>
>>You know, this is what I love about this game...people who don't
>>even play any longer continuing their self-righteous propaganda.
>>If you feel so strongly about things that no longer concern you,
>>why did you quit? If due to a lack of time, I find it amazing
>>you have the time to be interested enough to read and reply to
>>emails that do not concern you.
>
>
>Geez, Jamie, I wasn't aware that this list was closed from the teeming
>masses. But, anyway, any post that mentions my name concerns me. Perhaps
you
>forgot to read that part of the original post.
>
>Furthmore, I guess addressing what I wrote rather than my game status is
too
>much for you to handle. (And who said I wasn't in the game?)
>
Well, Dickie, if you are in the game, its under a different name.
If so, are you afraid of being recognized? Most of us [I presume]
play under our real names. And we go from game to game, allies in
some, enemies in others. And believe me, good enemies are hard to
come by. That's why I appreciate the Lord of the Crown. Despite
the banter between us, I believe a significant portion of them
recognize that I respect their play and their "persons". I certainly
would have not invited them into another game with me if I hadn't.
If you saved your emails from your Musketeer days, the only "demonizing"
I did of the LotC was to point out how _huge_ and how _effective_ they
were. I was usually the one who tried to find out how they accomplished
what they did and not simply fall into the trap of "this is impossible,
it must be cheating". A trap _both_ sides fell into when reverses
happened and "rules" became "bugs" became "features".
And I do NOT mean to imply, so please do not read that into this,
that those who do fall into that trap are inferior or stupid. People
who find out how things "work" put more time and effort into their turns.
I would say that they are properly rewarded for their efforts. Some
people do not have the time to this. The structre of LotC aids in
this. As such, they will always be the best organized alliance in
the game. They will be on the cutting edge of finding "features",
and will benefit from their thuroughness. That is a fact. If you
believe stating this is "demonizing", then I say GUILTY AS CHARGED,
and proud of it.
>And to ease your obviously anger-clouded mind, my propaganda is realizing
>that there is no good or bad, or right and wrong side. I call it as I see
>it. I see your anger and spite; I see the silly demonizing of Cendage b/c
he
>is simply better at diplomacy than many here. And, of course, I realize
that
>in attacking cendage with stupid little semantic/ideological games, you are
>openly commenting on your childlike vision (simple dichotomies) of the
>world. Or maybe you know this and are just a wannabe fascist at heart.
If there is any anger here, you brought it with you yourself. If anyone
needs to reread his messages, I suggest you start with the paragraph
above. Looks like quotes from "The Worst of Oleg" [not Greg]. No, come
to think of it, I don't recall him ever calling someone a fascist. But
in "Olympian Times", they don't know what that is yet. Whoops. Sorry,
I'm playing my stupid little word games again.
>
>It's amusing that when I talk to other players in this game, I don't get
any
>whining, complaining crap about the musketeers and how evil they
purportedly
>are. Instead, I simply get an analysis of personality (Maltar is a good
>leader, but not very farsighted; lord foul can't be trusted). They don't
>turn their disagreements with the musketeers into evil vs good, or right
and
>wrong. To them it is simply a conflict of ideas and theories and armies in
a
>political arena.
>
>Of course maybe that's why I like the LOTC so much. Within their ranks they
>don't play little fascist mind games. They are much more tolerant and
>democratic than you obviously are. Although i add that they aren't the
best,
>or most powerful, or even the prettiest (actually they are pretty damned
>ugly; belgians are very hairy). But they assume that their players are
>intelligent and don't feel the need to whitewash the politics with
>not-so-subtle word games to convince their members to be good little
>soldiers.
>
Let me get this correct..you are being objective when you criticise and I
am being a fascist and play "not-so-subtle word games". Hmmm. Time
for some more of those word games you do not like.
According to you:
Democracy is when a group of players who mostly know each other
personally meet regularly face-to-face to coordinate their orders;
basically: play as a Team instead of as a bunch of individuals.
They are rewarded for this. They know they can trust each other,
and they win far more encounters than they lose. I suppose they
must cast ballots at their meetings. Regardless, playing as a TEAM
does seem to work well, doesn't it? I think so.
Fascism is when someone does not start out with a core group; makes an
alliance out of total strangers [the majority of whom have never met
previously in other games]; and tries to get everyone to play on the
same "page". IE: out of total strangers, including people [well,
so far, just one person] who plan to do naught but betray their fellow
men, try to create a TEAM. Afterall, the Musketeers have repeatedly
been shown the benefits of team play by the Lords. But when they do the
same thing, they are fascists. Must be that revisionist history I
keep hearing so much about.
Seems to me the only difference is that the core of the LotC all know
each other and the core of the Musketeers are previously strangers.
Heck, they let anyone in. Even us [you and me]. Of course, about now
they may be questioning which one of thus they regret having let in
the most...that's humor, btw, in case you misread it as "anger"...again.
Second Chance
ICLF
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>