The Glory of Manifestos - Page 6

Hot_Enamel · July 31, 2003, 07:02

There have been a couple of replies since.. but I cant be bothered bringing them over

Here was my last post in the

thread

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

Still, I get extremely irritated when members of GoW try to portray our honor as worthless. There is a long way between "not quite 100% perfect" and worthless.

Nathan

Nah... I would probably say it is worthless.

GS put themselves on this pedestal as being the most almighty righteousness civ in the game.
The above couple of posts seem to indicate that GS broke the NAP just to “even the score” with GoW. Thats fair enough, we are doing the same to RP.
Don’t start blaming us if we feel we have to point out that your honour code ain’t worth **** anymore.

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 07:24

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFree
MZ: You are complaining to GS about the "spirit" of a NAP you had with them when you should look at your own actions against RP, a team you had a NAP with, before you complaign any further to GS or the world at large.

umm, just in case you forgot last week's trash-talking sessions...

RP and GoW didn't have a NAP!!!

Donegeal · July 31, 2003, 07:43

[out of PTWDG voice]

I find it completely facinating that all sides in this debacle are all pointing fingers at each other and accusing each other of the same thing.

At every stage, this game has mimicked the real world. I am now trying to comprehend the implications of this.

We have done an excellent job of everyone trying to win, or....

Our real leaders have actually done a good getting us to this point.

[/out of PTWDG voice]

Donegeal: Mom!!!!! Gathering Storm is Cheating!!!!
Nathan: Oh, man! He's getting his mom! Let's get out of here!
Don's mom: Alright you little twerps! Get back over here and play nice!

Everybody scatters. They forget the GAME and go on to something else. Except Don. Don gets grounded for a week. Thanks guys!

vulture · July 31, 2003, 07:46

GAME?? You mean this is a GAME???

Heretic.

Shiber · July 31, 2003, 08:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
umm, just in case you forgot last week's trash-talking sessions...

RP and GoW didn't have a NAP!!!

In Nathan's words: We have an MPP but we don't have a NAP = we have four rocks but we don't have two rocks.

I am willing to accept that other teams may have different ideas of what certain clauses and certain wording implies, but to repeatedly underplay some agreements and overplay other agreements is plain manipulation of words, MZ.

OPD · July 31, 2003, 09:22

Am I the only one who really loves these kind of threads, the emotion and desire expressed in these threads is so much more appealing than the usual stuff. Accusations and slander add a whole new dimention to the game and make things alot more interesting and emotional when it comes to crunch time.

Hot_Enamel · July 31, 2003, 10:08

Quote:

Originally posted by OPD
Am I the only one who really loves these kind of threads, the emotion and desire expressed in these threads is so much more appealing than the usual stuff. Accusations and slander add a whole new dimention to the game and make things alot more interesting and emotional when it comes to crunch time.

100% agree....
Havent had as much fun since the Vox-GS slagfest

FrustratedPoet · July 31, 2003, 10:13

100% disagree, obviously.

You guys do whatever makes it more fun for you. If slander, abuse and personal attacks are what keeps your interest in the game then ... so be it, but you're all very weird.

BigFree · July 31, 2003, 10:28

In the the 'spirit' of every MPP there's a NAP. And within that 'spirit' is the 'spririt' that you shall not do 'hostile act' towards the team you have that agreement with.

I realize that most of this is open for interpretation. GoW obviously sees it one way and RP sees it another and possibly each team in this game sees it differently than each other one! It's human nature to cast shadows on a subject in a way that shows your actions in the best possible light.

Perhaps we truly need a UN; a body or bodies who can interpret things in-game and out as to it's intended meanings and the 'spirit' of agreements and the game mechanic questions.

WhiteBandit · July 31, 2003, 13:16

Quote:

Originally posted by OPD
Am I the only one who really loves these kind of threads, the emotion and desire expressed in these threads is so much more appealing than the usual stuff. Accusations and slander add a whole new dimention to the game and make things alot more interesting and emotional when it comes to crunch time.

Oh yeah, as long as everyone keeps it in perspective and realizes that this is all a game nonetheless (I mean hell, I work with the smelly MZ guy in the ISDG anyway).

Besides, OPD, you're ugly and you stink!

DAVOUT · July 31, 2003, 13:23

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
but you're all very weird.

It is the untold criteria to be admitted here.

Arnelos · July 31, 2003, 13:26

I'm fine with trash-talking, it's arguing what the definition of is is that annoys the crap out of me.

Some of you don't seem to understand that you aren't winning any points and certainly aren't winning any supporters by continuing to argue this well past the point of the argument's usefulness.

If you progressed to new topics, that could be interesting (that's what we did in the old SPDG campaign threads

), but simply re-hashing to same jaded arguments over and over and over (both sides...) gets boring.

It seems to me that no one of the set of people you desire to convince is really listening anymore or really cares.

But if you want to continue wasting your time, fine by me.

Panzer32 · July 31, 2003, 13:38

Thank you Arnelos.

My new topic for discussion is that Roleplay sucks.

Or has that been discussed previously?

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 15:17

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFree
In the the 'spirit' of every MPP there's a NAP. And within that 'spirit' is the 'spririt' that you shall not do 'hostile act' towards the team you have that agreement with.

BF, I think we already went over this countless times, if RP really though MPP=NAP, then why did you explicitly try to include a NAP during the negotiations for a second treaty?

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 15:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Arnelos
It seems to me that no one of the set of people you desire to convince is really listening anymore or really cares.

Willing to bet on it?

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 15:19

Quote:

Originally posted by OPD
Am I the only one who really loves these kind of threads, the emotion and desire expressed in these threads is so much more appealing than the usual stuff. Accusations and slander add a whole new dimention to the game and make things alot more interesting and emotional when it comes to crunch time.

Amen to that!!

Shiber · July 31, 2003, 15:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
BF, I think we already went over this countless times, if RP really though MPP=NAP, then why did you explicitly try to include a NAP during the negotiations for a second treaty?

Because they were expecting GoW to creatively reinterpret the MPP agreement, in light of their past?

Beta · July 31, 2003, 19:13

Quote:

Originally posted by OPD
Am I the only one who really loves these kind of threads, the emotion and desire expressed in these threads is so much more appealing than the usual stuff. Accusations and slander add a whole new dimention to the game and make things alot more interesting and emotional when it comes to crunch time.

Yup. I agree.

Just have to keep it all in perspective.

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet:
"but you're all very weird."

Response by Davout: "It is the untold criteria to be admitted here."

Beta · July 31, 2003, 19:17

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

Further, while I admit that Gathering Storm took advantage of an agreement between our teams to favor our interests over yours, was not your entire purpose in requesting the agreement in the first place to manipulate us into acceeding to your interests at the clear expense of our own? You and Neu Demogyptica had already decided to divide Bob between yourselves and, further, had essentially decided that there would be no place for any significant Gathering Storm presence there (if any presence at all).

Gee - I sort of remember quoting almost exactly those same words regarding a settlement on Bob some 1000+ years ago.

nbarclay · July 31, 2003, 20:09

At a risk of beating the tattered skeleton of what was once, in the distant past, a horse, I'd like to counter GoW's analogy with another analogy.

Suppose, when we cut off Vox's iron, they had also been at war with Glory of Pigeons. (Disclaimer: the names used for hypothetical teams are strictly fictional and are not intended to represent any real teams, living or dead.) And suppose, in turn, that a war was in the process of starting between Glory of Pigeons and Gathering Ducks. Gathering Ducks sees that Vox is at war with their near-future enemy, Glory of Pigeons. They want Vox to survive, prosper, and do as much damage to Glory of Pigeons as possible. Therefore, they supply Vox with iron.

In a situation such as that, would supplying Vox with iron have constituted a hostile act by Gathering Ducks against Gathering Storm? No. It would have constituted a hostile act against Glory of Pigeons, and an act of friendship toward a nation that Gathering Ducks had a common enemy with, but the fact that Gathering Storm got hurt would have been a side effect of an action that's real target was someone else entirely. Gathering Storm would still have regarded the matter as anywhere from annoying to a cause for war (assuming we weren't bound by a NAP), depending on how we felt about Gathering Ducks and Glory of Pigeons at the time, but calling it a hostile act against us when the real target was Glory of Pigeons would have been a serious stretch.

Similarly, while our NAP precluded our treating GoW as an enemy, we and RP did have a common enemy nonetheless: Neu Demogyptica. That gave us reasons completely independent of our feelings toward GoW to want RP to be as healthy as possible and as able to put troops on their front lines with ND as possible under the circumstances.

Looking purely through the lenses of how our actions affected GoW, I can see how they could construe our actions as hostile acts against them. That's why GS hasn't tried to start flaming GoW as deal-breakers in this matter. But the reality is that we were pursuing a course that would help GS against ND without causing any genuine harm to GoW (except, of course, to their ambitions for an easy conquest of our ally) along the way.

Panzer32 · July 31, 2003, 20:24

Quote:

Glory of Pigeons

There is never glory in pigeons

What is the quickest way to make a city look horrible? War or Pigeons?

BTW, thats a good theme for a PTWDG III team.

Although I think most believe war to be much more agreeable then pigeons.

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 20:25

Ah but the difference is that the Glory of Pigeons would know from the start that supplying iron would have ment indirect harm to Gathering Ducks, it is imppossible to deny the hostility of that act towards another team regarldess of being allied with Bux

Thus, impeding the advance of the Glory of Pigeons against Horseplay constituted a hostile act by the Gathering Ducks as well as on the Old Demopigtica front, all at this time when Playmobiland remained idle.

We can also make analogies between the situation which pitted Old Demopigtica and Flux Vulnerablia that that's another story...

notyoueither · July 31, 2003, 20:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
To set the record straight, if it wasn't me bugging you, you would have never answered me.

Bull hockey! However the fact that you are so arrogant that you feel you can read my mind is fairly amusing.

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 21:43

I never said I could read your mind, all I said that we felt ignored since we were not given answers on time and your team has admitted there were mistakes in sending PMs.

Diplomatic mistakes happen, sure, but look at the consequences: war.

Panzer32 · July 31, 2003, 22:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
Ah but the difference is that the Glory of Pigeons would know from the start that supplying iron would have ment indirect harm to Gathering Ducks, it is imppossible to deny the hostility of that act towards another team regarldess of being allied with Bux

Thus, impeding the advance of the Glory of Pigeons against Horseplay constituted a hostile act by the Gathering Ducks as well as on the Old Demopigtica front, all at this time when Playmobiland remained idle.

We can also make analogies between the situation which pitted Old Demopigtica and Flux Vulnerablia that that's another story...

quit turning my witty proceedings into propaganda

nbarclay · July 31, 2003, 22:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
Ah but the difference is that the Glory of Pigeons would know from the start that supplying iron would have ment indirect harm to Gathering Ducks, it is imppossible to deny the hostility of that act towards another team regarldess of being allied with Bux

It would seem that in your language, "hostile" means "detrimental," while in ours, it means "for the purpose of causing harm". Would you care to suggest a suitable torture for the incompetent translators responsible for this mess?

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 23:44

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

It would seem that in your language, "hostile" means "detrimental," while in ours, it means "for the purpose of causing harm". Would you care to suggest a suitable torture for the incompetent translators responsible for this mess?

Yes, forcing that person to play as Korea during the rest of his existance.

E_T · August 2, 2003, 13:51

As I've been away for more than a week because of moving, just coming back and reading this thread has lifted my spirits somewhat. This whole thing is choice....

E_T

nbarclay · August 2, 2003, 19:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Panzer32

There is never glory in pigeons

Right. Glory of Pigeons does not exist. Doesn't that make it a perfect name for a team that does not exist?

Panzer32 · August 2, 2003, 20:19

No it doesn't. It makes me think of the extreme concentrations of uric acid in bird's well... you know