nadabethyname Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 survivalism aside, any alliance who would prop up and support ephraim grey and his !@#$%baggery deserves everything bad that will eventually come to them, as comes to all survivalists Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 What TBB and Finster said. Schatt, I forgive you for the emo-kiss spams, although I did it the instance after I clicked on those, thought you should know, Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 It's good to see you don't need to be part of a dangerous terrorist group to put out a quality publication. Enjoyed reading it even if I don't really know much about the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell Scream Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Schatt, remember when you were interesting on the OWF? I don't either. Twisting facts, half truths and biased polls are so awesome man. Keep up the good work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 We can both do this all day, I'm pretty sure you realize that. Every single one of your points can be contended, and then in turn you can continue to contend selective points of my own. Same cycle, here's the bottom line difference: your pandering to a crowd to paint a certain defamitory picture of my alliance (out of the blue) and I'm fending off your babel. You rolled up nothing and hit no one on the nose with anything that was not givin right back to you, you just have 4 or 5 people posting replies in blind support. As you said, I may not know you, but I know people like you...and they don't last very long where I'm from. In an environment such as this, you may actually even be able to trick yourself into thinking you have pulled the wool over someones eyes, but trust me there are plenty of people here who see right through all the extravagant amount of crap you created over an issue that has nothing to do with you. It's been commented on in private by others and noted. If, as you say, you really had some personal issue with VE or relevant concerns surrounding our role in any of the events that took place with GUN, and wanted further comment, you could have come and spoken with us like a man... yet this childish display is the route you choose instead. So by all means, continue. You have successfully swayed the minds of people who already shared your opinions anyway, certainly a victory that can help one sleep at night. I truly do wish I had more time, but I need to go actually argue for [occ: a grade] in the morning, rest assured though we can pick this back up tomorrow if your still inclined to be singing off topic nonsense from your soap box when I return. You know, I don't want to do this but... It seems like you sir, are mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Schatt, remember when you were interesting on the OWF?I don't either. Twisting facts, half truths and biased polls are so awesome man. Keep up the good work. He is, and forever shall be, more entertaining than most, whether you want to believe what he says or not. And hell, I hated him at one point, too. I probably still do, but so long as he's funny, and topical, and he has something to say, then I'll keep reading his posts. Edited October 21, 2009 by astronaut jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 This was certainly an interesting read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titodafarmer Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Has anyone done any math? If they claim that it has been 5 months since I was MoFA and SethB resigned as emperor in September, how could it have been my job or responsibility to hold elections? 5 months-1 month ago that SethB resigned=4 months. So at 3 months of me being in power as a minister....SethB was still in charge. It is his own fault that he did not hold elections. Edited October 22, 2009 by titodafarmer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Excellent publication, my dear Shantanamann. Also, how's Jofna? Jofna? What about Jofna? It's good to see you don't need to be part of a dangerous terrorist group to put out a quality publication. Enjoyed reading it even if I don't really know much about the situation. Dangerous terrorist group...... hahahaha.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Well sure, dismiss Schatt's criticism as crazy but I don't think you've taken sufficient interest in my disapproval of your actions. I will not forget this. :< That's the thing. You people will never be happy. Your kind will always barge in demanding proof, and blindly accusing. Yet, when asked for proof of said accusations, there is none unless you completely ignore the facts. You came into a thread with a seeded bias, and got told what you wanted to hear. Schatt knows what hes doing, and its twisting the truth to accomplish whatever so he wanted to accomplish. And that's how we end up with the same old people posting their disapproval of the same old alliances. You can call it truth, but in reality its nothing more than speculation you would find in the tabloids. See with people like Schatt they decried VE for being allied to NPO, then they decry them for not being allied to them. So how about that HellScream, remember all those months that us two tried to push for the NPO treaty to be canceled? I guess it happened overnight man! This sort of logic completely ignores that happened in between. The same can be said for most of his 'points.' If you are into mindless mob witch hunts, I guess this thread is cool. But to me, someone who would rather have the facts, its one of the biggest cop outs I have seen in a very long time. Enjoy your spot light Schatt. Though I kinda feel bad for EG too. The dude admitted to his crimes and received punishment, but I guess that's the price you pay for aggressive acts. Still seems like a random card to pull out to prove your point on this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildThing Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 I've always enjoyed a good witch hunt. Chalk up another evil-doer that is more interested in long-winded ramblings than employing any of his so called truths in order to dispel my wicked beliefs. Ordeal by fire for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 You know, I don't want to do this but...It seems like you sir, are mad. *applause* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 See with people like Schatt they decried VE for being allied to NPO, then they decry them for not being allied to them. Well then, if he didn't like you before, and he doesn't like you now... Hmmm, what is constant in this equation? Yes, there is an obvious bias here. Schatt attempted to use a survey to prove his bias was correct. He did a good job of using the numbers and did prove that there were some in OV who were unhappy, as opposed to Delta's claim. You have not done anything to disprove anything of these claims. In fact, the last two posts where you and Impero flipping about about Schatt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted October 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) That's the thing. You people will never be happy. Your kind will always barge in demanding proof, and blindly accusing. Yet, when asked for proof of said accusations, there is none unless you completely ignore the facts. You came into a thread with a seeded bias, and got told what you wanted to hear. Schatt knows what hes doing, and its twisting the truth to accomplish whatever so he wanted to accomplish. And that's how we end up with the same old people posting their disapproval of the same old alliances. You can call it truth, but in reality its nothing more than speculation you would find in the tabloids. Come on, Logannnnnnn, half the fun is in the stark contrast between OP and the response. I start off by calling Delta dumb because he's in a lulz alliance, end it with a disclosure of the complete invalidity of the survey, and VE's A-list shows up to try and discredit the survey. Like, really? Really? Really, VE? But you just keep opening doors . . . See with people like Schatt they decried VE for being allied to NPO, then they decry them for not being allied to them. So how about that HellScream, remember all those months that us two tried to push for the NPO treaty to be canceled? I guess it happened overnight man! This sort of logic completely ignores that happened in between. The same can be said for most of his 'points.' What I love about a good, solid thread, when I know I've done a good job, people show up and do two three things: (1) LOL BUBBLEGUM WAR! [check] (2) "This is what Schattenmann is thinking in his head. There's no quote, but this is what he's thinking." [thank you] (3) NERDRAGE BWWARRRRRR! [yes] You have hit upon number 2: "See with people like Schatt they decried VE for being allied to NPO, then they decry them for not being allied to them." People like me? Any statement by anyone other than me is not a statement of mine. People have been putting words in my mouth for 2 years, but it's never worked. I have not decried VE for "not being allied to NPO"--watch, this is a fine intellectual point, so listen close, don't miss it--I have decried VE's mentality in its actions. When the tide's high, they ride it high, when it starts to ebb, watch out! make a hole! VE's coming through. While VE was allied to NpO, NpO's government went on the second-longest running PR crapmess ever. Steppign on everyone's toes, insulting everyone's intelligence, creating wars for giggles and vendettas. VE stuck strong out of some retarded definition of honor that you don't cancel on jerkwads who let you reform after helping force you to disband. But then why did VE cancel with NpO? Because NpO disrespected VE due to a "list of other recent offenses against Viridia and her allies that shall, out of the remaining respect we have for Polaris, remain private. *" Hold up! VE suddenly had a problem with all NpO's shens in the run-up to the noCB War, then fights with The Coalition? Not what. Why. If you are into mindless mob witch hunts, I guess this thread is cool. But to me, someone who would rather have the facts, its one of the biggest cop outs I have seen in a very long time. Woah, buddy, try to break my iron-i-meter one more time and I'm going to take offense! I create a poll designed to answer a question raised on the OWF--How do OV members feel about this?--then VE proceeds to goonrush it, and VE are the ones who'd rather have the facts? Though I kinda feel bad for EG too. The dude admitted to his crimes and received punishment, but I guess that's the price you pay for aggressive acts. Still seems like a random card to pull out to prove your point on this topic. Baw. Bawwwww baw baw. EphriamGrey is a big boy, trust me. He knows that he did what he did, and he knows why Viridia's enabling and direct support is relevant to the current discussion. You can try to make people cry and turn me into a bad guy for making cut-and-dried statements of historical fact, but I've gotta tell you, no one's buying that one. Edited October 22, 2009 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Well then, if he didn't like you before, and he doesn't like you now...Hmmm, what is constant in this equation? Yes, there is an obvious bias here. Schatt attempted to use a survey to prove his bias was correct. He did a good job of using the numbers and did prove that there were some in OV who were unhappy, as opposed to Delta's claim. You have not done anything to disprove anything of these claims. In fact, the last two posts where you and Impero flipping about about Schatt. Oh most definitely, in fact your "u mad" post was really the most accurate one in this entire thread, by far haha. I think his survey is stupid, sure, but what I have major issue with is his post on the top of page 5. That is what my responses have been in reference to, as well as me generally not being a happy camper here...not the survey. I saved all my debating on the OV/GUN issue for the other thread and until that time have generally kept out of here with it. If you missed that post, take a look, if you were in my shoe's I'm sure you would react the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerdonia Redux Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 VE sux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildThing Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Post on the top of page 5 was one of my favourites... :< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Ugh... Come on, Logannnnnnn, half the fun is in the stark contrast between OP and the response. I start off by calling Delta dumb because he's in a lulz alliance, end it with a disclosure of the complete invalidity of the survey, and VE's A-list shows up to try and discredit the survey. Like, really? Really? Really, VE?But you just keep opening doors . . . What I love about a good, solid thread, when I know I've done a good job, people show up and do two three things: (1) LOL BUBBLEGUM WAR! [check] (2) "This is what Schattenmann is thinking in his head. There's no quote, but this is what he's thinking." [thank you] (3) NERDRAGE BWWARRRRRR! [yes] You have hit upon number 2: "See with people like Schatt they decried VE for being allied to NPO, then they decry them for not being allied to them." People like me? Any statement by anyone other than me is not a statement of mine. People have been putting words in my mouth for 2 years, but it's never worked. I have not decried VE for "not being allied to NPO"--watch, this is a fine intellectual point, so listen close, don't miss it--I have decried VE's mentality in its actions. When the tide's high, they ride it high, when it starts to ebb, watch out! make a hole! VE's coming through. While VE was allied to NpO, NpO's government went on the second-longest running PR crapmess ever. Steppign on everyone's toes, insulting everyone's intelligence, creating wars for giggles and vendettas. VE stuck strong out of some retarded definition of honor that you don't cancel on jerkwads who let you reform after helping force you to disband. But then why did VE cancel with NpO? Because NpO disrespected VE due to a "list of other recent offenses against Viridia and her allies that shall, out of the remaining respect we have for Polaris, remain private. *" Hold up! VE suddenly had a problem with all NpO's shens in the run-up to the noCB War, then fights with The Coalition? Not what. Why. Woah, buddy, try to break my iron-i-meter one more time and I'm going to take offense! I create a poll designed to answer a question raised on the OWF--How do OV members feel about this?--then VE proceeds to goonrush it, and VE are the ones who'd rather have the facts? Baw. Bawwwww baw baw. EphriamGrey is a big boy, trust me. He knows that he did what he did, and he knows why Viridia's enabling and direct support is relevant to the current discussion. You can try to make people cry and turn me into a bad guy for making cut-and-dried statements of historical fact, but I've gotta tell you, no one's buying that one. Once again, my main issue with you now is your words at the top of page 5. To be sure, I think that your manic interest in the OV/GUN issue is due to the same underling factors as your irascible that was expressed in the post to which I refer, but that's really just a side point. However, It's bizarre and completely out of context for this situation so I can't help but express my shock and awe about what in gods name you could possibly be thinking when you thought to yourself that it was appropriate here. Fact of the matter is you crossed the line, and you have a blind hate for my alliance. Your entitled to your opinion, but when you post horrible things based off of a twisted interpretation of events from the far past like you did in that post, you can expect me to come at you...not to make you look bad but simply to set the record straight about the community that I hold dear. Now, to address the real issues. You hold a horrible, horrible opinion of our alliance based on things from almost two years ago. That's fine, but when you spew the type of hate like you did in that post here in public you obviously open yourself up to rebuttal, and that includes your own actions. Apparently though, that's irrelevant according to you because you are allowed to hold yourself to a much lower standard then people you hate. The saying "those in glass houses should not throw stones" exists for a reason. I'm not saying your the same guy you were then, but your sure as hell saying we are when we clearly have shown otherwise. Ephriam Gray is not a point you can stick on either, as we are not happy we supported his trespasses back in the day and hell, we even ZI'ed him down the road. As for NpO, its still not exactly a point you can stick on, speak with them more on the issue if you want a little more clarity as to our feelings on that situation. I'm sorry, we don't publish periodicals about our feelings on our past, but I think our actions have spoken much louder then our words ever could. Edited October 22, 2009 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildThing Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 I'm sorry, we don't publish periodicals about our feelings on our past, but I think our actions have spoken much louder then our words ever could. I think that's what people are getting at, yeah. Also, surely no one in any form of house should throw stones. Throwing stones is something you do outside. Now, if you were trapped inside a house, it'd be a different story but throwing stones in a non-glass house wouldn't work very well I don't imagine. I'm left thinking that if I ever WERE to throw stones in a house, it'd probably be a glass one because it'd be the most effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted October 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Once again, my main issue with you now is your words at the top of page 5. Which were made in response to a member of VE: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?a...amp;pid=1916334 you can expect me to come at you...not to make you look bad Good thing, because you haven't/can't. Now, to address the real issues. You hold a horrible, horrible opinion of our alliance . . . . . . 's actions. I'm sorry, we don't publish periodicals about our feelings on our past, but I think our actions have spoken much louder then our words ever could. And I've been saying for 4 days that in fact your actions--2 years ago, last year, this year, this month, this week--do speak louder than your words. We just disagree on what your actions have been saying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Which were made in response to a member of VE: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?a...amp;pid=1916334Good thing, because you haven't/can't. . . . 's actions. And I've been saying for 4 days that in fact your actions--2 years ago, last year, this year, this month, this week--do speak louder than your words. We just disagree on what your actions have been saying Can you honestly say, looking back on his comment and your response, that its proportional? He made a low key statement and you utterly blew your top. Don't be alarmed that it has people kind of scratching their heads. Your next two remarks are closely related in my eyes. I argue that in reality, your reasons are excatly the opposite of what you say: You claim that you do not have a horrible opinion of our alliance, but rather have a horrible opinion of just our alliance's actions, and the reason that opinion still exists today is that you think that our actions have not done anything to show you otherwise in two years. I hold that you have a horrible and blind hate for our alliance now because you never particularly liked us in the first place. Therefore, you can look back on our actions and say we have not done anything different, not because its fact, but because that's the way you want to see it. Now, how did it go from casual dislike to such a seething hatred? I think personally the evolution of your attitude here is because you are board and don't have a cause to scream about at the moment (and I also think it has something to do with a very sad and profane little man from a few months ago who got his panties in a bunch when I laughed at his threats). Well, seeing as in your quoted posted you did not address anything of substance that I did in my own, aside from a quick and expected jab at my final sentence, I assume we don't have much more to say here. Edited October 22, 2009 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildThing Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 PSYC101 itt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Am I right in thinking less than 3 months ago the Ordo Verde charter changed from the one that was used during Sethb's reign as emporer to one that covered the use of a triumvirate? Yet Tito was still expected to uphold the elections on a date stated by a charter that wasn't even in use and couldn't possibly apply to a triumvirate anymore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Impero, you declined to response to my question. This confirmed my suspicions!!!!! It's a tarp!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataduanes Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Impero, you declined to response to my question. This confirmed my suspicions!!!!! It's a tarp!!!!!!!!!!! A tarp? a tarpaulin? 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.