| Author |
|
Garth
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 May 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 249
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 06:08 |
Myrin wrote:
I found this thread a little late, however, I think Rill's post on page one was way out of line. I didn't see anything said that they were condemning how other people play the game. The members of TLR merely stated how they work in their alliance. I find your statement to be confrontational and inappropriate particularly since this was a place for them to recruit like minded players.
Rill, your statement that you disagree with their philosophy proves that there are two different ways of looking at it. They mentioned no other alliance and didn't say that those who thought differently were wrong. You came into their recruitment post and turned it into something controversial. Personally, I think your post on page one should be removed. |
In light of the recent clarifications from Abstract Dream, it seems your points are generally off target. If you'd like me to go through and delineate point by point, I will, though I would send it as a PM and not muddy this thread any further. Your concern for TLR is commendable (especially as you resurrected the thread after so much time), but in this case it seems you may have misinterpreted what transpired. Rill (and her alliance(s)) indeed were the target of the particular references in the April 15th post, and the intended tone of that passage indeed was "an overt swipe". I do commend Abstract Dream for that clarification.
For what it's worth, though the term "Loyal Opposition" was applied to HugCr, we have nothing against TLR's members, and do not consider ourselves opposed to them.
edited for minor cosmetic changes
Edited by Garth - 04 Jun 2012 at 06:09
|
 |
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 05:33 |
|
"Loyal" since both sides have a vested interest in the success of the game and "opposition" refers to not my side.
I used it cuz it sounded good, or so I thought at the time.
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
 |
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 05:25 |
Loyal opposition usually refers to the political party (or parties) that is out of power, particularly when a country is at war; said party usually attempts to emphasize unity in fighting the "enemy." The term is more frequently used in Great Britain (and the Commonwealth), where protections such as freedom of expression are not necessarily constitutionally guaranteed as they are in the U.S. and thus opposition to the government could be construed as treason.
I'm not sure how it applies in this context. Perhaps you were saying that we share more similarities than differences?
Edited by Rill - 04 Jun 2012 at 05:32
|
 |
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 05:11 |
Garth wrote:
"Loyal opposition." You're not kidding, are you? Just for curiousity's sake, just who/what do you mean by that? |
abstractdream wrote:
The post was slanted against the practice of indiscriminate care-a-vaning and took an overt swipe at the hug set in general. |
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
 |
Garth
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 May 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 249
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 04:53 |
|
"Loyal opposition." You're not kidding, are you? Just for curiousity's sake, just who/what do you mean by that?
|
 |
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 04:53 |
abstractdream wrote:
In all honesty, the sentences in question were an attempt to make not sending resources to newbs look better than it sounds. Really, on the surface of it, what newb would want to join an alliance "known" for not sending res to its members?
The post was slanted against the practice of indiscriminate care-a-vaning and took an overt swipe at the hug set in general. Not that it matters now, but there was no intended venom in the statement. My intention was to have a harmless dig at the "loyal opposition." I've come to understand that thin skin prevails in Illy and everything will eventually be torn apart and examined under the microscope of PCness. With hindsight it's no surprise what ended up happening, however I personally am not upset at the outcome.
The previous posts may have technically derailed this recruitment thread but imnsho it has become one of the most entertaining threads in the Forums. |
Taking overt swipes at people in the TLR recruitment thread resulted in people at whom swipes were taken expressing their objections. I appreciate you acknowledging that such was indeed your intention, and I'm glad you're not upset about the result. Very fair-minded of you, and I applaud it.
Perhaps the OP could request that this thread be moved to a different forum and restart a different alliance recruitment thread, if that is in fact what the OP would prefer.
|
 |
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 03:53 |
|
In all honesty, the sentences in question were an attempt to make not sending resources to newbs look better than it sounds. Really, on the surface of it, what newb would want to join an alliance "known" for not sending res to its members?
The post was slanted against the practice of indiscriminate care-a-vaning and took an overt swipe at the hug set in general. Not that it matters now, but there was no intended venom in the statement. My intention was to have a harmless dig at the "loyal opposition." I've come to understand that thin skin prevails in Illy and everything will eventually be torn apart and examined under the microscope of PCness. With hindsight it's no surprise what ended up happening, however I personally am not upset at the outcome.
The previous posts may have technically derailed this recruitment thread but imnsho it has become one of the most entertaining threads in the Forums.
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
 |
Garth
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 May 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 249
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 02:38 |
|
Points well taken, Myr. I suppose those of us who have at times taken the brunt of the needling and condemnation are quicker to roll our eyes and say "Here we go again..." And many of my comments are probably understood better by the people for whom they're intended than the casual observer. Certainly, providing all the backstory here would bore the pants off of most people, on top of the obvious thread-derailment. If any player in the game cares enough about the "philosophical divide" to discuss it, I will gladly join in a respectful debate. Otherwise, I will do my best to ignore any insinuation that those of us who are warm and send welcome gifts are against self-sufficiency and freedom of choice.
|
 |
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 02:21 |
I responded to a post around an hour after it was made because I felt it unfairly targeted Ryelle's alliance (the references to hugs, etc.)
Myr responded after the last post had been made more than a month and a half previously.
Who is really trying to stir things up?
|
 |
Myr
Forum Warrior
Joined: 26 May 2011
Location: Orlando, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 437
|
Posted: 04 Jun 2012 at 02:12 |
|
I would also like to point out that my frequent vans to newbs also puts me at odds with EF's philosophy. I do not feel that this recruitment post was a stab at how I like to do things, instead I read it as TLR making sure their recruits don't expect what many other alliances are offering.
|
 |