Intergalactic Summit

Lord Above, I sure hope so.

If all other prayers in the cosmos go unanswered, let this one be heard.

I was referring more to that pesky 'extinction' problem they're grappling with.

Ah, the 'spoils of war' argument... that means the money, moron. What 'spoils' do you really think an organization like ours is going to focus on? Are you such an idiot that you think we were actually going to dock in any of those stations? That would have been a great way to get ourselves stuck, if not murdered by the residents. A few hundred crew vs the entire population of a station. Not good odds.



Oh! It's in public opinion! Then it MUST be true! Because we all know that random idiots in New Eden know more about what's going on in the swarm that a member of the Directorate does! I know what was said on the IGS—I was the principle person saying it.



Again with this idiotic assertion. Nobody was docking in the Providence stations. Docking in a nullsec station surrounded by enemies rather than going the 4 jumps back to lowsec is idiotic. What, do you think we brought armies of marines along to pacify the security and civilian populations of those stations? The entire point of the campaign was understanding the intricacies of Entosis Warfare. Incurring additional costs in order to maintain the kind of security presence needed to safely not get murdered by the mobs as soon as we decanted would have been even stupider than your entire diatribe.

And that's without even getting into the idea that we are a bunch of rapine torturers. You might want to curb the projection there, Amarr. We didn't maintain a largely mercantile empire in the north, and establish an even more mercantile empire in Delve, by being the kind of feral slaver hounds you want to make us out to be. That kind of behavior doesn't exactly lend itself to stable, well-socialized behavior within the swarm, either, you know.



Then you're a four-hundred-plus year idiot.

The 'hedonism' within the Imperium is no more rampant than it is among any other population in the cluster. Yes, there are some people who get a little crazy. There are also a lot of us who work long days, every day, to make sure the wheels of society keep turning.

And 'liberalism'? What liberalism? This is an authoritarian socialist dictatorship.

As for 'sociopathy', I think you're confusing that with 'tribalism'. Within our society, we all generally get along about as well as members of any society do. Most of us tend to be relatively well-adjusted individuals. Sure, we don't necessarily extend those same social courtesies to those outside the 'tribe', but that's kind of the nature of societies—or are you going to call the Amarr Empire sociopathic because they don't extend the same courtesies and respect to the Republic that they do their own people?

I mean, if that's the hill you want to die on, great. But I really wouldn't advise it. After all, you're the moron who claimed that using women and children as target practice [. . . ] has always been an atrocity in the Amarr Empire no matter what their status was - slave or free." But you really seem to have forgotten such lovely moments as the extermination of Starkman Prime—an entire planet, within the Empire, killed in order to execute one man.

And remember, before you get on your high horse, that that action was not illegal, was not condemned by the Throne when it happened. In fact, the only statement that comes close to an official condemnation of it comes from the man who gave the order. And all he did was say 'ok, now that we've killed everyone on the planet... nobody's allowed to shoot anything on the planet'.

Yeah. There's some moral high ground for you. That's without even getting into the minor, but significant, distinction to be made between your example 'an atrocity in the Amarr Empire', ie: an internal matter of the Empire turning its weapons against its own people 'slave or free', and actions taken against an external population, such as... I don't know, the millions of unarmed women and children who were killed during the Amarr invasion of Matar.

Being amoral doesn't preclude an understanding of morality. He's the one who raised a moral objection. I'm simply pointing out that not only is his claim (that violence against the innocent is an atrocity within the Empire and would never be tolerated) patently false on the surface, the sheer scope and nature of the events that make it false give him no moral grounds to stand upon.

I care about hypocrisy and accuracy. I'm sorry you don't understand that.

For example: your objection to the term 'tribalism' betrays a woefully simplistic view of the social dynamic involved. Tribalism isn't a singular, binary behavior pattern. People can display tribalist behavior on a number of axes at the same time. For example: an Amarr loyalist may display this type of 'us vs them' mentality toward non-Amarr. He can also, when no outsiders are present, engage in a more limited form of precisely the same mentality of tribalism toward other Amarr by receding into 'my corp vs all other Amarr corps', 'my House vs all other Houses', etc.

Similarly, capsuleers in nullsec can exhibit this same kind of behavior toward their affiliations with their alliance, while also displaying the same patterns of behavior on an ethnic basis—though usually, not at the same time. Nothing prevents human beings from holding multiple affiliations simultaneously. Most do, and simply work to minimize the conflict in loyalties. It's all a matter of which group they're identifying with in that moment.

So you're saying you're one of the most knowledgeable people as regards occult and heretical practices?

HERESY! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!

It's kind of impossible to point out the hypocrisy in his assertions against atrocity—itself a moral judgment—without demonstrating the holes in his morality-based position.



'Othering' is a ridiculous term like 'micro-aggression', and serves no purpose except to attempt to paint certain types of behavior as significantly different from the larger category to which they belong. I'll not use such nonsense, especially not when the issue was whether or not the behavior in question was pathological. It's not. It's a normal human behavior pattern.

Why care about moral principles if one is amoral, even using term atrocity as you said is strange for an amoral that supposed to be indifferent. You simply don't fit the criteria of amoral, you do fit as a moralist tho.


Ordering things and specializing terms is the epitome of accuracy, you can not shove everything in to one term it makes things convoluted and inaccurate. You are either going for accuracy or generalizing, it's one or the other. Terms aren't ridiculous if they serve the purpose of specifying little differences from the larger category, refusing to use the word when it serves its purpose is just strange.

Saying I care about accuracy and then using broad terms is hypocritical btw.

Nuh uh! I paint red stripes on my ships because it makes them go faster!

On a separate note..I'm actually rather fond of the fact that I know a neat little secret about Max Singularity's corporation.

But I ain't tellin'

He seems nice enough, and I guess our guys kind of like him for some reason (He's interesting!)