Jump to content

Flame of the Flawed

Members
  • Posts

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Flame of the Flawed

  1. I know answers to a lot of things. Things you all do not want to know. I’ve been to the top of the mountain. I’ve had the chalice of power in my grasp and drank deeply from it. Trust me. Why did t$ really sign NPO? What was the true intent of ‘Papers, Please’? Which current major alliance leaders, having representation in all major spheres, comprise the secret and long standing, ‘Bloodlines Society’? This is the story of a man who has nothing to lose anymore, and therefore everything to gain. He is outing what must be exposed, while concealing what ought to be unseen. Part 1 Some people call me Uncle, but nobody calls me friend. Some people call me bastard, but nobody calls me home. Some people call me by a name, but nobody calls me by my name. True, not false. That may sound confusing, but it really isn’t. Don’t look at the penumbra, but feast your eyes directly on the corona. Orbis isn’t the murky pool. Its secrets are not so hard to decipher. One must just embrace the deep end. Why do we turn from truth? Is truth not itself a belief? Is belief not an end in itself? But rather truth is the beginning, begetting a greater satisfaction. It can be tough to swallow when you don’t properly chew. That’s why I’m here. That’s why I’m ready. That’s why the time is now. Section 2 Consider this: Time and again the wheels of Orbis turn and proceed to churn. Sometimes things seem stable, other times they get bumpy, and on occasion, the ride is outright perilous. Yet somehow the wheels never fall over to the wayside. One wheel never gets out of step compared to its companions. What is this innate stability? What is this natural law? How does this system function? They call their rotational leader, ‘The Axle’. Each has their turn. The anticipation of each is how they all relate, how they learn to understand one another. As they say, “It brings order to the chaos. It brings melody to the cacophony. It brings reason to the unreasonable.” ‘They’? Who are you referring to? I’m referring to those who think this game is their game. Chapter 3 Stay still for a moment. Forget whatever has been on your mind. Just listen. Just feel. Just cease to understand what you never had to comprehend in the first place. It takes up unnecessary space, and leaves the mind cramped, unable to see what is right in front of you, hear what surrounds you, and taste what is sometimes literally at the tip of your tongue. We’re all capable of it. We just need to see what we need, and not see what they need. I’m asking you to actually play this game for once, rather than be the game being played. Why is this THEIR game? It should be YOUR game.
  2. 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡
  3. I accept your plea of guilty, Adrienne. Duckroll was the father of the Rickroll.
  4. If you all put duck in the name and don't call it duckroll, then you people simply don't know your memes well enough
  5. ^ 100% Actual NPO Argument that NPO made in back channels to t$ not long before the treaty was cancelled
  6. As someone who remembers BK back to their founding, and alluding to what Strum said, BK was definitely the alliance who's early days and later days were most diametrically opposed in terms of most early members'/founders' intent compared to what it became. It was certainly an interesting transformation, and one of the sadder stories. I do hope the rank and file members who wish to stay find good homes elsewhere and realize that it isn't too hard to re-integrate into the broader community.
  7. I guess I should be the one to bring up how features of this game have been nerfed more than once in direct response to t$ mastering certain aspects of game play (though always well within the rules). The best example of this being Treasure Island And TI/treasure bonuses should have been nerfed, even though it being nerfed was hugely damaging to t$'s profit potential (we would have reached a level of such immense wealth that it would have been preposterous). Sometimes you just gotta accept when something is good for the game, even if it isn't good personally for you or your alliance. The same thought was in mind when t$ went paperless and left the 'hegemony' that centered around us, because we thought if we continued, the game's politics would become stale and stifled. And that would be boring. And games aren't meant to be boring.
  8. If everything being said here is true about the false CP allegations, if it wasn't for the fact that the actual financial ramifications for Alex aren't worth him lawyering up (since I'm guessing it would cost much more money than the actual damages done, but maybe I'm wrong), then they would absolutely be opening themselves up to civil liability. Libel is a real thing and shouldn't be taken lightly. This game is not worth getting yourself into real life legal trouble.
  9. Do you mean to say you never said you did not do anything wrong? Genuine question, otherwise that response doesn't make sense in the context.
  10. So you are saying NPO is like Trump then. Neither did anything wrong, and the plethora of evidence is a huge conspiracy. Good to know. Thank you for your perspective.
  11. 'We give you money so you are stupid to ignore and support our cheating.' Why does this remind me of something about military aid and Ukraine and Biden and Crowdstrike and other words I don't understand...
  12. I can't be bothered to read everything here, and many of you know I avoid the OWF, but I did noticed this... Since when can t$ actually hitting KETOG be rephrased as t$ merely feigning interest in hitting KETOG? That's some Olympic-level verbal gymnastics right there. I want to see those Chinese Olympians' birth certificates verifying their age.
  13. TI (properly known as The Dongminion) wasn't just for $yndisphere alliances (though it was much more profitable for them), it was open to any nation who wanted in. You had to pay very high taxes to join, but the bonus made it more than worth it, which is why so many nations joined and to this day it is still the largest alliance to have ever existed in terms of total score (outside of a certain bug that occurred once...).
  14. Blubber is also a great lubricant There is such a thing as baby whales you know. They need to be put on a diet before those bad habits are set. Blubber is what whales have.
  15. Back in my day, the definition of a whale wasn't based on city count but infra per city. Infra = Fat; Fat=Blubber; Blubber is used in whaling. If you have a lot of cities but a rational infra cap, you ain't no whale in my book.
  16. I'll start out by saying when reading the post I quoted, I did think Edward meant a doctrine directly pertaining to an agreement with BK, and that he was referring to that as the foundational doctrine. So I just want to add clarity there since it seems I misinterpreted his intent. As for the idea that N$O had the right to intervene as it pleased, I won't disagree with there being agreement with that. I'm not active in any of those channels, but I don't doubt that it seemed there would have been support for the idea of using N$O power to prevent consolidation if we wished. Now, the question is how the interpretation of that is playing out here. Even the 'doctrine' in this sense is highly ambiguous as to how to actually act on it, and it doesn't change the fact of how the doctrine was acted on and communicated differently to t$ prior to the hit on Guard/GOB and after the hit. NPO never communicated out to t$ prior to the hit that they considered this war to be a part of the 'doctrine' and therefore meant we should hit everyone, and I think you all knew if you did communicate that out, that t$ wouldn't have attacked. The entire internal narrative of allied discussions was focused on other motivations, though based on what is being said, NPO had that in mind the entire time. I believe that inconsistency is important to point out, as it is key to understanding t$'s perspective.
  17. So the intent of my posts in this thread are mainly just about clarifying information in regard to t$ when we are mentioned. So I'm going to respond to this as well. The agreement between BK and NPO is not a foundational doctrine of the NPO/t$/HS grouping. At most, only one person from t$/HS knew of it (i.e. no one from HS knew about it), and that person is now inactive and can neither confirm nor deny the claims in question. If the claim is true that Kayser did indeed agree to this, he never informed anyone else in t$. It is also important to note that a single tri in t$ doesn't even have the authority to unilaterally agree to such a term on behalf of t$, as it would require support from the other two tri's as well. So he could have agreed to support it himself and to try and convince the rest of t$ gov, but he could not commit t$ to it himself. Additionally, when the new head of FA (one of our oldest members and former tri, Sisyphus/Wilhelm) took over following Kayser's departure, the 'doctrine' was never mentioned to him at all by allied gov until after NPO approached t$ about expanding the war beyond Guardian and GOB, even though if it was considered something that t$ had agreed to, it would had made sense to bring it up far earlier and quite aggressively. So that tells you that NPO was aware of the validity of this 'doctrine' when it came to t$. So maybe this is something Kayser said he would support, but I have no doubt he never would have been able to make it happen even if he was still around—maybe that explains some things... And anyone with basic knowledge of how triumvirates work and internal t$ politics would know the same. So this could be another strategic miscalculation on NPO's part to try to make a side agreement with an individual gov member, but not the gov in itself; or it could be something was lost in translation between Kayser and NPO. With Kayser no longer being around, it is hard to say. But I can say that not only was it not a foundational doctrine of the NPO/t$/HS grouping, it wasn't something that t$/HS agreed to at all. heh, I creeped on you and saw your nation is penis shaped. What a glorious feat. If only all nations were penis shaped. I approve.
  18. t$ has always been about losing. We've just been highly unsuccessful at it
  19. I think we need to focus on the key issue here. Several times earlier I know you've shared similar feelings, and you had framed this as being a matter of NPO sovereignty (a term not used in this post, but several times elsewhere) when it comes to deciding to join the war contrary to the terms t$ had laid out. But I don't think anyone here has denied NPO's sovereignty. It is a matter of trust. As I've said earlier, I'm retired so I'm not actively involved in these convos or decisions anymore, but I don't actually doubt that there was, as you put it, 'no assurance of zero retaliation ever' that came actively and verbally from NPO. But is that all an ally should expect? It was known within t$ that NPO had different views on this war (though the degree of how strong those differences were was clearly not known), but nonetheless the terms of this war were agreed upon, even if just 'tacitly', as you put it, if in this context 'tacitly' means you allowed t$ gov to believe you would follow the terms while never overtly promising 'no assurance of zero retaliation ever' ('ever', an absolute term, which certainly gives an absolute amount of flexibility). But I don't think t$ thought that such an overt assurance was needed to avoid NPO not following the previous agreement based out of an assertion of their sovereignty. No one is saying an alliance can't back out of earlier agreements if they so wish, but the repercussions are that it will impact your perceived trustworthiness amongst both your allies and the broader community. That is why this isn't a controversy or matter of sovereignty, but trust. Ultimately, I think the calculations come down to that NPO always wanted in the war, but knew if they were upfront with t$ as to their intent, they knew t$ would never join. But they believed that a t$ hit on GOB and Guardian would garner counters which would prove the whole disagreement moot and allow entry without needing to be honest of their intentions to t$. t$ on the other hand believed that those counters would not occur if the terms were clearly communicated. NPO then acted as they did because t$'s prediction proved correct, which meant they wouldn't be able to enter the war as they desired. So this is actually all based in a strategic miscalculation of NPO in incorrectly predicting the response of Guardian's and GOB's allies. Yes, Hilme's unexpected inactivity caused issues and dynamics to change, but that doesn't change the root of the issue of how NPO traversed this whole process. If t$'s intent was flattery of the likes of CoS and their friends, then it is clear they never would have entered. But you do make an interesting point on not being informed beforehand to the exit from the war. But that is something that should go both ways. Though you had told t$ gov that you were planning to enter, which you then received a strongly negative reaction to (based on what I've already shared above), the timing of your entry was something that came as a complete shock and surprise to t$ leadership. NPO never informed t$ that they would be entering as soon as they did, as t$ found out about it at the same time as everyone else in this game. NPO did this knowing that it would result in an escalation of the war, which meant mass counters from the broader coalition on t$ and a complete alteration to t$'s war strategy, yet you did not inform them so that all of this, which meant t$ going to war with many more alliance's unexpectedly, was once again a complete surprise. If you had informed t$ leadership of your specific plans, and the timing, I'm confident t$ leadership would have told you what the response would be. I still see the gov channels and know that immediately before your strike, t$ gov was unaware and still ideally hoped to dissuade you from the attack. So yes, informing an ally of major moves is quite important. And I'm sorry you were so displeased that t$ took such a hard stance on following the criteria they had told the entire game of (truly a matter of t$ sovereignty) and of which NPO, as you acknowledged, had given its 'tacit' approval. But on the matter of being informed before hand, is it reasonable to expect such courtesies from others when you deny it to them?
  20. When you're gurgling my you know what later tonight while unsuccessfully trying to spell the word successful in your sub-German accent, you'll understand when I win, we all lose. @durmij dear, come downstairs. Mommy wants you to watch this.
  21. Well the other other Founder just had to google that to realize that excuse was b.s.
  22. I love conspiracy theories. I love conspiracy theorists. The more conspiratorial you get, SRD, the more you will please me. This particular one is wrong in several key points that lead you to a false conclusion, but what you propose isn't entirely unreasonable given what is public knowledge. Either way, don't let that stop you. A group of us from PnW a couple years ago used to regular listen to a local Toronto conspiracy AM radio program. Unfortunately the powers that be have shut the program down now. It did serve as a major component of the inspiration for CoS's theme though, so the Spaceman lives on. Though my only issue is that your post wasn't conspiratorial enough.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.