Tylan wrote:
GH isn't rising to the occasion, purportedly, because the siege mechanics have been overhauled and are still very much unfinished. I'm sure with your 6 forum posts that you have a wealth of experience with game mechanics and should know that it takes a long time and a lot of effort to have "nice things" in Salem. Sticking your neck out with an unfinished system unduly risks losing your nice things especially if there is very little to gain by being the hero.
[...]
Back to GH. Why is it GH's responsibility to stop the Tribe?
I am not sure what part of my post suggests it is GH's responsibility to stand up to the Tribe. I merely commented on their big-R "Rebellion", as they portray it on the forums ("Mushibag lives!!!111"), is anything but effective. Don't make a strawman out of me and put words in my mouth, O ancient-forum-warrior.
Tylan wrote:You're right, of course. GH doesn't yet seem to want to be troubled with having to deal with the Tribe directly. But it's not exactly fair of you, dear forum warrior-in-training, to assume that GH is the only thing that can stand up to the Tribe. What' more, it's inappropriate of you to consider the Tribe as the "villains" in need of a good, rough spanking.
I didn't assume that GH is the only one that could. They're the ones who portray themselves as now being the "Rebellion", and I commented specifically and only on that aspect, as they portray it. The fact of the matter is that they have experience with group organization and gameplay mechanics that puts them in a unique position to overthrow The Tribe, if they worked at it, compared to say another startup with less experience. Beyond that, there is nothing that makes GH particularly special.
Unless the forum posts portraying the innocent deaths of new players are false, The Tribe, while not breaking any game rules is hurting others who have as of yet not committed any crime. Their use of force to maintain their system of power (executions, threats, gameplay bugs etc.) make them a group that functions primarily on the use of terror and legitimately criminal conduct (in terms of the game rules) in order to maintain power. Again, not saying all of this is against the rules, but the point is there is no love lost for The Tribe from the average player, given their -- yes -- "villainous" tactics.
Tylan wrote:Also, your dismissal of the GH's forum use as only self-stroking ego play is misguided at best, and if after a handful of threads you can't see what they achieve in a few posts in the way of popular opinion against the Tribe, you really don't belong in House of Burgesses.
Uhh...you sure do love your backhanded tactics when discussing things, eh? I'll ignore the jab and focus on the meat: I'll repeat myself -- GH uses the forums the same way The Tribe does. **** talking galore. Nothing particularly meaningful in terms of how it affects the politics (other than maintaining the status quo in the forum war), even if amusing.
Tylan wrote:Personally, I don't think we've seen the "good guys" yet.
I rest my case then, as that was the main point I was trying to make.
Tylan wrote:I think it's entirely possible that a group of altruistic individuals may one day rise up, become strong, and protect the weak. Maybe you can be part of that group instead of posting your feelings regarding the Tribe vs GH in the incorrect thread (please reference the several political threads rather than this one on scalpings).
The scalpings thread is part of the propaganda and terror tactics of The Tribe. I am not the first so far to have used this thread in this manner, and I am entirely justified.
Responding to what is simply a description of how an average player views the politics on Plymouth with "why don't YOU go do something about it? huh? huh?!" just reeks of being butthurt by the way.
Tylan wrote:In the meantime, your attempt at dissecting the two factions mentioned barely seems to scratch the surface of current issues and instead presents your own masturbatory opining by providing Utopian beliefs on the way you feel Plymouth could be.
I did not provide any Utopian opinions on how Plymouth should be. I did not suggest that I was writing an academic treatise dissecting the politics here. I only provided an opinion that is frankly, echoed in little ways by quite a few people.
If for a moment, you stopped projecting your need to masturbate on the forums on others, you would see that you essentially wrote a long post full of things that weren't said by me, but were in your head. You needed someone to "put down", and associated with them convenient assumptions you could use.
I'd like to finish off by proving that you are only interested in masturbation:
Tylan wrote:Also, your overuse of the word "scummy" in describing both the Chief and GH just seemed like you weren't trying. For example, I'd call the Chief "industrious" or perhaps "tyrannical" at times when the ends must justify the means. GH is best described as "indolent."
You see, I wasn't trying to show off my vocabulary -- I don't *need* to show it off, as my ego is given great blowjobs in real life. I like to use simple words, to convey ideas simply.
The truth is that the truth is the truth.
Scum is scum.
Happy masturbating!
