|
Post Reply 
|
Page 123 6> |
| Author | |||||||||
Myr 
Forum Warrior 
Joined: 26 May 2011 Location: Orlando, FL Status: Offline Points: 437 |
 Topic: H? and The CrowsPosted: 20 Nov 2013 at 03:10 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
|
Aristeas
Greenhorn 
Joined: 01 Feb 2013 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 17:31 |
||||||||
Mh, I meant 'mixed up' in the sense of confusing/confounding, not of mixing A with B. No one should claim his polemic to be a totally rational argumentation was what I intended to say. Mostly polemics is partly rational, though this part can get small here, indeed
 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Angrim
Postmaster General 
Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 17:23 |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Aristeas
Greenhorn
Joined: 01 Feb 2013 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 17:15 |
||||||||
Well, Kumo withdraw the 'real' and repeated the distinction/observation I thought he was making in his original post:
And it´s not that this is a bad distinction, from where he/you are staying, it a quite reasonable one... One part going into war with you, the other having it´s ideals...
That is so obvious, that I just can´t believe that this is the main aim of the post. Hey, but at least we agree that this is the case^^ What it did entail was stuff, I said it would entail, namly exhortation of the peacefulness of the crows, the bonds of friendship he sees between you and the ones not fighting you, and the, well, ungood decision of other crows against their values to go to war with you. To quote Kumo where he is just saying that:
So I don´t see where my shortenig was inaccurate. That H? dosn´t want the enmity of even more crows should go without asking I think...
That is not the case, to quote Kumo again:
and in his second post he used again a derogatory term like "grudgalition". So he uses even almost the same term like Rill (just harder, from sad to 'beyond saddening'), and making a travesty where before was "want" for peace isn´t flattery either. Sounds more like condescending in my ears... Of course rethorical it´s a great juxtaposition of travesty and pinnacle, hard do make your evaluation of both sides even more clear. Polemics is an art (I at least enjoy reading when it´s really good), but it´s own art, and shouldn´t be mixed up with neutral description or rational argumentation. My point was, that on the level of dialectics you can´t reasoably allow one person a thing you are not allowing another one... In this case, I see Kumo and Rill on quite the same level, just with Rill wanting even less conflict, so she is not happy about the ones going to war with you, as Kumo is not happy with the ones going to war against you...
Well, at least try to see it from her perspective: 1) She is not against you specifically, but against (almost) every armed conflict here. If she is sad some allies are going into war with you, it´s not because she is against you, but against this conflict as a whole (and she might have had even her part in the decision of her allaince to stay out of it!). Taking her personally instead of seeing the problem in the non-shared basic presime is missing her point in my eyes. 2) She has had her history with your alliance, obviously starting out good with (assumed) shared premises and values, ending up in harassment, probably from both sides. But as she claimed, and I find it reasonable (and partally in line with your (alliances) description of the motives of other parties in this conflict here), she tried to counsel you, as at least there was a common past and you could be seen as the more resoable part of the war. As we say in germany, the smarter one gives in, saying someone to give in is then maybe discrimination, but a positive one... 3) Of course she could get very stingy and itchy, but not only did members of your alliance too, but also you put your "critique" of consones playstile to a much harder and harsher level then Rill could ever do with her discourses. So I just don´t see how you can claim her behaviour to be intolerable. If she is intolerable due to her verbal critique, how much more intolerable is your alliance with such critique put into action? (implication here is not that you shouldn´t have messed with others, just that you should be able to have others mess with you verbaly)
Of course you are not a mouthpeace, but as long as your actions with and inside your alliance don´t suit your discourse here it might be hard to convince somebody. Because then it appears as if you are not convinced yourself or take your conviction not as that important as to affect your deeds... Of course that´s not bad in itself and quite common, I mean, I am for example convinced of the very bad effects of CO2 on the climate, but that conviction is not stopping me from going to holidays in planes. But then, I am not using this conviction in a rational argumentation. Not that this fact is invalidating an argument I would make in vavour of climate savtey measures, but it makes it very easy for adversaries not to pay any heed to what I say...
Of course her tone isn´t actually nice anymore, but given the history and escalation of things between you, I can´t blame her (or you), I can just hope that, well, you derive at a good understanding of your nonunderstandings^^ Her opinions and arguments were part of the formation of our, now maybe shattered, culture here, even though we almost all ended up not being of her opinion, but maybe only because and against her opinion.
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Angrim
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 17:11 |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1005 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 14:57 |
||||||||
|
Nice idea Grego, in fact after we have won this I think I may open my own wing in honour of this post. Dont think we have an rCrow yet, obviously we do not have enough wings.... there are still standard European script characters left.
 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Grego
Postmaster 
Joined: 09 May 2010 Location: Klek Status: Offline Points: 729 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 14:32 |
||||||||
|
Good work Kumo! Now you just need to win this war and force losers to " rethink/restructure/shut down" and rebranding is done. "Real Crows" will be sustainably sized and much easier to handle.
 http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/the-nature-of-the-crows_topic5268_page8.html |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
scottfitz
Forum Warrior
Joined: 22 Apr 2010 Location: Spokane WA USA Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 05:38 |
||||||||
|
I stand corrected.
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Le Roux
Wordsmith
Joined: 30 May 2012 Status: Offline Points: 151 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 05:29 |
||||||||
|
; ) there are indeed former crows on the other as well !! ; )
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
scottfitz
Forum Warrior
Joined: 22 Apr 2010 Location: Spokane WA USA Status: Offline Points: 433 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2013 at 05:25 |
||||||||
|
Mona, you are as much a Crow as any of us, certainly as much a Crow as I!
Last time I looked, there were only Crows on one side of this conflict. Some of us Crows are on one side, and some are on neither!
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123 6> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
H? and The Crows
Topic Options
Angrim wrote: