

You are too new to know this, but we entered GW3 on the Aegis side, were persistently disliked by GOONS and Initiative in general, and bound to the MDP web only through MHA, for a long time (several months). During the Continuum time we were members of Citadel (which predated it). Our security was never solely reliant on the group of treaties around NPO – something which perhaps is difficult to understand for a player who has only seen the NPO-centric world, although it should be clear to an NSO member.

Are you done belittling me? No? Are you done now? Okay then. It's charming how persistently you keep dismissing me as a "new player" and then go further and imply that I am unrepresentative of my alliance. I know more than you assume that I know and I've seen plenty of things. I know your history. The Initiative doesn't apply here. I'm talking about your actions in the most recent age of Citadel, Q, and 1V.

Having been bound to the MDP web "only" through MHA and the Citadel meant that before the Continuum you were already bound indirectly to the international power structure "only" through two of the New Pacific Order's close allies, long time allies. Perhaps that is difficult to understand for a player who's looking to prove the opposite although it should be clear to anyone.

[Londo Mollari]

You should read a post of Delta1212's where he detailed the past few months in a good, but amusing, format, in which all of "the other side" thought Gre was trying to get killed when they left tC if you honestly believe that.

If Gre "flip flopped" then literally all of Karma did, because they left the power structure months in advance and yet you still consider them flip floppers - pretty much all the other alliances in Karma were more integral to the power structure than Gre was at that point.

SF, FOK, CnG, Sparta, TOP, all were tied into the hegemony for far longer than Gre ever was. There is no way to "flip flop" as you speak when you "start" the other side, or however you would want that to be phrased.

The only mutual defense treaty that C&G ever held with any Continuum alliance was the Sparta-Athens treaty. Furthermore, Sparta did not engage in any wars from the signing of that treaty prior to the Karma War, nor did the Continuum launch any large scale offensives. In contrast, The Grämlins were directly militarily involved in the curbstomp and subsequent extermination of Norden Verein as Continuum members. I would therefore argue that The Grämlins were very much more a part of the hegemony than C&G ever was, even if they did disagree with it vocally while a part of it, and subsequently left to fight it.

[Sal Paradise]

I dont think you are in a position to make a valid judgement about that. Or maybe... you're not some long lost gov member of us, are you?

I'm in no position to claim my growing fondness for this thread? Why not?

[HellAngel]

I'm in no position to claim my growing fondness for this thread? Why not?

You laughed at me for saying we werent in danger back then. I count that as disagreement.

[Sal Paradise]

So I'm in no position to disagree?

[Bob Janova]

Tom, the point is that the main players in the Continuum/1V hegemony were in a position where we were far more isolated and opposed to them in the past, and our security was not the reason for our later treaties. Since you've only been here since late 2007, you would only have seen Grämlins 'in the hegemony' and could easily have got the wrong impression about that – as indeed you seemed to do.

Re 'NPO's closest allies' – our treaties with MHA and TOP had nothing to do with that, but you are right in a way – that makes it even more clear that Continuum wasn't for our security.

Anyway, this is getting off topic and IC so I don't want to go in depth here.

[TehChron]

The only mutual defense treaty that C&G ever held with any Continuum alliance was the Sparta-Athens treaty. Furthermore, Sparta did not engage in any wars from the signing of that treaty prior to the Karma War, nor did the Continuum launch any large scale offensives. In contrast, The Grämlins were directly militarily involved in the curbstomp and subsequent extermination of Norden Verein as Continuum members. I would therefore argue that The Grämlins were very much more a part of the hegemony than C&G ever was, even if they did disagree with it vocally while a part of it, and subsequently left to fight it.

Londo, I may talk a whole lot of stuff about you being gullible and such, but at the very least you remain honest about what you think. Even if you're wrong.

Since Sleep is a wonderful thing, lets begin my response. Thanks to everyone holding down the fort for me so far, and those who see where Im getting at.

What should be most telling here isnt who the op points out as an example, but the context in which the post is made. I am always fascinated by those who claim the level of discourse isnt to thier personal tastes or likes, but yet read it anyway. Then devote a thread to the notion of said dissatisfaction within in the same venue, and engage the same people they claim to be complicit in thier annoyance. Watching a dog chasing its tail is fun for awhile but over time it becomes an excersise of wasted time as the final outcome of the act is clear, they bite themselves or stop.

Actually Im saying im going to do something about it. Post invalidated.

This thread is so deliciously ironic in that it's just another platform to call some from Karma (and bob) hypocrites.

You know what really makes this place horrible, not hidden agendas, lies, hypocricy or any of that crap, its folks going over the same thing over and over again at every opportunity because they may have a grudge or opinion that they feel needs to be heard every 2.4 minutes.

I apologize for not being around for long enough to be doing this over and over again. And I also have used the OP to pretty much bluntly announce Im going to be doing something about this grudge...So I really dont see what your point is. Post Invalidated.

I was almost agreeing with you just reading your tl;dr, but then I read the rest. By using Bob Janova as an example you lose me completely. If I were to point out how debating should be done, he would be near the top of my list. It's not just that I like Janova. I like the way he argues. I'm sure he uses spin. Feel free to call it out when you see it. Chances are you'll just be spinning in the opposite direction. That's what happens here. Debates like those you point out are what make the OWF worth coming to. There are about a million problems with post quality on these forums. You addressed none of them in your OP.

I addressed what I viewed as a problem. Im not here to crusade against whatever problems you see, but the sheer amount of spin and crass hypocrisy put forth by folks like Bob Janova and ChairmanHal are what I think are the worst problem. And thats the point of the OP. I doubt a bunch of spinning, strawmen, and loaded statements makes the OWF worth coming to for a lot of folks. But everyone has their own standards, I suppose. But meh, the fact you fall for the legend is evidence enough of just how warped the standards have become, where a fake debater is considered a paragon of the actual art.

I think our fundamental difference is that you feel that the ability to express one's self on these forums is independent of anything that can be done against that nation (a la Vox) which leads you to the conclusion that no one can force one to not say what they want.

This is a game where alliance on alliance wars is a reality. The fact that the threat of war against your nation is nothing NEW doesnt suddenly mean that the threat of lost infrastructure makes it ok to blame an IC action for OOC silence. Really now...Beating up on your nation doesnt do a thing to the player behind it. Its just a game.

Two things, first, he was, and second, trying to learn a language without speaking it is not exactly the best way to understand it.

Sadly he was not around in Summer of 2006. By readily available evidence on Page 3, in fact. While this kind of lying alone should be enough evidence to invalidate your post, Ill continue with the relevant stuff.

Mispelling the person's name (multiple times) for whom you have devoted an entire post to bash lacks class yes. Either it's sloppy or downright disrespectful (in addition to the post itself).

Janova wasn't the point of the OP. The fact my proofreading was sloppy on that account would actually support the fact I just didn't see him as big enough a point to be worth the effort of making sure I typed the name right. Point invalidated.

See to me that is actually more frustrating, because people who go on and post when they have literally no idea what is going on and act like they should be taken seriously piss

Glad to see we agree.

Your entire post is made using inferences as the strongest basis for your argument.

Actually I analyze posts and point out the hypocrisy as evidence. But I suppose you're more than welcome to misunderstand the OP, as you have thus far done so spectacularly up until now.

[magicninja]

I enjoy my exchanges with Bob Jonova. He isn't all that bad. I'm probably one of the worst of the people you are talking about but then again I don't care.

[TehChron]

I enjoy my exchanges with Bob Jonova. He isn't all that bad. I'm probably one of the worst of the people you are talking about but then again I don't care.

Hes certainly more successful at it than you are, and frankly thats the point. Although bashing on folks like you would have been easier and safer insofar as backlashes go, using Janova as the example of the successful usage of that fake debating does far more to illustrate my point. Sure there are other examples to use, but I was too lazy to take the time to fill up the quote limit on that long as hell OP.

[enderland]

This is a game where alliance on alliance wars is a reality. The fact that the threat of war against your nation is nothing NEW doesnt suddenly mean that the threat of lost infrastructure makes it ok to blame an IC action for OOC silence. Really now...Beating up on your nation doesnt do a thing to the player behind it. Its just a game.

So you would have no qualms with going to "none" and letting yourself get raided all the time? At what point do you not think that it is ok to bully someone? If I point a gun at someone's head and say "delete your online blog" they still have a choice to not do that. That does not make them 100% responsible if they choose to delete their blog.

If this is "just a game" why do you care so much about how people post? For being "just a game" you sure put a lot of time into it. Also, since it is "just a game" then wouldn't being able to play the game actually matter?

Sadly he was not around in Summer of 2006. By readily available evidence on Page 3, in fact. While this kind of lying alone should be enough evidence to invalidate your post, Ill continue with the relevant stuff.

"Back then" was vague enough it could have meant anything. My apologies for not 100% correctly interpreting your post. Perhaps you could make an effort to be more clear in the future instead of using vague generalizations.

Janova wasn't the point of the OP. The fact my proofreading was sloppy on that account would actually support the fact I just didn't see him as big enough a point to be worth the effort of making sure I typed the name right. Point invalidated.

"Point invalidated."

I wish I could just post that and feel good about myself, knowing I had shred someone else's argument and "won!"

If one particular person was not the point of the OP, it would have been far more effective to take posts from this huge swarm of people (which I agree exist) and show that the problem is widespread instead of taking one poster and targeting them for what is apparently "not the point of the OP."

I have a really hard time accepting the "well I wasn't trying to make a thread to attack someone it just was a side effect" response as being 'legit' in the slightest.

POINT INVALIDATED.

Actually I analyze posts and point out the hypocrisy as evidence. But I suppose you're more than welcome to misunderstand the OP, as you have thus far done so spectacularly up until now.

Four posts are not evidence to "convict" someone with 4,514 posts. Then again 0.1% is reasonably sufficient to adequately determine the character of someone's posts.

POINT INVALIDATED