Jump to content

How to Spot a Polar Lie


Schattenmann

Recommended Posts

For those of us who are not necessarily active enough to fully understand the various nuances and back room dealings going on in the cyberverse, your previous hate campaigns; for example TWiP; offered interesting and informative perspectives on current events.

I get that with this you are trying to provoke Polaris. But erm that's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Schat-man? Tell which of the following is more likely:

Polar signed a treaty with MK while secretly hating them and wanting them to burn.

OR

A series of missteps and a convoluted treaty web brought Polar to this spot in this point in time.

I'm a fan of ooccam's razor myself since it's easy to use and gives a nice close shave, so I'm gonna roll with option B for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this basically sums up what I would otherwise have to write in reply to the OP;

(OOC before a link? i dunno, better safe than sorry) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix_F7rEExqI

Edited by hizzy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='02 February 2010 - 10:59 AM' timestamp='1265126354' post='2153228']
[img]http://lastprice.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/broken_record.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

fixed your post for ya there ;)

congrats Schatt. you have reinforced everything i've ever thought about you. When you actually learn to post original stuff, try again k?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='elborrador' date='02 February 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1265151680' post='2154002']
fixed your post for ya there ;)

congrats Schatt. you have reinforced everything i've ever thought about you. When you actually learn to post original stuff, try again k?
[/quote]

You got called out for not defending all your allies. It's okay I'd be ashamed too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='02 February 2010 - 06:06 PM' timestamp='1265152010' post='2154011']
You got called out for not defending all your allies. It's okay I'd be ashamed too.
[/quote]
I know! And after MK so selflessly defended them against all those who attacked Polaris in the first part of this war!

(sarcasm.)

Edited by Geoffron X
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' date='02 February 2010 - 02:21 AM' timestamp='1265098917' post='2152836']
All I see is a bunch of quotes in the OP taken out of context. You really need to come up with something better.
[/quote]
Eh? They're all in context. The context is: Polar used to love MK. I don't see how these are out of context. In fact, if Schatt had removed that context, he wouldn't even have a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='02 February 2010 - 06:05 PM' timestamp='1265155523' post='2154154']
If you're just going to talk and not do anything about it...well just stop talking.

We get it. You dislike Polar. Now please entertain us by declaring.
[/quote]
Yeah, it's not like he's every done anything like that before.

No, NEVER!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='mrcalkin' date='02 February 2010 - 02:31 PM' timestamp='1265131868' post='2153397']
Until he said something you didn't agree with :rolleyes:
[/quote]

No, when he was clever and interesting, quite I often didn't agree with his views either...
But his threads had the :popcorn:
Nowadays it's just : :mellow:

... I say that Polaris deserves something better than this poor attempt at journalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tobistus' date='02 February 2010 - 08:20 AM' timestamp='1265116809' post='2153049']
In other words: Just let the grown ups have their fun, and mind your own business unless you wanna get involved personally.
[/quote]
I see a student of the Shahenshah School of OWFery has joined us today. I'm sorry, son, but you're not ready for your exit exams.

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='02 February 2010 - 08:22 AM' timestamp='1265116940' post='2153052']
So wait, because Polar have started a war against raiders who were never allied to MK, and because they have re-entered the war to help those who joined their side and got left out to dry by declaring war on an alliance that is not allied to MK, they were somehow lying when they said they were happy to sign an MDP with MK?

I'm sorry, I just don't see how that's logical.
[/quote]
Bob Janova you may yet change my opinion of VE singlehandedly, you are a gentleman and a scholar.
The essential problems with your response are glaring. You refer to Little P's war against \m/ as a "war against raiders" but we know that the difference is a wide gulf. CNARF declared war on raiders, Little P declared war on \m/. If anyone wants to go drudging through post histories, they will find I have lent my voice to decry techraiding in general as well as unprovoked war in the guise of raiding. You will all also find that I have never defined mass raids on alliances as "raids" because that's not what they are; they are alliance wars. So it is that Little P's former protectorate and current ally GOONS went to war against FOA along with \m/ and PC. They may have erroneously called it a raid, but I assure you, it was an alliance war just as Athens entered a war against Knights of Ni! but tried to pass it off as a "raid."
So we see that if Little P declared "war against "raiders" then they would have declared war on GOONS, PC, and \m/, but their course of action and the definition of those AAs' actions shows something entirely different: Little P declared on \m/, not raiders.

As to your inability to make the lying connection, in all honesty, it really was more fun to quote the sycophantic crap replies, but I should have quoted the treaty. You are right on that count. (However there may yet be an argument that in fact all those IOs were lying as they never had any intent to do all those pretty things they said).
So, to the lies:
Little P made several pledges in its treaty with MK; pledges in regard to conduct, and intelligence.
In Article II of [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70180"]the treaty[/url], "Conduct," Little P "pledge[s] to show only respect and good will towards [Mushroom Kingdom]." In fact, Grub's war of election showed only disrespect and no good will whatever in regards to MK. While in Rok's cancellation thread Polarians are arguing that it is not verbotten to attack an ally of an ally (convenient, at least, now innit? :ehm:) none has come forward with an example of it happening; it is not practiced. Grub may cry Sovereiggggggggggntyyyyyyyy from the top of his ivory tower, but he is not stupid, and he knew how things would run, but didn't care.
In Article VI of [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70180"]the treaty[/url], "Intelligence," Little P puts its sacrosanct word to it that "should knowledge of a political or military nature vital to the security of [Mushroom Kingdom] come to the attention of [Polaris], [Polaris is] required to share it within a timely manner." Straightforward language, for those who did not too stupid to read. In fact, Grub has acknowledged that TOP/IRON told him that they were going to attack MK (as part of an offensive against all of C&G), but Little P did not pass this information on to Mushroom Kingdom. When Little P elected to re-enter the war they're "trying to stop" they once again breached their Article VI obligations, giving MK "about 5 minutes" notice.

Indeed, Little P has little to no regard for any ally, or for their obligations.

[quote name='Joe Izuzu' date='02 February 2010 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1265149412' post='2153939']
This is simply the latest of a recent series of failed threads authored by Schattenman in which he is attempts to restore his relevance in a post-Hegemony world. I, for one, feel rather sorry for him.
[/quote]
Weird, I thought I was establishing my relevence in a post-Hegemony world by being one of the keystone creators of a Red economic treaty and a vehemently vocal proponent of NPO's inclusion in it despite heavy pressure from other Red AAs and Karma. Or by founding an alliance that sticks by its word, has real principles that distinguish it from Mega AA #5. Or by contributing to The Tabloid Tribune. Or by any number of things.

But don't you worry, I know you're only putting on a show so that Three Emperors Pact bloc will look tempting to Grub. Good little Pacifican.

[quote name='KingEsus' date='02 February 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1265151065' post='2153976']
For those of us who are not necessarily active enough to fully understand the various nuances and back room dealings going on in the cyberverse, your previous hate campaigns; for example TWiP; offered interesting and informative perspectives on current events.

I get that with this you are trying to provoke Polaris. But erm that's about it.
[/quote]
I'm glad you got the point of this thread, which is not a TWiP, but I am saddened that you were unable to further carry the train of understanding that as a not-TWiP, it's goals are in fact different and the two should not be compared. Keep taking your vitamins and watching your Baby Einstein videos, and you'll get there, though.

[quote name='King DrunkWino' date='02 February 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1265151466' post='2153991']
Schat-man? Tell which of the following is more likely:

Polar signed a treaty with MK while secretly hating them and wanting them to burn.

OR

A series of missteps and a convoluted treaty web brought Polar to this spot in this point in time.

I'm a fan of ooccam's razor myself since it's easy to use and gives a nice close shave, so I'm gonna roll with option B for now.
[/quote]
I don't believe that occam's razor has anything to do with it, because of course we all know that Option B as you've labeled it is the correct answer. The difference, then, in people that are rational and people that are empassioned pundits is that rational people like myself can look at that "series of missteps" and see that even if they were missteps, they were deliberate and taken with full conviction of Little P's inability to do wrong. Little P convoluted its own treaty web, Little P declared its own war of election. Little P condones the identical actions of GOONS re: FOA by continuing to hold (and utilize) the treaty with GOONS, while condemning the identical actions of \m/ and PC re: FOA. It becomes less and less of a "series of missteps" and more and more of a tromping across common sense.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='02 February 2010 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1265155523' post='2154154']
If you're just going to talk and not do anything about it...well just stop talking.

We get it. You dislike Polar. Now please entertain us by declaring.
[/quote]
Oh you haven't already forgot what happened the last time I got goaded into "doing something"?

Edited by Schattenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='02 February 2010 - 09:31 PM' timestamp='1265175082' post='2155128']
Oh you haven't already forgot what happened the last time I got goaded into "doing something"?
[/quote]

Oh I know, I'm just wondering if you'll do it again.

(I hope you do it would be entertaining)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='elborrador' date='02 February 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1265151680' post='2154002']
congrats Schatt. you have reinforced everything i've ever thought about you. When you actually learn to post original stuff, try again k?
[/quote]

How about I do the complete opposite and post unorignal stuff?

[IMG]http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff246/cndump/eltrollador.jpg[/IMG]

I knew I held onto that for a reason, liar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='03 February 2010 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1265175082' post='2155128']
I don't believe that occam's razor has anything to do with it, because of course we all know that Option B as you've labeled it is the correct answer. The difference, then, in people that are rational and people that are empassioned pundits is that rational people like myself can look at that "series of missteps" and see that even if they were missteps, they were deliberate and taken with full conviction of Little P's inability to do wrong. Little P convoluted its own treaty web, Little P declared its own war of election. Little P condones the identical actions of GOONS re: FOA by continuing to hold (and utilize) the treaty with GOONS, while condemning the identical actions of \m/ and PC re: FOA. It becomes less and less of a "series of missteps" and more and more of a tromping across common sense.[/quote]Actually, we notified GOONS of our intent to cancel our treaty with them not long after Grub found out about the FOA situation. GOONS, rightly, sought to rectify the situation, and seemed to recognize that they made a mistake which they attempted to make right. Because of that, the treaty was not canceled until rather recently when GOONS entered the war with Umbrella.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first heard about 'shrooms, I avoided them because Papa Sponge said they were bad for you. By the spring of 2008, however, I was curious enough to begin some experimenting.

Do you know what I found? That I liked 'shrooms. I liked they way they felt. I liked the way they looked. I liked the way they smelled. I liked the way they sounded. I even liked the way they tasted (I was drunk and LJ Scott can be pretty convincing :v:). What I liked most of all, however, was the way that 'shrooms made me feel.

Suffice to say I started to use 'shrooms pretty regularly until, in summer 2008, I crossed the line from recreational user to verifiable addict. From that point on, I believed that every Polar should be indulging in 'shrooms regularly. So, I became a pusher and I pushed quite fiercely for increased contact with 'shrooms within both Polar, and NSO.

Eventually, my dream of increased Polar contact with 'shrooms came true. For a single day I became the happiest addict in the world, with a lifetime supply of 'shrooms to be shared with all of my Polar comrades. Part of my personal conceit even encouraged myself to think that I played a significant role in making it happen.

Recently, however, there have been a lot of bad trips on both sides of the Polar-'shroom equation which has led some to question whether or not this contact between Polar and 'shroom is going to last. Even I, arguably the biggest 'shroom addict in Polar, have had some doubts and have chosen to take a break from that regular 'shroom contact which has been an integral part of my CN existence for so long.

What is not in doubt, however, is the fact that my feelings and the feelings of the vast amount of Polars which were expressed on that day were real. They were not empty lies. They were not a political smoke screen. They were a genuine expression of a sentiment which I firmly hope will weather this storm so that it can be rekindled back into a beautiful bonfire of love, trust and respect.

Whether or not that hope is realized, however, does not change the fact that now, like then, I love 'shrooms and that I very much look forward to the day when the prospect of bad trips will end so I can once again indulge in 'shrooms without hesitation, and without reserve.


And, by the way, I [b]STILL[/b] think the treaty should have been named bLUE

Edited by Fallen_Fool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=Schattenmann]Treaty lawyering[/quote]
See, this is actually a valid criticism of Polar, though you could level exactly the same accusations at MK, who didn't exactly 'show only respect and good will towards NpO' in the initial DoW thread, and didn't inform Polar of the many raider-coalition counter-attacks which they would have known about in advance ... not to mention not defending Polar against the many alliances which declared on them out of choice (everyone except PC pretty much).

By the time the TOP/IRON front was opened MK had made it very clear what they thought of that treaty.

[quote]While in Rok's cancellation thread Polarians are arguing that it is not verbotten to attack an ally of an ally (convenient, at least, now innit? :ehm:) none has come forward with an example of it happening; it is not practiced.[/quote]
RoK have a valid case to complain about that, although Grub stated that he talked to RoK about it before declaring. MK do not – Polar didn't declare on an ally of MK or even at 2 steps removed, and it is only through the choice of several other people that MK became involved in the NpO-\m/ war.

Edited by Bob Janova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Geoffron X' date='02 February 2010 - 06:26 PM' timestamp='1265153202' post='2154057']
I know! And after MK so selflessly defended them against all those who attacked Polaris in the first part of this war!

(sarcasm.)
[/quote]

Have you ever heard of a non-chaining treaty or are you being willfully ignorant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='02 February 2010 - 11:31 PM' timestamp='1265175082' post='2155128']
I see a student of the Shahenshah School of OWFery has joined us today. I'm sorry, son, but you're not ready for your exit exams.
[/quote]

This is something I must ask, because I have only recently began to hear about this Shahenshah School. What the heck is it? Just some guy who posted a tl;dr about how to troll efficiently on the OWF without getting mod warned/ban?

If so, could I have a link or source to see this article? It has me interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='03 February 2010 - 01:22 PM' timestamp='1265203363' post='2156363']
See, this is actually a valid criticism of Polar, though you could level exactly the same accusations at MK, who didn't exactly 'show only respect and good will towards NpO' in the initial DoW thread, and didn't inform Polar of the many raider-coalition counter-attacks which they would have known about in advance ... not to mention not defending Polar against the many alliances which declared on them out of choice (everyone except PC pretty much).

By the time the TOP/IRON front was opened MK had made it very clear what they thought of that treaty.


RoK have a valid case to complain about that, although Grub stated that he talked to RoK about it before declaring. MK do not – Polar didn't declare on an ally of MK or even at 2 steps removed, and it is only through the choice of several other people that MK became involved in the NpO-\m/ war.
[/quote]

Bob, at the root of this issue, regardless of Polaris self appoint moderation of community standards, Polaris
did declare an agressive war on their part. If you go back to the very begining of this conflict with a non bias veiw it was NpO who declared the very first war. To claim that had no effect on the treaty chain is dishonet at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tobistus' date='03 February 2010 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1265221709' post='2156846']
This is something I must ask, because I have only recently began to hear about this Shahenshah School. What the heck is it? Just some guy who posted a tl;dr about how to troll efficiently on the OWF without getting mod warned/ban?

If so, could I have a link or source to see this article? It has me interested.
[/quote]
[img]http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u51/silverfoxrocker/FailTroll1.png[/img]
He's in your gov, BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...