Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 21:26:00 -
[1]
Let us examine the following assumptions:
1. Freedom is very important to people, they are attracted to it and desire as much of it as they can get. 2. Wealth is very important to people, they are attracted to it and desire as much of it as they can get. 3. More freedom allows more diversity. 4. Providence is relatively poor in raw resources (as null-sec regions go). 5. Providence under CVA stewardship has attracted more capsuleers than any other nullsec region 6. Providence under CVA stewardship has attracted a more diverse range of capsuleers than any other nullsec region 7. No capsuleers were forced or coerced to live in Providence
If we can agree on the assumptions, the question they raise is simple: Why would so many capsuleers choose to visit or live in Providence?
It cannot be because of wealth alone, since there are many more or equally attractive options. Would it perhaps be because of the combination of freedom and wealth. Perhaps it was the freedom to fly about unmolested? The freedom to mine in peace? The freedom to not bow to a master and pay him rent? The freedom to avoid get involved in nullsec politics?
Providence was a poor choice in attaining wealth by itself, but if gave the visitors great freedoms. The consequence of not being able to shoot passersby at random without negative consequences apparently paled besides the reduction of the risk of not being shot at by random passersby yourself.
Hence, these freedoms attracted capsuleers from all walks of life, from all races and from all corners of the universe. Not only did it attract them, it made the wealthy as well, as they were offered free access to most of the region's resources without the need to provide some form of restitution or the need to open diplomatic relations. They were free to come and go as they pleased.
CVA stewardship, being among the most strict and stern among the alliances provide predictability and stability. And the relative freedom from others trying to hurt them is what attracted the people. Providence was *the* most free region in New Eden by far. Because their stewards cared. Cared for more than just themselves. They care for people who didn't swear allegiance to them, they cared for people that didn't pay them rent, they cared for people that didn't always agree with their stance on politics or slavery.
If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom.
Or are my assumption faulty? Is there perhaps another reason that Providence attracted so many different capsuleers?
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
![Forlorn Wongraven Forlorn Wongraven](https://images.evetech.net/characters/168061053/portrait?size=64)
Forlorn Wongraven
Universal Army Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 21:32:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Forlorn Wongraven on 15/03/2010 21:32:26 I wish the Holders woul actually hit their weapon groups (defending their system and not getting wealthy) as much as they hit the "New topic" button on Galnet. ____________________
Lord Makk > I swear to god if there is a saviour, his name is Forlorn.
|
![Andreus LeHane Andreus LeHane](https://images.evetech.net/characters/179995450/portrait?size=64)
Andreus LeHane
Gallente Mixed Metaphor
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 21:35:00 -
[3]
I've never heard Amarrians so bitter before. This must be a long-held wish finally come true. -----
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 22:30:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 15/03/2010 22:30:10 Providence under CVA was simply a collection of stagnated, worthless alliances who wanted nothing more than a 'sansha hunt for free' pass. It was a homogenous forced standings enclave of puppet regimes.
It was as predictable as it was dull. New Providence will be far more dynamic, and allow people to access 0.0 space under their own terms and initiative. Ambitious corporations and alliances across New Eden will surely rejoice at the news they no longer have to subserviently bow down to arrogant CVA overlords in order to gain their own space. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:00:00 -
[5]
The constant hair-splitting about CVA's 'version' of NRDS and U'K's 'version' of NRDS probably bores me as much as it bores my enemies...but Originally by: Butter Dog Ambitious corporations and alliances across New Eden will surely rejoice at the news they no longer have to subserviently bow down to arrogant CVA overlords in order to gain their own space.
Trying to sell "new" Providence as any different is rediculous, Butters. CVA and the Providence Holders are being systematically dismantled not because we are enemies of -A-...but because we dared to attempt strategic progress outside of Providence, and because we didn't back down when we were told to.
Ambition? That is what ambitious coporations and alliances can expect: pop up on the scope of the Southern Coallition as a strategic issue (varrying from annoyance to direct threat) and you will have the entire Southern Coallition dropped on your head as a result.
We got what was coming to us, make no mistake...but so will the next truly ambitious organization. Unless, of course, they're just plain better. The Southerm Coallition is creating a playground to their liking, and they are displaying for the whole Galaxy to see what happens when people don't play by their rules. The new Providence will be no different from the old Providence in that regard.
|
![Tarran Tarran](https://images.evetech.net/characters/374394057/portrait?size=64)
Tarran
Black Swan Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:02:00 -
[6]
Can someone from -A- et al please explain to me how the new Providence would be any different from other areas of 0.0 space? I'm not trying to flame - I seriously don't get it. Is it just that one of the main holder alliances (UK) would be NRDS, therefore reducing the number of ppl who would potentially shoot at you if yo hadn't wronged them?
As far as I can tell from previous posts, UK would not itself shoot anyone not red, but would not intervene to prevent or punish anyone who followed an NBSI policy in their space?
A lot of the posters on this topic assume that more ppl with access to 0.0 space is a good thing. I take it UK does not agree if the extra numbers are contingent on Providence being "0.0 Light" space?
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:10:00 -
[7]
Garreck, CVA gave permission for LFA to launch an assault into AAA space. There is no more to it than that. We all know that Providence is a collection of vassal states, and the odd puppet leader - indeed the friction between LFA and CVA was a direct result of you attempting to tell them what leader to install. And you were successful in installing a pupper leader in AM, for all the good it did them.
It's a simple truth that CVA wanted to build an 'empire', propped up by slave states who had to ask CVA's permission to so much as urinate in Providence. UK have no such ambition, we only seek to guard against the abomination of slavery.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Butter Dog Garreck, CVA gave permission for LFA to launch an assault into AAA space. There is no more to it than that. We all know that Providence is a collection of vassal states, and the odd puppet leader - indeed the friction between LFA and CVA was a direct result of you attempting to tell them what leader to install. And you were successful in installing a pupper leader in AM, for all the good it did them.
It's a simple truth that CVA wanted to build an 'empire', propped up by slave states who had to ask CVA's permission to so much as urinate in Providence. UK have no such ambition, we only seek to guard against the abomination of slavery.
Absolutely none of which is relevant to what I said. Keep focused, Butters.
Ambition that flies in the face of -A- interests will end in a Southern Coallition beatdown.
This is no different than the previous situation where ambition flying in the face of CVA interests would end in being red-listed.
The situation for outsiders has not changed one bit. You are flat lying to imply it has or will.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:28:00 -
[9]
This is simply incorrect - the ability for an entity to truly manage it's own affairs, including diplomatic relations, will certainly attract more ambitious corporations and alliances who can truly be called 'independent'.
Yes, attacking a powerbloc will probably result in a very bad outcome for them, but that is just common sense. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Xyla Vulchanus Xyla Vulchanus](https://images.evetech.net/characters/319844160/portrait?size=64)
Xyla Vulchanus
Amarr Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:42:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Merdaneth If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom.
You speak of freedom as if it has a universal application. Are you really so dim?
U'K have always, and will continue to, fight for the freedom of Matari slaves and against the freedom of the Amarrian Empire to act howsoever it chooses, despite the suffering it leaves in its wake. Maybe a further 20 or 30 discussions on this point will enable the message to get across?
We Come For Our People (and your systems) |
|
![Archbishop Archbishop](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1033127867/portrait?size=64)
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:53:00 -
[11]
The observations of Merdaneth are quite accurate. Where there was peace there is now war. Where there was the ability to live without fear now there is terror. Where people could come together and earn a living now there is poverty and despair.
The attack on Providence was an attack on freedom. Regardless of your views on slavery and the Amarr Empire the fact remains for years and years Providence was the safe place to go in 0.0 space. That is now gone. The future of pirate gangs roaming unmolested, of terrorists shooting everyone on site, of murder and slaughter, those are the days we have now. Those days replaced peace and stability. Those days replaced true "freedom".
Archbishop
PIE WEBSITE ARCHBISHOP PORTAL |
![Roderigo Borgia Roderigo Borgia](https://images.evetech.net/characters/246780038/portrait?size=64)
Roderigo Borgia
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:54:00 -
[12]
ok i'm not really the person to explain this but i am in -A- so here how new providence will differ from old providence in my understanding of things
alliances unable to take space in the current 0.0 regions will be offered space in providence...
they will get the stations the upgrades etc etc etc, they can then do whatever they want - nbsi, nrds, the only restriction being placed on them is no sov war - so if they dont like there neigbours then its hard luck for them, they can try and drive them out but are not allowed to attack sov directly.
so its kinda like low sec but with the advantages of 0.0
wether the new alliances form a coalition to police the area or happily fight each other for good fights is entirely upto them. They have the freedom to do what they want but they will have to be able to accept running and hiding or fighting when hostiles appear, -A- will not be coming to save them.
now shall again say i'm in no way a spokesman for -A- but thats how i understand the plans for the area
|
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:58:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Xyla Vulchanus You speak of freedom as if it has a universal application. Are you really so dim?
U'K have always, and will continue to, fight for the freedom of Matari slaves and against the freedom of the Amarrian Empire to act howsoever it chooses, despite the suffering it leaves in its wake. Maybe a further 20 or 30 discussions on this point will enable the message to get across?
Not at all. Ushra'Khan fights *against* those that support a society where slavery is acceptable. However, they misappropriate their fight as a struggle for freedom in general, while it is fairly clear that while the slaves' freedom benefits from the Ushra'Khan struggle, the freedom of capsuleers suffer. I'm fine with you arguing that a loss of capsuleer freedoms is an acceptable price to pay for the freedom of slaves. Just don't fall into the Star Fraction trap that Ushra'Khan was fighting for freedom in general or even that of capsuleers. It is rather evident to most people that Providence has become more closed to non-affiliated capsuleers than before.
Slave freedom gained, capsuleer freedom lost.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
![Chav Queen Chav Queen](https://images.evetech.net/characters/671983424/portrait?size=64)
Chav Queen
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:00:00 -
[14]
Actully nothing was enforced on people coming to providence other than they respect other people and dont commit any acts of violence on the locals.
Thats hardly what I would call opressive would you? You share a house with others you have to have a few ground rules to make sure everyone pulls their weight.
I dont know why you have such a problem with people who make their living shooting sancha pirates I bet there are some who do so in your corp. Stange coming from someone who advocates freedom, that you have such a loathing for anyone looking for a FREE sansha killing pass as you put it.
Obiously being free, and being free to kill rats in belt are two completly different things in your eyes.
There was much more to providence than just the corps and alliances there, It was the only part of 00 space I know of where space tourists could get thier first look at 00 sec without being hunted down like dogs by the locals.
|
![Archbishop Archbishop](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1033127867/portrait?size=64)
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:08:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia ok i'm not really the person to explain this but i am in -A- so here how new providence will differ from old providence in my understanding of things
alliances unable to take space in the current 0.0 regions will be offered space in providence...
they will get the stations the upgrades etc etc etc, they can then do whatever they want - nbsi, nrds, the only restriction being placed on them is no sov war - so if they dont like there neigbours then its hard luck for them, they can try and drive them out but are not allowed to attack sov directly.
So you plan to dictate to these people what type of war they are allowed to engage in? How is this any different from the "Standings Enclosurement" claims against CVA? Both require obedience to a "master" of sorts (either CVA or -A-) so what is the difference?
I assume the Ushra'Khan and Star Fraction will oppose this ordered "Warfare Enclosurement" policy by -A- and will take action against it? Anything else would be quite hypocritical of course.
Archbishop
PIE WEBSITE ARCHBISHOP PORTAL |
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:11:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia alliances unable to take space in the current 0.0 regions will be offered space in providence...
I remember some vocal Star Fraction member saying that there would be no place for the weak and all that. Offering the weak a place in Providence seems very counter to what is proposed.
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia they will get the stations the upgrades etc etc etc, they can then do whatever they want - nbsi, nrds, the only restriction being placed on them is no sov war - so if they dont like there neigbours then its hard luck for them, they can try and drive them out but are not allowed to attack sov directly.
It seems that you desire Providence to be the next place for pod pilots without ambition or competence? You will police them and threaten them with expulsion by force if they don't follow your rules. Meanwhile you roam in the space and kill the pilots of the powers you installed there?
And you truly believe that will work?
If an alliance stops paying for sov, will they be allowed to remain, since another cannot take sov without your permission?
It seems like you are trying to build a kind of odd theme park.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
![Pimpertron Pimpertron](https://images.evetech.net/characters/382433224/portrait?size=64)
Pimpertron
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:12:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Pimpertron on 16/03/2010 00:12:50
Originally by: Butter Dog Edited by: Butter Dog on 15/03/2010 22:30:10
New Providence will be far more dynamic, and allow people to access 0.0 space under their own terms and initiative. Ambitious corporations and alliances across New Eden will surely rejoice at the news they no longer have to subserviently bow down to arrogant CVA overlords in order to gain their own space.
What if their terms are they dont want anyone shooting at them the moment they jump through a gate? Who is going to respect that ? What your saying is bring a big enough gun because its going to be like the wild west around here and whoever has the biggest gun gets their way.
As for dynamic your having a laugh. It will become a wasteland with nothing but roaming gangs and gate camps just like the rest of 00 sec.
|
![Darveses Darveses](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1767714451/portrait?size=64)
Darveses
DAEDALUS X The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:22:00 -
[18]
Oh Archie, you're such an amusing voice on the IGS these days! ![Very Happy](/images/icon_biggrin.gif)
"CVA and allies have..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"UK is pushing forward into..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"NRDS will be..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"My underpants today..." "Yeah, but STAR FRACTION...!!"
--- Star Fraction Public - The new Channel
|
![Andreus LeHane Andreus LeHane](https://images.evetech.net/characters/179995450/portrait?size=64)
Andreus LeHane
Gallente Mixed Metaphor
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:25:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Pimpertron As for dynamic your having a laugh. It will become a wasteland with nothing but roaming gangs and gate camps just like the rest of 00 sec.
You know, I've never really understood what the problem with this idea was.
A cat is not a dog. A farmer is not a sailor. 0.0 is not Empire space. Pretending it was didn't really make it so. -----
|
![Roderigo Borgia Roderigo Borgia](https://images.evetech.net/characters/246780038/portrait?size=64)
Roderigo Borgia
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:34:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Merdaneth
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia alliances unable to take space in the current 0.0 regions will be offered space in providence...
I remember some vocal Star Fraction member saying that there would be no place for the weak and all that. Offering the weak a place in Providence seems very counter to what is proposed.
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia they will get the stations the upgrades etc etc etc, they can then do whatever they want - nbsi, nrds, the only restriction being placed on them is no sov war - so if they dont like there neigbours then its hard luck for them, they can try and drive them out but are not allowed to attack sov directly.
It seems that you desire Providence to be the next place for pod pilots without ambition or competence? You will police them and threaten them with expulsion by force if they don't follow your rules. Meanwhile you roam in the space and kill the pilots of the powers you installed there?
And you truly believe that will work?
If an alliance stops paying for sov, will they be allowed to remain, since another cannot take sov without your permission?
It seems like you are trying to build a kind of odd theme park.
firstly the star fraction while currently have some similar targets as us have nothing to do with -a- and if we encounter them will shoot them
so what they say or said really is totally irrelevant to what we do
as for forcing rules on the people in providence - just one rule the rest is for them - the same offer was made to cva - so stop complaining - cva most certainly tells the holders where and what space they can have - and as i said that is my understanding of things only - some inter prvidence sov war might be tolerated i dont know but certainly no moves on -A- space (as defined by what we consider ours not what officially has sov, thought that should be spelled out since seems to be the ralling cry of cva and pets)
as for telling us we are destroying an area where people could go to avoid 0.0 politics etc then again looks to your leaders they involved providence in 0.0 polotics when they became a strategic threat on our boarders - that threat cant be tollerated so is being removed end of story - if you dont like what will replace it then stay in empire
|
|
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:39:00 -
[21]
Hehe... we were a threat to -A- sov... Damn.
I want what he's smoking :P
|
![Icarus3 Icarus3](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1928190179/portrait?size=64)
Icarus3
Gallente DAEDALUS X The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:42:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Darveses Oh Archie, you're such an amusing voice on the IGS these days! ![Very Happy](/images/icon_biggrin.gif)
"CVA and allies have..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"UK is pushing forward into..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"NRDS will be..." "Yeah, but Star Fraction...!"
"My underpants today..." "Yeah, but STAR FRACTION...!!"
Beautifully put there Darv. Maybe now they will understand it due to the simplicity of the examples? lol
|
![Archbishop Archbishop](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1033127867/portrait?size=64)
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 00:47:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Roderigo Borgia
as for forcing rules on the people in providence - just one rule the rest is for them - the same offer was made to cva - so stop complaining - cva most certainly tells the holders where and what space they can have - and as i said that is my understanding of things only - some inter prvidence sov war might be tolerated i dont know but certainly no moves on -A- space (as defined by what we consider ours not what officially has sov, thought that should be spelled out since seems to be the ralling cry of cva and pets)
So you admit you will engage in "Warfare Enclosurement" and restrict the warfare of those residing "freely" in Providence? You should be careful in readily admitting to do something the Ushra'Khan and others have so vocally claimed to oppose.
Do we have an Ushra'Khan representative here who can comment on the "enclosurist" plans of -A- and their admitted policy of forcing a rule on others?
Archbishop
PIE WEBSITE ARCHBISHOP PORTAL |
![Lord Maximullis Lord Maximullis](https://images.evetech.net/characters/267976618/portrait?size=64)
Lord Maximullis
Amarr Du'uma Fiisi Integrated Astrometrics
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 01:10:00 -
[24]
It's your own fault, stop whining. |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 01:39:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Butter Dog the ability for an entity to truly manage it's own affairs, including diplomatic relations, will certainly attract more ambitious corporations and alliances who can truly be called 'independent'.
Paying rent is not independence. There's simply no serious discussion to be had on that matter, no serious case that can be made for independence of a tenant. Trying to make such a case is fairly transparent salesmanship, which is understandable given the Southern Coallition's need to fill Providence systems with anyone but CVA and those Holders who refuse to kneel...but it's salesmanship nonetheless.
I certainly won't make the counter-case that the Holder system was more independent; we are certainly an interdependent organizational scheme, by design.
|
![Karn Mithralia Karn Mithralia](https://images.evetech.net/characters/2039726296/portrait?size=64)
Karn Mithralia
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 03:16:00 -
[26]
It amazes me how people - no not people - slavers, continue to spout all this tripe about freedom in Providence under CVA. You took the place to reclaim it for the Amarrian Empire for ****sake.
Hello! You are slavers, the antithesis of freedom. Wake up and smell the slaver-hounds.
Play to the minds of the greedy and gullible all you want with ya blathering 'we did it for the freedom of all', some of us are not so easily suckered.
The level of semantic debate on this forum has reached levels of stupidity I never thought I'd see. Soon you will be arguing white is black.
Anyway, its all so many words, Providence is burning regardless.
As for rent, what? Certainly no one is paying rent to U'K we routinely turn down any such offers.
|
![Tarran Tarran](https://images.evetech.net/characters/374394057/portrait?size=64)
Tarran
Black Swan Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 04:02:00 -
[27]
The point of my question was not to whine or call for anyone to adopt rules I like. The new holders of Provi can set whatever rules they want, and those who do not like them can try to move them out. I happen to think the old regime under CVA et al was good for Eve pilots, even if it was Diet 0.0. I simply cant see the new regime as described being as friendly to smaller corps and alliances looking to get into 0.0 without hooking up with an existing power bloc.
I think it is disingenuous to pretend that Provi could thrive ecnomically as it did in the past under the new rules which have been described, and that the -A- power block should not even bother trying to say that it would be (sorry Butter Dog). Ironically, when I read CVA's justification for the expansion attempt, and the subsequent refusal to back down, they seem to have come to share UK's disdain for corps and alliances who just wanted to hang out in 0.0 space and rat without nasty 0.0 politics.
In sum, if the old Provi was Diet 0.0, and regular 0.0 was Quafe with all the sugar, it sounds like new Provi would Quafe with about 75% of the calories?
|
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 04:07:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Karn Mithralia Certainly no one is paying rent to U'K we routinely turn down any such offers.
I'm absolutely certain nobody is paying or will be paying any rent to U'K.
However, any discussion laying bare the truth behind the proposed illusion of Southern Coallition influence in Providence being benevolent, self-determining, open to the ambition of outsiders, or anything close to "free" is far more substantial than "semantics."
|
![Karn Mithralia Karn Mithralia](https://images.evetech.net/characters/2039726296/portrait?size=64)
Karn Mithralia
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 05:31:00 -
[29]
Oh I'm sure there is room for discussion about how free Providence will be under the influence of SC. I've stated my position in detail on that eslewhere and will only repeat that time will tell.
What is pure dribble though is Merdaneth's assertion that Providence under CVA was somehow more free. Its laughable to say the least. I much prefer honest slavers who fight for what they believe in than his worm tongued sementic debate.
All of which is pretty irrelevent to be honest, nothing is one or lost on this forum. Day by day CVA's grip on Providence is weakened and the reclaiming fails. That is what matters.
|
![Pimpertron Pimpertron](https://images.evetech.net/characters/382433224/portrait?size=64)
Pimpertron
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 07:31:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Pimpertron on 16/03/2010 07:32:51
Originally by: Andreus LeHane
Originally by: Pimpertron As for dynamic your having a laugh. It will become a wasteland with nothing but roaming gangs and gate camps just like the rest of 00 sec.
You know, I've never really understood what the problem with this idea was.
A cat is not a dog. A farmer is not a sailor. 0.0 is not Empire space. Pretending it was didn't really make it so.
00 sec is vast but the population is so low. System after system bare and pretty much void of life, shut off for nuetral pilots. Providence was different it was like an oasis of life and activity always people coming and going and all in reletive peace and safety. Why should so much space be shut off too people? its a shame and also a waste of space. Mabey this is why so many now move to wormhole space.
Unless you experianced providence you wouldnt understand just how well it worked.
|
|
![Wotlankor Wotlankor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/157128864/portrait?size=64)
Wotlankor
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 07:39:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Merdaneth Why would so many capsuleers choose to visit or live in Providence?
And herein lies the problem. The pod pilots and their Amarrian masters were free but at the cots of minmatar backs that were not deemed worthy to work out for themself their own path.
If this is indeed what your view of the world is build upon then yes your "logic and "assumprtions" make sense.
Ofcource Providence was attractive the s****of the universe who wanted to reap the fruit of slavery.
|
![Rodj Blake Rodj Blake](https://images.evetech.net/characters/383783955/portrait?size=64)
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:21:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Karn Mithralia
As for rent, what? Certainly no one is paying rent to U'K we routinely turn down any such offers.
Of course nobody is paying you rent.
I suspect that like many landlords, -A- probably take a dim view of their tenants sub-letting out their property.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
![Karn Mithralia Karn Mithralia](https://images.evetech.net/characters/2039726296/portrait?size=64)
Karn Mithralia
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:49:00 -
[33]
No one is paying them rent either.
Your grasp of the facts is dismal.
|
![Darveses Darveses](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1767714451/portrait?size=64)
Darveses
DAEDALUS X The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:59:00 -
[34]
The reason for the "success" of Providence really is quite a simple one.
This isn't about principles and ethics, and it certainly isn't about CVA being such nice people to invite everyone to their private playground either. It merely relies on the fact that the generic capsuleer just doesn't care.
I'm quite sure that, would you ask 50 random capsuleers in New Eden, at least half of them wouldn't even know what "IGS" stands for. As long as they get their ISK down in Providence, they're satisfied.
They don't care who has to pay the price, as long as it isn't themselves.
CVA could have set up an agreement that claims "By using our facilities in Providence you agree that you actively and openly support child abuse and genocide, just because it's pretty fun stuff" and people would still sign to reap their share.
Therefore, I could care less about what a safe haven Providence was, because slavery isn't much better than child abuse, and genocide...? Well, I'm sure we have that covered down there.
No one living in Providence and therewith supporting the CVA should be considered "neutral" in this conflict, no matter what the almighty CVA standing list says.
And no Archie, that doesn't mean SF now shoots neutrals just because. --- Star Fraction Public - The new Channel
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 09:30:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Hehe... we were a threat to -A- sov... Damn.
Well, you wont be by the end of the week ![Wink](/images/icon_wink.gif) ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 09:38:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Archbishop
So you admit you will engage in "Warfare Enclosurement" and restrict the warfare of those residing "freely" in Providence? You should be careful in readily admitting to do something the Ushra'Khan and others have so vocally claimed to oppose.
Do we have an Ushra'Khan representative here who can comment on the "enclosurist" plans of -A- and their admitted policy of forcing a rule on others?
Archbishop
You're deliberately missing the point.
Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
Or are you proposing that if one of these entities assaults AAA space, they should be allowed to get on with it, without anyone fighting back? Don't be so ridiculous. Of course they are going to get crushed - if you act with such rash stupidity, you deserve the appropriate response.
You also conveniently ignore one of the key benefits - that AAA and UK will protect Providence from unwanted territorial invasion. This means these new entities will be quite safe by 0.0 standards. They will have their independence, yet also be able to turn to us should the worst happen and their space be invaded by an outside entity.
We're not going to hold their hands if a roaming gang passes through, but I think we'd rather enjoy crushing invasion attempts, for example by CVA or slaver-aligned forces.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Halarach Halarach](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1740862458/portrait?size=64)
Halarach
Amarr Epitoth Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 11:39:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Halarach on 16/03/2010 11:41:22
Originally by: Xyla Vulchanus
Originally by: Merdaneth If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom.
You speak of freedom as if it has a universal application. Are you really so dim?
U'K have always, and will continue to, fight for the freedom of Matari slaves and against the freedom of the Amarrian Empire to act howsoever it chooses, despite the suffering it leaves in its wake. Maybe a further 20 or 30 discussions on this point will enable the message to get across?
Are you able to communicate in any other form than poor smack Xyla? Woof woof bark some more.
I find what defines U'K (anti-slavery) to be somewhat paradoxal. It means your only reason to exist is to be against something. It's so much easier than trying to actually build.
Also that makes you very dependent of us. What would you do, if you'd manage to destroy slavery. I guess the answer that comes to mind is collapse, since you wouldn't have any reason to exist anymore.
As such by wanting to destroy us you're destroying yourself, poor you.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 11:51:00 -
[38]
Slavery will, unfortunately, never truly die. There will always be those vile enough to support it, promote it even, and the ill concieved economic 'benefits' they feel it brings.
UK shall always remain as the guardians against slavery. Without our watchful eyes, who knows what foul deeds would be committed. We've saved millions from their plight, and if that is because we are against something, then so be it.
However, you're also wrong when you claim we don't want to build something. We do. A universe free from slavery and those who support it. But even if such a goal were to be obtained, we would have to remain ever vigilant to prevent the descent into horror that is (or was) CVA's Providence regime. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:30:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Butter Dog Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
According to AAA, the new providence entities will not able to engage in territorial assault period. They will be told (as opposed to deciding for themselves) what actions they may or may not engage in and where.
Kinda sounds like slavery.
Quote: Or are you proposing that if one of these entities assaults AAA space, they should be allowed to get on with it, without anyone fighting back? Don't be so ridiculous. Of course they are going to get crushed - if you act with such rash stupidity, you deserve the appropriate response.
I don't think that's the extent of his "enclosurist" issues, his point is you make this big objection to the way CVA operates with its lesser alliances, yet AAA plans an even more invasive dictating of diplomatic options without even being a member of the same bloc.
Quote: You also conveniently ignore one of the key benefits - that AAA and UK will protect Providence from unwanted territorial invasion. This means these new entities will be quite safe by 0.0 standards. They will have their independence, yet also be able to turn to us should the worst happen and their space be invaded by an outside entity.
Never once have I seen a conquering army not sell itself as a liberation force. You are proposing a system whereby smaller entities are kept dependent upon you. You claim you'll provide protection, but for weeks have frothed at the mouth and convulsed while shouting how terrible it is to foster such weakness and complacency and that those not capable of the fortitude required should stay in empire.
Also, can I see where AAA has made its official statement of intent that includes responding to all calls for aid from their newly installed provi-pets as a dutiful protectorate?
Quote: We're not going to hold their hands if a roaming gang passes through, but I think we'd rather enjoy crushing invasion attempts, for example by CVA or slaver-aligned forces.
Because its well known how much capsuleers enjoy sovereignty campaigns as opposed to casual roaming.
You may as well put on your resume's now: Garden Keeper.
Keep in mind, I am no supporter of slavery or oppression...I'm just also not a fan of yet another self-serving war being sold as a battle for freedom.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:37:00 -
[40]
I think you will find most entities enjoy the larger scale battles which accompany sov warfare. We spend time building up the shiny toys (titans, supercarriers, dreads) to be able to use them for just this purpose.
The only time Sov warfare is dull, is when it is not contested and becomes a grind. But an active attempt by CVA to reclaim sov will certainly not be dull. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
|
![Fuku Hitori Fuku Hitori](https://images.evetech.net/characters/853105595/portrait?size=64)
Fuku Hitori
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:40:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
Originally by: Butter Dog Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
According to AAA, the new providence entities will not able to engage in territorial assault period. They will be told (as opposed to deciding for themselves) what actions they may or may not engage in and where.
Kinda sounds like slavery.
Do you cry "I'm a slave" to your god, Ammarian, because you cannot fly your pod into the heart of a star? Do you cry "free me" whilst choking back tears, upon realising you have to enter a pod to experience the vacuum of interstellar space?
|
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:47:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Butter Dog I think you will find most entities enjoy the larger scale battles which accompany sov warfare. We spend time building up the shiny toys (titans, supercarriers, dreads) to be able to use them for just this purpose.
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
Enjoying privileges you specifically intend to deny to others.
This largest fault with continuing to sell this war as a great "moral" crusade...is that it isn't one.
You'd probably garner more support just by admitting your races hate each other and this has nothing to do with rights or protecting the oppressed, it has to do with blood vendettas and personal honor.
There is nothing altruistic about beating one's chest and declaring themselves the possessor of superior moral conviction.
|
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:54:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Fuku Hitori Do you cry "I'm a slave" to your god, Ammarian, because you cannot fly your pod into the heart of a star? Do you cry "free me" whilst choking back tears, upon realising you have to enter a pod to experience the vacuum of interstellar space?
See, another example of blind, vengeance-filled hatred. Anyone not in lock-step with their interpretation is apparently an Ammarian slaver.
I'm Intaki, not Ammarian, and I don't own slaves.
Maybe if you all turned down the light of your self-proclaimed purity and selfless-ness, you'd be able to see what's really in front of you and that you're being used by powers who have spent not one minute in anguish over your brothers and sisters in bondage and, if it were possible, would win this war in such a way that not one slave was freed from doing it yet all of their self-serving interests would still be secured.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:25:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 16/03/2010 16:28:19
Originally by: Halarach I find what defines U'K (anti-slavery) to be somewhat paradoxal. It means your only reason to exist is to be against something. It's so much easier than trying to actually build.
I hear a lot of this kind of bleating from the CVA and Amarrian imperialism in general. The concept that "building" is good by default and "destroying" is bad. But its such a dishonest idea really and would have us believe that its impossible to build "bad things".
Listen Halarach (and I mean really listen.) If a man (lets call him Aralis) builds a giant machine designed to torture and punish, to rip the flesh from victims, to expose the vitals, to drain blood, to remove organs, to rip the bones and crush the joints and all the while preserving "life" with support tubes and ointments the better to prolong the agonies and terror of the subjects displayed on an ornate raised dias in the town square. If this man presents this "masterwork", this temple to mortal suffering and invites us to praise his industry and creativity, his attention to detail and enduring designwork - his vision even. If he then comes here and says "respect what I have built!"
Are you really genuinely surprised that the audience hurls imprecations and gathers brands to burn his machine to dust and ashes and him with it on principles of basic humanity and innate love for life and freedom? Not everything that is built is good. Not every act of destruction is bad. It is good to burn an evil thing. From the ashes something better may rise.
This is what the CVA have always struggled to understand. You built your empire on suffering and misery. It was corrupt and diseased from the start. Do not be surprised then tearing it down is the rational decision made by idealists and heroic free-fighters the cluster wide.
True Knowledge |
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:35:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
This is incorrect. It's just basic common sense that a Providence entity won't be able to territorially assault the member of a powerful coalition and expect to survive.
They have no hope of succeeding in a territorial war against the Southern Coaltion. This is not anyone 'controlling' anything, it is basic and simple fact. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:43:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Not everything that is built is good. Not every act of destruction is bad. It is good to burn an evil thing. From the ashes something better may rise.
This is what the CVA have always struggled to understand.
Hardly. In fact, many of us operate with this very understanding. Our definitions of good, bad, evil, and better are simply quite different from what Star Fraction adheres to.
It is always entertaining to see Star Fraction describe whomever is convenient for their current propeganda purposes as "idealists" and "freedom fighters." If this were an Ushra'Khan led initiative with organizations like-minded to Ushra'Khan's stated ideals of freedom, the sentiment would be accurate.
The Souther Coallition, however, is not a coallition of idealists and freedom fighters.
CVA bit off way more than we could chew and we're getting what we brought upon ourselves, but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding continue to be transparent in their agendas. We are observing the collapse of one authoritarian regime under the weight of another authoritarian regime...even more interestingly the falling regime is being crushed because they a) dared to be ambitious and b) refused to kneel or be coerced.
Discussion about the victory of idealism and freedom over tyranny and oppression is laughable.
|
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:54:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Syyl'ara
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
This is incorrect. It's just basic common sense that a Providence entity won't be able to territorially assault the member of a powerful coalition and expect to survive.
They have no hope of succeeding in a territorial war against the Southern Coaltion. This is not anyone 'controlling' anything, it is basic and simple fact.
The public statements released by AAA state they are most certainly going to be "controlling" providence. My comments have nothing to do with an group installed by AAA turning on them, but on their stated intentions to use corrective discipline/consequences for engaging in certain kinds of activity after being so installed.
Again, let me state, I have no personal issue with your operations of late.
What I do take issue with is the chest beating over your supposed morality and the attempts to sell what you're doing as a "noble" crusade. Some noble causes are being claimed in the midst of this, but not at nearly the same rate as territorial control.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:13:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Garreck ...but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding...
Oh come on. Thats a merdenath/archbishop style nonsense argument you are better than that Garreck.
CVA (more than any entity in recent memory) have famously succeeded only on the efforts of others. Without the Amarr-bloc of holders in Providence you were nothing. Don't try to diminish the efforts of others by claiming that things they couldn't achieve on their own are worthless.
Nobody is claiming they achieved the defeat of CVA providence "on their own" that would be ridiculous. As ridiculous in fact as CVA claiming to have built and held Providence "on their own."
True Knowledge |
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:29:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Darveses The reason for the "success" of Providence really is quite a simple one.
This isn't about principles and ethics, and it certainly isn't about CVA being such nice people to invite everyone to their private playground either. It merely relies on the fact that the generic capsuleer just doesn't care.
Most indeed don't care about if the rulers of PRovidence keep slaves or not. Most of them *do care* about their own freedom and about the growth of their wealth. They came to Providence because they could increase their wealth in relative freedom.
Therefore, the current attacks grant the non-capsuleer slaves more freedom, but take away freedoms from the capsuleers. That is why I am concerned, the motivation to fight CVA because of standings enclosurism or to allow capsuleers in Providence more freedom is false one. The motivation to free slaves is a true one.
Currently, Ushra Khan propaganda seems to echo that the new Providence will be more free to capsuleers as well. It is quite obvious that the policies -A- and they plan to implement will restrict capsuleer freedoms. Star Fraction has been fighting under false pretenses all along, but that is nothing new. To have Ushra Khan echo the false SF propaganda is something new.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:42:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Not everything that is built is good. Not every act of destruction is bad. It is good to burn an evil thing. From the ashes something better may rise.
Ms. Constantine, I quite agree.
However, what CVA build was considered good and attractive to capsuleers. It granted them unprecented freedom to exploit the wealth of nullsec space. Current developments are taking away those freedoms, and making the Providence nullsec wealth just as hard to gain as most other regions to unaligned pilots.
The capsuleers were granted these freedoms by an entity they could trust and rely upon. An entity that freely granted aid in the form of patrols and docking rights to the unaligned neutrals desiring to increase their wealth.
If in the new Providence gatecamps trying to keep out all newcomers and docking rights are only given to a priviliged few, then yes, freedom will have suffered. And the Star Fraction contributed to it. The policies of the CVA and holders gave the capsuleers a great sense of freedom, the greatest in all of nullsec. Your legacy will be that you helped destroy this 'freespace' and not some idiot propaganda statement about standings enclosurism which will soon be forgotten.
Capsuleers will remember that there once was a part of nullsec space where new pilots could freely go to, where small corporations could mine vast quantities of ore and aid Concord in destroying the most dangerous pirates. They will remember there once was a part of space you didn't need to pay or negotiate with others first to give one a relatively risk-free entrance. They remember the camaraderie of giving aid to an unknown pilot instead of choosing between running or attacking. They will remember a part of space not filled to the brim with psychopathic killers ruled over by tyrants and robber barons.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:44:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
What I do take issue with is the chest beating over your supposed morality and the attempts to sell what you're doing as a "noble" crusade. Some noble causes are being claimed in the midst of this, but not at nearly the same rate as territorial control.
We will have to agree to disagree that the removal of a regime supported by slavery is not a 'noble cause'.
Also, you don't seem to understand the restrictions CVA placed on their holders. They were puppet states. Entities moving to New Providence are under no such leash. They are entirely free to manage their own affairs, including diplomatic relations.
If they wanted to set AAA red and roam to HED, so be it. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![NEMESIS SIN NEMESIS SIN](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1404981827/portrait?size=64)
NEMESIS SIN
Method In Khaos
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:46:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Merdaneth Outdated rhetoric
Put to it whatever rational you like, your time is at an end.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:48:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Merdaneth The capsuleers were granted these freedoms by an entity they could trust and rely upon. An entity that freely granted aid in the form of patrols and docking rights to the unaligned neutrals desiring to increase their wealth.
Well it wasn't "free" was it? They needed to hold their nose and ignore the stink of human misery on the worlds below. They needed to accept the lies told them in the Citadel channel, they needed to accept their inferior place in the hierarchy of Imperial Providence where Amarrians and Holders could order them out of belts at will, where permits had to be begged for to raise towers, where standings were dictated and where freedom of action and interaction were restricted severely. They had to accept the safety of the pirates that CVA considered friends - They couldn't take revenge on criminal acts committed by CVA loyalists and allies elsewhere in eve.
It was largely impossible to be an "unaligned neutral" in Providence because eventually you'd be bullied and harrangued into aggressing the enemies of the CVA regardless of whether those enemies would themselves shoot first on neutrals.
This is the reality. Your lies in this thread are being exposed now by the day.
True Knowledge |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:54:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Garreck ...but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding...
Oh come on. Thats a merdenath/archbishop style nonsense argument you are better than that Garreck.
It's no argument. It's a reminder of what has brought us here. Allow me to be more specific: in this particular case, Star Fraction, having met repeated failure in multiple campaigns with various allies to undermine the CVA and Holders regime, is now trying to tie in some sort of Fractionite ideological success to the Southern Coallition's victory, when what is in fact happening here is two enclosurist organizations are fighting and one is losing. There is no victory for freedom or dreams or any such nonsense in a Southern Coallition take-over of Providence. There is merely a new authority to answer to.
The attempt to dress up the Southern Coallition's campaign with Fractionite ideology is the nonsense argument, Ms. Constantine. It is a land grab precipitated by CVA aggression and fully pursued in the face of CVA defiance. Your nonsense argument continues with the following smoke and mirrors:
Originally by: Jade Constantine CVA (more than any entity in recent memory) have famously succeeded only on the efforts of others. Without the Amarr-bloc of holders in Providence you were nothing. Don't try to diminish the efforts of others by claiming that things they couldn't achieve on their own are worthless.
Nobody is claiming they achieved the defeat of CVA providence "on their own" that would be ridiculous. As ridiculous in fact as CVA claiming to have built and held Providence "on their own."
This is all a complete deflection from the topic at hand! Nowhere did I so much as imply anyone claimed the dfeat of Providence "on their own," and I've already explicitly stated in this very discussion that the CVA and Holders relationship was one of interdependence by design. Not only is your argument here a slight of hand as it is irrelevant to the current discussion, it's a complete deception as it puts words in my mouth.
My point is simple, and stated many times: Southern Coallition occupation of Providence is not a victory of freedom or anything close. It is the replacement of one authoritarian system with another.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:04:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Garreck My point is simple, and stated many times: Southern Coallition occupation of Providence is not a victory of freedom or anything close. It is the replacement of one authoritarian system with another.
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars. If the CVA is wounded and broken and unable to project power to oppress and bully its neighbours then again, freedom has won a victory. I remember the 370 Slaver starships that came against Space and Freedom II last year Garreck. That was CVA providence attempting to extinquish the lives of 38,000 freed Matari Slaves.
If the outcome of the war in Providence means that CVA lack the power to oppress in this scale in the future. Then again, freedom has won a victory.
True Knowledge |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:07:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Garreck on 16/03/2010 18:08:38
Originally by: Jade Constantine If the CVA is wounded and broken and unable to project power to oppress and bully its neighbours then again, freedom has won a victory.
If the replacement of one authoritarian, enclosurist regime with another authoritarian, enclosurist regime is a victory for freedom, Ms Constantine, then not only do I have nothing further to add...but I must agree with you.
I suppose it goes without saying that I find the premise utterly rediculous.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:10:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Garreck I suppose it goes without saying that I find the premise utterly rediculous.
Well it would be too much to expect a man blinded by religion into accepting that one human being should be enslaved by another as a natural state of order to be capable of debating with logic.
True Knowledge |
![Rodj Blake Rodj Blake](https://images.evetech.net/characters/383783955/portrait?size=64)
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:10:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars.
Tell me, has -A- abolished slavery in the systems it previously controlled?
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:11:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Also, you don't seem to understand the restrictions CVA placed on their holders. They were puppet states. Entities moving to New Providence are under no such leash. They are entirely free to manage their own affairs, including diplomatic relations.
Being given space, told what you may or may not do with it, and having those expectations backed by threat of expulsion from the entity that installed you is the very definition of being under a leash.
Quote: If they wanted to set AAA red and roam to HED, so be it.
I find it slightly humorous that all of your examples involve direct aggression against AAA when I'm not talking about that at all. If AAA installs an alliance, then another next door who is constantly a threat to the first, what options are available for resolving this? Will AAA play dutiful landlord and sit the tenants down? Will AAA remove the first alliance for trying to remove the second? Will AAA remove the offending alliance or say "if you can't stand the heat..."?
Their own statements are a matter of public record, now...they intend to "enforce" certain behaviors and standards in Providence.
I do appreciate that we can agree to drop the slave issue and talk substance. While it is truly a deplorable condition to impose upon others, its being called into the debate seems to automatically make it dwarf all other equally important considerations.
|
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:15:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: Jade Constantine
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars.
Tell me, has -A- abolished slavery in the systems it previously controlled?
I have no idea, but I know Ushra'khan have. And they are challenging for sovereignty and control of key systems in Providence right now. I trust the Ushra'khan to ensure their allies will free the slaves in Providence. Little more needs to be said.
True Knowledge |
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:47:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
Being given space, told what you may or may not do with it, and having those expectations backed by threat of expulsion from the entity that installed you is the very definition of being under a leash.
They will be able to do whatever they wish. If they were just having an arguement with a neighbour, I doubt we'd get involved.
The only reason they would ever be removed is if they threatened UK or AAA sovereignty. But that applies to all of our enemies, it's fairly standard practice for an alliance who has invested in it's space to be protective of it.
In short, they would be free to do whatever they wished. It's very unlikely they would wish to assault a member of the Southern Coalition territorially, because it would be pure suicide. But they can still try it if they want, and face the inevitable consequences.
That is the very definition of freedom of choice. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Darveses Darveses](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1767714451/portrait?size=64)
Darveses
DAEDALUS X The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 19:27:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Garreck
If the replacement of one authoritarian, enclosurist regime with another authoritarian, enclosurist regime is a victory for freedom, Ms Constantine, then not only do I have nothing further to add...but I must agree with you.
I suppose it goes without saying that I find the premise utterly rediculous.
Let's have this argument again when AAA controls Providence, right now it seems a bit...off. --- Star Fraction Public - The new Channel
|
![Andreus LeHane Andreus LeHane](https://images.evetech.net/characters/179995450/portrait?size=64)
Andreus LeHane
Gallente Mixed Metaphor
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 20:12:00 -
[63]
YEAH, BUT STAR FRACTION... -----
|
![Merdaneth Merdaneth](https://images.evetech.net/characters/665320754/portrait?size=64)
Merdaneth
Amarr Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 21:01:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Butter Dog
In short, they would be free to do whatever they wished. It's very unlikely they would wish to assault a member of the Southern Coalition territorially, because it would be pure suicide. But they can still try it if they want, and face the inevitable consequences.
That is the very definition of freedom of choice.
Merdaneth laughs loudly.
I'll tell that to my slaves mr. Dog:
"Dear slaves, you are free to do whatever you wish. It is very unlikely you would wish to escape, because it would be pure suicide. But you can try if you want, and face the inevitable consequences.
That is the very definition of freedom of choice. An Ushra Khan bigshot told me so, and you know, they are experts on that area"
Merdaneth continues laughing. A excellent one mr. Dog, most excellent! ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
![Garreck Garreck](https://images.evetech.net/characters/329036612/portrait?size=64)
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 21:13:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Darveses
Let's have this argument again when AAA controls Providence, right now it seems a bit...off.
What, because observing current regions held by the Southern Coallition isn't an adequate baseline to determine whether or not they are standings-enclosurist?
Or because it's an inconvenient truth that all that is happening here is one authoritarian standings enclosure regime is replacing another authoritarian standings enclosure regime and the Fractionites need a couple more weeks to figure out how to wordsmith that reality into something relevant to the Fractionite vision?
|
![Syyl'ara Syyl'ara](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1682520992/portrait?size=64)
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 22:21:00 -
[66]
Basically, if you are truly of the conviction you are on a righteous crusade with the abolitionist stance, then make that your position. I'd truly admire you for it.
Free the slaves, and don't apologize for one second about the consequences for doing it, at least you could be admired for the strength of your convictions and steadfastness to a cause that's sympathetic and easy to identify with.
The way you're choosing to go about this, however, the justifications and rationalizations endlessly pouring out, I can't help but feel it is a cloak for other purposes.
When asked about the nature of how Providence will run going forward (complete contradictions to AAA statements in the media aside), you instead choose to respond to the unasked question of "what would happen if an entity attacked the SC?" when events unfolding in the present clearly demonstrate what the results of that act would be. The statement that "its common sense" should have equally led you to realize this was not the question asked, but you already know that.
Whatever you do, don't use freeing slaves as a justification for your own gains. In such a case, you would be treating them like pawns, their plight and suffering only a bargaining chip to deal with.
Since this, of course, isn't the case, perhaps U'K can dispense with the apologetics on SC's behalf?
|
![Xyla Vulchanus Xyla Vulchanus](https://images.evetech.net/characters/319844160/portrait?size=64)
Xyla Vulchanus
Amarr Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 00:19:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Halarach Edited by: Halarach on 16/03/2010 11:41:22
Originally by: Xyla Vulchanus
Originally by: Merdaneth If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom.
You speak of freedom as if it has a universal application. Are you really so dim?
U'K have always, and will continue to, fight for the freedom of Matari slaves and against the freedom of the Amarrian Empire to act howsoever it chooses, despite the suffering it leaves in its wake. Maybe a further 20 or 30 discussions on this point will enable the message to get across?
Are you able to communicate in any other form than poor smack Xyla? Woof woof bark some more.
I find what defines U'K (anti-slavery) to be somewhat paradoxal. It means your only reason to exist is to be against something. It's so much easier than trying to actually build.
Also that makes you very dependent of us. What would you do, if you'd manage to destroy slavery. I guess the answer that comes to mind is collapse, since you wouldn't have any reason to exist anymore.
As such by wanting to destroy us you're destroying yourself, poor you.
You think that was smack-talk? You really are quite sensitive Halarach - like a quivering butterfly on a tremulous petal. It's quite sweet really. But anyway, I don't follow your warped logic which I will not stoop to dignify with a response here. All I will add is that U'K build very nicely thank you. We have carved out a very nice little area of space for ourselves which is prospering happily. In the near future we may even decide to build a jump bridge network, you know, like the one you used to have!
We Come For Our People (and your systems) |
![Archbishop Archbishop](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1033127867/portrait?size=64)
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 00:36:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Garreck
What, because observing current regions held by the Southern Coallition isn't an adequate baseline to determine whether or not they are standings-enclosurist?
Or because it's an inconvenient truth that all that is happening here is one authoritarian standings enclosure regime is replacing another authoritarian standings enclosure regime and the Fractionites need a couple more weeks to figure out how to wordsmith that reality into something relevant to the Fractionite vision?
In the end we'll see "Warfare Enclosurist" behaviors by -A- and -UK- as they've already stated. Then we'll see how much credibility the Star Fraction really has toward their "cause" of freedom. If they are true to their cause they will take up arms against -A- and -UK- for setting down rules the citizens of Providence must follow. If they are complete lying hypocrites they will not.
I think the anarchists are already realizing they've just helped to replace one "tyrant" with another "tyrant". But in the way they did so, screaming about "enclosurists" and "morality" they've painted themselves into a corner. I'm guessing they'll be as hypocritical as ever and ignore their cause because it isn't convenient. It's a pattern with them.
Archbishop
PIE WEBSITE ARCHBISHOP PORTAL |
![Nauplius Nauplius](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1384333221/portrait?size=64)
Nauplius
Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 01:55:00 -
[69]
Perhaps I don't see what all the fuss is about. Because this freespace utopia said to be under construction in Providence is neither new nor uncommon. It exists in Insmother. And Wicked Creek. All five of Atlas's regions actually. Don't believe me?
But they pay rent, you say! I quote the Scope, if you must believe that the so-called New Providence will be somehow rent-free and thus special for that:
Quote:
Tzuko1 of ATLAS commented on the capture of 9-F0B2, ôwe have not decided yet what to do with that system, but we will surely not keep it û I think some renters will be interested in it.ö
Although I know of no public statement on the matter yet, I'm going to take a wild guess and say that similar terms will apply to whatever Atlas has been allotted out of the recently reinforced Cold Steel and -7- systems. Thus, I conclude rent does not disqualify a territory from being a freespace utopia.
But they might have slaves, you say![1] Having conquered all of the notoriously slave-holding Angel Cartel's territory (outside Curse itself), I'm sure that some individual Atlas pilots have accumulated slaves as a side-effect of operations against the Cartel. And the same number of rules and regulations govern those slaves as now govern slave-holding in this New Providence ù that is, no laws at all. No laws against slaves in the cargo hold. No laws against selling slaves at a station. No laws against keeping slaves in a POS.
But they have ù horror of horrors ù mandatory standings, you say! Well, not really. Atlas renters do not have mandatory reds. And the few mandatory blues do not include the rest of the Southern Coalition, only Atlas and the other renters, which means it is legal for an Atlas renter to gank an Ushra'khan freedom fighter, and vice versa. Really. Some of you might be surprised at this with all the blather from some quarters about how special the New Providence is going to be, but its true.
But what about NRDS, you say? Residents of Insmother may blow away any neutral that wanders in without censure from Atlas. Residents of the New Providence may blow away any neutral that wanders in without censure from -A- or Atlas or Sys-K or whomever. Now, I am just a humble Khanid Commoner, and so I sometimes miss subtleties that are apparent to my betters ù but I ain't seeing any difference here.
None of this is meant to cast aspersion on Atlas; they are a fine Alliance, a fine Dominion (if not a friend of the Amarr), and had I not felt pangs of guilt about abandoning the Amarr Empire in its time of trial I might still live in Insmother now.
I just never realized that I was living in a freespace utopia when I did.
[1] Not that there is actually anything wrong with the Enlightenment of lawfully acquired slaves, of course.
|
![Tizian Enel Tizian Enel](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1047724352/portrait?size=64)
Tizian Enel
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 05:03:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Syyl'ara Never once have I seen a conquering army not sell itself as a liberation force. You are proposing a system whereby smaller entities are kept dependent upon you. You claim you'll provide protection, but for weeks have frothed at the mouth and convulsed while shouting how terrible it is to foster such weakness and complacency and that those not capable of the fortitude required should stay in empire.
This reminds me of something.. let me think...
Oh yes, I've got it now! "We are doing this to enlighten the slaves, it's for their own good".
|
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 08:19:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 17/03/2010 08:20:30 New Providence residents will be completely free to behave as they wish. What exactly are CVA and their pets claiming they are not free to do?
"oh but but but... they if try to assault AAA or UK territorially they will be pushed out of Providence in a counter-attack, this makes them a slave!!!"
Er, no. They're free to act as they wish, in the full knowledge that certain actions have natural consequences. They have infinately more freedom to act than any holder ever did under CVA. That is a simple, undeniable fact. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga Laebetrovo](https://images.evetech.net/characters/803753544/portrait?size=64)
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 09:00:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Butter Dog
New Providence residents will be completely free to behave as they wish.
What if a new providence resident begins to engage in the slave trade? Will they be evicted?
|
![Roderz Roderz](https://images.evetech.net/characters/484795599/portrait?size=64)
Roderz
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 09:44:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Butter Dog Edited by: Butter Dog on 17/03/2010 08:20:30 New Providence residents will be completely free to behave as they wish. What exactly are CVA and their pets claiming they are not free to do?
"oh but but but... they if try to assault AAA or UK territorially they will be pushed out of Providence in a counter-attack, this makes them a slave!!!"
Er, no. They're free to act as they wish, in the full knowledge that certain actions have natural consequences. They have infinately more freedom to act than any holder ever did under CVA. That is a simple, undeniable fact.
This is quite commendable, so install meatshield, reset them and then farm them pvp wise.I wonder if this includes UK ehehe.
Quoting a leaked post = The desired endstate will be that we have replanted the rain forest of Providence with new and different flowers plants and trees and they will yield to us a bounty of killmails.
Provi TL;DR = Remove the threat install content for us and replant the rain-forest.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 09:56:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Scagga Laebetrovo
Originally by: Butter Dog
New Providence residents will be completely free to behave as they wish.
What if a new providence resident begins to engage in the slave trade? Will they be evicted?
They are welcome to make whatever decisions they wish. They will of course understand what the consequences will be.
We won't tell them not to do anything - they should be intelligent enough to work out the consequences of engaging in the slave trade themselves. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga Laebetrovo](https://images.evetech.net/characters/803753544/portrait?size=64)
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 16:06:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Scagga Laebetrovo
Originally by: Butter Dog
New Providence residents will be completely free to behave as they wish.
What if a new providence resident begins to engage in the slave trade? Will they be evicted?
They are welcome to make whatever decisions they wish. They will of course understand what the consequences will be.
We won't tell them not to do anything - they should be intelligent enough to work out the consequences of engaging in the slave trade themselves.
So you will enact consequences for 'new' providence residents who engage in the slave trade. I am not one to 'confidently guess' what these consequences are, for that would be presumptious. For that reason, I should ask you - what are the consequences that Ushra'khan has in store for such entities?
Am I unreasonable to suggest that Ushra'khan will set them red and try to evict them and their infrastructure from providence (or ask a powerful entity to help them achieve this)?
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 16:38:00 -
[76]
'Freedom' means 'Freedom for all', not 'Freedom for people to keep slaves'.
And yes, I'm quite sure we would act immediately to remove any entity who supported slavery. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Nur AlHuda Nur AlHuda](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1618015594/portrait?size=64)
Nur AlHuda
Amarr Callide Vulpis
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 20:21:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Butter Dog 'Freedom' means 'Freedom for all', not 'Freedom for people to keep slaves'.
And yes, I'm quite sure we would act immediately to remove any entity who supported slavery.
Quoting for future reference when UK will be at north and Providence and AAA space get steamrolled.
|
![Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga Laebetrovo](https://images.evetech.net/characters/803753544/portrait?size=64)
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 20:41:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Butter Dog 'Freedom' means 'Freedom for all', not 'Freedom for people to keep slaves'.
And yes, I'm quite sure we would act immediately to remove any entity who supported slavery.
Thank you for the clarification.
There is another, just question that I wish to ask. Let us we entertain the likely possibility that perchance, an entity resident to the hypothetical 'new' providence might inadvertently 'aid and abet' another entity - non grata by virtue of support for slavery. What is the Ushra'khan recourse there?
Let us define terms before we risk receiving platitudes as our response. By 'aid and abet', such may include activities in this non-exhaustive collection of suggestions: permiting docking at administered stations, maintaining standings, permiting the deployment of POS, flying in fleets together.
Again, what is the Ushra'khan recourse there? Does Ushra'khan seek forbid any resident entity in the hypothetical 'new' providen from permitting supporters of slavery entertaining such activities as aforementioned? These are valid questions, ones that may be...overlooked by entities interested in sharing a neighbourhood with terrorists as yourselves...
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 21:20:00 -
[79]
I think I can state with some confidence that anyone who aids slavers will be considered a valid target. We must do all we can to ensure the promotion of freedom - that is, freedom for ALL our people. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Kazzzi Kazzzi](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1894634296/portrait?size=64)
Kazzzi
Amarr Iniquitous Technologies Deep Space Engineering
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 21:28:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Scagga Laebetrovo
Originally by: Butter Dog 'Freedom' means 'Freedom for all', not 'Freedom for people to keep slaves'.
And yes, I'm quite sure we would act immediately to remove any entity who supported slavery.
Thank you for the clarification.
There is another, just question that I wish to ask. Let us we entertain the likely possibility that perchance, an entity resident to the hypothetical 'new' providence might inadvertently 'aid and abet' another entity - non grata by virtue of support for slavery. What is the Ushra'khan recourse there?
Let us define terms before we risk receiving platitudes as our response. By 'aid and abet', such may include activities in this non-exhaustive collection of suggestions: permiting docking at administered stations, maintaining standings, permiting the deployment of POS, flying in fleets together.
Again, what is the Ushra'khan recourse there? Does Ushra'khan seek forbid any resident entity in the hypothetical 'new' providen from permitting supporters of slavery entertaining such activities as aforementioned? These are valid questions, ones that may be...overlooked by entities interested in sharing a neighbourhood with terrorists as yourselves...
The war is not over Scagga. Have you lost all resolve to stop the Southern war machine? Already you seek to find loopholes in U'K Providence administration policy, a policy not yet written, in order to exploit for your future propaganda. Does this mean the Imperial forces have resigned themselves to their fate and have given up all hope? Will there be a formal surrender? |
|
![Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga Laebetrovo](https://images.evetech.net/characters/803753544/portrait?size=64)
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 22:19:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Kazzzi
The war is not over Scagga.
The war is not over.
We have our orders. We carry them out.
|
![Neu Bastian Neu Bastian](https://images.evetech.net/characters/789795683/portrait?size=64)
Neu Bastian
Minmatar Valklear Guard
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 13:57:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Merdaneth Let us examine the following assumptions: ... Or are my assumption faulty? Is there perhaps another reason that Providence attracted so many different capsuleers?
Capsuleer Freedom has **** all to do with the freedom of the thousands or even millions of humans your ilk keeps captive against their will for political, religious or ideological reasons, or just ethnicity; coerced into doing your bidding. I couldn't care less if capsuleers can`t go into providence with out getting shot, like it is in most 0.0 regions. Capsuleers can pay not to be shot.
Capsuleers can choose to go elsewhere.
Capsuleers can shoot back.
Capsuleers will die, and resurrect in a fresh clone, free to make new choices.
|
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 16:58:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Butter Dog 'Freedom' means 'Freedom for all', not 'Freedom for people to keep slaves'.
And yes, I'm quite sure we would act immediately to remove any entity who supported slavery.
Hmm , yet the third of U'K that was hastily recruited from Providence ,into the ranks were never asked to publicy renounce slavery . Something the Ushra'Khan of old wouldv'e demanded . Nowadays acceptance comes at the cost of a large pos or a few meagre pieces of intel . This new U'K just want numbers for cannon fodder no matter their past . And the open invitations to Providence holders to join this new Utopia , will you demand they renounce slavery publicy ? , because since the invasion of Providence it has never been asked or demanded . In fact some of U'K's newer members have a rather colourful history . You can keep lieing to your audience here Butters , but lve seen it from within , and not but a few weeks back I defended U'K. Not anymore , thats the problem , I've seen too much for myself and other pilots of principles to walk away from an alliance they called home for a very long time . Before I leave as l dont want to steal your fame you so dearly love , I'II rephrase an old saying we used to have in U'K. "Amarr will eat itself" ...... "U'K will eat itself"......fixed !!
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 17:23:00 -
[84]
U'K welcome pilots who have seen the error of their ways, and wish to prove this by turning their guns onto CVA and their pets.
Many of our finest pilots, such as Lord Makk, are ex Providence pilots who have saw for themselves the horror of being part of CVA's powerbloc.
Now, go back to your ~wolfpax~ and leave the revelant entites in this conflict to discuss matters on Galnet. There's a good chap. |
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 18:31:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Butter Dog U'K welcome pilots who have seen the error of their ways, and wish to prove this by turning their guns onto CVA and their pets.
Many of our finest pilots, such as Lord Makk, are ex Providence pilots who have saw for themselves the horror of being part of CVA's powerbloc.
Now, go back to your ~wolfpax~ and leave the revelant entites in this conflict to discuss matters on Galnet. There's a good chap.
(ooc) I wouldve thought with the amount of trolling you spend on these forums you wouldve prepared a better response my young Bitters ![Smile](/images/icon_smile.gif) It still does not answer my questions , questions many are seeking answers too . I gave 3 years to U'K , something you quickly wish to ignore for the sake of numbers at any cost . We all know how low Makk stooped to gain his position in U'K on both sides of this war , as did many other newer pilots in U'K . Thats what makes us different Butter . I will stick to my principles and honour at any cost , whereas you will bend and twist the rules depending on what suits you on a daily basis . I was one of the first to move into Providence to fight , to remove the Provibloc , till I saw the provibloc move into the ranks of U'K so cheaply . Cheating & stealing their way into U'K . At what level are you prepared to stoop to , to get what you want ?. You got one thing right Butters , you do love to talk and steal the limelight , talk is cheap Butters ![Wink](/images/icon_wink.gif) I,II leave you to your soapbox & limelight , what goes around comes around ![Wink](/images/icon_wink.gif) |
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 21:29:00 -
[86]
I've flown with and for UK longer than you, Conlin. I was there fighting off hostile gangs when the first POS were laid down to claim sovereignty in 9UY.
I know where UK have come from. The difference between you and I, is that I'm not stuck in the past. I appreciate the past, but I don't let it hold the alliance back.
UK is a major participant in a war to remove CVA. Many doubted this would ever happen - and yet, it's happening. You chose to cut and run because you were asked to support their removal.
Don't dare to lecture anyone else on being 'true' or 'loyal', when your own record of fighting for the cause is lying in tatters. |
![Andreus LeHane Andreus LeHane](https://images.evetech.net/characters/179995450/portrait?size=64)
Andreus LeHane
Gallente Mixed Metaphor
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 03:55:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Andreus LeHane on 19/03/2010 03:56:17 The curious thing here is that accusations pertaining to this imagined future are being thrown around by the Provibloc, but the fact is CVA and its various satellites are not entitled to Providence. It was not gifted to them and it is not theirs through any law of inheritance or, if you'll pardon the expression, divine providence. It was not destined to be theirs and in truth what they hold is not de-jure but de-facto control of the region - and that is slipping, slowly. Like with any other 0.0 region, CVA took Providence by force and ruled by right of conquest. It was military strength that gave CVA Providence and if they cannot maintain that strength then it is expected, natural, some might even say inevitable that they lose it once again.
As dogmatic and self-despising as Amarrians are, CVA do not give themselves enough credit. It was not God who gave you Providence - it was you. It was not some divine being's will that you take the land, it was your own. It was not some deity's effort that built the outposts and turned away invaders, it was yours. Through your own effort and determination you took the land and held it for years. Now you are facing an enemy with the determination and the power to unseat you. If you cannot face them, if you cannot turn them away, they will cast you down and take what you worked so hard for.
Complaining that this notional future would somehow be "unfair" or "unproductive" will do you no good. At the end of the day if New Providence becomes the wasteland you predict it will come as no comfort to the thousands of pilots who lost everything for you to tell them that you were right. At the end of the day if you cannot defend it, it will not really matter whether New Providence ever matches your ideal of the old one. You may be entirely correct and Providence will end up as just another 0.0 region over which people squabble, but will having been right give you any more than a sense of satisfaction? Do you expect your appeals to consequence to motivate some massive popular counterstrike against AAA and Ushra'Khan? Do you honestly expect your enemies to be swayed by arguing that they should simply just accept your way of doing things because it's more profitable for a third party?
When this is over, one side will hold Providence and one side will not. And in the end, that side that won is the only side whose opinion will really matter. |
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 04:25:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Butter Dog Don't dare to lecture anyone else on being 'true' or 'loyal', when your own record of fighting for the cause is lying in tatters.
At least I have my reputation & the respect of my former enemies , thats a lot more than you,or the mess you've made of U'K's roleplaying reputation . The best pilot you could think of as a role model earlier was Lord Makk , that says a lot . You may have been around U'K a few months earlier than myself helping it to build , and l guess youl,l still be playing the fiddle in here whilst it burns . You forget one important factor . When we lost Unity , I was still there in U'K keeping it alive , along with the rest of those honourable trusted pilots . You were ?.... oh yeah ! I'm surprised your taking the criticism , usually your lapdog is biting at my heels by now . Another lie by Butterdog ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Why exactly would I cut & run to help support CVA's removal when Ive already stated l was there at the first , and 3 years previous ?. You sure your not trying to hide the real reason for my and quite a few others departure (not inc 11B)?. You spend so much time in here that your beginning to believe all these lies you create on a daily basis my young friend |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 04:43:00 -
[89]
Well Conlin, I can only respect your position and willingness to speak your mind.
It has given me something of a new understanding. I wondered what UK might do beyond their great conflict, but perhaps in the new UK it may not matter.
Certainly we have all seen a very different UK of late. One that is without a real purpose and mission. Further to that it has been marginalized somewhat in the latest conflict, moreso each passing day and battle.
Perhaps there is a need of a fresh start by many pilots and alliances.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 10:52:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Conlin
At least I have my reputation & the respect of my former enemies , thats a lot more than you,or the mess you've made of U'K's roleplaying reputation .
The only reputation you have is of someone who cut and run when you had a real chance of helping remove CVA. You call that being loyal? You think that helps UK realise it's goals? Of course it doesn't, any fool can see you just wanted to persue your own selfish agenda.
The moment you had to align yourself to UK's true goals, instead of just killing lone sansha hunters whenever you felt like it, you ran away faster than your legs could carry you. What kind of reputation is that? Not one any self respecting pilot in UK would wish to have.
I'm not sure what you mean by "roleplaying reputation", but I'd rather UK achieved it's goals of removing CVA from Providence than engage in pointless Galnet pleasantries with our sworn enemies.
At the end of the day, I and those like me helped shape UK into the force it is today, allies and all, killing CVA and removing her allies from Providence. I understood UK's goals, and how we can realise them - no thanks to you.
You persued your own selfish agenda, and if people like you were a the helm of UK we'd still be in Curse acheiveing nothing.
|
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 10:53:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Certainly we have all seen a very different UK of late. One that is without a real purpose and mission.
Yes because removing your terrible alliance from Providence definately wasn't our purpose or mission ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif) ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 12:01:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Certainly we have all seen a very different UK of late. One that is without a real purpose and mission.
Yes because removing your terrible alliance from Providence definately wasn't our purpose or mission ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
And now?
You can only hope that CVA will continue the fight I suppose.
Without CVA, the UK mission is... hmm...
|
![Borza Slavak Borza Slavak](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1705492410/portrait?size=64)
Borza Slavak
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 12:06:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
And now?
You can only hope that CVA will continue the fight I suppose.
Without CVA, the UK mission is... hmm...
Your logic appears to be "don't try and accomplish your goals, because then you won't have any goals anymore". I don't think even your CVA slaver friends would agree with that sentiment. Pathetic.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 12:19:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
And now?
You can only hope that CVA will continue the fight I suppose.
Without CVA, the UK mission is... hmm...
So you're saying that CVA and her allies have given up, will never try to reclaim Providence, and will not continue the fight at all?
Well, if that is the case, we shall simply bask in the glory of your death. Will keep us occupied for long enough. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Lucy Midnight Lucy Midnight](https://images.evetech.net/characters/799895837/portrait?size=64)
Lucy Midnight
Loki Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 22:19:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Butter Dog I think I can state with some confidence that anyone who aids slavers will be considered a valid target. We must do all we can to ensure the promotion of freedom - that is, freedom for ALL our people.
In a region where there are no restrictions on who can be shot, it hardly seems like a consequence to add one more potential aggressor.
|
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 04:31:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Conlin
At least I have my reputation & the respect of my former enemies , thats a lot more than you,or the mess you've made of U'K's roleplaying reputation .
The only reputation you have is of someone who cut and run when you had a real chance of helping remove CVA. You call that being loyal? You think that helps UK realise it's goals? Of course it doesn't, any fool can see you just wanted to persue your own selfish agenda.
The moment you had to align yourself to UK's true goals, instead of just killing lone sansha hunters whenever you felt like it, you ran away faster than your legs could carry you. What kind of reputation is that? Not one any self respecting pilot in UK would wish to have.
I'm not sure what you mean by "roleplaying reputation", but I'd rather UK achieved it's goals of removing CVA from Providence than engage in pointless Galnet pleasantries with our sworn enemies.
At the end of the day, I and those like me helped shape UK into the force it is today, allies and all, killing CVA and removing her allies from Providence. I understood UK's goals, and how we can realise them - no thanks to you.
You persued your own selfish agenda, and if people like you were a the helm of UK we'd still be in Curse acheiveing nothing.
Seriously Butter , you need to get over yourself and that ego of yours . It will get the better of you one day . Once again you forget , it was ppl like me , thrasher , lachy , atreidos , fleshy etc who fought -A- & Provibloc , Who was then invited by -A- to join their fleets as they were impressed , and that my young pup is where the fruits of our invitation with -A- stemmed from . Not your constant chit chat in here . U'K's true goals , or just yours ?, just because 11b didnt idolise you ,you wanted rid . Once again you forget 11b was responsible for billions of isk of damage during this war with its interdiction . Something Karn supported . And responsible for sylph folding and unlike you its not speculation its fact based on a mail recieved from its ceo ![Razz](/images/icon_razz.gif) Correct !! , I did have a selfish agenda , to invade provibloc and remove CVA , not recruit provi and kiss its former alliances with offers of Sov ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
|
![zoolkhan zoolkhan](https://images.evetech.net/characters/155861703/portrait?size=64)
zoolkhan
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 10:11:00 -
[97]
Edited by: zoolkhan on 20/03/2010 10:11:49
Originally by: Conlin I did have a selfish agenda , to [..cut..] kiss its former alliances with offers of Sov ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
boys, take it to private will ya? nobody is interested into two blown up egos each of you claim to have won the war before its over. Get into a sandbox and play with dolls.
Both of you are quiet ok pilots withing their own specialisation. Granted.
But your presence alone would not have gotten us anywhere.
Both of you have the diplomatic skills matching the talking potatoes from yulai II.
Ushra'khan is a collection of talents, and only the whole of it is what leads to succsess.
Nothing is as pathetic as turning the back to your brothers in their most important fighting since foundation, and then even claim that whatever we will achieve is your earnings. I mean.. please...
And Butter dog has an own space station now, so his ego could finally dock. But whomever judges the alliance over his comments, is careless, ignorant, naive, ******ed.
pick your two of those.
recruiting -forum
|
![Shiroi Okami Shiroi Okami](https://images.evetech.net/characters/542568769/portrait?size=64)
Shiroi Okami
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 11:24:00 -
[98]
Well said Zoolkhan. Although I wonder if we reinforce that station will BD's ego be able to undock again? ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
In all seriousness other than a severe drop in recruitment standards of late I don't believe UK has done so much wrong, certain individuals excepted.
However, just for you Butter Dog, I'm going to state some facts, seeing as you seem to have conveniently forgotten them.
1. We have all done our part for the UK cause, all fought the battles, whether they be recent or years old, so stop *****ing. 2. 11b left Uk because of a difference of opinion topped with a big misunderstanding, which is rather different to betraying the alliance. I could have enmptied UK's war chest when I left had I wished, but I didn't, so I won't have you lot tossing around the 'fact' that 11b has 'betrayed' UK in it's 'hour of need'. 3. Which brings me to my next point, this is no hour of need for UK. At no point was UK in danger itself, nor was the -A- offensive in danger of stalling after d-g, because CVA just didn't put up any resistance. This is not even UK's campaign. If it were not for -A-'s decision to invade providence, this never would have happened. Uk just jumped on the bandwagon or was being a good ally and helping out -A- (However you want to take it) and at the same time completing UK's original objective of socking it to the slavers and taking back their space. Make no mistake however, -A- would have defeated providence with or without you. Just with the aid of sys-k, atlas and UK it was simply easier. So stop throwing around the term 'revelant' like you actually are. 4. UK could be quite easily compared to france during the second world war so many thousands of years ago. France (Providence) was invaded and occupied by Germany (CVA and allies), the French (UK) began a guerilla war on the German (CVA) occupation, and caused disruptions to supply routes, troop movements, and everyday business, while never actually fighting them outright. Eventually when France was liberated by the Allies Forces (-A- and allies), the French all puffed themselves up and started talking about how vital they were to the war etc etc, when at the end of the day the US and Russia probably would have beaten Germany on their own, the French Resistance simply made it easier. This draws an almost exact parallel between that event and the current situation in providence.
In short, stop talking yourself up and stroking your already collossal ego, because for all your smack, trolling and tough talk, UK's part in this theatre of war was small, yours even smaller. Had your cloning process gone awry and resulted in your destruction immediately before the burn providence campaign, nothing would have changed, Uk would still have done it's part, -A- and allies would have still trashed providence, so all in all, Butter Dog, you are expendable, you are irrelevant.
As am I, as is any one individual in an alliance, aside from maybe the executors.
|
![zoolkhan zoolkhan](https://images.evetech.net/characters/155861703/portrait?size=64)
zoolkhan
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 12:35:00 -
[99]
Edited by: zoolkhan on 20/03/2010 12:35:52
Originally by: Shiroi Okami
4. UK could be quite easily compared to france during the second world war so many thousands of years ago.
Nothing is as worthless as references to happenings that cannot be verified, because simply no datacores with accurate material exists this side of the eve gate about myths of wars thousand of years ago involving races and planets taht probably didnt even exist.
How accurate is the material you researched, if youre even unable to tell the exact amount of years with an accuracy of.. well say 100 years plus/minus?
If you want to impress the public galnet audience, perhaps use references to happenings of a past, that at least podpilots remember.
recruiting -forum
|
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 13:43:00 -
[100]
This was about shutting butter up , everybody gets tired of his self centred chestbeating and needs reminding once in a while its a team effort . Your like the pmt of provi these days matey , always late ![Razz](/images/icon_razz.gif) Maybe if you had stopped sitting on the fence for so long , things wouldnt have gotten so bad as they are .So when you see ex alliance members arguing , take a second back . And ask why , instead of trying to play the father figure Hopefully youl,l fall off that fence one day , and act , before its too late ....again !!
|
|
![Kozmic Kozmic](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1621830212/portrait?size=64)
Kozmic
Universal Army Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 18:04:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Shiroi Okami WAlthough I wonder if we reinforce that station will BD's ego be able to undock again? ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
I thought you guys did not do the station shooty thing, just the fun roamy stuff.
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 19:03:00 -
[102]
I don't give a toss about 11B and certainly have nothing against you.
What I objected to was the way you came on Galnet shouting 'look at me!' and telling blatent lies after you decided to leave. It was undignified, and completely unnecessary. You accused UK of not being true to her ideals at a time we're removing CVA from Providence. The stupidity of it all was breathtaking.
If you had not have done that, we wouldn't have had to call you irrelevant, or lacking in bigger picture understanding. Most of UK feel the way I've expressed in my posts to you, and the reason for that is the childish and frankly pathetic manner in which you decided to leave. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Conlin Conlin](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1199241757/portrait?size=64)
Conlin
Gallente Mad Bombers
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 03:07:00 -
[103]
Actually Butter , once again you got it all wrong again . That announcement on Galnet was an exercise to show U'K had lost any rping credibility , and when you look at your responses , we were proven right .In a very big way . Notice I said "We" & not "I" . Dont judge others by your own standards please . Now l,ll leave the last word to you , once you've scoured all the other topics your struggling to defend .
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 08:50:00 -
[104]
Yes, killing our mortal enemy and removing them from Providence is destroying our credibility ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif)
Honestly, I couldn't give a toss what you or anyone else thinks of our credibility. I care about two things: Killing CVA, and making UK a strong and capable alliance.
If I hurt a few peoples feelings on Galnet along the way, forgive me for not caring in the slightest. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Lilan Kahn Lilan Kahn](https://images.evetech.net/characters/527279244/portrait?size=64)
Lilan Kahn
Amarr The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 09:59:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Conlin Actually Butter , once again you got it all wrong again . That announcement on Galnet was an exercise to show U'K had lost any rping credibility , and when you look at your responses , we were proven right .In a very big way . Notice I said "We" & not "I" . Dont judge others by your own standards please . Now l,ll leave the last word to you , once you've scoured all the other topics your struggling to defend .
what is this rping you speak off?
did you get lost on the way from the asylum trying to escape your horrible demented person
"Bringing Content to you 1 round of ammo at a time" |
![Scarlette Derion Scarlette Derion](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1204447272/portrait?size=64)
Scarlette Derion
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 10:59:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Butter Dog Yes, killing our mortal enemy and removing them from Providence is destroying our credibility ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif)
Honestly, I couldn't give a toss what you or anyone else thinks of our credibility. I care about two things: Killing CVA, and making UK a strong and capable alliance.
If I hurt a few peoples feelings on Galnet along the way, forgive me for not caring in the slightest.
If by 'strong and capable', you mean 'Bloated with useless cannon fodder' and 'follows -a-'s lead', then yes, the current UK is strong and capable. Although I'd say many provipet alliances also felt that quantity was better than quality, and look where that ended up ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
|
![Butter Dog Butter Dog](https://images.evetech.net/characters/943964550/portrait?size=64)
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 13:42:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Scarlette Derion
If by 'strong and capable', you mean 'Bloated with useless cannon fodder' and 'follows -a-'s lead', then yes, the current UK is strong and capable. Although I'd say many provipet alliances also felt that quantity was better than quality, and look where that ended up ![Rolling Eyes](/images/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Funnily enough, that isn't what I meant. But of course you knew that.
By 'strong and capable' I mean able to do more than just roaming and killing sansha hunters. Also, being 'strong and capable' is a goal, as I don't believe we're nearly there yet. But it is a worthy goal, and the UK of today is stronger than it has ever been. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 13:40:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Merdaneth
If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom. Or are my assumption faulty? Is there perhaps another reason that Providence attracted so many different capsuleers?
So you are claiming that attacking an imperialist entity that thrived on slave labour on the planets below and forced all capsuleers in space to submit to a dominant standings regime based on the acceptance of slavery was somehow an attack on "freedom"?
You Nationalists are certainly sounding desperate at the moment.
True Knowledge |
|
![CCP Adida CCP Adida](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1245885080/portrait?size=64)
CCP Adida
![](/images/icon_dev.gif)
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 15:15:00 -
[109]
Removed OOC replies
Adida Community Rep CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
![Fridarey Fridarey](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1859940849/portrait?size=64)
Fridarey
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 15:22:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Merdaneth
If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom. Or are my assumption faulty? Is there perhaps another reason that Providence attracted so many different capsuleers?
So you are claiming that attacking an imperialist entity that thrived on slave labour on the planets below and forced all capsuleers in space to submit to a dominant standings regime based on the acceptance of slavery was somehow an attack on "freedom"?
You Nationalists are certainly sounding desperate at the moment.
Would be interested in hearing Merdaneth respond on this one.
|
|
![Catualda Catualda](https://images.evetech.net/characters/347617303/portrait?size=64)
Catualda
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 04:27:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Butter Dog Yes, killing our mortal enemy and removing them from Providence is destroying our credibility ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif)
Honestly, I couldn't give a toss what you or anyone else thinks of our credibility. I care about two things: Killing CVA, and making UK a strong and capable alliance.
If I hurt a few peoples feelings on Galnet along the way, forgive me for not caring in the slightest.
If you now represent the UshraÆkhan I once loved (4 years ago when I had to leave due to planetside issues) IÆm sorely disappointed.
We were freedom fighters, our interest wasnÆt in gaining huge territories or make fortunes, wasnÆt even to ally to some foreign (to the cause) Powerbloc and pass for nothing more than a puppet to be toyed with.
Our Purpose, the purpose as I understood it was to fight slavery, not build an empire! You can tell me what you will about how building said empire will end slavery, but the moment you become a regional power or a servant to one you indeed lose all that made the core of UÆK to become nothing more than a political toy or puppeteer.
If it means anything, anything at all, if my words as a former member of ushraÆkhan have any meaning, remember what being a freedom fighter was about, why unity station was built, remember that roaming in small fast gangs meant more than tactics, was a trademark of UÆK with a lot more meaning than spewing forth some dozens upon dozens of capitals.
I had the pleasure to participate in some skirmishes and events that made history for UÆK, I was proud and still feel proud of having served under the command of Karn Mithralia in NebuÆKauÆBehudeàand as I said, nothing saddens me more than to see UÆK reduced to a servant of AAA.
Perhaps itÆs just me,maybe IÆam wrong, but I felt the need to make this my opinion known.
|
![Nefher Zhila Nefher Zhila](https://images.evetech.net/characters/677984212/portrait?size=64)
Nefher Zhila
Amarr Khanid Provincial Vanguard
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 04:46:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Merdaneth
If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom. Or are my assumption faulty? Is there perhaps another reason that Providence attracted so many different capsuleers?
So you are claiming that attacking an imperialist entity that thrived on slave labour on the planets below and forced all capsuleers in space to submit to a dominant standings regime based on the acceptance of slavery was somehow an attack on "freedom"?
You Nationalists are certainly sounding desperate at the moment.
A claim by an Anarchist entity that thrives on piracy and chaos, and forces capsuleers to a blind set of chaotic and often conflicting rules in space based on the acceptance of liberty and free travel who claim to defend said freedom.
Interesting.
Khanid Loyalist,Bahadir of Family Zhila. Former member of the 13th Royal Khanid Regulars, proud member of the khanid provincial Vanguard. |
![Jade Constantine Jade Constantine](https://images.evetech.net/characters/158634209/portrait?size=64)
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 07:02:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Nefher Zhila
A claim by an Anarchist entity that thrives on piracy and chaos, and forces capsuleers to a blind set of chaotic and often conflicting rules in space based on the acceptance of liberty and free travel who claim to defend said freedom. Interesting.
You accuse us of piracy? Please explain.
True Knowledge |
![Black Necris Black Necris](https://images.evetech.net/characters/284117655/portrait?size=64)
Black Necris
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 07:04:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Catualda
If you now represent the UshraÆkhan I once loved (4 years ago when I had to leave due to planetside issues) IÆm sorely disappointed.
We were freedom fighters, our interest wasnÆt in gaining huge territories or make fortunes, wasnÆt even to ally to some foreign (to the cause) Powerbloc and pass for nothing more than a puppet to be toyed with.
Our Purpose, the purpose as I understood it was to fight slavery, not build an empire! You can tell me what you will about how building said empire will end slavery, but the moment you become a regional power or a servant to one you indeed lose all that made the core of UÆK to become nothing more than a political toy or puppeteer.
If it means anything, anything at all, if my words as a former member of ushraÆkhan have any meaning, remember what being a freedom fighter was about, why unity station was built, remember that roaming in small fast gangs meant more than tactics, was a trademark of UÆK with a lot more meaning than spewing forth some dozens upon dozens of capitals.
I had the pleasure to participate in some skirmishes and events that made history for UÆK, I was proud and still feel proud of having served under the command of Karn Mithralia in NebuÆKauÆBehudeàand as I said, nothing saddens me more than to see UÆK reduced to a servant of AAA.
Perhaps itÆs just me,maybe IÆam wrong, but I felt the need to make this my opinion known.
Nice to see you are doing ok Catualda, and working to free the slaves, instead of just being a forum warrior.
Its amazing how people can come to a public forum, and say "OH UK was this and now is that!, OH! in my time, the music was good, now its just noise!".
You even know what we just did in Providence? Tell me what part of this you don't approve: Removing entirely the slaver operations from the Providence Region. Stopping the Amarr paramilitary expansion or "Reclamation". Getting payback for the trick CVA and pets pulled on us 3 years ago.
Its quite clear we couldn't have pulled this ourselves alone, but its also quite clear we did this job together with "A", not as pets but as brothers in arms.
But i mean, of course you know best what UK should be, with your full 6 months in the organization, which ended almost 4 years ago.
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 07:22:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Nefher Zhila
A claim by an Anarchist entity that thrives on piracy and chaos, and forces capsuleers to a blind set of chaotic and often conflicting rules in space based on the acceptance of liberty and free travel who claim to defend said freedom. Interesting.
You accuse us of piracy? Please explain.
It's the patch you where over that eye...
Oh and the very nature of your concept of 'freespace'.
We all have our own dictionaries here...
|
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 07:30:00 -
[116]
>>You even know what we just did in Providence?
Cloaked a lot?
>>Removing entirely the slaver operations from the Providence Region.
-A- and atlas did that pretty much on their own.
>>Stopping the Amarr paramilitary expansion or "Reclamation".
-A- and atlas did that pretty much on their own.
>>Its quite clear we couldn't have pulled this ourselves alone...
Or at all?
But hey. It's done. You might have managed to get someone else to do the dirty work...
Wait, hold on. -A- did this for their own reasons. They did it because of the whole sovreignty thing. The were worried about CVA taking space while they were busy elsewhere. They didn't do it for Ushra'Khan or the slaves. They did this for themselves and nobody else.
Let's face it guys, you are just along for the ride here, Just like Daisho and all the rest.
Ah well. It's still kind of like a victory.
|
![Black Necris Black Necris](https://images.evetech.net/characters/284117655/portrait?size=64)
Black Necris
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 14:31:00 -
[117]
Edited by: Black Necris on 24/04/2010 14:31:54 You know those kind of tears are used for a exquisite perfume used to anoint new warriors of Ushra Khan in the New and Improved Church of Providence (NICHUP)?
So far you have provided us with enough material to anoint the whole eve universe, I thank you for filling our stock.
Your rage filled and emotional statement, a statement that seems to come from the despair of loosing everything in the matter of a week or so its quite understandable, perhaps if you had showed as much in the battlefield as you do in the forums you would had kept your space for a little longer.
But hey! who am i to say what Aralis strategies are...
The most gracious & anointed lordship Black Necris Archbishop for the New and Improved Church of Providence
*PS: WTS anointment oil! 1.5 mill each bottle, we got several scents of tears for your pleasure! take home the warm smell of "Larmes du Xina" or "Plui des yeux de Merdaneth". Call this week and take two bottles for the price of one! thats right sir! But wait thats not all... If you call between the next 2 hours, you will get a certified copy of Pax Amarria signed by no other than Archbishop Black Necris, Holy leader of the New and Improved Church of Providence (NICHUP)!!!11!1
**Disclaimer: The signing of the books may or may not take place in the toilet. Ink may or may not be fecal matter.
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.24 21:02:00 -
[118]
Ah. No real responce to that one I see.
Because in the end, Ushra'Khan has no victory at all. They were swept in upon a mighty wave, a victory of their greater masters.
They are returned to their home in unity, but it was a gift to them by another greater power which defeated their enemy for reasons of it's own.
But you still have your outposts, so rest well. Indeed you now sit in your own space holding empire in an ever more peaceful region.
It will be interesting new times for Ushr'Khan.
|
![Black Necris Black Necris](https://images.evetech.net/characters/284117655/portrait?size=64)
Black Necris
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 00:20:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Ah. No real responce to that one I see.
Because in the end, Ushra'Khan has no victory at all. They were swept in upon a mighty wave, a victory of their greater masters.
They are returned to their home in unity, but it was a gift to them by another greater power which defeated their enemy for reasons of it's own.
But you still have your outposts, so rest well. Indeed you now sit in your own space holding empire in an ever more peaceful region.
It will be interesting new times for Ushr'Khan.
What response you want? No matter what i say you are going to keep crying we are pets. Why would we engage you alone when you yourselves formed a power block with hundrds of organizations fighting for your side? How can you have the guts to come here and tell us we have no victory when you didnt even put a defense? Did you really expected us to come alone and take the whole providence by ourselves?
I never said UK did it alone, nor that UK was capable of pulling that feat against the whole proviblock.
The fact here is that we did kick you out of those systems and if you had put any resistance you would had noticed that UK pilots were a third of the total pilots in most of the fleets.
Of course is the easy path to come and say: ha! UK didnt Won! but the fact is that we did, and the fact is that you loose and the sad part about it is that you didnt even put a fight.
Most victorius lordship Black Necris Archbishop for the New and Improved Church of Providence (NICHUP)
*PS: ha! we won.
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." |
![Alekseyev Karrde Alekseyev Karrde](https://images.evetech.net/characters/725386886/portrait?size=64)
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 07:10:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Xina Tutor Let's face it guys, you are just along for the ride here, Just like Daisho and all the rest.
Do not underestimate the awesomeness of riding a wave.
---
|
|
![Major Templar Major Templar](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1085516930/portrait?size=64)
Major Templar
Caldari KINGS OF EDEN Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 09:05:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Black Necris What response you want? No matter what i say you are going to keep crying we are pets.
Some of your own members in fact have stated that Ushra'Khan are pets and are ok with it, however I do not have a way of pulling those communication logs.
Quote: Why would we engage you alone when you yourselves formed a power block with hundrds of organizations fighting for your side? How can you have the guts to come here and tell us we have no victory when you didnt even put a defense? Did you really expected us to come alone and take the whole providence by ourselves?
We did not expect that at all. But then you could not expect us to put up a "defense" when we are staring down the barrels of 250+ in one system that does include 100+ capitals. Also, at the point the Sev3rance space was assaulted there was no "power block" seeing as CVA had stopped fighting for their "allies" (or should I say pets that weren't called pets but were treated lesser by them) a long time ago. CVA did not openly refuse to assist with the defense of any space, they just stopped showing up and saying it was part of the stratagy. So don't say that we didn't defend our space, because when we could actually put up a fight that wasn't complete suicide, we did (looks at XHQ-7V and the defeat of Atlas' gang.)
Quote: The fact here is that we did kick you out of those systems and if you had put any resistance you would had noticed that UK pilots were a third of the total pilots in most of the fleets.
Proving that Minmatar schools are lacking intelligent teachers in the field of Math. For example, XHQ-7V saw no Ushra'Khan members in the fleet that actually removed the modules for Sov. Most of the other systems saw small Ushra'Khan turn out except of course KBP7-G for that was all you wanted, someone else to clean out the crap and for you to take the good part.
Quote: Of course is the easy path to come and say: ha! UK didnt Won! but the fact is that we did, and the fact is that you loose and the sad part about it is that you didnt even put a fight.
"UK didnt Won!" Also, proving Minmatar schools to be lacking in intelligent teachers in the field of English.
Also, you won? I don't see it as you "won" as much as I do, you were there and got a plaque saying "I was at the battle of KBP7-G" and then given the station from the people that did the real work. Also, don't get too comfortable there, as given enough time, someone at some point will come in and take you out of your seat in KBP7-G. Because -A- will not be there for you always to keep the big boys away from you. Now, I'm not claiming that Sev3rance will be the one, nor am I ever going to claim that the Holders or anyone from the old Holders will be the ones doing it. I believe that dream is dead and done. But someone will show interest in that space one day and come for you. Ushra'Khan will be removed from there and so will the very funny and worthless alliances seated in the space next door.
So, as I have always said to every post ever before from people claiming that we are upset about the loss of space, just remember this. Space comes, space goes. Don't get too attached to it as one day you may just lose it. And always don't forget, that an alliance is not an alliance because it hold space, for if that is the only reason you remain an alliance then you were doomed to fail before you even started.
Live long, Die well, and never forget to update your Death clone, Major Templar Sev3rance
Major Templar Head of Armed Forces Kings Of Eden Sev3rance |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 12:29:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
Originally by: Xina Tutor Let's face it guys, you are just along for the ride here, Just like Daisho and all the rest.
Do not underestimate the awesomeness of riding a wave.
When you have earned your right to hold space in battle, then we will talk.
|
![Borza Slavak Borza Slavak](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1705492410/portrait?size=64)
Borza Slavak
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 13:32:00 -
[123]
It's really quite amusing how the providence bloc collapsed, most members not even helping each other. This is rather apparent when you see how -7- members seem to think that what happened in their corner of space applies precisely to the entirety of the providence campaign. It just goes to show they never left their own pocket of space, until they were forced to of course ;)
|
![Black Necris Black Necris](https://images.evetech.net/characters/284117655/portrait?size=64)
Black Necris
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 14:56:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
Originally by: Xina Tutor Let's face it guys, you are just along for the ride here, Just like Daisho and all the rest.
Do not underestimate the awesomeness of riding a wave.
When you have earned your right to hold space in battle, then we will talk.
When you have earned your space by defending it in battle then we will talk.
Most awesome & loved lordship, conqueror of undefended space Lord Black Necris Archbishop for the New and Improved Church of Providence (NICHUP)
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 15:10:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Black Necris
When you have earned your space by defending it in battle then we will talk.
We are still fighting Atlas. Who are you guys again?
|
![Erichk Knaar Erichk Knaar](https://images.evetech.net/characters/263059457/portrait?size=64)
Erichk Knaar
Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 17:41:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Originally by: Black Necris
When you have earned your space by defending it in battle then we will talk.
We are still fighting Atlas. Who are you guys again?
You seem bitter about this whole thing.
|
![Black Necris Black Necris](https://images.evetech.net/characters/284117655/portrait?size=64)
Black Necris
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 18:12:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Originally by: Black Necris
When you have earned your space by defending it in battle then we will talk.
We are still fighting Atlas. Who are you guys again?
There there, let it all out Xina, let it all out...
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." |
![Xina Tutor Xina Tutor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/704038464/portrait?size=64)
Xina Tutor
Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.25 22:02:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Black Necris follow the example of shadowanglight! hes already thinking on retaking providence!![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif) ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif) ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif) ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
Hey, come on, you have to feel sorry for some 'pilots'...
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |