Print

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

[Desiderya]

Three days. Besides, shelter is relative against weapons like these.
The Science of Never Again chronicle states that planetary defense wasn't the most advanced technology of the caldari - if it was, it would've been different.
But yes, it didn't hit them by surprise.

[BloodBird]

And all this essentially confirms what I've tried to get across.

There is no conclusive evidence for the genocide theory (any type) available, but neither is there hard evidence that excludes it - this means there are countless questions that can be asked regarding the whole situation and how it played out, but very little in the way of answers. Ergo, Seri's post here can be seen as the official Federal view-point - the oposite end of the two view-points present in the conflict, the other being the popular claims made by the Caldari side of the events and their viewpoints, accurate or no.

We simply don't know for sure, but we can theory-craft until we die of old age, and Seri has presented an 'alternative' view after analyzing the issue at hand. Still plenty of questions, but as much as I'd love to have a few more answers to things like intentions, (The Federation's intentions, before RN and after the U-Nats took control, after thy got kicked out, what the Caldari mega's was thinking, etc) means, conclusions and more details on the following 100 years worth of warfare. However the lacking answers also lets us have more discussions and conflicts over this, IC... and OOC. This is good, imho - it would produce more activity around it as both sides argue their perspective viewpoints on the matter at hand and the results of those came about. Good roleplay and some pewpew should never be declined.

[orange]

Ergo, Seri's post here can be seen as the official Federal view-point
...
Seri has presented an 'alternative' view after analyzing the issue at hand.

I don't think Seri's point is actually to say "State Bad, Fed Good!" but to point out that saying "Fed Bad, State Good" is to miss other side of the discussion.

Cas, this might be a reasonable idea, except that this is not provided as a Gallente viewpoint, but as a "better perspective" on the PF.

[BloodBird]

I take it you agree with Vikarion then, Orange? I don't get the meaning in your post.

Honestly, I don't know exactly what Seri wanted with his post. Maybe my idea is right, and he made a "federal" view-point on the matter at hand. Maybe he's just analyzed it from his own viewpoint and provided the original post as a theory-crafting idea on how and what and why regarding the outbreak of the G-C war. I don't know. Would help if he would come aroudn here and clarify... *nudge*

I've made my opinion clear anyhow, and see little more to contribute to the conversation - especially being unsure what exactly the purpose of the tread is.

[orange]

I take it you agree with Vikarion then, Orange? I don't get the meaning in your post.

The point is that Seri did not start out saying that he wanted to develop an In-Character Federal viewpoint, official or popular.  He presented the analysis as a better perspective on the prime fiction based on his educational background.   He proceeded to cherry pick prime fiction he referenced and extrapolated possible alternative actions despite his educational background.  I may be overvaluing his education by assuming the study International Relations includes the League of Nations, United Nations, national governments, etc and their success at gaining compliance with their will without at least the threat of arms.

I do not think it is a better perspective out-of-character.

I think there are real gems in his analysis and agree that the security dilemma between the Federation and Caldari Corporations was real.  I disagreed that the Corporate security concerns were ill-founded, as he seems to have put forward in his post.   I think his analysis is an excellent starting point for developing a solid Federation perspective on the beginnings of the Gallente-Caldari War.

Perhaps that is the real goal of the thread.  It is clear that the Caldari RPers have a developed viewpoint and that there is not a well developed Federation perspective on the G-C War.

To that end, I think it is worthwhile to include at least a brief discussion on the corporate secession of Serpentis and ORE.   Both began life as Federation corporations.  They expanded their operations beyond the official borders of the Federation (much like the Caldari corporations).  The Federation government did not take to take truly restrictive action against of either of them until they were too big or distant for the Federation to mount an effective campaign against them.  Is this because a single corporation was not important enough? Perhaps the loss of some corporations will not damage the foundation of the Federation?  What about the secession of a different corporation?

[Vieve]

It is clear that the Caldari RPers have a developed viewpoint and that there is not a well developed Federation perspective on the G-C War.

I wouldn't say that there isn't a well developed Federation perspective on the G-C War.  I think rather that there are multiple developed perspectives on it, none of which has become socialized enough among Federation RPers to become the "perspective of reference" (quotes mine).

Will there ever come a time when there are enough Federation RPers agreeing on anything to create such a thing?¹  Maybe.


¹Myself included.   I'm not an agreeable person.

[Mithfindel]

To that end, I think it is worthwhile to include at least a brief discussion on the corporate secession of Serpentis and ORE. Both began life as Federation corporations.  They expanded their operations beyond the official borders of the Federation (much like the Caldari corporations).  The Federation government did not take to take truly restrictive action against of either of them until they were too big or distant for the Federation to mount an effective campaign against them.  Is this because a single corporation was not important enough? Perhaps the loss of some corporations will not damage the foundation of the Federation?  What about the secession of a different corporation?

Not all corporations hold a planet in Luminaire system? And take with them several founding ethnicities? One of the chronicles mention that the Gallente feared that the Intaki and the Mannar would pack their stuff, as well: And sure, some Intaki joined the Caldari State, and some Intaki "troublemakers" were exiled into the Syndicate.

[Bataav]

It is clear that the Caldari RPers have a developed viewpoint and that there is not a well developed Federation perspective on the G-C War.

I wouldn't say that there isn't a well developed Federation perspective on the G-C War.  I think rather that there are multiple developed perspectives on it, none of which has become socialized enough among Federation RPers to become the "perspective of reference" (quotes mine).

Will there ever come a time when there are enough Federation RPers agreeing on anything to create such a thing?¹  Maybe.

¹Myself included.   I'm not an agreeable person.

Perhaps this is an interesting blurring of the divide between the OOC opinions of players regarding their interpretation or understanding of the PF for their chosen faction and the IC opinions of their characters from within those factions.

It's interesting that the Caldari RPers appear to present a relatively uniform coherant viewpoint while the Federation RPers express a wide range of differing views which in some cases can contradict those of others.

[Bastian Valoron]

It's interesting that the Caldari RPers appear to present a relatively uniform coherant viewpoint while the Federation RPers express a wide range of differing views which in some cases can contradict those of others.

As far as I know, there are opinional differences also among the Amarr, Minmatar, Caldari and even Intaki RPers, and as we're talking only about a handful of people, I wouldn't read much meaning to it. At some point in the past there must have been a couple of like-minded Caldari players who discussed these things through and now it has become a part of the official fanon. It's not a necessarily a negative thing that there are still open questions on the Federal side. There are players who like to construct coherent arguments and in many ways it's awesome that there are still aspects of the lore which haven't already been discussed and polished before our time.

[Casiella]

For comparison: see the recent debates about the Ammatar/Nefantar and Starkmanir among Matari characters (some even in the same alliance) on the IGS.

[Hamish Grayson]

I'm not an agreeable person.

I disagree.

[Hamish Grayson]

At some point in the past there must have been a couple of like-minded Caldari players who discussed these things through and now it has become a part of the official fanon.

Actually, rather than a group of Caldari Rpers meeting and then coming to a consensus privately - it's because Seri, Bloodbird and a few others have been re-posting or posting in this same thread for more than a couple years.  Those Caldari RPers who regularly point out the same logical fallacies year after year have formed a loose cliche.   I suppose we owe Seri something for that.

[BloodBird]

At some point in the past there must have been a couple of like-minded Caldari players who discussed these things through and now it has become a part of the official fanon.

Actually, rather than a group of Caldari Rpers meeting and then coming to a consensus privately - it's because Seri, Bloodbird and a few others have been re-posting or posting in this same thread for more than a couple years.  Those Caldari RPers who regularly point out the same logical fallacies year after year have formed a loose cliche.   I suppose we owe Seri something for that.

I've been arguing the fed-side of the G-C war's start IC, repeatedly? I must have forgotten that, I can't recall even one case of arguing this IC, though I'm sure there is one somewhere - likely from the period right before, leading up to, or during the start of, FW.

I'm not sure I should be flattered or insulted that you claim I've helped repeatedly argue something IC to the point where the Caldari RP'ers collectively agree on their view-points regarding the topic - after all I think I've barely argued this two or three times (this being the second or third time) OOC.

If you recall examples of this I'd love links, if I have been arguing this in an IC-sense I'd like to remember it myself

[Hamish Grayson]

I said Caldari RPers, not characters.   The last IC post of yours I bothered to read was your character jetcaning people into the sun.

Perhaps you posts are more memorable because of a frequent failure to understand what the other side is actually saying, combined with a rather intense vitriol.

[BloodBird]

I said Caldari RPers, not characters.   The last IC post of yours I bothered to read was your character jetcaning people into the sun.

Perhaps you posts are more memorable because of a frequent failure to understand what the other side is actually saying, combined with a rather intense vitriol.

... what? I've looked over my posts on the EVE-search site and did not find this anywhere. I can't recall having done it either so if you do please share a link.

As for the... vitriol - I'm not 100% sure what the word even means but I think I do, to that I've little to say besides the fact your entitled to our opinion. I'm not sure it's a deserved remark but then I likely will know once I'm more clear on exactly what you mean.

Or if your even thinking of me/my toon - the first remark here kind of produced a "what? When, Why? I don't even..." reaction. Would you bother to clarify?