| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
pershphanie
   |
Posted - 2004.07.04 12:16:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Tatsue Nuko
And being "anti-territorial" is not the fundamental principle behind Jericho. The fundamentals is that we are pro-freespace and pro free trade. The anti-territorialism is a consequence of that - it isn't the foundation.
Sorry, maybe you can help me understand a little better. What are your definitions of anti-territorial and pro-freespace? How can one be territorial in free space?
Oh yeah, one more thing. Please use the phrases "pro-free space" and "allied with m0o" in a sentence? And before you claim not to allied with m0o, lets click the link.
JF and m0o "free space" allience
http://www.blixts.net/sunbeam/host/firekiller_sig1.jpg |
pershphanie
|
Posted - 2004.07.04 12:16:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Tatsue Nuko
And being "anti-territorial" is not the fundamental principle behind Jericho. The fundamentals is that we are pro-freespace and pro free trade. The anti-territorialism is a consequence of that - it isn't the foundation.
Sorry, maybe you can help me understand a little better. What are your definitions of anti-territorial and pro-freespace? How can one be territorial in free space?
Oh yeah, one more thing. Please use the phrases "pro-free space" and "allied with m0o" in a sentence? And before you claim not to allied with m0o, lets click the link.
JF and m0o "free space" allience
http://www.blixts.net/sunbeam/host/firekiller_sig1.jpg |
pershphanie
|
Posted - 2004.07.04 22:30:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Tatsue Nuko
]Sorry, maybe you can
The only way I could se any problem at all in the definitions is if you confuse "0.0" status for "anything goes" and "might is right". If you think that just because there is no CONCORD all ethics is left at the closest gate from empire, then that speaks volumes of you and you alone.
How does me being confused about what you mean by free space speak volumes about me?
I appologise. I guess my last post wasn't clear enough. I'll try and do better this time. I'm only confused because the principles behind NAST imply that by 'free space' you mean that any should be able to fly through it with out getting shot at. But you contradict those principles by teaming up with m0o and evolution. This leads me to believe that the type of free space that you are in favor of is the type where you are free to shoot people for no reason.
You didn't really say what type of free space you are wish to have in your last post. So are you in favor of the type of free space that Halseth writes about or are you in favor of the type of free space that your allies M0o want?
http://www.blixts.net/sunbeam/host/firekiller_sig1.jpg |
pershphanie
|
Posted - 2004.07.04 22:30:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Tatsue Nuko
]Sorry, maybe you can
The only way I could se any problem at all in the definitions is if you confuse "0.0" status for "anything goes" and "might is right". If you think that just because there is no CONCORD all ethics is left at the closest gate from empire, then that speaks volumes of you and you alone.
How does me being confused about what you mean by free space speak volumes about me?
I appologise. I guess my last post wasn't clear enough. I'll try and do better this time. I'm only confused because the principles behind NAST imply that by 'free space' you mean that any should be able to fly through it with out getting shot at. But you contradict those principles by teaming up with m0o and evolution. This leads me to believe that the type of free space that you are in favor of is the type where you are free to shoot people for no reason.
You didn't really say what type of free space you are wish to have in your last post. So are you in favor of the type of free space that Halseth writes about or are you in favor of the type of free space that your allies M0o want?
http://www.blixts.net/sunbeam/host/firekiller_sig1.jpg |
| |
|