These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why Diana Kim must be destroyed

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anslo
Scope Works
#41 - 2014-06-03 15:15:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Anslo
Andreus Ixiris wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Yeah and how many times to I actually take time to rant about anything to you people? No where NEAR as much as you do to Kim.

Bollocks. Pretty much 90% of the time we spent talking to each other was you pissing and moaning about Morwen, Saede, Ava, True Slave Foundations, Alexylva Paradox or one of the billion other people or organisations you've developed a petty grudge against. And I would have been absolutely fine with that. I would have been happy to continue offering my shoulder to cry on. I would have been delighted to continue sending you music that uplifted you. I would have been absolutely fine if you hadn't jumped into bed with the one dangerously unstable, genocidal lunatic with a speech impediment that I couldn't tolerate sharing space with. That was literally all you had to do to maintain my loyalty to your vendetta against the world, Anslo, and you couldn't even get that right.

Threaten you with something hilarious, Anslo? Just like Diana Kim, there's nothing I could possibly threaten you with that's more hilarious than already being you.


You maintain loyalty? Dude you go from Federal to Black Eagle to Blooder to Nul Bloc drone in a few weeks. Next week you'll probably try looking at being a shaman.

You have the loyalty of an out-of-work mercenary jumping at the prospect of a new paycheck. So what is Diana was sat in my router? She didn't do anything, she didn't cause trouble.

Then YOU, you pull me aside and demand I remove her, and threaten me and mine if I didn't.

Loyalty my ass, kid.

Also I like being me. It's hilariously awesome. I love my Anslol nickname. Do you have a nickname that doesn't involve belittling your pseudo intellectual bullshit?


@Stitcher: Hard to take them seriously when they rewrite the same crap at every single turn against her. If you don't like them, ignore them. Simple.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#42 - 2014-06-03 15:18:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
Anslo wrote:
@Stitcher: Hard to take them seriously when they rewrite the same crap at every single turn against her. If you don't like them, ignore them. Simple.


If I had a reactor core engineer on deck who expressed the sentiment "it's hard to take that venting plasma seriously when it's always the same every single time" I'd fire him, and dock for emergency maintenance.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Jinari Otsito
Otsito Mining and Manufacture
#43 - 2014-06-03 15:21:48 UTC
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:
Anslo wrote:

* Someone from Pyre of Jinari calls me edgy


If you're referring to Ms. Otsito, they're not a member of Pyre Falcon (Unless you're referring to another Pyre). If you are referring to my company, why do you believe I or any member of it would call you edgy? What is that even supposed to mean?


It may just be induced paranoia, but I think he just threatened to burn me at the stake of(sic) something.

Prime Node. Ask me about augmentation.
Anslo
Scope Works
#44 - 2014-06-03 15:24:35 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Anslo wrote:
@Stitcher: Hard to take them seriously when they rewrite the same crap at every single turn against her. If you don't like them, ignore them. Simple.


If I had a reactor core engineer on deck who expressed the sentiment "it's hard to take that venting plasma seriously when it's always the same every single time" I'd fire him, and dock for emergency maintenance.


I'm sorry but I just can't agree that reactor's and people's attitudes are the same thing. I mean I can see where you're coming from and how it'd make sense to you, but I just don't think it's an accurate comparison.

No offense intended by the by.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#45 - 2014-06-03 15:27:14 UTC
None taken, but I'd appreciate an explanation as to why you think the analogy is an invalid one.

"I disagree" carries no weight: I'd like to hear a reason.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Scherezad
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#46 - 2014-06-03 15:28:11 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Alright, how many of those posts weren't just one liners taking a jab versus a full on rant?


I don't think I agree that the distinction is an important one. Doesn't matter if it's a little hiss or an eruption of glowing plasma, reactors only vent coolant when the pressure's too high.

That's very true, Verin, but the appropriate response to watching a reactor starting to vent is to apply coolant, and then redesign the system parameters so that the venting stops.I think that's what Mr Tetua is suggesting here - people are happy enough to go to step A but seem reluctant to move to step B.

Though I have to admit that Mr Tetua can be pretty darn good at venting when the mood suits him. No offense meant!
Anslo
Scope Works
#47 - 2014-06-03 15:31:39 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
None taken, but I'd appreciate an explanation as to why you think the analogy is an invalid one.

"I disagree" carries no weight: I'd like to hear a reason.


Ugh but that'd involve effort! And thinking!

I guess I just don't see people and reactors the same at all because of what they do. Reactors are pretty black and white. They don't control themselves in specific bursts, they don't have a conscious, they aren't aware of things. The crew either vents the reactor and prevents a melt down, or it doesn't.

People can control themselves, vent in different ways, express dislike in different ways, or simply refuse to acknowledge or deal with the source of their frustration by removing it from their daily lives. We people can do that. Reactors can't remove the need to vent their crap from their lives as it's part of their existence.

We humans get the lovely option to chose whether or not we let a source of frustration be involved in our existence. At least, that's how I see it.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#48 - 2014-06-03 15:36:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
Scherezad wrote:
That's very true, Verin, but the appropriate response to watching a reactor starting to vent is to apply coolant, and then redesign the system parameters so that the venting stops.I think that's what Mr Tetua is suggesting here - people are happy enough to go to step A but seem reluctant to move to step B.


Given that redisigning the system parameters of an individual's behaviour would broadly be considered unethical and is for practical reasons all but impossible in the specific case of a capsuleer, is it any surprise that nobody's progressed to step B?

We've got a badly malfunctioning reactor that we can't fix, and Anslo's suggesting we should lock the emergency release valves because the constant hiss of escaping gas is getting annoying.

Anslo wrote:
Ugh but that'd involve effort! And thinking!

I guess I just don't see people and reactors the same at all because of what they do. Reactors are pretty black and white. They don't control themselves in specific bursts, they don't have a conscious, they aren't aware of things. The crew either vents the reactor and prevents a melt down, or it doesn't.

People can control themselves, vent in different ways, express dislike in different ways, or simply refuse to acknowledge or deal with the source of their frustration by removing it from their daily lives. We people can do that. Reactors can't remove the need to vent their crap from their lives as it's part of their existence.

We humans get the lovely option to chose whether or not we let a source of frustration be involved in our existence. At least, that's how I see it.


We're more deterministic than you think I'm afraid. Not completely so, I agree - for my part I do believe in free will - but there are mountains of evidence to the effect that humans still follow a lot of programmed rules, even if the edges are fuzzier than you'd find in any machine.

The price for resisting that nature is, often, neuroses. Given the option between venting and enjoying a temporary sensation of relief and choosing to endure it in silence while slowly grinding my teeth down, I'll take the former.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Anslo
Scope Works
#49 - 2014-06-03 15:37:39 UTC
No. I'm saying either get a new reactor or a new ship. Stop subjecting yourself to this one.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#50 - 2014-06-03 15:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
Anslo wrote:
No. I'm saying either get a new reactor or a new ship. Stop subjecting yourself to this one.


Gladly. But, and this is where the analogy does break down, we can't. Not ethically.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Anslo
Scope Works
#51 - 2014-06-03 15:43:22 UTC
Yeah you can.

Don't let her bother you. Why do you HAVE to change her behavior? She's her own person. You're not her dad or care taker. Let her do as she does. If she's such a source of annoyance, let her do what she does while you ignore it.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-06-03 15:48:35 UTC
Why do YOU have to change our behaviour? We're our own people. You're not our dad or caretaker. Let us do as we do - if we're such a source of annoyance, let us do what we do while you ignore us.

The reason, I suspect, why we both involve ourselves in this is because we both care about other people and become frustrated when we see them behave in ways which we think are inadvisable.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Anslo
Scope Works
#53 - 2014-06-03 15:50:36 UTC
I had to re-read that first line a few times, then remembered you're Caldari. Then it made sense.

Is it bad I forgot you're Caldari?

...Woops.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#54 - 2014-06-03 15:52:19 UTC
In this instance, I wasn't actually talking about being Caldari. I was referring to... well, this whole conversation and the people you're trying to persuade that it's not worth their time.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Anslo
Scope Works
#55 - 2014-06-03 15:53:09 UTC
OK then this is just gonna be a back and forth of why and why not....

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#56 - 2014-06-03 15:56:15 UTC
...what's a WIDOT contingency?

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#57 - 2014-06-03 15:56:25 UTC
Maybe. Maybe you're prescribing a medicine you should be taking yourself. Maybe you're right to.

The important sentiment was the second paragraph.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Scherezad
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#58 - 2014-06-03 15:57:25 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Given that redisigning the system parameters of an individual's behaviour would broadly be considered unethical and is for practical reasons all but impossible in the specific case of a capsuleer, is it any surprise that nobody's progressed to step B?

We've got a badly malfunctioning reactor that we can't fix, and Anslo's suggesting we should lock the emergency release valves because the constant hiss of escaping gas is getting annoying.


We can only reconfigure ourselves - that's what I was suggesting, as was he, I think. I'm no advocate for forced personality modification in all but he most dire situations. I'm kind of sad that you'd think I'd suggest it. I don't know how I got this reputation of being okay with forced brain reprogramming, because there's very little I find more awful.

She feeds off of this sort of conflict. Continuing to vent at her behaviour will only encourage it. That doesn't help anyone.
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#59 - 2014-06-03 16:01:55 UTC
Good grief no, I didn't think you'd advocated that at all! I'm very sorry if I gave that impression - I know you better than that.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2014-06-03 16:04:53 UTC
Anslo wrote:
You maintain loyalty? Dude you go from Federal to Black Eagle to Blooder to Nul Bloc drone in a few weeks. Next week you'll probably try looking at being a shaman.

I've always been loyal to the Federation, and if you think I was ever loyal to the Black Eagles, ask SnipeHunt about the Navy Issue Megathron I threw in front of a FIO blockade for them. As for why I'm in nullsec? There's a lot of money to be made out here, and as long as I serve the alliance's interests they don't give a damn what I do with it. I daresay when my expenses are covered some of it will find its way into the pockets of corporations aligned with the Federation's interests.

Anslo wrote:
You have the loyalty of an out-of-work mercenary

Slow clap, Anslo, slow clap. You've worked out that Duty corporation, one of the oldest capsuleer mercenary organisations in New Eden, hires mercenaries and engages in mercenary work. Your "I Can See Five Feet In Front Of My Face!" trophy is in the mail.

By the way, on a vaguely related note, the only person who laughed harder than me at the mail you sent to my CEO whining about me was the CEO you sent it to.

Anslo wrote:
So what is Diana was sat in my router? She didn't do anything, she didn't cause trouble.

Diana Kim is trouble. Wherever she go, she causes trouble. She argues indiscriminately with anyone who even remotely disagrees with her. She advocates genocide. She awoxes her supposed allies. She entangles neutral fleets in militia conflicts. My expectations of most people are pretty low, Anslo, but for how informed you seem to be on most people I expected a little better from you.

Anslo wrote:
Also I like being me.

Well, someone has to. Blink

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.