Petition: For the Sake of Fun - Page 2

Shiber · July 30, 2003, 14:02

OK, I just burst into laughter reading Giggis's last two posts.
Keep it up

Shiber · July 30, 2003, 14:07

GF, due to your recent actions, I have no choice but to PermaBan you with my new SuperUltraMod powers.

* Shiber casts PermaBan on GiggisFart.
* Shiber's spell is successful.
* Shiber used 4 Magic Points and gained 500 Experience Points.

Whoa... that was more like, SuperUltraMUD powers.

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 14:52

Note: This post has been deleted because the poster has been ShiberBanned.

Theseus · July 30, 2003, 19:22

WOW!!!

I just caught up. The discussions have been... interesting.

I know that everyone, myself included, can get heated, slighted, angered, disappointed, irritated, surprised, outraged, etc., at some of the things that have happened, and some of the things that have been discussed (or not), and certainly at the way some things are said (or not). And, as UnO, points out, sometimes our personal lives can add to the fire as well.

I'd like to say two things:

* Everyone one of us, either individually or as teams, have made the choices and taken the actions and said the words (or not) that have gotten us here... with much discussion and agonizing, I am sure. And I absolutely RESPECT everyone's right to make their own choices and take their own actions, even though I may have done differently. To me, it's not personal, it's just how people choose to do this thing... the results will bear witness to all of those choices, that's all.

* It's very easy (especially on taking the last day or so's posts in all at once) to lean back for a sec and say, "Whoa, this is a little much, it's just a game." Well, it seems that it's not just a game... The amount of energy, the level of intensity, the emotional and intellectual commitment... We have chosen to make this an important part of our lives, and as such, especially given that we are here at Apolyton, and what that means to me at least in terms of our community's culture, I think that we could all agree to a bit more decorum and respect. Not to take away from trash-talking and fun, but let's remember where we are, and with whom we're dealing.

So, Shiber, consider your petition signed by me.

(and Lucille and Ricky

)

Rhothaerill · July 30, 2003, 19:33

Well said Theseus.

And since I forgot to do this earlier, I'll sign too.

mrmitchell · July 30, 2003, 19:39

everyone in this game who is not a roleplayian is stupid

you will fall to the blade

resistance is futile, sissies

j/k

I support the bill in principle. It's only more of a goodwill agreement than a bill though.

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 20:07

Deleted

Theseus · July 30, 2003, 20:18

Smart alecness if fun, GF, definitely

(and you ARE on of the best at it). Please don't stop, really.

Taking it all in at once, though, it just seemed a little bit too much... the smart alecness turned into, hmmm, accusation and vindiction, or at least that what it felt like.

Perhaps a little more humor? A punch to the shoulder instead of the face?

Abuse chickens and squid... not people.

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 20:32

Deleted

Beta · July 30, 2003, 21:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
WOW!!!

I know that everyone, myself included, can get heated, slighted, angered, disappointed, irritated, surprised, outraged, etc., at some of the things that have happened, and some of the things that have been discussed (or not), and certainly at the way some things are said (or not). And, as UnO, points out, sometimes our personal lives can add to the fire as well.

I'd like to say two things:

* Everyone one of us, either individually or as teams, have made the choices and taken the actions and said the words (or not) that have gotten us here... with much discussion and agonizing, I am sure. And I absolutely RESPECT everyone's right to make their own choices and take their own actions, even though I may have done differently. To me, it's not personal, it's just how people choose to do this thing... the results will bear witness to all of those choices, that's all.

* It's very easy (especially on taking the last day or so's posts in all at once) to lean back for a sec and say, "Whoa, this is a little much, it's just a game." Well, it seems that it's not just a game... The amount of energy, the level of intensity, the emotional and intellectual commitment... We have chosen to make this an important part of our lives, and as such, especially given that we are here at Apolyton, and what that means to me at least in terms of our community's culture, I think that we could all agree to a bit more decorum and respect. Not to take away from trash-talking and fun, but let's remember where we are, and with whom we're dealing.

Been there, done that.

In other words, I agree.

On the other hand - game on!!! Are we men, or are we mice??? Oh - pass the cheese please.

alva · July 30, 2003, 21:21

Good idea Shibs

nbarclay · July 30, 2003, 22:18

The reason the "Glory of Manifestos" thread got out of hand so quickly was that it started with an attempt at character assassination against the entire GS team. Such messages, especially as thread starters, and even more especially if they are perceived by the accused as grossly inaccurate, will almost inevitably produce a lot of heat.

Trash talking can be a lot of fun when everyone involved knows it's not intended seriously. Beta's "Iraqi foreign minister" bit was magnificent, precisely because everyone knew not to take it too seriously. I think the key is that it's okay to make outrageous accusations in a spirit of fun when everyone knows they aren't intended to be taken seriously, and it's okay to have serious discussions on serious matters as long as the goal is to get down to the truth, but when outrageous or distorted accusations are made regarding serious matters, that's an almost certain recipe for harsh words and hurt feelings.

Nathan

Master Zen · July 30, 2003, 22:57

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay
The reason the "Glory of Manifestos" thread got out of hand so quickly was that it started with an attempt at character assassination against the entire GS team. Such messages, especially as thread starters, and even more especially if they are perceived by the accused as grossly inaccurate, will almost inevitably produce a lot of heat.

Trash talking can be a lot of fun when everyone involved knows it's not intended seriously. Beta's "Iraqi foreign minister" bit was magnificent, precisely because everyone knew not to take it too seriously. I think the key is that it's okay to make outrageous accusations in a spirit of fun when everyone knows they aren't intended to be taken seriously, and it's okay to have serious discussions on serious matters as long as the goal is to get down to the truth, but when outrageous or distorted accusations are made regarding serious matters, that's an almost certain recipe for harsh words and hurt feelings.

Nathan

Let's see, "character" assassination directed at the entire team?

If anything it was "team" assassination, and yes, that was my sole intention and by some of your guys' replies, I see you fell for it

There was nothing as outrageous or distorted at what I said, then again self-righteousness leads to self-justification which of course makes it quite understandable the responses some of you chose. Trust me, I hold nothing against GS members as individuals, I consider some of you as great people and friends and hope to continue as such.

You all simply should have followed the lead of your wise leader, nye, by simply saying "bring it on". All you did was make it worse and now you're blaming me for it...

nbarclay · July 30, 2003, 23:18

Quote:

It is obvious that GS has never had any peaceful intentions and that it will seek to establish a presence on Bob, regardless of past written agreements, signed in the name of the so-called "honor code" which they claim to uphold. Apparently GS is willing to violate deals and switch sides to its convenience despite appearing to be a team upholding a superior standard of decency and integrity. GS's action has shown that this "honor code" exists only as a figment of their collective imagination, and as a now-useless propaganda tool to try and convince the world that their word is solid as a stone.

The fact that we hold a different definition from you of what constitutes a "hostile" act means that our entire honor code exists only as a figmant of our imaginations? You don't think that's even the slightest bit distorted?

Master Zen · July 30, 2003, 23:28

Not when you were blasting the rest of the world on sending Vox iron. A hostile act by GS was then perceived as anything that would hinder your war effort. So now when you blatantly hinder ours you refrain from considering a hostile act? Double-standard if you ask me, you know quite well what a hostile act is.

Theseus · July 30, 2003, 23:38

There it goes again...

Makes you feel for the world's leaders, doesn't it?

This is the "good relations" thread, guys.

Arnelos · July 30, 2003, 23:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
Not when you were blasting the rest of the world on sending Vox iron. A hostile act by GS was then perceived as anything that would hinder your war effort. So now when you blatantly hinder ours you refrain from considering a hostile act? Double-standard if you ask me, you know quite well what a hostile act is.

MasterZen,

You forget that Glory of War and Spain were not yet in-game at war

Master Zen · July 30, 2003, 23:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
There it goes again...

Makes you feel for the world's leaders, doesn't it?

This is the "good relations" thread, guys.

Hey I just signed the disclaimer... don't look at me!

Arnelos: we declared war on you in public, that's counts IMO.

Theseus · July 31, 2003, 00:07

Man, is that telling...

Anybody got a definition of "declaration of war" in this game? In game, out of game, private PMs, public forum, etc.?

Aaaaand, chiming in from the Cake or Death corner:

"A f*ckin' jihad on you!"

nbarclay · July 31, 2003, 00:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
Not when you were blasting the rest of the world on sending Vox iron. A hostile act by GS was then perceived as anything that would hinder your war effort. So now when you blatantly hinder ours you refrain from considering a hostile act? Double-standard if you ask me, you know quite well what a hostile act is.

If GoW troops were already engaged in combat and GoW lives were at stake if you didn't get troops to the front in time, I would view the situations as parallel.

nbarclay · July 31, 2003, 00:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
This is the "good relations" thread, guys.

Which is why I'm trying to debate in a polite, civilized way.

Theseus · July 31, 2003, 00:40

G'night from me, folks.

I might have to join Team Sunshine... I love all of you. :sob: :sob:

(until you are DEAD! MWAHAHAHAHA!!!)

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 00:48

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

If GoW troops were already engaged in combat and GoW lives were at stake if you didn't get troops to the front in time, I would view the situations as parallel.

We were at war Nathan, unable to engage because there were no troops to engage. Our declaration of war was posted. As for GoW lives at stake that's just another case of self-justification and you can go around and around the issue but ultimately leading to the inescapable fact that it was a hostile act, even by your definitions.

But oh well, we can argue this forever... we can argue it wasn't parallel because we were standing on a jungle tile and GS had been in desert, or that we were using Riders instead of Med Infs, or simply the one that I guess is the most obvious, we are GoW and you are GS, and GS by defintion does not commit hostile acts.

anyway, I think this is the wrong thread to argue things...

Tiberius · July 31, 2003, 01:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
anyway, I think this is the wrong thread to argue things...

You took out the words from my mouth. Go back to your trash talking threads!

Oh, and Theseus:

Hot_Enamel · July 31, 2003, 01:57

Nice idea Shiber..but dont sign me up.
IMO, some posts deserve to flamed.

I recall a RP member called ND Nazis.
I also remember GoW calling RP Hitler.

Some posters need to be brought back in line.

In recent events, we have a team who repeats over and over and over again, that they will win this game using an honour code that puts them above every other team.
When really, they are opportunistic as the rest of us.
The GS honour code aint worth spitting on, and GoW's mistake, was to believe that they would honour the spirit of their agreements.

Had GoW an agreement with "Mr Loophole" himself (aka Togas) we would of half expected some sort of backstab. For example, when it was suddenly dawning on RP that GoW may go to war with them, they hastily tried to negotaite a NAP. Even with our riders advancing towards their lines, they still tried to screw us by inserting a paragraph that required GoW to acknowledge that RP had legal ownership to half the continent. We expect this from RP. It is how they have been treating us for most of the game. It is one of the many reasons why we attacked. I would rather not play a game where I have to spend a whole evening studying proposals for any clauses.

Anyway .. I want to have the right to flame every GS member that deems it necessary to bring up their honour code yet again and again and again.

{edit - sorry .. I will repost this is the flame thread}

Darekill · July 31, 2003, 02:06

@ Hot Enamel.
You are right in so far as I would never accept it from anyone neither in joke nor elsewhere to call me a Nazi because that is the least thing I am. Though I'm proud to be a german and are not afraid to show that. It's just my belive that anyone from anywhere has the right to be proud of the nation he is from.

Does that mean i have to flame that person.

I don't think so.

Step one: I would kindly ask this person to stopp that.
he dosn't care?
Step two: I woud tell him that he is wrong and that I'm not going to accept that.
he still insists?
Step three: I'd adress him that I'dont like it and that he should please go and **** himself.
he is still on his toes.
Step four: I'll ignore him. In a forum no one can force you in a conflict you don't want.

The comunity will see who's wrong and who's not. no need to flame.

Master Zen · July 31, 2003, 02:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Hot_Enamel
In recent events, we have a team who repeats over and over and over again, that they will win this game using an honour code that puts them above every other team.
When really, they are opportunistic as the rest of us.
The GS honour code aint worth spitting on, and GoW's mistake, was to believe that they would honour the spirit of their agreements.

Well, perhaps it was all one big giant ruse and propaganda tool. And guess what? We were all duped!!!

Congrats, Team Benedict Arn...err... Gathering Storm, you are definitely the team which has fooled us all for the most time.

asleepathewheel · July 31, 2003, 02:37

notyoueither · July 31, 2003, 02:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Hot_Enamel
In recent events, we have a team who repeats over and over and over again, that they will win this game using an honour code that puts them above every other team.
When really, they are opportunistic as the rest of us.
The GS honour code aint worth spitting on, and GoW's mistake, was to believe that they would honour the spirit of their agreements.

Had GoW an agreement with "Mr Loophole" himself (aka Togas) we would of half expected some sort of backstab. For example, when it was suddenly dawning on RP that GoW may go to war with them, they hastily tried to negotaite a NAP. Even with our riders advancing towards their lines, they still tried to screw us by inserting a paragraph that required GoW to acknowledge that RP had legal ownership to half the continent. We expect this from RP. It is how they have been treating us for most of the game. It is one of the many reasons why we attacked. I would rather not play a game where I have to spend a whole evening studying proposals for any clauses.

Anyway .. I want to have the right to flame every GS member that deems it necessary to bring up their honour code yet again and again and again.

{edit - sorry .. I will repost this is the flame thread}

You seem to neglect the fact that GoW has broken every single deal that GoW has ever made with GS, save one. GoW was suggesting that they should also delay on fulfilling that deal for Chivalry as well, but perhaps GoW thought they might have need of GS soon, so that one was completed. However, GoW still broke the first half of that deal, so I guess it is only one half of a deal they did not break.

Now, GoW has violated an NAP as well, or maybe they think we did. OK. Chalk up one-half to GS, and one-half to GoW. I think the score is still rather unbalanced.

Some people expect GS to treat a team that never upheld a single deal with us as we would any other? I think that something is wrong with that picture.

Go ahead. Reserve the right to flame, just wear your asbestos.

BigFree · July 31, 2003, 05:33

Funny how arguments from one thread get carried over into another thread...bygones won't be bygones till this war is over; well except for my FAMily!

BTW, should GF get a PCR for all the 'deleted' posts he's made? He sure has a habit for going back and getting rid of the evidence; how sad.