Lord of Puns

Might just get VIP to have snoody french spies

I doubt the intention was to appear with a nazi emblem. Given that the Nazis stole a large number of symbols and stigmatized them I think this is kinda unnecessary. It would appear more as if while creating the flag, they were lazy and added on a symbol that's minor demarcations set it aside from being Viking related to Nazi. Probably didn't even know it's relation to the Nazis. Sure I guess it's naive but you have more evidence that it's mere accident and lack of attention than you have it's a pro Nazi stance.

Were you not so blatantly opposed to the conception of a deity, I'd nearly say you're agnostic: not caring. But I do find it interesting that while you have no interest in the understanding of the universe's origins you have set aside a distinct view point. That's a rather odd combination. "There's no way to know what happened but it sure wasn't that". I'm rather surprised I've never come across this view point before.

Literally isn't a religion. And when I mean literally I mean it literally cannot be a religion. Just like the independent party in US politics isn't a party. It's just a single belief or policy.

lol well I guess it's toast

Boy this entire thread derailed the minute it was posting. come talk to me if you ever happen find yourself with a more open mind. EDIT: Eh it's not really bait, mb

"I didn't actually say that at all" *proceeds to imply point all over again* And believe it or not the hardest part to being faithful is with age. Children have the highest rates of faith because they merely haven't put much thought into it and are often raised on the basis. When you take the actualities of life of course it's difficult to believe in a higher spiritual being or any spiritual being for that matter because you've adjusted your own point of view. But this doesn't support that religion or having beliefs within themselves is a lie. I don't see how having a spiritual crisis would prevent one, no matter how stubborn, from swaying views. This is all very opinionated for someone trying to make a logical argument.

While not trying to get too far off topic, constantly questioning is what leads to religion in the first place as well as what leads away from it. When there is an uncertainty or something impossible to prove, only people that have strong faith or stubbornness continue to believe in something wholeheartedly. Questioning isn't problematic, and what you classify as a "thinking person" is a person that uses the same logic to disbelieve in something as they do to believe in something. The issue here is that you're taking the idea that following a religion detracts from the rest of your intelligence merely because you believe in something that has neither been proven or disproven. There are certainly an enormous number of inexplicable occurrences daily that would give a person just as much justification to believe in something without hard evidence as there would be to not believe in something due to a lack of hard evidence (vice-versa). Now back to the bestiality question: while I certainly do not support bestiality in any way, sort, or fashion, I do think conversations like these are important. Stigmas are developed by ideas like this, in which a person is pushed to complete and utter support or disapproval towards something based off of how they were raised and how society displays such ideas. So while this stigma may be preventing what would likely be something we are all very uncomfortable with, I find stigmas harmful to the advancement of society. Good or bad, they prevent people from question, from exploring or even wondering why there was such an issue in the first place. So while it may be something no one wishes to question, it's certainly helpful for advancing thought and understanding.

I think I had a cable network once named FSN

No no go ahead, I'd love to hear your reasoning why you believe it's "(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) Politics time" besides the reasoning that you already gave. Because from what your first quote was it appeared that you said since this treaty you began referring to it as "(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics time" and gave no other reasoning behind it. So if you're going to call me out for not understanding at least show me where I'm not understanding.

If anything I'd me more worried about the huge influx of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) players rather the tying treaty. As we've seen before again and again on orbis, large scale wars have erupted out of blatant power adjustment. And after the last war political spheres collapsed and new ones were reborn. Everyone has been crying out since the first major spheres erupted "(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is here! The end is nigh!" but come on, I've seen relatively no (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) based political tactics taking major form except for the basis of the UPN/DEIC/BoC failed blitz (shitz). This tying treaty will do nothing but unravel again once growing paranoia and undermining tactics used to destroy these treaties arise. I will give credit where it is due that a large part of the reason that (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) political spheres have failed in orbis is because people freak out about stagnation and prepare their asses for war. So while you see this treaty as an issue, its more than likely to be the root of the next major conflicts. While we have some people who only know the ways of getting caught up in treaties, another entire half of the game only know the ways of war and political strategy. They may have numbers but so did Rose when they hit Mensa, hell Rose was supposed to be one of the most militarized alliances in the game and they got their asses handed to them. In the end I doubt that this (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) apocalypse will be anymore than just worry. If you want to base fears on (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) politics dont worry about these treaties: look at the surge of new (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) alliances, that's where the problem is arising.

Not really, they can go anywhere from 3-6.

BoC was never in Alpha, I don't even think they were in Beta.

It is a shame to see an interesting new idea scrapped. Best of luck on future ventures

You have, over and over again, alluded to the issue that Jews are the root of the problem in Israel. Over and over again. It's not the Jew card when you're actually being an anti-semite. I do not think that anti-zionism is anti-semitism in any form. I've tried to distiguish the difference between the two repeatedly. And if you've done so much fcking research I don't understand how you could not know anything about the Gaza-Israeli relationship. The Palestinian Authority. Led by Abbas. Partakes in infrastructure projects there regularly. Israel's relationship with the Palestinian authority is a hell of a lot better than most people give them. The Government of the West bank is the Palestinian Authority yet they do not partake in any other form of aid other than packages of food and water. Why is that? Because Gaza is !@#$ controlled by Hamas. Abbas has admitted it, Hamas knows it. They may not be "the official government of the West Bank" but they sure as hell are the only ones controlling Gaza. How can you have done research and still not know that the West Bank is not Gaza at all nor does it have all that much control over it. The Israeli army is sloppy and does a number of problematic and humanitarian conflicts in Gaza, I don't support it and I'm aware of the number of unjustified killings and disproportionate uses of force. But you're comparing it to an Internment camp. The infant mortality rate in Gaza is 105th ranked in the world (that's very good). The Gaza strip's death rate is the 5th lowest in the entire world! Their population below the poverty line is higher than Greece and about another quarter of the world. Which seems very comparable to internment camps. Totally. Yup. Is Gaza a fun place to live? No. Is it a internment camp? Not by any means at all. EDIT: Quoted twice

I want you to get off of this site, and go research Israel. Your perceptions of Israel are formed by your own attempt of comprehension of what's going on in the Middle East. Israel has a problem with the treatment of Palestinians. Gaza is not a !@#$ing internment camp. I don't know where or how you're coming to these conclusions because it would appear all that you know about Gaza was the first 15 words of every newspaper headline and nothing more. Gaza is growing ridiculously fast due to cooperation between Israel and Gaza, there are a number of New Cities that are currently being developed with both Israeli and Palestinian money. While Israel has launched attacks and assaults that have been very clearly defying laws of war, that is NOT THE ENTIRE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO. I want people, such as yourself who are only versed in what the front page of a newspaper said about Israel and Gaza, to actually put in some research into your !@#$ing claims. If you want to get angry about Israel's actions, GOOD! Look into what Israel and Palestine have done cooperatively as well as independently. Every one of your posts have been nothing but closet anti-semitism and sheer ignorance.

No. Nono. No this is wrong. Zionism may be tied to the religion, but it is NOT the reason for Israel's state occupation. You need to stop tying the religion to the state. Seriously. People that see Israel and Judaism as one begin to hate Jews for that reason. Likud and Netanyahu are extremists, not regular Jews. And I'd very very loosely define the Likud party as full of 'Jews'. Don't blame the religion for the states actions.

He's a Political Commentator, more of a satirist. He started the whole Drumpf thing, but it's all more aimed at getting laughs than an actual counter-campaign

This is so full of shit it's confusing. Number one. Zionism is the ideology that Jews are entitled to a homeland. It IS NOT the idea that Jews are inherently better due to their belief that they are the chosen people. Nazism was the belief that Germans were the perfect people, not that they deserved a home state, but that they should not be denied anything and that everything going wrong was not any German's fault. Balfour was a good idea, On paper. In which land that was taken with the fall of the Ottoman Empire and was at the time very sparsely inhabited would go to people who just got out of persecution. Biblical claims are bullshit, however, both have modern claims to the region. Are the palestinian's claims any more deserving than the Israelis or vice versa? No. The Palestinians today are hardly at all from the area they claim. In fact, a vast majority of the people living there previously belonged/were citizens of a surrounding state. The Israelis have no justifiable claim over the disputed land either. Is one population better than the other/more humanitarian? No. Both sides have become radicalized because of state-sponsored terrorism and over blown media coverage. Constant worry of terrorist attacks from Gaza terrify the Israelis into supporting anything National, which is why Likud is in power. Constant oppression by the Likud government on the Palestinians promote more attacks on the Israelis. In the end, the small parties (Likud and Hamas) that promote the subjugation/destruction of either side propel the citizens of both lands into believing what their government is doing is justified. Jews are not Terrorists, Israelis are not Terrorists, Palestinians are not Terrorists, Muslims are not Terrorists. Hamas, and Likud are terrorists. Fermenting fear in both populations in order to see one side over power the other.

I don't think you understand what John Oliver is

But if you believe that credits are gonna sell for a little more than 2mil you're being very generous. Towards the end of the month they may when people get desperate to make a buck. But for the majority of the month expect them to stay around 3-4mil when they can sit on their asses and wait the market to play into there hands.

No no sheepy, Markets work like this: I want to sell my credits. This guy is selling it for less than me. Good for him, he will get bought. But I on the other hand want to make money. I will not go lower than him down to 2million. Cuz I'm not stupid. So I'm gonna post at 3million. The other guy will soon run out of credits. When that happens, I control the market. I sell them for as high as I !@#$in want. Which most likely will be 4 million. Literally go to the credits page. Look at the trends. Just watch them.

Your numbers are still off. Ok let me do the math for you. Right here: 2mil per credit * 10 credits = 20mil (Current Rate) 3mil per credit * 10 credits = 30mil (Through Trade) 4mil per credit * 10 credits = 40mil (Through Trade) If you think, that people will drop the prices of credits, to where they no longer make a profit, than either you dont understand economics, you're naive or you're just not thinking clearly. If I bought 10 credits and I wanted to make a profit, I would go to the market and sell them for more than what they are worth. Currently they are worth 2million. But I want to make a profit, so I'm going to sell them for... lets say 3 million. Why, why, why would I ever drop the prices sheepy? March 1st or not, I'm going to keep selling them AT LEAST 1 million higher. Some players will sell them for 4 million, because they can. And so they will make 40million per month. I don't know if you've been really stressed out, but you're just not thinking through this.

Hm I wonder why people would sell credits for more to make a profit now. If credits were worth 1mil and they were sold on the market for at least 2mil. It's not like they've already spiked to around 3mil on the market. 60million is off, but selling 10 credits to make 30-40million is ridiculous. And no you basically doubled their income. Also what is this about having no reason to increase the sale of credits, wasn't that whole reason for updating them? To increase the sales? Where the hell are you getting these figures?

First of all, I'm within the top 4% of the game. Literally only 15-40 nations out of the 4k nations could even possibly make 20m a day stably. You're right about the cash, you will make more. But now credits will also be sold on the market for more. I'm guessing around the 3-4mil mark. What you've done is created a system that people will no longer go to the market to buy credits but buy them on their own, smart but in order to make that worth while you've stretched the possible earnings by a shit ton. 20/40/60m per !@#$ing month is absolutely ridiculous. I don't understand why you even think that it's balanced at all.