Intergalactic Summit

Sure, if you'd like to have rotten tomatoes tossed to your face.
"Freedom fighter" in Napanii is "Vaajpa Sentokan"

As for terrorist, I am not sure it would provoke any form of reaction, terrorists are just terrorists. Well, maybe we would laugh at you a bit, since you don't look very scary. Maybe instead of calling yourself a terrorist, say something like 'Yarrr!' Show us your war face?

And... cute sebiestor squeaking "Fear the tribes!" That gonna be so funny!

I only ever yell internally in combat and it's usually 'RAAAAWR!' or 'AHAHAHAHAHA!'. Actually no, 'AHAHAHAHAHA!' wasn't me. Or was it? My memories are hazy.

Cripes. Better check the logs again.

Yelling in local takes the time that is better spent warping in and locking targets. It also announces intention to everyone in local, remove all doubt. I do not do it.

I yell internally to embolden myself, usually pre-fight.

Wait, the 'AHAHAHAHA!' I keep hearing in my head happens during the fight.

Honestly, I kinda assumed it would be implied by my question that that was what I was referring to myself as such. Has it happened? It certainly has, though I'm not proud of it. At the same time I think you'll agree following orders is important and you don't always know every detail in a combat situation. (Majority of the times it happened was home defense fleets with CO2 way back and raids on provide later. My own fleets and the majority of my time flying in combat it's been an unspoken rule not to.)

If she misunderstood what you ment by declare your intentions then she might still shoot you

You realize that a sebistor can make a point defense system and prevent your main weapon from dealing damage

I am really tired from replying to trolling, and I suggest everyone to review the topic and return to the subject.

The main idea was that Nouvelle Rouvenor is an invasion attempt on Caldari Prime. It wasn't invasion in the military sense, but the situation was fixed by military methods.

Of course it is only a hypothesis, because nobody who lived back then can't tell us anymore what happened back then. We can only analyze gallentean behavior and build parallels to what they are doing now. We can also take a look at those who took responsibility for this operation (and though we can't confirm that Dragonaurs did it, we can believe them, that they did it, because if they are honorable, they wouldn't lie), and make a conclusion that it was a culture warfare.

Now, two hundred years later, gallenteans have attacked us again. And while we have to defend ourselves and fight for our own sovereignty and our colonists to protect them from gallentean atrocities, we shall also use military approach against gallente cultural invasion as well. It is our duty to prevent forming of new 'Nouvelle Rouvenor's and 'Port Roulette's, and shall we find them existing, they must be dismantled. Just like all the remaining gallente settlements on Caldari Prime.

To be fair I only intend to when my people are brought up, I think half (or atleast a notable amount of times) my views are just seen that way even though I'm merely playing devil's advocate.

Then again this statement will probably be viewed as a troll..... Doncha just love catch 22s?

And in my case while I'm Gallente I have since renounced my loyalty to the Federation the day I joined the Horde but I still don't want genocide of anyone.

I know it may surprise some but I am something of an amateur archaeologist, and thus am often interested in the esoteric.

So when I heard Mr. Ramal’s reply to Miss. Kim at first I simply chuckled and moved right along.

But the rhythmical nature of the statement especially considering the context prompted me to deeper reflection.

It took a bit, but after considerable trouble, and one or two altercations…. I was actually able to have a rather disagreeable panel of experts agree on a translation for Mr. Ramal’s statement.

So, forgive if I ‘rephrase’ the translation to make it more palatable to the more genteel patrons of the Summit.

Ky’figat’kla… I hope I pronounced that correctly, ‘refers to a morally reprehensible person who ‘has’ to seek amatory companionship outside of their species.’

The’mhat’sk or perhaps Them’hat’sk… but forgive me there were knives out by this point and I didn’t think pressing those involved wise… but, ‘refers to a bitter, unlikable person who hates other peoples happiness.’

Pitia’bleblo’vitt… seems to be best… although there is some disagreement, translated, ‘one who speaks nonsense.’ But I am told the inflection used indicates that said nonsensical expressions are due to flaw in personality not a mental affliction.

Have you ever done something you knew you would later regret? Well this is one of those times.