May I respectfully point out that you are not helping your case with such answers ? At best, you deny people the right to express themselves - however one can feel about what has been said - and at worst, you only make yourself look unable to build a proper argument to counter what has been said. If it is so fractured and pseudo-intellectual, what do you have to fear if your answer is well documented and rationaly constructed ? By default, you implied that lady Noh won the argument as soon as you told her to "shut up". You also state that her argument has become stale and tedious, and yet offer no explanation of how you came to that conclusion.

It would have been ten times better for you either to build up a rational reasoning or either not to answer at all. If you think that people look stupid alone without your help, the audience will see through it too. Now that I think of it, you should follow the 10 PR rules of your own leadership, especially rules #8, #9 and #10. They are wise. Rules #1 and #2 are more of a concern for your leadership, I guess.

I am not really surprised to read that from you. As usual you prefer to go ad-hominem instead of adressing my points. I am also almost pretty sure that you agree with them, anyway. You just choosed to ignore their validity because it suits your own colored agendas - defending the people sharing your views whatever it takes, as poor as some of their answers could have been. And you call me colored ? What a bunch of populist hypocrits we have here.

The only one that choosed to be reasonable while still adressing some concern about my point was Deciever's Voice, and I agree with most of what she said.

As precised above, I raised my own points against the OP in my two first messages (pages 1 and 2). So yes, instead of using your tu quoque ad-hominem rhetoric, I would suggest that you start to use your own advice about knowing one's own biases. The correct truth is not always the one that seems to be.

When you say that I "never call to account all the Amarrian provocateurs", either you have a short memory, or either you only see what you want to see. I actually do it most of the times, though at least, and as absurd or non rational their drivels may be, they usually put the form and carefully explain their reasoning behind. But that said, why do you think I have been branded heretic in the past by numerous amarrian loyalists, like PIE Inc ?

Also, I do not really know what makes you and people think that I like to present myself like the voice of reason or other silly things like this (this purely out of curiosity ?). I try to remain reasonable and rational, but that does not mean that I am alone doing so, and I also wonder what you are waiting for to do the same. Yes, more respect and rationality, and less bias and demagogy is what I am looking for. I couldnt care less if people see me like an arrogant white knight or other silly considerations.


A small edit : this reminds me a little of Aria Jenneth. She sometimes faced the same remarks.

Well, the ratio of interesting discussion, sodomy and memetic engineering to the usual slap-fights was too good to be true for a while there, I suppose. And futile as this request is going to be, I'll still make it - if you have some kind of personal problem with Ms. Farel's behaviour or philosophy, or indeed anyone's, please whine about it elsewhere.