Again, it was not my country. Mine is doing just fine and is out of your reach to touch.

Stop playing stupid. You knew exactly what you were doing when you decided to grab people 5 days before the reset ends. Maybe the icn country was low on def(yeah, 60k acres with 2m turrets is silly), but the evo country certainly had a reasonable amount by anyone's definition. You weren't accomplishing anything except to mess someone else over and you know it.

PS: Why are you warring in a netgaining game? DERP DERP THE ARGUMENT GOES BOTH WAYS!

Do you morons not even know how to read? I'M not the one fluffing about farming. I'm complaining about this douchebag grabbing someone 5 days before the set ends after whining all set long on AT about OTHER alliances farming him. How hard is that to understand?

Just because you're ignorant doesn't mean anything.

1) He didn't get grabbed a single time by Evo the entire set.
2) It's not even my country.
3) If not for his many posts about how the big, bad alliances have been doing mean things all set(or as you said, crying like a fluff), I wouldn't post this. He gets lots of support from people for being a rebel and standing up against alliances for their bad manners, but when he does something that serves no purpose except to fluff someone else over, that's pretty messed up.

Although according to his logic, I can feel free to grab other alliances at any point in a set because I don't feel like they deserve their land. LOGIC!

That is a load of steaming bullfluff. You've been claiming the moral highground ALL SET LONG because these big, bad alliances deigned to farm you. Poor you! And in fact, I rooted for you when you were standing your ground against other alliances and their overreactions when you actually retalled.

But when you decide to landgrab someone not even 5 days before the set ends when they and their entire alliance haven't even hit you, and then claim it was for attacks that in no way involved you that took place weeks ago, that's just being an asshole.

Perhaps you missed something in MY previous posts, the part where your actions have absolutely no meaning except to try and ruin someone's set. It's not about 'mindlessly going through the motions', it's not about 'making it your own'. Those countries you grabbed for no reason at the very end of the set where they can't possibly recover from it WERE PLAYING THE GAME HOW THEY WANTED TO PLAY! Maybe the game is about war for YOU, but many people enjoy netting and perfecting a strategy and seeing big numbers at the end. Who are YOU to tell THEM how to play? Who are you to ruin their enjoyment?

You're right, you can do what you want. But I have to right to call you out on 2 months of hypocrisy and a complete fluff move that doesn't benefit you at all, and only serves to screw someone else over. Great work.

Word to everyone that plays in this server! Stop landgrabbing now because this asshole may decide that you don't deserve the acres you took!! OHNOES!

Hahaha are you serious? You really are ridiculous, aren't you? 343 was inactive and detagged and farmed. Pretty common practice, not to mention many other alliances got plenty of land off him as well. Are you going to farm those RD, PDM, MD and Neofed countries that got land off of him? And you're upset about someone gaining their acres off an alliance retaller after being topfed and not being able to get the land back? Fairly common practice among many alliances when the numbers don't even get close.

But I guess you get to play the moral crusader, protesting actions that occurred over a month ago. That is very logical. "Not hurt you TOO much"? Do you even believe the absolute drivel that is spouting from your mouth right now? Hitting someone 5 days before the set ends when they are destocking is nothing but a fluff move designed to be a fluff to someone and ruin their set. Why didn't you hit the many many countries that missiled and farmed you all set? Why hit two countries that never did anything to you all set at the very last minute when they can't do anything in return except further destroy their finishes?

You. are. a. hypocrite.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

It wasn't even my country, I just think the guy is a fluff.

I like how you tell people not to farm you and publicly threaten to suicide on people here on AT, and then you go and topfeed someone from an alliance that hasn't touched you all set 5 days before the set ends. Just wanted to ruin someone else's finish?

Hypocrite

Edit: I didn't mean to say he farmed them. Happy now?

And you 'jumped' into your tag. Just like every single other person on this server 'jumped' into their tag.

It went from untagged to neofed, and then hit imag. Pretty standard.

Edit: I guess it did some hits as untagged, and THEN tagged up. They probably forgot to tag first. No big deal.

Pretty sure that's:

A) Not a tagjumper
B) Pretty standard practice...

I agree with Bobby :)

I think you're reading far too much into this, Rockman.

So tell me why so many radicals decide to willfully ignore the teachings of the Quran? I would say they are asshats that follow random crap(or random people more like it).

The government FORCED banks to give terrible loans to people? Oh bother....

I'm not anti-big business. I'm anti-financial meltdown of 2008.

Sam, you've been making some great points so far, but this latest one is straight from the mouth of the GOP. Just because you might be a beneficent employer, doesn't mean ANYONE ELSE is. Sure, that may be a bit of fear-mongering and conjecture on my part, but it highlights the reason why laws and regulations are necessary. People have had the ability to purchase their own healthcare for years, but a MASSIVE chunk of people refuse to until they actually get sick. And by then it's too damn late. If people were forced to have some basic health insurance, would they be more or less likely to visit a doctor instead of an emergency room?

And like Dissident just pointed out, do you really think the rich are better able to manage their money than most people? Well you're right, because they manage to siphon the bulk of it offshore and abuse tax loopholes with their armies of lawyers and tax professionals. There's a reason Romney isn't making his records public: It's EMBARRASSING to the average American.

Let's just go back to deregulating the system, because that has worked SOOOO well!! And trickle down economics? How many godamn times do we have to keep making the SAME MISTAKE and expecting the outcome to be different! Go look up 1929 and the Great Depression and come back and tell me how wildly different the current situation is from back then. Tell me how the Democratic government put programs in place under FDR that gave the rich HUGE tax breaks and DEREGULATED business so that it could pull the rest of us lowly peons up into prosperity with them.

Oh wait, you can't possibly tell me that, because IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

Btw, I'm kind of tired of the whole 'OMG CORRUPT POLITICIANS!' trope. Yes, many of them are blatantly corrupt, but the majority of them aren't. As long as you realize that most politicians have a single goal that dictates all of their actions: Getting re-elected. That's all that matters to most politicians. Once they gain that power, they will do whatever it takes to KEEP that power. Simple as that.

If we want this to change, we have to be the ones to force it. New laws that severely curtail the infusion of money into politics, and some form of term limits would go a LONG way to making things a bit better for the average joe. Although with the incredibly bad Citizens United decision, I'm not sure if the first one is even possible anymore.....

States' Rights have been on an upswing for the past two decades, although a lot of that remains to be seen as we continue to experience fallout from the recession of 2008.

In Japan:
店内で(Inside the store)
お持ち帰りで(Carry home)

CONfluffULATIONS KF!! I bet it will be the fluffiest ceremony EVER

Sam nailed it. The founding fathers were pretty much obsessed with one thing: preventing the abuse of power. They were paranoid of this, and rightfully so. And speaking of power, the primary goal of those that hold power is and always will be the same. That being to KEEP whatever power they have. Everything else is secondary, including the expansion of said power.

DETMER!!! Congrats man!!! I miss you like a fat kid misses cake :(

That's the current form of American Libertarianism, ie the Libertarian Party. It tends to be economically libertarian(ie extremely limited government and laissez faire), but socially conservative. Hence why Ron Paul is part of the Republican Party.

And seconded on the terrorism = communism. It's red scare all over again....But honestly, having a common enemy is an incredibly powerful political tool. Just look at North Korea.

Where did she go??

I'm actually not talking about political parties here, which is what you missed. I'm talking about peoples' beliefs. Within the US, the Democratic Party falls more on the Liberal side of things, and the Republican Party is more on the Conservative side. It's a bit simplistic, especially when you consider that the the US as a whole is decidedly more Liberal than many/most other countries in the world.

It can definitely help to expand the line to a 2-dimensional grid, with Social issues on one side, and Economic issues on another. But at the end of the day, it's how people vote that matter. You could be incredibly liberal when it comes to social issues, but if you vote based on economic issues, that's what matters. And in that case, my argument about where the parties lie and how there will never be a viable 3rd party still stand.

Also, I will admit that I was being dumb and mistaking US Libertarianism with actual Libertarianism. I'm dumb for doing that.

Socialism, Libertarianism and Libertarian Socialism all fall pretty clearly on the Liberal end of the spectrum.

In that case, Libertarian Socialism clearly falls on the Liberal side of the things. Your turn.

You? Last I checked, I don't play in Evo. So nice job there, I guess.

And were you really asking if you violated the terms? It might help if you actually read the pacts you put your name to. But I guess this allows you to claim plausible deniability. After all, if you simply don't read the pact, you don't have to abide by it!!

At least, that's how you seem to operate based on all the historic evidence. 'LALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA'

Socialism and Libertarianism are two wildly contrasting views. Someone who claims to be both is very deeply confused and self-conflicted. Please re-read my first paragraph. Did I mention 'Republican' or 'Democrat'?? I said Liberal/Conservative. Don't mistake the two, especially considering the vast majority of American politics takes place on the more 'Liberal' side of things when compared to other countries.

But you inadvertently brought up a good point: People can often hold decidedly Liberal views in one area, and Conservative in another. Most typically this is some dichotomy between Social and Economic viewpoints. So yes, someone could be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The important factor is how they vote.

Bonus homework for you if you want to continue this discussion: Look up Liberalism and Conservatism and get back to me. Thanks :)

I guess LaF's new way to get land is to just grab fat countries in alliances they have pacts with and then violate the terms of said pact by buying as many turrets as they possibly can to discourage any retals.

Considering their track record with pacts, it's just par for the course, I guess.

Pretty sure everyone knows who/what that is. And pretty sure it's incredibly trivial and hardly controversial.

If the center-right is the center of American politics, doesn't that make it the center?

I feel ancient...can't imagine how Patty must be feeling :P

I am assuming that people must fall somewhere along a 1 dimensional line that denotes 'Liberal' and 'Conservative'. The parties fall on the line, not the other way around. Everyone falls somewhere on that line. Maybe not in every issue at hand, but overall, everyone is a dot on that line. IF a strong, centrist party rose to power and manage to edge out both competing parties, one or the other party would simply disappear. The reality of the situation is that we have a first-past-the-post system, not a proportional system like many other countries have. The mechanics of the system CANNOT support 3 equal parties.

As the Republican Party continues to move further to the right(ie the extreme), they lose ground in the middle(ie independents/centrists/etc). If this trend continues, there could very well be a new party that would rest in the middle to middle right, and the GOP as we know it would dissolve. The people on the extremes are so far from the beliefs of the other party, that they are basically safe votes, and so parties must compete for those ideologically in the center. That's how it works in a system like ours.

1) There should be a national consensus of some kind of the mechanics of voting. Having each state set their own arbitrary guidelines and rules for the actual process of voting is incredibly flawed and abused like crazy.

2) There will never be more than 2 parties. The entire system as it stands CANNOT support more than that. The more one party shifts away from the center, the more centrists vote for the opposing party. It's simple mechanics.

Grelky is playing again? Happy day!

ESSEY! Once an AICer, always an AICer.

H@!

Last I checked, this was the Alliance server. Which means having an alliance with things like Retal Policies and Pacts. Pretty much derp.

I think Pang should just shut the game down. Would that solve all your problems, Xinhuan?

Good Luck EDge!!!

eSports is a real thing, but WHICH game do you pick? That's why there are events like MLG or the old WCG stuff..

Haha, just kidding. I'm super white. I'm in Asia right now if that counts?

Wow nice

I'm asian.

And still, to this day, the ways of RD are ever-mysterious!

I'd like to lance DL sometime :)

Tellarion was some random name I made up back in the days of MUDs

Find something with my name in it!