EVE Search - The Unholy Trinity

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Intergalactic Summit

The Unholy Trinity

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.07 15:49:00 - [1] Originally by: The Cosmopolite Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 06/04/2007 21:20:32 The Star Fraction and Bloodveil agree on numerous matters and share similar points of view on a number of issues above and beyond our respective opposition to the Amarrian regime. This is based on our understanding of the respective ideologies. The interpretations of third-parties are irrelevent. Which is to say, even if you think our ideologies are in total opposition, that is not enough to show that we must be united only by opposition to the Amarrian Empire. To show that, you must show that we do not agree on any other point. That has not been shown. The Cosmopolite What has been shown, repeatedly, is that the ideology you express here on IGS is at least as alien to that of Bloodveil than it is to that of the Amarr loyalists. You position is untenable - you are intelligent enough to realize this, even if you will not admit to it. Why not admit it to yourself, reconsider your moral ethics and learn something from the experience. Your current position reminds me of a three year old who puts his hands across his ears and continously sing "tralalala" in order to avoid hearing an uncomfortable truth. Mr Cosmopolite, I still hold you in higher esteem than that - please do not prove that my faith in you is undeserved. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.07 21:05:00 - [2] Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Nobody but nobody tells us who we should and shouldn't fight. Ever. Please notice that we never have. All we have done is point out the double standards of your dealings with people around you. The ideology of Bloodveil should be at least as alien to you as the ideology of the Amarr loyalists. At least if we judge you by you speaches here on IGS. However, I must ask you this: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? PIE currently have several wars active besides various other duties (read the news). We deal with our enemies depending on their importance to us. Star Fraction is not high on the list and so we leave you alone for the time being. If you expect us to repect your right to form your own policies (which we do - we simply point out the inconsistencies) then who are you to question ours? Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Pointing out ideological differences between us and our allies is totally without value. We have ideological differences with everyone, friend and foe. So now you are willing to admit to the all too obvious differences in ideology between Star Fraction and Bloodveil. That is certainly a step in the right direction. Does this mark the beginning of a new line from Star Fraction regarding this question? Originally by: Devilish Ledoux The difference between friend and foe is that we still believe that our friends will come around to our way of thinking eventually without combat; while we believe that our enemies will probably never come around to our way of thinking and must be suppressed so that they do not impede our evolution. I can see how you must feel this way. While the Amarr loyalists have stuck to their views all along, Revan and her Bloodveil has certainly shown a certain moral "flexibility" when it comes to forming policies. Such "flexibility" might well prove to be an asset when dealing with Star Fraction it seems. Originally by: Devilish Ledoux Now, if you're done wasting your time hunched over a comm station, come out and make a difference. We're waiting for you. Then by all means, keep waiting. We will deal with you in due time - when we see fit. Until then just hang around - at least you do no harm to anyone that way. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.07 22:14:00 - [3] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Originally by: Octavinus Augustus However, I must ask you this: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? We have precisely no respect for cowardice. Is that the best you can come up with? You have no answer to my question so you try with an obvious flamebait? As for the quality of the bait you present, it makes your attempt to degenerate the disussion even worse. We have told you repeatedly that we find you to be rather insignificant. Do you honestly think we care one bit what you do or do not respect? Perhaps you should leave the posting to Mr Cosmopolite and others like him. People who at least makes an attempt to present an intelligent view on the debate. Try answering the question next time - If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.07 22:23:00 - [4] Originally by: The Cosmopolite We are the ones who judge that our ideologies have sufficient points of agreement, beyond any particular shared opposition to a given entity, for us to co-operate on any number of issues. So your basic stand is that while you have the right to question the ideology of other's (ie your thoughts on the Amarr theocratist dictatorship or whatever) you frown on anyone who put your own ideology under a similar scrutiny? You do indeed have the right to form alliances and frienships with whomever you desire. But then you make grand statements on IGS regarding "freedom" and follow it up with actions that clearly contradict your words. How can you expect that we shall not point to the inconsistencies so that those third parties you seem to disrespect so much may see you for what you really are? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.07 22:25:00 - [5] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Sorry, I only read the words of those with the courage to support their views in space. Come win my respect with actions and then I might be prepared to give you an answer. So instead you post replies to posts you haven't even read? You are beneath even contempt. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 10:44:00 - [6] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine And yet I and my comrades are free to go where we choose in your capital systems and you are not. Must be maddening for you. So now you are back to reading and answering my questions Jasmine? In that case I guess I'll refer you to my original one: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? As for what is maddining to whom, the Amarrian Loyalists are used to seeing enemies in Amarr from time to time - it's just business as usual to us. We will deal with you in due time. However, SF has spent considerable energy on various threads whining about our tactics and strategies. Perhaps we may conclude that SF appear to be less content with the current situation than PIE? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 11:02:00 - [7] Originally by: The Cosmopolite My stand is that I will refute claims that are false and claims that the only point of agreement between the Bloodveil and the Star Fraction is a 'shared hatred of the Amarrian Empire' are false claims. The issue here, at least as far as I'm concerned, is that at the very basic level the ideologies expressed by SF and Bloodveil are incompatible. One wishes for a galaxy wide theocratic dictatorship with Revan Neferis at the helm while the other wishes for an end to all government. Just one clear example of incompatibility. There are multiple. You answer that you and Bloodveil agree on a number of issues and that that is enough for you. That would be like PIE seeking admittance into Ushra Khan as we both claim to defend the individuals right to "live and prosper in accordance with the law". That we interpret "live", "prosper" and "law" in vastly different ways should matter little according to your standards. You will see no such alliance. PIE and U'K are incompatible and we both know it. We both place a very high value on such concepts as "consistency", "commitment" and "belief" - even if we believe in different things. Incidentally, that is another reason why U'K ranks a lot higher on PIE's "enemies to deal with" list than does SF. I must refer you again to my analogy with the 3-year-old who holds his hands across his ears and sing a little tune to avoid facing the uncomfortable truths of the world. You increasingly remind me of such a child, Mr Cosmopolite. I fear this discussion has reached a dead end. Until you are willing to face the world as it is, and not as how you wish it to be, then there is little point in this debate. When you have come to your senses seek me out and we may yet have a debate. Until then, keep your hands across your ears and sing your little tune. Just in case, you had better close your eyes as well. GOD only knows what they may find out if you keep them open. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 15:45:00 - [8] Edited by: Octavinus Augustus on 08/04/2007 15:44:35 Edited by: Octavinus Augustus on 08/04/2007 15:42:38 Originally by: Jasmine Constantine The issue here is that a coward who has thus far played absolutely no role in the fighting has no place to debate or criticise either entity that believes in personal responsibility, individual strength and opposition to the status quo. I am trying to drop you subtle hints here but until you come and do something substantive about your "concerns" you are occupy the position of a windbag no more and no less. Jasmine, you have all the subtlety of a brick. Both you and the brick may believe you are subtle, but that doesn't necessarily make it so. As for the rest of your post, it's just the smack we have become accustomed to from your side. You Jasmine should probably concentrate on the question put to you: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? Or is it that you have no answer and consequently tries to derail the discussion once again? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 17:29:00 - [9] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine Originally by: Octavinus Augustus You Jasmine should probably concentrate on the question put to you: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? [/quote I expect nothing from my enemies except that they be prepared to risk their cowardly skins in battle while presuming to lecture people on galnet. You have precisely no right to expect courtesy from me, you have done precisely nothing to deserve it. That, little Jasmine, place you at odd's within your own organisation. The previous view expressed by SF was that PIE should not presume to tell you people how to fight your war. You now tell us that you expect no such courtesy (although you shall certainly have it). Tell me, little one, does it not bother you that you cannot even live up to the standards your own organisation must expect from it's members? Or is it that SF expects one standard of conduct from it's enemies while not feeling honorbound to conduct your own dealings in a similar way? I think it is time for you, little Jasmine, to call in the cavalry and let those of your organisation with a little more talent for this do the talking. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 17:32:00 - [10] Originally by: Atandros Considering the recent upsurge in using plain T1 fittings and the deployment of legions of T1 cruisers by the Amarrian loyalists (all easy to see in our public kill records), I don't think that chap is putting money anywhere near where his mouth is in any sense whatsoever. Perhaps, little Jasmine, the cavalry has arrived. Do we have a new candidate to try his hand on your little campaign of smack? Perhaps, Atandros, I should refer you to the question Jasmine is so evidently unable to give a conherent reply to: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? Can you do any better? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.

Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.08 22:15:00 - [11] Originally by: Atandros I'll begin dignifying you with answers when I see you fighting for your paramilitary organization, and contributing to it with something more substantial than trapping other Galnet posters in linguistic contortions. I take it then, that you cannot come up with an answer either Mr Atandros? If it helps you, then please do pretend the question is asked by anyone you like. That isn't really important. The question remain the same. For you convenience, I'll post it again below: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.09 08:07:00 - [12] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine When the entirety of the opposing allied forces meets in a dramatic fleet battle and pursuit and you are the only person hiding in a station you have to get an inkling of the reason why it is we disrespect you so. So little Jasmine has seen fit to put me on trial. A trial in which she holds the position of both prosecutor, defence, judge and jury. A trial in which the defence has no right to speak. Surprisingly, I must have been convicted after a gruelling trial of several (indeed several) seconds. So now my life is forfeit and I'm doomed to live in everlasting dishonour. For those of you out there who are actually interested in hearing both sides of a story before jumping to conclusions, I can present you with the following points: A) At the time of the engagement I was nowhere near my pod interface. I didn't arrive in it until approximately an hour after the engagement. I guess some would call that an extenuating circumstance. B) I did, in fact, send a servant (some would, for some reason, label him an "alt") of mine to the proceedings as it was deemed that his field of expertise was more needed than mine. That should probably count as an extenuating circumstance as well. C) Due some inexplicable physical law of the universe we inhabit, I'm unable to interface with my pod while this servant of mine is interfacing with his. Yet another extenuating circumstance? To my mind these 3 points should prove that once again, little Jasmine has run off making wild accusations and and even wilder assumptions without even checking the facts before doing so. Having done so repeatedly already, most people would assume that she would display a willingness to learn from past mistakes. Little Jasmine has shown a remarked "reluctancy" to do so, however. Little Jasmine may be a fine fighter jock. She may even be the best in the EvE galaxy for all I know. Her performance here on IGS has been mediocre at best though. If I had been a public relations advisor to Star Fraction I'd advice her to start reconsidering her tune - is somehow distracts from the message when every other node is false. I seriously doubt little Jasmine would follow such an advice however. But there you have it - now I've even given her a golden opportunity to prove me wrong by expressing my doubts. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.09 08:13:00 - [13] Originally by: Azure Skyclad Edited by: Azure Skyclad on 08/04/2007 22:46:21 I don't expect anything from you or anyone else Octavinus. This is the simple point of understanding that you and your ilk fail to grasp. Little Jasmine already tried this line - it didn't work. SF has repeatedly complained about the tactics and strategies of PIE in this war. In other words you expect us to behave differently than we do. SF has repeatedly remarked that you expect us to let you fight your wars in any way you see fit. SF has repeatedly remarked that you expect us to let you make friends on your own terms, irregardless of obvious incompatible ideologies. I have simply asked if one cannot expect you to deal with others the same way. And so I ask, once again: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? The answer should be rather simple. A "yes" or a "no" would suffice. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.09 08:18:00 - [14] Originally by: Ituralde Nothing needs being reconsidered, Worm. Cry foul when your vaunted 'Golden Fleets' aren't fleeing from their own capitol, not even stopping to defend your own CEO. Pathetic. You have no ground to stand on. Nice try at a save Ituralde. Unfortunately you fail to relate to the issue at hand. Little Jasmine has condemned me, and to justify her condemnation, she has presented "evidence" to support her case. Unfortunately (for her) her "evidence" was flawed to say the least. Try relate to that, instead of simply inventing a new stand. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.04.09 11:48:00 - [15] Originally by: Azure Skyclad Your questions are based on flawed assumptions. I don't expect anything from anyone. I am not looking for approval for my actions. I am not extending that courtesy to others. Originally by: Azure Skyclad It's that simple. Whatever my fellow freecaptains say is their business. SF is not monolithic so saying "SF expects....." and words to that effect is a bit silly because it's meaningless. So, am I to understand that when an SF official speaks on behalf of your alliance you do not feel any obligation to follow his words? When Mr. Cosmopolite in the very beginning of this thread says that "In the coming weeks, the Star Fraction is resolved to demonstrate that the very heartlands of the Amarr Empire are unsafe" - he has no right to make such comments as they are made on your behalf as well as his own? After all, you are individualists, and not bound by the voices of others, are you not? My question was posed to SF. If you do not feel bound by the words spoken by SF officials, you should certainly not speak that can be interpreted as such. So if there are any of you out there who actually has the authority to speak on behalf on SF as an organisation, the question still stands: If you expect others to respect your right to fight whomever you wish in whatever way you wish - should you not extend that same courtesy to others? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.22 15:55:00 - [16] Garreck, you can't reason with these people - trust me, I've tried and failed continously. They believe that taking 4 weeks to organize an expedition to an empty system outshines "building" and controlling a region with 4 stations and a well developed infrastructure. They believe that opening a vast region of space to commerce and trade by civilians counts for less than ganking a few haulers on autopilot. They believe that they are the members of a religious organisation not believeing in GOD. Obviously they never even bothered looking at the teachings of the Sani Sabik cults before stealing their name in order to have some of the "fame" rub on on their own petty band of misfits. They believe that slavery should be outlawed - no wait, that was last month. They believe any slave has a right to rebel against their owners - no wait, that was last week. They believe that the Minmatar are "monkeys" - no wait, that belief will change tomorrow. Their beliefs are "flavor of the day". Garreck, why do you bother? The only question I personally would like to see an answer ot is this: How can Star Fraction claim friendship with an organisation that claims another of their friends are monkeys? Does their "fractional" beliefs allow such disdain for their U'K allies or will one of their friendships turn sour? I know Star Fraction houses many honorable pilots (and a few less so). It surprise me that they can quietly accept such treatment of their friends and allies. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.22 22:49:00 - [17] Originally by: The Cosmopolite I have said all that I need to say on the topic of this thread and as to the rather foolish attempts to draw us into the current argument, I only say that we are not the keepers of the Sani Sabik or the Ushra'Khan and that which is between them is none of our business. The Cosmopolite I think I must have caught you in a bad moment, Mr Cosmopolite. I posted a question regarding your understanding of the concept of friendship. This was done due to an honest interest in understanding how your outlook differ from mine, which it obviously does. You have answered my question for which I am grateful. If a friend of mine stand falsely accused I will stand by him in support. I will even defend an enemy being falsely accused - my sense of honor sees to that. And calling our U'K enemies monkies is certainly something they do not deserve. I believe most Amarr Loyalists would testify that the U'K has been skilled and worthy opponents. Also, I know of few monkies armed with Tech II autocannon - although some entertaining images does spring to mind. As for the "foolish attempts to draw us into the current argument" let's just leave it at that - it was never my intention. Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.
Octavinus Augustus Amarr Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.29 12:28:00 - [18] It is not a common experience that I find myself in agreement (more or less) with a pilot of the Electus Matari. It is so rare in fact, that I will have to comment on it. Originally by: Davlos An organization that fails to respect its enemies is one unworthy of respect. I used to have exactly the opinion you're voicing in the above statement. The PIE/SF debacle a few months ago (when I was still PIE) has taught me that this is not the "entire" truth. In Star Fraction there are many pilots whose behavior both in space and "out of it" is honorable and thus worthy of respect. In my own expereince names such as Cosmopolite the Orator, Upstanding Sable Schroedinger (I keep spelling the name wrong) and Razor Jaxx the Fighter springs to mind. I'm sure there are several others. Then of course you have people such as Little Jasmine Constantine. I think I'll leave it up to you to form your own opinion. Originally by: Davlos An organization that announces itself the liberator of memes I must admit that this is somewhat confusing to me. A few posts up in this thread I enquired as to how Star Fraction could maintain friendships with both U'K and Revans Sani Sabik imitation having one referring to the other as "monkeys". The reply was the the "interaction between third parties" was none of Star Fractions business. Yet Star Fraction seem content to fight the Amarr loyalists on the ground that we force our ideals on others - but wouldn't this constitute "interaction between third parties"? Mr Cosmopolite (when he answered) stated that he had no further interest in this discussion and out of respect for him I refrained from pushing the subject. Seing that several other SF pilots has shown more interest than he, perhaps some of those would feel more inclined to answer? Motto: Vae Victis - Woe to the vanquished.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.