[DEFEATED]Repeal:Liberate Confederation of Corrupt Dictators

[Thuzbekistan]

I dont mean to be a d*ck here, but none of this is relevant. You're calling someone out for spending a small amount of money on a game.

He sarcastically went "Lol how can you afford internet". Well, I gave him a detailed answer on why. And helpfully proving that this is about more than just these small little purchases, Jocospor went and spent over 170 dollars on this game a few days after that post. It wouldn't be so bad if he didn't ooze condescending entitlement, but he does. All the time.

I'm sorry you've been through that and still siffer, but it's not relevant to the conversation and it was really unfair for you to go for this line of attack.

I've yet to see any of you explain how it's irrelevant, while I've been repeatedly explaining how it was on-topic over and over. As for it being unfair for me to bring it up? I don't care. Especially now with the implication I'm making it up. I'm even more inclined to be unfair towards Jocospor, Shrew, and the Confederation in the future.

This whole thread, you've been overly hostile, condescending, and done nothing to maintain a civil argument. Cancer or no, disabled or no, theres no reason for this.

Apparently my exchange with Peigan just didn't fucking happen, huh? Go back and check it out. I am civil within reason. When it's these CCD peeps though, I will not hold back, because they deserve it.

1) it was not relevant due to the fact that he was responding to you calling him out on it. He simply stated that 1.35 is a small amount of money. That's like, 1000 stamps. I've seen more people spend money on GA resolutions.

2) it is extremely unfair and that you dont care is eh. Having to have supported and helped with cancer survivors who are still disabled to this day in my own family, I hate that you are using it as a way to try and take a debate opponent off guard and make him seem like a grade A arse. He may be that, but using cancer and disabilities to do so is just frustrating.

3. Your condescension is the only one I have experience with in this thread because the moment I popped on here, you were condescending, hostile, and dismissive to my reasoning for being against offensive liberations.

Again, I am truthfully sorry for what you suffer, but using it the way you have is what's over the line, not jobors confusion at being angry over 1.35. His response to you was well manored but firm and you treated him like he slapped you in the face.

[RiderSyl]

1) it was not relevant due to the fact that he was responding to you calling him out on it. He simply stated that 1.35 is a small amount of money. That's like, 1000 stamps. I've seen more people spend money on GA resolutions.

"How can you afford internet" - him
"I can't, actually, due to ____" - me

Are you being willfully ignorant here, or do you sincerely believe that exchange is off-topic?

2) it is extremely unfair and that you dont care is eh. Having to have supported and helped with cancer survivors who are still disabled to this day in my own family, I hate that you are using it as a way to try and take a debate opponent off guard and make him seem like a grade A arse. He may be that, but using cancer and disabilities to do so is just frustrating.

Being a cancer survivor who is still disabled to this day, I don't give a damn what you think of my choice to bring it up. He decided for the millionth time to be condescending towards another player, and he chose the wrong topic and the wrong player.

3. Your condescension is the only one I have experience with in this thread because the moment I popped on here, you were condescending, hostile, and dismissive to my reasoning for being against offensive liberations.

I was dismissive to your reasoning because your reasons were shitty ones.

His response to you was well manored but firm and you treated him like he slapped you in the face.

TIL that implying someone is lying about having had cancer is "well-mannered and firm".

[Thuzbekistan]

1) it was not relevant due to the fact that he was responding to you calling him out on it. He simply stated that 1.35 is a small amount of money. That's like, 1000 stamps. I've seen more people spend money on GA resolutions.

"How can you afford internet" - him
"I can't, actually, due to ____" - me

Are you being willfully ignorant here, or do you sincerely believe that exchange is off-topic?

2) it is extremely unfair and that you dont care is eh. Having to have supported and helped with cancer survivors who are still disabled to this day in my own family, I hate that you are using it as a way to try and take a debate opponent off guard and make him seem like a grade A arse. He may be that, but using cancer and disabilities to do so is just frustrating.

Being a cancer survivor who is still disabled to this day, I don't give a damn what you think of my choice to bring it up when he decided for the millionth time to be condescending towards another player.

3. Your condescension is the only one I have experience with in this thread because the moment I popped on here, you were condescending, hostile, and dismissive to my reasoning for being against offensive liberations.

I was dismissive to your reasoning because your reasons were shitty ones.

His response to you was well manored but firm and you treated him like he slapped you in the face.

TIL that implying someone is lying about having had cancer is "well-mannered and firm".

1. Eh, either way.

2. Then theres no use discussing this further.

3. More condescension. Got it.

4. All he said is while he couldnt verify it, he was sorry and even gave a whole spiel about hoping you make the best of it, then continued to be very respectful in defense of his spending 1.35.

[RiderSyl]

4. All he said is while he couldnt verify it, he was sorry and even gave a whole spiel about hoping you make the best of it, then continued to be very respectful in defense of his spending 1.35.

And then his buddy Shrew implies that I lied about it.

Which is why we're discussing it again in the first place.

[Caracasus]

Good lord, you picked the wrong person to say this to.

I'm a disabled 25-year-old whose only income is a monthly check from Social Security. I have two thirds of a functioning right lung. The remaining one third of that lung is damaged from chemotherapy, and the entire left lung was removed due a cancerous tumor. That means I cannot walk down a hallway without having to sit down or stop, and no workplace will give me the amount of scheduled breaks I would need to actually work and make a living. I actually don't pay for the ISP I have. I wouldn't have an internet connection and my quality of life would be severely worse than it is now if not for excellent support from my family. $1.35 is a lot of money for me, and I can't see ever asking those that help keep my quality of life in a good place to help me pay for what you do. Pushing forward terribly-written proposals that have no chance of passing on a nation sim that's slowly dying anyway is a waste of money that I don't have, because I have to save every penny after spending hundreds on doctors and pills and vitamins and supplements and tests and operations and groceries and rent.

Don't call me "buddy".

I dont mean to be a d*ck here, but none of this is relevant. You're calling someone out for spending a small amount of money on a game. It's not classy or ethical, but no one could tell what's happened to you or what your story is. Yeah, theres people out there that live on a dollar a day and a 1.35 would help them quite a bit.

I'm sorry you've been through that and still siffer, but it's not relevant to the conversation and it was really unfair for you to go for this line of attack. This whole thread, you've been overly hostile, condescending, and done nothing to maintain a civil argument. Cancer or no, disabled or no, theres no reason for this.

Thank you so much for so perfectly articulating why this "civil argument" stuff is utter bullshit.

Here we've got someone who may be a tad snarky presenting their own experience as evidence that people cannot afford to spend a couple of quid on recruitment TG's and you take issue with them, and not the person who inferred they were lying about having cancer.

I take it that Shrew passed your level of "civility" there then?

[Cedoria]

Everytime you think CCD can't go any lower, they sink the boat to the bottom of the frisking Mariana Trench...

Here's a tip friends, if you don't want to be a pariah, stop being jerks.

[Thuzbekistan]

4. All he said is while he couldnt verify it, he was sorry and even gave a whole spiel about hoping you make the best of it, then continued to be very respectful in defense of his spending 1.35.

And then his buddy Shrew implies that I lied about it.

Which is why we're discussing it again in the first place.

Wasnt him, was it? Definitely doesnt mean jobor deserved the response you gave him or the hostility. Him and shrew are not the same people.

[Cedoria]

I dont mean to be a d*ck here, but none of this is relevant. You're calling someone out for spending a small amount of money on a game. It's not classy or ethical, but no one could tell what's happened to you or what your story is. Yeah, theres people out there that live on a dollar a day and a 1.35 would help them quite a bit.

I'm sorry you've been through that and still siffer, but it's not relevant to the conversation and it was really unfair for you to go for this line of attack. This whole thread, you've been overly hostile, condescending, and done nothing to maintain a civil argument. Cancer or no, disabled or no, theres no reason for this.

Thank you so much for so perfectly articulating why this "civil argument" stuff is utter bullshit.

Here we've got someone who may be a tad snarky presenting their own experience as evidence that people cannot afford to spend a couple of quid on recruitment TG's and you take issue with them, and not the person who inferred they were lying about having cancer.

I take it that Shrew passed your level of "civility" there then?

Of course, the whole 'civility' restriction only applies to the people attacking CCD. They can be as jerkish as they like, obviously.

[Thuzbekistan]

I dont mean to be a d*ck here, but none of this is relevant. You're calling someone out for spending a small amount of money on a game. It's not classy or ethical, but no one could tell what's happened to you or what your story is. Yeah, theres people out there that live on a dollar a day and a 1.35 would help them quite a bit.

I'm sorry you've been through that and still siffer, but it's not relevant to the conversation and it was really unfair for you to go for this line of attack. This whole thread, you've been overly hostile, condescending, and done nothing to maintain a civil argument. Cancer or no, disabled or no, theres no reason for this.

Thank you so much for so perfectly articulating why this "civil argument" stuff is utter bullshit.

Here we've got someone who may be a tad snarky presenting their own experience as evidence that people cannot afford to spend a couple of quid on recruitment TG's and you take issue with them, and not the person who inferred they were lying about having cancer.

I take it that Shrew passed your level of "civility" there then?

I didnt see shrews post and I was referring to her conversation with jobor. Not shrew.

[RiderSyl]

More condescension. Got it.

You jumped in here calling this the "victim Olympics". so you can get off my case about condescension, thanks.

And then his buddy Shrew implies that I lied about it.

Which is why we're discussing it again in the first place.

Wasnt him, was it?

Is that your argument? That I got accused of lying about being a cancer survivor by his right-hand man, while he only said he "couldn't verify it"?
Okay. Cool beans. Thanks for wasting everyone's time by making a distinction that changes absolutely nothing.

[Thuzbekistan]

More condescension. Got it.

You jumped in here calling this the "victim Olympics". so you can get off my case about condescension, thanks.

Wasnt him, was it?

Is that your argument? That I got accused of lying about being a cancer survivor by his right-hand man, while he only said he "couldn't verify it"?
Okay. Cool beans. Thanks for wasting everyone's time by making a distinction that changes absolutely nothing.

1. Using victim status to gain respect in a devate is generally that.

2. No, my argument was that bringing this up at all with jocospore (not sure why I was saying jobor) was really irrelevant. I hadn't even seen shrews post and while they may be friends, it wasnt him. Joco was extremely respectful in his response and only pointed out that he couldnt verify it, but then continued to take it at face value.

But whatever, enjoy, you guys.

[RiderSyl]

1. Using victim status to gain respect in a devate is generally that.

Gain respect from who, exactly?

No, my argument was that bringing this up at all with jocospore (not sure why I was saying jobor) was really irrelevant.

You abandoned that argument after I showed how it bringing it up was relevant, though.

I hadn't even seen shrews post and while they may be friends, it wasnt him. Joco was extremely respectful in his response and only pointed out that he couldnt verify it, but then continued to take it at face value.

Again, making a distinction that changes nothing. Also, Joco accusing me of trying to guilt trip him was "extremely respectful" to you? Interesting.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

1) it was not relevant due to the fact that he was responding to you calling him out on it. He simply stated that 1.35 is a small amount of money. That's like, 1000 stamps. I've seen more people spend money on GA resolutions.

"How can you afford internet" - him
"I can't, actually, due to ____" - me

Are you being willfully ignorant here, or do you sincerely believe that exchange is off-topic?

It is off topic. This thread is about the game, you brought up something personal that isn't related to the game, at all, no wonder how you frame it.

I'm going to be very blunt here, I really don't care about you. I don't know you, I've never met you, and the chances we ever do meet in person are infinitesimally small given you probably live on the opposite side of the world to me.

Lots of people have their own (usually real) political stances and some info in their signatures. You'll notice I don't have anything about me, personally, written anywhere. Why? I don't expect people to know, or care, about me personally. Apparently they do, given we get accused of being fascists not just in-game but outside as well, but I digress.

I play NationStates as a game, not to have someone try and use their own personal circumstances to shame us for spending a few dollars on telegram stamps. Guilt tripping is exactly what it was, otherwise you would have left it at "You don't know my personal circumstances, $1.35 really is a lot of money to me."

I'm done with this, end of discussion.

[Valentine Z]

Geez, people are getting ticked off. ><

Still, as my WA nation Victoriaans Nederlands, I'll still have to be against. I mean... call it going with the bandwagon, but my vote is a drop in the ocean as of now.

[Kurnugia]

Annnnnd it gets utterly ROFLstomped.

In comparison: The liberation in of itself had about 1/3 opposition to it. This one has only about 10% approval. Money may buy into the queue but it sure as hell won't buy you skills in politics.

[RiderSyl]

It is off topic. This thread is about the game, you brought up something personal that isn't related to the game, at all, no wonder how you frame it.

Asking how I can afford things is personal, and that's what Joco did to kick this off. No matter how hard y'all try to paint what I said as off-topic, it won't work.

I'm going to be very blunt here, I really don't care about you. I don't know you, I've never met you, and the chances we ever do meet in person are infinitesimally small given you probably live on the opposite side of the world to me.

Is that your justification for implying that I lied about being a cancer survivor?

Lots of people have their own (usually real) political stances and some info in their signatures. You'll notice I don't have anything about me, personally, written anywhere. Why? I don't expect people to know, or care, about me personally.

Cool.

I play NationStates as a game, not to have someone try and use their own personal circumstances to shame us for spending a few dollars on telegram stamps.

"How can you afford internet if a few dollars is too much for you?"
I'm disabled and cannot support myself.
"Don't shame us like that!"

This is comedic.

Guilt tripping is exactly what it was, otherwise you would have left it at "You don't know my personal circumstances, $1.35 really is a lot of money to me."

So describing why it's a lot of money to me is what made it cross the line into guilt tripping? Oh okay! Totally makes sense.

[Castelia]

Money may buy into the queue but it sure as hell won't buy you skills in politics.

More like money won't erase the bias NSGP has towards the CCD, but okay.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Guilt tripping is exactly what it was, otherwise you would have left it at "You don't know my personal circumstances, $1.35 really is a lot of money to me."

So describing why it's a lot of money to me is what made it cross the line into guilt tripping? Oh okay! Totally makes sense.

I really didn't want to post this, but okay, if you insist.

*snip*

Even you agree you didn't need to post it here.

It's not relevant, it was unnecessary, and it's guilt tripping. End of story.

[Grater Tovakia]

Wow... Shrewlama with the offsite, OOC screenshots. So classy.

[Castelia]

Wow... Shrewlama with the offsite, OOC screenshots. So classy.

Considering you've been attacking us OOC with IC characterization, well...

Edit: The privacy thing is correct, though. Shrew, might I suggest you remove that?

[Caracasus]

So describing why it's a lot of money to me is what made it cross the line into guilt tripping? Oh okay! Totally makes sense.

I really didn't want to post this, but okay, if you insist.



Even you agree you didn't need to post it here.

It's not relevant, it was unnecessary, and it's guilt tripping. End of story.

Jesus christ... Normal people, normal, well adjusted people, do not double down on accusing someone who has had cancer of not having it to win an internet argument. Dragging this out isn't good for you or anyone involved. Please, for the love of god would you just drop this already?

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Edit: The privacy thing is correct, though. Shrew, might I suggest you remove that?

Name and picture removed:

[RiderSyl]

That log doesn't show me trying to guilt-trip Jocospor. It shows that I know I could have not gone into detail, that I didn't care and went into detail anyway, and that I wanted to see y'all uncomfortable. So, you temporarily violated my privacy and gained nothing. Well done.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Jesus christ... Normal people, normal, well adjusted people, do not double down on accusing someone who has had cancer of not having it to win an internet argument. Dragging this out isn't good for you or anyone involved. Please, for the love of god would you just drop this already?

I'm not saying they don't have cancer.

What I am saying, and what I will stand by, is that their original post was not relevant, unnecessary and wholly intended to put us in a difficult spot by guilt tripping.

2) it is extremely unfair and that you dont care is eh. Having to have supported and helped with cancer survivors who are still disabled to this day in my own family, I hate that you are using it as a way to try and take a debate opponent off guard and make him seem like a grade A arse. He may be that, but using cancer and disabilities to do so is just frustrating.

This is my stance on this as well.

[Castelia]

It shows that I know I could have not gone into detail, that I didn't care and went into detail anyway, and that I wanted to see y'all uncomfortable.

But isn't that guilt-tripping?