These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Challenging maleficars

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arrendis
TK Corp
#61 - 2017-05-26 23:43:13 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
Things are not binary. Some loyalists are more loyal than others.


Now, that's just patently ridiculous. Just because someone's price is high doesn't mean they're not just as mercenary and faithless as the lower-priced traitors. It just means they're more conceited.
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#62 - 2017-05-26 23:50:45 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
Things are not binary. Some loyalists are more loyal than others.


Now, that's just patently ridiculous. Just because someone's price is high doesn't mean they're not just as mercenary and faithless as the lower-priced traitors. It just means they're more conceited.


So you are saying that CVA has been bought? By whom, exactly?

Now, I will say that Providence has many problems of faith caused by their distance from Amarr and their constant contact with the nullsec barbarians, but their core ideals as an organization remain with Amarr and not with some other group.

They are not perfect loyalists, by any means, and they do certainly harbor some heretics, but I have no problem calling them a pro-Amarr organization.

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Arrendis
TK Corp
#63 - 2017-05-27 00:01:00 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:

So you are saying that CVA has been bought? By whom, exactly?


Now you're putting words in my mouth. I haven't said they've been bought. I'm saying that if they can be bought, then it doesn't matter how much it takes. Can they be bought? Who knows. But setting up a double-standard based on the price involved in getting someone to abandon everything they say they hold dear... that's just silly. Either they'll do it, or they won't.
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#64 - 2017-05-27 00:04:06 UTC
Where did I set a standard based on price?

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#65 - 2017-05-27 00:08:17 UTC
Ah, I think I see, it's how you are reading the word loyal.

I may have been using it more loosely than you are. I would say that the line between loyalist and not is this very question of "can they be enticed to betray the Empire by any means." If the answer is yes, then they are not loyalists. If the answer is no, they are loyalists, even if they might be imperfect ones.

I have no evidence that CVA would ever be enticed to betray the Empire as an organization.

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Arrendis
TK Corp
#66 - 2017-05-27 00:09:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Arrendis
'Some are more loyal than others'.

Asserting one person can be more loyal than another person but both are loyal, can only mean 'the less loyal person will turn their coat more easily'. That's price, no matter what form the payoff takes. If there's any price at all that would work, that's not a loyalist, that's just a merc whose price hasn't been met yet.

Loyalty is 'will you or won't you betray the thing you claim to be loyal to?'

It's very much a binary proposition.

Now, if you want to say that some loyalists adhere more rigorously to the nuances and minutiae of Amarr culture and beliefs, sure, that's legit. But they're not more loyal or less loyal. Either they're loyal... or they ain't.

Edit to add, as we crossposted...

Gaven Lok'ri wrote:

I may have been using it more loosely than you are. I would say that the line between loyalist and not is this very question of "can they be enticed to betray the Empire by any means." If the answer is yes, then they are not loyalists. If the answer is no, they are loyalists, even if they might be imperfect ones.


Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
Things are not binary. Some loyalists are more loyal than others.


So, yeah. Both statements can't be true. 'If yes, then they are not loyalists' pretty much means 'Things are binary' in this regard.
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#67 - 2017-05-27 00:16:47 UTC
I have no idea how you survive in the messy universe of the nullsec Barbarians with an approach to language that allows no room for nuance.

The word has a somewhat wider range of meaning than you allow. Take the phrase "He loyally attended every religious celebration," for example.

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Arrendis
TK Corp
#68 - 2017-05-27 00:24:26 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
I have no idea how you survive in the messy universe of the nullsec Barbarians with an approach to language that allows no room for nuance.


Pretty easily. I work with people who've earned my loyalty.

Quote:

The word has a somewhat wider range of meaning than you allow. Take the phrase "He loyally attended every religious celebration," for example.


It's amazing, isn't it? The way adverbs aren't the noun they're based on?
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#69 - 2017-05-27 00:35:02 UTC
Ah, that wasn't the best choice of rejoinder. If you insist on only using the same part of speech, lets go to a phrase from one of those strange Gallente religions where it would be perfectly reasonable to call someone a "loyal churchgoer" or, if you want something secular, a "loyal sports fan." The phrase isn't implying that the person is less likely to outright betray their religion or team than a normal churchgoer or sports fan, but that they go above and beyond to show their loyalty to that religion or team.

It's also notable that you cannot reduce Amarr to a single proposition that they are loyal to. We aren't that simple, so they can be loyal to some aspects of Amarr without being loyal to all of them. A perfect loyalist is loyal to all of those ideals, while a less than perfect loyalist might be important to the most important ideals, but disloyal to some of the less important ideals, and I would still call them a loyalist.

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Arrendis
TK Corp
#70 - 2017-05-27 00:59:31 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
a "loyal churchgoer" or, if you want something secular, a "loyal sports fan." The phrase isn't implying that the person is less likely to outright betray their religion or team than a normal churchgoer or sports fan, but that they go above and beyond to show their loyalty to that religion or team.


Actually, the phrase is pretty strongly indicating that no, you're not likely to abandon your devotion to that church or that team. If you were, you wouldn't be loyal, now would you?

Quote:

It's also notable that you cannot reduce Amarr to a single proposition that they are loyal to. We aren't that simple, so they can be loyal to some aspects of Amarr without being loyal to all of them. A perfect loyalist is loyal to all of those ideals, while a less than perfect loyalist might be important to the most important ideals, but disloyal to some of the less important ideals, and I would still call them a loyalist.


"Reduce"? I think Amarr is a singular proposition. I mean, the culture is built around the faith. The government itself is built around the faith. If someone's personally devoted to Her Catieness, but they're a Blooder, then they're still a Heretic, right? And since Catydid and the Empire are the instruments and expressions of God's Will, as interpreted by the Theology Council, then to be a Heretic is to be in open defiance of the Empress' and the Empire's position. Which means it's not loyal. It's expressly in opposition and contradiction of what loyalty would be. And that percolates through every aspect of the Empire. Either you're doing things the Imperial way, or you're not.

I mean, taken with this statement, this gets downright weird:

Quote:
I have no idea how you survive in the messy universe of the nullsec


See, if I disagree with Mittens, that's fine. I can disagree with Mittens. When I do, I say so, directly to him, too. Mittens doesn't claim to be infallible. He doesn't claim to be speaking for God. Sure, there's more open bloodshed between factions, but this whole idea of 'messier'... we're a messy species. I'd rather be out here, where I know who and what I'm dealing with, than in the fundamentally deceitful, shallow, and treacherous gilded cesspit that is Amarr.
Graelyn
Aeternus Command Academy
#71 - 2017-05-27 01:18:10 UTC
You must be a blast at Soires. Straight

Cardinal Graelyn

Amarr Loyalist of the Year - YC113
Arrendis
TK Corp
#72 - 2017-05-27 01:24:13 UTC
Graelyn wrote:
You must be a blast at Soires. Straight


The PIE Ball last year wasn't bad. The meadeiswine was nice. A little weak, but nice. But generally, no, I don't do parties. Not a lot of free time, really.
Claudia Osyn
Non-Hostile Target
Wild Geese.
#73 - 2017-05-27 02:05:17 UTC
Wait, I always thought loyalty worked on a sliding scale..... in favor of people with deep pockets.

A little trust goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll go.
Gaven Lok'ri
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#74 - 2017-05-27 03:23:12 UTC
Your literalism and willingness to reduce entire religions or cultures to singular propositions goes a long way towards explaining your belief in absurdly hardline atheism.

Admiral of the Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris

Divine Commodore 24th Imperial Crusade

Holder. Vassal of the Emperor Family
Arrendis
TK Corp
#75 - 2017-05-27 03:31:55 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
Your literalism and willingness to reduce entire religions or cultures to singular propositions goes a long way towards explaining your belief in absurdly hardline atheism.


Really? And how would you define 'absurdly hardline atheism'? Because my position is: there is no evidence for God. There is nothing we observe that requires the existence of God. Therefore, there is no reason to introduce 'God'. There's also no proof there isn't a god. So there's no reason to belief there is no god. There's no reason to believe one way or another.

Belief, keep in mind, is an active position. Disbelief is also an active position.

And before you object with 'that's not atheism, that's agnosticism', the prefix a- means 'non'.. A-gnosticism is 'I do not claim knowledge'. a-theism is 'I do not believe in gods'. Thus, agnosticism is atheistic, and much of atheism is agnostic in nature.
Vaari
Imperial Pharmacy
#76 - 2017-05-27 17:58:04 UTC
Gaven Lok'ri wrote:
ValentinaDLM wrote:
CVA fight in the milita, and defend Providence setting people like me red and shooting us. That might not seem like much to some, but I haven't seen Vaari on the battlefield, unless that battlefield is IGS, but I see CVA in space all the time.. Their actions seem consistent with opposing people like myself, that is people who wish the Empire and it's loyalists harm.


Yes, many CVA actively fight on the front lines for Amarr in the war against the Matari.


We are not at war with the matari. Matari people contains all matari to original minmatars to ammatars. I say this to prelude that amarrian loyalists are propably soon to see some declarations from me. Our alliance is amarrian loyalist and remain so, but negotiations with minmatar loyalistst start soon. All is made with the spirit of San Matar's blessed visit on Amarr Prime.

Fear the God and honor the Empress!

-House Valius battle shout.
Casserina Leshrac
Sanguine Illuminations
#77 - 2017-05-27 18:08:33 UTC
Claudia Osyn wrote:
Wait, I always thought loyalty worked on a sliding scale..... in favor of people with deep pockets.


I'll buy that for an ISK. Blink

We stand at the Abyss, drawing the Patterns of Fate - Casserina Leshrac, Savant, Sani Sabik.
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#78 - 2017-05-28 05:14:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
If the definition of loyal is "cannot be enticed to betray by any means", then no one is.

Everybody breaks. Everybody. And while strength of mind is a good quality, it is not exactly the same as loyalty.

I would say loyalty is defined by your intentions, and by your actions. They have to be in line and in favor of the person or group you are loyal to. Proclamations of undying feelings of dedication are just words. Without action they are nothing.
Jin'taan
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#79 - 2017-05-29 10:36:30 UTC
I do quite enjoy you all deciding to simply debate on the forums over how loyal we are or are not, on the whims of a man who attempted to instigate a coup within a loyalist organisation against it's rightful leader (as imposed by Aralis) as he was unable to follow basic courtesies on our communication channels and was actively hindering our ability to work against our enemies, and as such was temporarily muted which he took as a grave offence to his honour.

But, never let the facts get in the way of an old grudge, I suppose.
Mizhara Del'thul
Kyn'aldrnari
#80 - 2017-05-29 10:52:42 UTC
Oh, old grumps here isn't so much the instigator of the debate as he is just a reminder of it. This has been something raised into public bickering from time to time for years now. Personally, I don't really have a hound in this race, but have always appreciated real and honest enemies over those that are only fighting for... well, the fight.