Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vendrin]

Rather enjoying it, and interacting where I can.

[Arnulf Ogunkoya]

Rather enjoying it, and interacting where I can.

Likewise. It's interesting to have someone taking the part of baseliners coming to speak with us and try to woo us to their cause.

I'm baffled by the wardec though. Seems a tad pointless.

[Casiella]

I'm slightly disappointed to see Soter continuing the line of claiming the posters are fabrications, but I suppose that it makes for a particularly convincing brand of conspiracy theorist.

[Vikarion]

I'm slightly disappointed to see Soter continuing the line of claiming the posters are fabrications, but I suppose that it makes for a particularly convincing brand of conspiracy theorist.

How can I put this very nicely...

Hmm.

Soter has not had...an "accepting" reaction...to the concept that the Federation is not a bright and shining light in the darkness of New Eden.

[Casiella]

That's realistic, though. You and I both know many, many individuals with the same viewpoint about the US.

[orange]

Soter has not had...an "accepting" reaction...to the concept that the Federation is not a bright and shining light in the darkness of New Eden.

That's realistic, though. You and I both know many, many individuals with the same viewpoint about the US.

I can only guess at the intentions of Soter's player; but I do not think the character is that simplistic.

The character Soter appears to view the real Federation as having fallen from what it can and should be.  He holds up the original concept of the Federation as a bright and shining beacon for the rest of the Federation and New Eden to pursue, not the Federation as it stands.  He reels against what he views as unconstitutional actions and tainting political parties.

[Valdezi]

I agree, and I also think the wardec was an interesting, role-playing way for him to get his point across.

[Myyona]

I agree, and I also think the wardec was an interesting, role-playing way for him to get his point across.

Sorry, but I consider the act of declaring war on people during an IGS disagreement out of place. "You do not agree with me? I keeel you!" We all know that these characters likely never will log into the game even less leave a station. As one who role-plays through actions I am very much aware of the limitations of in game mechanics to show sign of disagreement besides declaring war on each other. Still, as this element primarily resides within the domain of IGS it will be hard to do something meaningful about with in-game actions.

Am I the only one who distinguish between IGS, in game actions, official and player written lore and while they all make up the World of EVE not everything can be freely transferred between domains?

[Saxon Hawke]

Sorry, but I consider the act of declaring war on people during an IGS disagreement out of place. "You do not agree with me? I keeel you!"

Maybe so, but Jules is at least consistent in this regard. The ILF has the battle scars to prove it.

[Julianus Soter]

So, I made this quite clear in character. But do I need to copy-paste my IC explanation for an out of character discussion, as well?

[Casiella]

Only if your IC actions are driven by your OOC considerations. Or vice-versa.

[Julianus Soter]

Only if these people's IC actions are driven by their OOC considerations. Or vice-versa. You mean.

[Casiella]

No, I mean that you only need to repost your IC stuff as OOC if they're the same. (I'm not saying that they are, mind, just responding to your question. )

[Julianus Soter]

So, the people reposting the same opinions their characters have on the IGS on the forum are operating under the same methodology, yes?

Which means I would need to post my character's response i this forum so these same individuals could have the chance to read said response again.

[Casiella]

I think you may be jumping to some conclusions here.