Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jasmine Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 18:37:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Archbishop Of course Jasmine. Except I've noticed quite a few people here other then PIE asking questions the last few weeks. If you'd like I'll make a list of names and corps and post them here.
Some people are honest, some are not. You're in the latter group.
Star Fraction is recruiting
|
Jasmine Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 18:42:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Archbishop On the other hand I dont really see anyone supporting you except this two year old pilot in a rookie pilot corp who hasnt posted since 2005 and whose other posts are very "pro-SF" in nature. Kind of sad really.
Hang-on, I knew you had selective reading but wouldn't the opinions of the OP actually count in this? She asked some honest questions - was answered and then posted this?
Quote: Thank you for your replies Jasmine it has helped me understand the Star Fraction. I will retract my earlier complaint that you are hypocritical and acknowledge you do embrace some of the concepts of free space I recognize. At first I was uncertain but your explanation about your activities with Black Rabbits show you are not engaging in piracy yourself. I think all who are not pirates should oppose pirates so we differ in that belief but I share more in common with Star Fraction and free space than any other entity. I believe in the the concept of the free spirit. I am writing a doctrine I subscribe to speaking about this that I will publish when done. In many ways the free spirit doctrine is very similar to the free space agenda of the Star Fraction but in other ways it is not. I see much opportunity to learn though and share experiences in free space thus I welcome your comments when I post the doctrine. I believe you to be seeking a better life for all and I was unjustly abrupt with my criticisms. The concept of the free spirit is dear in my heart and I hold it above all others in my quest for contentment and peace. Taki
Or is she another "clone-jack" because she doesn't live in Archbishop-land?
Star Fraction is recruiting
|
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 18:45:00 -
[63]
Quote:
Or is she another "clone-jack" because she doesn't live in Archbishop-land?
Not at all. I did check and she was actually hostile to you at first. And I noticed she doesnt agree with you on everything. Thats fine.
Im sure you dont know who this other character is though? The one with all the links? Either way its pretty funny. I encourage everyone to read the entire thread and the links in that post I did. I think some good quality entertainment is reward enough.
Thank you Jasmine. You've made my day.
Archbishop
PIE WEBSITE & FORUMS PIE INFORMATION CENTER |
Jasmine Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 18:51:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Archbishop Not at all. I did check and she was actually hostile to you at first. And I noticed she doesnt agree with you on everything. Thats fine.
I'm guessing she doesn't really need your approval. Still those are the breaks.
Star Fraction is recruiting
|
RedSky Hail
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 20:19:00 -
[65]
/me sings "Nobody Likes You, Everybody Hates You, Why Dont You Eat Some Worms?"
/me points at Star Fraction
Dont worry about them... They are.... misled.
|
Jonny Damordred
Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.28 21:10:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Beringe
Originally by: Jonny Damordred
I love how random people come into these threads and flame us. As an old teacher once said "Smacktalk just proves you are doing it right"
Was it FragM?
No, Alex Capone.
Cheers, Jonny D. -----
|
Nemesor
Gallente Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.29 05:38:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Nemesor on 29/01/2007 05:36:17
Originally by: Archbishop I just love that feature where you can click on a portrait and see the last posts of a character.
I was wondering how you sensed when Jade or another Star Fraction member made a post. You probably have one of your oiled boyish slaves tending a data terminal pressing the "Find Jade" button every few seconds. Really... give the lad a break... I am sure there are better uses for your... "stock".
|
Ryoma Sakamoto
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 03:33:00 -
[68]
Getting back to the topic (hopefully), I have a few questions about Star Fraction on a more day-to-day basis:
1. Is a SF member allowed to engage in piracy? (outside wars and other hostilities, of course) 2. If yes, are there any "code of conduct" to be followed (example: in war zones only, no podding, etc.)? 3. If no, what are the penalties for the SF member committing piracy?
I'm asking this because my area of operations have become an SF war zone, and my operation patterns will be greatly affected by how SF treats neutrals in a war zone.
|
Tecam Hund
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 03:40:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Ryoma Sakamoto Getting back to the topic (hopefully), I have a few questions about Star Fraction on a more day-to-day basis:
1. Is a SF member allowed to engage in piracy? (outside wars and other hostilities, of course) 2. If yes, are there any "code of conduct" to be followed (example: in war zones only, no podding, etc.)? 3. If no, what are the penalties for the SF member committing piracy?
I'm asking this because my area of operations have become an SF war zone, and my operation patterns will be greatly affected by how SF treats neutrals in a war zone.
We don't pirate... But seriously, it pays to read before asking.
|
Ryoma Sakamoto
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 03:53:00 -
[70]
We don't pirate... But seriously, it pays to read before asking.
I did read this thread, and found that the SF neither supports or opposes THIRD PARTY piracy.
I couldn't tell from the posts here what the SF thought of FIRST PARTY piracy (ie. by its own members).
Still, it's nice to know that I won't have to run away every time I bump into an SF ship in Placid.
|
|
Azure Skyclad
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 07:46:00 -
[71]
We don't shoot neutrals. Ever.
Kinda covers the "piracy" angle.
http://www.voodoorockers.co.uk/ |
Doktor Quick
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 07:58:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Jonny Damordred
Originally by: Doktor Quick stuff
I love how random people come into these threads and flame us. As an old teacher once said "Smacktalk just proves you are doing it right"
Love and Ganking, Jonny D.
nice quote, maybe you should actually quote something next time. As for being a "random person" the only reson I haven't spoken up in the past is because I've been holding my tongue in order to make sure I had my facts and Ideas strait. I had something to say, I said it, thats what this forum is for, if you don't like it, you know where to shove it.
Let me say that I don't disagree with your endgoals, in fact I think that the posthuman era is a laudable Idea, that said the method in which you've chosen to 'accelerate' human development is retarded. You speak of all people standing on their own and defending themselves, you speak of their imortality and how it will allow them to get stronger, and you completely ignore the fact that getting stronger costs money and effort, it's not that these things can't be gotten but in the world you actively attempt to create it is too easy to take them away. Wherever there is no protection for those just starting out there will be no one just starting out, they simply won't have the funds or skills to survive, even clones cost money and when you can't make any your imortality quickly disapears
There is a reason that empires form, and it is simply protection of the weak, whatever the empire may eventualy become as long as there are many who need protection from the unscrupulous there will be those willing to provide it. When you attack those trying to help the newcomers, for whatever reason you stymie your own agenda, because without a place to grow those newcomers will never even have a chance to start.
|
Sable Schroedinger
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 09:35:00 -
[73]
Obviously you either didn't read or ignored because it didn't fit your tiny world view, the example I posted earlier. I have put forward that such fears are ungrounded. The fact that you refuse to address my earlier point leads me to assume that you are pursuing a pro reliance, pro master/servant agenda and so are cherry picking points to promote your own slave keeping ideals.
--------------------------------------------
Join Now |
Natasha Donnan
Caldari Silent-Running Surveillance
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 10:38:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Archbishop Well its an honest question.
1. You can be "FREE".
2. You can believe something other than we do.
3. Of course if you do we'll kill you.
4. Because we want you to be "FREE".
5. But only "FREE" as long as you believe what we do.
<snip>
Archbishop
Oh my...
As a complete neutral and relative newcomer to this kind of discussion I am amazed at your ability to try and force everyone to see everything according to your perspective on the world.
I have taken the time to read through the twists and turns of this thread (I have even looked at SF propoganda in some depth since seeing these recent threads).
I have to say that at least the opening poster had the sense to see that The Star Fraction have been quite honest about their ideology. I do admire their patience in responding to the questions although I do think they could do it in easier terms. Ironically however I do think The Star Fraction are continuing to struggle with their own humanism and that the antihumanist goal is far from complete even as we speak. That however is one for another day.
I think Archbishop that you are a manipulator of words. You ignore the fact that The Star Fraction as far as I read it first 'believe' that we are subject to forces beyond our control. That there is an 'infection' that needs to be rooted out. Their priority is that 'infection' and their ultimate goal is freedom.
All you did was try to play up 'freedom' as their core belief and then claim a paradox in what they do. A paradox is an entangled hierarchy of values - nothing more. The paradox is simply your invention to try and muddy the waters.
From what I can see freedom is a goal for the Star Fraction but that their immediate focus is on the immediate binding effects of the mimetic of nationalism. It sems clear to me at least that their struggle is not yet realised. The situation far from perfect. After all vast swathes of space are populated by people who have yet to realise that goal and even worse by scum that would seek to openly enslave others. They might try to struggle towards that goal. They might do their best to model it. It doesn't mean that it has been achieved by any means.
Its ok Archbishop you should let it rest now.
|
Ryoma Sakamoto
|
Posted - 2007.01.31 03:32:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Azure Skyclad We don't shoot neutrals. Ever.
Kinda covers the "piracy" angle.
Thank you so much. That neatly sums up both the First party and the Third party aspects of piracy, as SF members cannot pirate a third party, and cannot interfere with third party piracy under this simple policy.
|
Jasmine Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.31 15:59:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Doktor Quick nice quote, maybe you should actually quote something next time. As for being a "random person" the only reson I haven't spoken up in the past is because I've been holding my tongue in order to make sure I had my facts and Ideas strait.
Shame therefore you failed to achieve this laudable task in this thread.
Quote: Let me say that I don't disagree with your endgoals, in fact I think that the posthuman era is a laudable Idea, that said the method in which you've chosen to 'accelerate' human development is retarded.
I think you don't really understand it. This based on your later comments of course:
Quote: You speak of all people standing on their own and defending themselves, you speak of their imortality and how it will allow them to get stronger, and you completely ignore the fact that getting stronger costs money and effort
How do you think that Jericho Fraction pilots achieve this independence and self-defence capability? Do you think we crawl on our bellies and submit to imperial structures until we are "ready?" Is that what you are arguing here? Do you think we were given our money and ships? Are you arguing that we are somehow different from the rank and file and that our example is not revelant to this discussion?
Quote: it's not that these things can't be gotten but in the world you actively attempt to create it is too easy to take them away.
You make a grevious error in believing that submission to hierarchical authority structures cannot be more arbitary than anarcho capitalism. The difference is in the institutional motive to remove this freedoms as opposed to mere competition and unrestricted commerce.
Quote: Wherever there is no protection for those just starting out there will be no one just starting out, they simply won't have the funds or skills to survive, even clones cost money and when you can't make any your imortality quickly disapears
Basic clone costs are free. One can earn enough money to improve one's starter vessel in under an hour with independent commercial effort. Your argument is profoundly pessimistic and inaccurate. In fact you simple prattle the "conventional wisdom" that we know to be false - and your words in this case are an example of the kind of memetic contagion that opposes the next stage of human cultural evolution.
Quote: There is a reason that empires form, and it is simply protection of the weak, whatever the empire may eventualy become as long as there are many who need protection from the unscrupulous there will be those willing to provide it.
That is the lie. The truth is that empires form to sustain the status quo and ensure that society cannot change too far from pre-set parameters.
Quote: When you attack those trying to help the newcomers, for whatever reason you stymie your own agenda, because without a place to grow those newcomers will never even have a chance to start.
Whereas we believe that to enslave a newcomer with cloying imperial protection you cultivate a slave to convention biddable and susceptable and incapable of independent action.
Star Fraction doesn't recruit or encourage such people. We are interested in the pilots who were ninja-mining arkanor out from under the eyes of m0o corp in the first weeks of the capsule diaspora. We are interested in people who don't aknowledge or even believe the restrictions on their ambitions and capability that conventional wisdom imposes. We seek people that fought the Great Northern War in breachers and kestrels and attacked battleships to show they feared absolutely nothing and refused to be restricted and condemned to serfdom.
Fractionites are the people that don't know their own limitations and laugh in the face of conventional wisdom. If you understand the message this will be inspirational - if you don't then it'll seem utter insantity.
But at the end it says more about audience than the message.
Star Fraction is recruiting
|
Renee Soleil
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.01.31 18:33:00 -
[77]
Do you see nothing between submission to hierarchical authority structures and anarcho capitalism? _______________________________________________________ If you wish them to be brothers, have them build a tower. |
Devilish Ledoux
Caldari Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.01.31 18:47:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Renee Soleil Do you see nothing between submission to hierarchical authority structures and anarcho capitalism?
Between them, I see progress. _
Sig removed, lacks game related content. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
|
Nachshon
Caldari Gradient Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 00:06:00 -
[79]
Here is another question for Star Fraction:
Suppose, in the society you form, a pilot acquires a dreadnought. What is stopping him from, say, flying to a planet, and using threats to force the people of the planet to submit to his demands?
__________________________________________ What I say should not be taken as the position of Gradient or NMTZ. |
Nekumi
Caldari Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 00:34:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Nachshon Here is another question for Star Fraction:
Suppose, in the society you form, a pilot acquires a dreadnought. What is stopping him from, say, flying to a planet, and using threats to force the people of the planet to submit to his demands?
We hope to achieve total responsibility for oneself. If someone threatens an individual it is up to the individual to deal with it.
In your example, the people on the planet would stop it.
|
|
j0sephine
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 06:11:00 -
[81]
Edited by: j0sephine on 03/02/2007 06:08:52
Interesting, if bit repetitive read. There's couple points which i'd like to press for clarification, if that's not a problem...
* "we fight those who spread and support regressive ideologies, this is not forcing our ideology on those people" -- if you actively and aggressively seek to erase incompatible ideologies, doesn't it in fact leave these you attack with no option but to either adapt your ideology, or fight you? To use the provided earlier example, if you shoot the man when they do anything else *but* listen to the birds (since as it happens, you believe listening to the birds is the way forward) ... aren't you leaving them with no choice but either listen to these birds, or fight you for their right to exercise other options? Or is there some sort of 3rd option that am missing..?
* a theoretical situation -- two independent and free entities decide to arrange formal contract involving exchange of power. In order to more effectively pursue their own goals, one side provides the other with some sort of rendered service, the nature of service being agreed upon when the contract is formed... including, but not limited to following guidances or orders issued by the other side involved in the contract. At any time either side is free to revoke the contract, if for some reason they find it no longer suitable.
Is the theoretical situation presented compatible or incompatible with SF outlook of society, and in case of the latter would be those who exercise it, on both sides... actively pursued as 'spreaders of incompatible ideology' or whathaveyou..?
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 14:39:00 -
[82]
Originally by: j0sephine
[I]f you actively and aggressively seek to erase incompatible ideologies, doesn't it in fact leave these you attack with no option but to either adapt your ideology, or fight you? To use the provided earlier example, if you shoot the man when they do anything else *but* listen to the birds (since as it happens, you believe listening to the birds is the way forward) ... aren't you leaving them with no choice but either listen to these birds, or fight you for their right to exercise other options? Or is there some sort of 3rd option that am missing..?
You are, I would suggest, ignoring the possibility of ideologies, ways of life and political stances that are not by any means the same as ours but nevertheless can co-exist quite happily with our ideology. We have never said our way is the only way.
Quote:
* a theoretical situation -- two independent and free entities decide to arrange formal contract involving exchange of power. In order to more effectively pursue their own goals, one side provides the other with some sort of rendered service, the nature of service being agreed upon when the contract is formed... including, but not limited to following guidances or orders issued by the other side involved in the contract. At any time either side is free to revoke the contract, if for some reason they find it no longer suitable.
Is the theoretical situation presented compatible or incompatible with SF outlook of society, and in case of the latter would be those who exercise it, on both sides... actively pursued as 'spreaders of incompatible ideology' or whathaveyou..?
As an abstract example, the arrangement described above is quite compatible with the Star Fraction's ideology if both parties consider that the terms of the contract amount to a free and fair exchange.
The Star Fraction itself would very carefully examine any actual terms presented to it in such a situation of course and we ourselves would not consider certain terms a fair exchange under any circumstances. Others would have to make a decision as to what they would regard as fair for themselves of course.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Recruitment |
j0sephine
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.04 02:15:00 -
[83]
"You are, I would suggest, ignoring the possibility of ideologies, ways of life and political stances that are not by any means the same as ours but nevertheless can co-exist quite happily with our ideology. We have never said our way is the only way."
Absolutely, hence i asked specifically about ideologies which are incompatible with your own. When it comes to these, does your policy of eradication of such ideologies leave these who practice them with choice other than either adapt alternative ideology which happens to be compatible with your own (i.e. abandon their original stance) ... or fight you to keep their outlook the way they come to choose it?
"As an abstract example, the arrangement described above is quite compatible with the Star Fraction's ideology if both parties consider that the terms of the contract amount to a free and fair exchange.
The Star Fraction itself would very carefully examine any actual terms presented to it in such a situation of course and we ourselves would not consider certain terms a fair exchange under any circumstances. Others would have to make a decision as to what they would regard as fair for themselves of course."
Excellent, thank you. Obviously leaves me curious about these terms which would be never considered fair etc, but i understand it could be quite broad subject that'd take considerable time to explain.
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.02.04 02:56:00 -
[84]
Originally by: j0sephine
Absolutely, hence i asked specifically about ideologies which are incompatible with your own. When it comes to these, does your policy of eradication of such ideologies leave these who practice them with choice other than either adapt alternative ideology which happens to be compatible with your own (i.e. abandon their original stance) ... or fight you to keep their outlook the way they come to choose it?
Well, you put it slightly differently now but I won't quibble. In the terms you use above, the issue is that the ideologies we object to have the fundamental feature, in our view, of necessarily coming into conflict with freedom and the many ways of life that involve true freedom and independence. If there are those who refuse absolutely to discard the anti-freedom elements of their ideology û which would typically involve a total abandonment of such an ideology or at least a radical revision of it û then we will consider ourselves at liberty to fight them should we deem it necessary. If they take the view that they must pre-emptively fight us that is their choice and we will meet them in battle.
Put simply and to answer you directly, there is no other choice for those who cleave to ideologies that have inherent anti-freedom characteristics. Those who say that it is oppressive to deny those who support tyranny the choice to support such are being disingenuous. One should not shrink from destroying a torture chamber simply because it would put the torturer out of a job and thereby 'oppress' him.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Recruitment |
j0sephine
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.05 17:27:00 -
[85]
Edited by: j0sephine on 05/02/2007 17:24:39
"Well, you put it slightly differently now but I won't quibble. In the terms you use above, the issue is that the ideologies we object to have the fundamental feature, in our view, of necessarily coming into conflict with freedom and the many ways of life that involve true freedom and independence. If there are those who refuse absolutely to discard the anti-freedom elements of their ideology û which would typically involve a total abandonment of such an ideology or at least a radical revision of it û then we will consider ourselves at liberty to fight them should we deem it necessary. If they take the view that they must pre-emptively fight us that is their choice and we will meet them in battle.
Put simply and to answer you directly, there is no other choice for those who cleave to ideologies that have inherent anti-freedom characteristics. Those who say that it is oppressive to deny those who support tyranny the choice to support such are being disingenuous. One should not shrink from destroying a torture chamber simply because it would put the torturer out of a job and thereby 'oppress' him."
This is quite reasonable i suppose (i have bit of concern about situations stemming from possible different outlook on mentioned core issues, but there isn't much point in getting into that) ... one --last-- question though if i may, as it comes from this reply of yours.
I see that SF can find certain situation where another entity refuses to adjust their stance so they stop being uncompatible with ideologies accepted by SF, as justification to engage into conflict. This is fair enough. There's also mention of convenient case where the other side chooses to pre-emptively engage in hostilities with SF for the same reason. What however, if the faction attacked for their incompatible outlook refuses to engage in the hostility with SF, even after the fact?
A theoretical situation to illustrate it: suppose a jumpgate is located which leads to up-to-now unexplored systems. The natives who settle these systems had no contact with the rest of our world... their remaining historical records do however allow to establish shared, common root with our own ancestors which causes them to view us as their progenitors and thus beings that shall not be ever harmed by them. Now the unfortunate part is, the ideologies of these long-lost brethrens happen to be uncompatible with SF's own outlook and due to different ways to interpret and value these core issues, there's very little chance of coming to agreement about such matters.
So the problem/question would be i guess... if faced with such situation, would SF deem it necessary to eradicate that society as carrier of 'hostile ideology', despite their targets actively refusing to defend themselves by striking back even when put under direct attack... or is it something more akin to current SF RoE applied to 3rd party piracy and such? (i.e. something like "their ideology may be wrong but as long as they don't attack us specifically, we have no reason to meddle in their affairs", if i understand it right)
Will freely admit this is quite convoluted and unlikely to happen situation, and perhaps also too complicated to able to provide a "one size fits all" kind of answer... so if it cannot be answered then it's fine. There's just --shall we say-- personal reasons that i'd rather not disclose, that made me seek answer to it ..;
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.02.05 21:25:00 -
[86]
Originally by: j0sephine
Will freely admit this is quite convoluted and unlikely to happen situation, and perhaps also too complicated to able to provide a "one size fits all" kind of answer... so if it cannot be answered then it's fine. There's just --shall we say-- personal reasons that i'd rather not disclose, that made me seek answer to it ..;
It is somewhat convoluted, yes, and given the lack of threat from the society you describe diplomatic, political and economic measures would seem more appropriate than military. There is no default position of 'eradicate' when other avenues can be explored with respect to other entities and the positions they adopt.
As for personal matters, these are perhaps better explored in a less public arena. If there are issues you wish to discuss with any of our representatives you know where we are.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Recruitment |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |