Talk:Abington First/Newsletter/Issue8

Darka Unwilling to Take Responsibility

Does the foolish, rediculous, arrogant, dumb, unknowing fool that wrote this dare to show himself? I don't think I've ever read any more crap, by Sigrid's flames! - Easy

I am Gauihu, current editor of the Abington First newsletter. If you or one of your comrades wishes to try to come stab me in the middle of the night (as is your wont), you are free to try. If on the other hand, you have something reasonable to say which is relevant, feel free to do do in your "Volcanic Hot" deceptionletter.House Olik 22:12, 27 January 2007 (CET)

Nah I'll just do it here. Firstly, it is not Darka that has to take responsibility, but RedSpan in the first place. On his own or not, he is a RedSpanian and attacked Darka during peace. "Oh yes but that's called mercenary, and doesn't Darka know everything about being mercenary, he was paid to do so." Yes Darka does, but when Darka attacks a realm under contract, then we don't expect that realm to watch and see us attack, but to fight back. It's just the same now: AJ attacked Mr_Jones, and contract or not, Darka fights back.

Secondly, what is that crap about Darka being illegitimate? Hell where do you get that from?eand the fine was 500, so AJ still cashed 100, and the other 500 just went to RedSpan. 600 gold pure profit for RedSpan, do you think we are stupid enough to accept that of that bounty 500 is held by the goat ranch instead of by one goat? So Tony refused to pay the 600 gold to Darka, and so Darka takes measures. Point. For every peasant that is killed on Goat soil, Tony is responsible. Tony still has the faith of the goat peasants in his hands: he can pay the bounty to Darka and save the peasants, or be stubborn and greedy and see the peasants die. Tony and his council is the only one that has to take his responsibility, Gauhiu! - Easy

No, that doesn't hold water. Darka has to take responsibility for what Darka does. Darka's troops, under the orders of Darka's leadership, are raping and murdering. This is quite different from AJ, on his own, stabbing one of you whiny bastards in the night - not simply on a level of scale, but on a level of National Responsibility. An Abington noble once attacked a Cagilan noble - our realms were at peace, and are still at peace. What happened? Well, I punished that noble and the Cagilan Empire realized something everyone knows but which you are willfully ignoring in order to self-justify an unjust war - the actions of a criminal are not the actions of the State.

As for Darka being illegitimate, why, that is simply a statement of fact. You're a "mercenary company." You take your "orders" from "employers." That doesn't sound like a Sovereign Realm to me.

Lastly, you are once again trying to shake off the responsibility of your own actions. Trying to blame the victim. You do this with every time you barbarians go and pillage. It's always, and how conveniently, someone else's fault! I see this reasoning - as Arch Priest of a Realm - from criminals, all the time. Nearly every single criminal tries to blame his victim(s). Well, that may work for your own guilty consciences, but it doesn't work with regards to Justice, Reason and Rationality. Try again. House Olik

Your way of debating is remarkable. You write a whole paragraph full of nonsense and then you say Do you have anything relevant to add? Try again. The trademark of Abington, once again shown clearly. I wonder how it comes that Carelia did take its responsibility and banned that guy - what was his name again, Vos Estis? I wonder why RedSpan cannot do the same. Ah yes, but AJ has always been a good guy for RedSpan, and if he brings RedSpan to war with the mightiest realm on Atamara, then so be it, as long as he is still a goat because he is a good guy who helped RedSpan in the past! Those goats see: Ho, AJ just gained 600 gold, but he mustn't keep all for himself so we'll take 500 from him, officially as a fine, in reality as a donation/contribution, and in the meantime we can try to please Darka and get away with it unpunished! Don't you get it? RedSpan holding the gold or AJ, it's all just the same!

Darka does take its responsibility, Darka leads this punishment campaign and Darka is the only realm that is at war with RedSpan's mighty friends as well, namely your pathetic "army" - what is taking you so long, are you scared? In this case, Talerium and BoM are just participation, Darka is leading and it is not denying that! We have come with our full will and will fight this until the end, either when Tony complies or when RedSpan is fully sacked. Darka takes its share of the responsibility, now it's time for Tony to take his. You call RedSpan the victim, but they were the agressors in the first place, maybe not by sending AJ, but by not properly punishing AJ. They take responsibility for that. But you're a good boy, you're right, you punished one of your infils for attacking a noble, very nice! A noble! Just a normal guy like there are fifty in a realm! Without a bounty! Abington gained nothing from it that it didn't deserve, so a fine was sufficient. Do you see the difference? AJ didn't attack just a normal Darkan, he attacked our Banker Mr_Jones, who is far more than just a regular noble, and on top of that he gained 600 gold from that! Now, do you have anything relevant to add? Easy

Well, Sir "Easy," I asked if you had anything relevant to add because, "By the Gods, Sigrid! This is Crap! Whoever wrote it must be foolish and hiding, what is his name!" is not relevant. Though it is your opinion, it certainly doesn't qualify as relevant and the only reason I indulge fools like you is because it sharpens the wit to engage in wordplay. Though I admit in your case, it's more akin to bludgeoning a piece of wood repeatedly. Will you break today, wood?

Darka does not take responsibility because Darka, as with Talerium, are blaming their own actions (rape and pillage) on Redspan. That is just about the opposite of taking responsibility. Do you have anything relevant that counters this, or just more arrogant chest-thumping and histrionics?

Your whinings about AJ's punishment are also irrelevant. The fact remains that Redspan punished an infiltrator. Darka doesn't like this punishment; I know, we get it. So take responsibility - tell the world not, "Redspan is causing us to rape peasants!" but "We are raping peasants, because we disagree with Redspan's judicial system!" Until your leaders can have the stones to do so, I will continue to assert that your realm is attempting to avoid responsibility for actions taken by your realm. And you can cry about that all you like, but I promise you, once you're rightfully in prison, you should probably save your tears for yourself. House Olik 20:40, 28 January 2007 (CET)

LMAO I am starting to realise why Lavigna can't stand you, Olik, all you can do in debating is counter arguments with the counter that were waylayed in the first place (wait I'll explain that since your childish brain can't catch that: You give an argument, let's call that argument A. I counter that with argument B, whereupon you counter argument B by restating A). That is not debating, that is boring your opponents. Sometimes a useful technique, but it won't work with me. So, let me explain you this one more time, I hope your brains get it now: The responsibilities Darka has to take according to you are a result of the bigger responsibilities that Tony has to take but did not take for not properly punishing AJ for attacking a foreign counsellor while at peace with that realm. Darka did not like this punishment because it was a farce! AJ gains 100 gold, RS gains 500. It doesn't matter who, as long as a goat is having that gold, it is bad. So "Pay Darka the 600 gold for the cares Mr.Jones had to get, for the troubles Darka got while being without Banker," Kostaja Kosunen said to Tony. Unlike with you Abbies and goats, every Darkan nobles has a daily contribution to the economy, and every day out of business is a loss. Tony refused to pay the 600 gold, knowing that Darka would attack them if they didn't. Tony values 600 gold higher than the sake of his people, I wonder what ruler would do that. Darka gave several weeks for RedSpan to prepare itself, but when the Darkans arrived at Meldeen, they saw free passage to their capital Stargard. Darka was coming to claim the 600 gold, but since RS was not willing to pay them out of your own will, we had to take them from their "peasants", those brainwashed goats that now follow their daddy goat in everything it does. You cannot keep saying that Darka is not taking its responsibilities, and stop saying that RedSpan is the victim. Tony's stubbornness and greed is the cause of all this, nothing more, nothing less. Point finale. I know many rediculous arguments of you will still probably following, but if I don't see anything relevant (I hope you understand what that word means, since you use it in every sentence?), I will not be responding, I don't have time to keep responding to childish arrogant fools like you. Easy

"Easy" - The reason I repeat my arguments is because you ignore them or paraphrase them in apparent gross misunderstanding of what they are. And because you have yet to refute them. You insist that "It is not Darka who has to take responsibility" (your own words;see above), so you yourself are only giving a justification for what my main point is - you aren't taking responsibility. I don't care if you think you don't need to - the fact is you aren't. Apparently you didn't know it, but you've already conceded this so-called "debate" long ago, little one. And you conceded it again just now when you mysteriously, suddenly have no more time to back up your "debate." I understand - you must have a lot of peasants that Redspan is forcing you to rape. House Olik 18:20, 29 January 2007 (CET)

"Olik" - The reason I ignore your arguments is because they make no sence and you keep repeating them. Once again there is nothing interesting to read here, so I won't bother replying to you, or I'll find myself repeating myself as well and you are not worth that. Easy

"Easy" - Of course they don't make sense (to you). But it's a good thing you aren't responding, just like you said you wouldn't.... I look forward to you continuing to refuse to respond! House Olik 21:00, 29 January 2007 (CET)

"Olik" - Get stuffed, fool. Easy

I think you need to get your facts straight. Darka did not dmeand 600 gold. But 1200 Gold...double that of the bounty. Now do you see why we wont pay such extontionate fees. ScottSabin 17:58, 29 January 2007 (CET)

Ah yes I remember now, my bad. It still doesn't make a difference, RedSpan will pay it anyway, whether they want or not, and now the consequences will last much longer and you goats will have to mourn about that, and that is all your fault, Tony. I hope you will sleep well tonight.

Counting isn't the only skill in which you have no education. You STILL can't accept responsibility for your own cowardly actions! You think because Redspan doesn't bow to your greedy, unreasonable demands, they are to blame for whatever you do? That's sheer ignorance. Let's say a criminal kidnaps your mother (well, first assume you have one). Then he tells you that if you don't bend over, kiss his arse and let him boff you for forty days and nights, he will kill her. You refuse (assuming you refuse. Maybe you wouldn't?), and he kills her. So, time to lay blame, the Judge comes along and imprisons you, since it's your fault. You are fine with this decision, yes? House Olik 20:57, 29 January 2007 (CET)

My that is a rediculous example, and it clearly shows your greed, against a superior enemy I would value the life of my mother higher, just as I would value the life of my population higher than 1200 gold if I were in Tony's place, for he knows that he cannot win this. And you are once again falling into repitition, stop whining about your "responsibility" all the time, it won't change a thing. If you say I can't accept responsibility, then so be it, if that's what will keep your crap inside your mouth. RedSpan will suffer for this. Point. Easy

Ah, "Easy," you are aptly named. You try, so hard, to remain detached, to come across as superior by claiming, "I'm not even going to respond! You are not worth my time!" But then you just can't help yourself, and you start bleating like a buggered sheep. You have no "point." You disagreed that Darka can't claim responsibility, now you agree, but you call this a "point?" Yes - MY point. Thank you for conceding, but I will not now, nor ever, stop telling the truth. Nothing you can possibly say will silence me. Ever. If you can't deal with it, your inane insults are not going to make you feel better. They only make you look like the ignorant barbarian thug you are.House Olik 21:23, 29 January 2007 (CET)

Sweet dreams, scum.

Best comeback, ever! --Habap 21:28, 29 January 2007 (CET)

"your Volcanic Hot deceptionletter"

I find it somewhat ironic that you would even hurl that (Volcanic Hot deceptionletter). While Darka's newspaper may be biased (as to be expected from any publication originating from any place), isn't it for a journalist or a reporter to report the truth? Of course, it is up to the readers to decide on what is falsity and what is fact. And as a reader of the Abington First Newsletter, I see it as an editorial or a commentary publication. The facts here are bent and wrought to fit your agendum. Surely, the slanderous slew that spews from this spectacular sh- never mind. What I mean is, Gauhiu Olik, I believe anyone with two eyes and some mass solid between said eyes, would see this for what it is. (OOC: I LOLd.) Jezralhm 04:39, 28 January 2007 (CET)

If that is what you believe, then you will also believe they have no need for you to speak for them. If they have mass solid behind their eyes then they will make up their own minds without you needing to declare their opinions. What they may or may not think without saying is irrelevant to this discussion, and sheer speculation on your part until they do in fact, say something in agreement with you. (And what is this nonsense of "reporters?" I am a Noble. What are you?) House Olik 06:11, 28 January 2007 (CET)

Noble Olik, I sense much irony in what you have just said. You say I should not "speak for them" and that I have no need "to declare their opinions". This irony is not lost on me. Given that you are speaking for Abington, and avidly declaring your own opinion, perhaps then - debating with you should be divinely announced as a one way street, and that all shall nod in approval. Against your challenge: I fear there may be a problem with gathering an assembly to declare Abington First Newsletter as the true deceptionletter, in that the circulation of this newspaper is so limited as to have an audience of one, your own ego. What is this reporters I speak of? Well, my dear sir, it's one who investigates, reports or edits news stories. Given that you are, denying the fact you are a reporter then, shall I assume you submit to the fact that you agree with me and that you are not a reporter but a mere commentator who's opinion can be carelessly discarded like a grain of salt? Jezralhm 07:38, 28 January 2007 (CET)

I am not speaking in an official capacity for Abington. I speak for Abington First, and I speak for my family, and of course, for myself. I am not the one who just said words to the effect of, "anyone reading who is intelligent, agrees with me!" That would be your fallacy (argumentum ad populous), not mine. And quite clearly the circulation of this newsletter is not so limited as to merely myself, or you sir, would not have read it. And with regards to "reporters:" You were clearly making allusions to "reporting" as a profession, not as an activity. I may be writing news stories, but my profession is not "reporter." I am a Noble. So, your last assumption is merely more strawmen for the burning. And even if it weren't, are you saying that only one who is a "reporter" is immune to having their opinion "carelessly discarded?" Ridiculous! Now, have you anything relevant to add, or do you simply want to try pushing lies and fallacies again? House Olik 07:49, 28 January 2007 (CET)

In regard to arcane Latin phrase - I am not appealing to the passions of the audience, I am beseeching proper judgment upon a source. In regard to the circulation of this newletter, the writing speaks for itself. (OOC, at the time of writing: This page has been accessed 58 times.) As a noble, you are entitled to your opinion. But you cannot mix opinion with fact. Facts are to be interpreted. To report or write news is to deliver facts. To commentate is to deliver opinions, alternatively to deliver one's interpretation of facts. Does your writing seek to unearth the truth or propagate Abington First's agenda (unify Abington through patriotism, albeit to victimize and create animosity to so called "illegitimate realms")? Jezralhm 09:41, 28 January 2007 (CET)

You misunderstand the language of the arcane. You have made the fallacy of trying to give weight to your argument by suggesting that anyone who reads this, who is intelligent, will agree with you. It doesn't matter who agrees with you, and it certainly doesn't matter who you IMAGINE will agree with you, your argument must be valid all the same. So far, it isn't. What IS your argument, anyway? That I'm biased? Congratulations - you are too. Everyone is biased? Anything ELSE irrelevant to add? Perhaps you could whine about how poor Darka is being "victimized." I know - it must be the fault of those Redspanian peasants... they, and I, are victimizing the innocence of Darka... (OOC - 58 times is not 1 time. Really, don't go OOC to support this argument. Frankly, while we're on that, this is a Newsletter sent to peope of Abington and especially in Abington First. What are your character(s) doing reading it? Just because it's on the wiki, so it must be fair game?) House Olik 20:25, 28 January 2007 (CET)

Disregarding the misunderstood Latin insult and the obvious flaws in circulation of Abington First argument, I'm going to jump straight to the point. I am biased, we all are. That's the blatant obvious. But with my partisanship, I still try to tell the truth, however one sided it may be. My argument therefore, is Abington First is not a newsletter, but a commentary page dedicated to your views alone.

• Q: "Does your writing seek to unearth the truth or propagate Abington First's agenda?"
• A: .

Your move.

Jezralhm 23:27, 28 January 2007 (CET) and Jezralhm 00:06, 29 January 2007 (CET)

OOC - the "A" answer you quoted was an OOC response to your OOC comment about page views = circulation. I'm really not in the mood to mix OOC and IC arguments here. House Olik 23:49, 28 January 2007 (CET)

IC - It is rather convenient that the truth serves Abington First's agenda. I see no need to lie when the facts speak for themselves. Whether you call a publication "news" or "comments" is ultimately irrelevant - I have made no lies. The fact is, truth has not been flattering to Darka for a very long time. House Olik 00:10, 29 January 2007 (CET)