A Time for Change

[darkemporor]

Originally Posted by Gerami

My point is, this dictatorship is stupid. Where's the oppressiveness?

There IS oppression. They just aren't allowed to talk about it. >:]

Originally Posted by Lance

Off-topic posting is not against the rules, and neither should it be. We've been over this before... The best suggestion I can make about them is that if it really bothers you, you should split the thread.

It doesn't matter what ya'll don't like about Zormite. We've been over THIS before, too. I can only suggest if you don't like what's going on with Zormite, you split.

Wren

[Dehitay]

A lot of people seem to be confusing a Republic with a Democracy
Just to clarify things
Republic - one person represents a group of people
Democracy - major issues are voted upon

It is true that Zen did a horrible job describing why Zormite is a Republic contrary to what Wren said
But if you look at it from the view that Aki is representing the Zormite Republic, then it could be said it's a Republic

[busyrobot]

If Saddam Hussien can call himself a president who wins a popular vote in a Republic (even still from his trial no less), then I think Zormite can call itself whatever it wants.

All of you grumblers, please buy a plane ticket and go whine at that guy at his trial. That could actually be amusing.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by busyrobot

If Saddam Hussien can call himself a president who wins a popular vote in a Republic (even still from his trial no less), then I think Zormite can call itself whatever it wants.

Look what happened to him =) Besides, it isn't relevant for you because you said earlier that Graal can't be compared to real life

[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

Look what happened to him =) Besides, it isn't relevant for you because you said earlier that Graal can't be compared to real life

I stand by that, however as many others have made irl comparisions, I offered a relevant one that counters their points. As far as what happened to Saddam, I assure you if he called his regime by another other name, it would have had no effect on what happened to him - and has nothing to do with the topic.

My point is that the terminology is very subjective irl, and also quite flexible. The nit picky long winded complaints about zormite are as out of place as they are baseless. Its as annoying as spending a year and a half listening to people complaining about the color of the dustari wand or something.

Give it up already. Its a game. No one would even care IF you all had a point, the fact that you don't only adds to the irrelevance.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by darkemporor

There IS oppression. They just aren't allowed to talk about it. >:]

OPPRESSIVE FISH?! Woah, whats this world coming to?

All of you grumblers, please buy a plane ticket and go whine at that guy at his trial. That could actually be amusing.

[sarcasm]you're so funny[/sarcasm]

[falco10291029]

Republic - one person represents a group of people
Democracy - major issues are voted upon

Ok, want me to help fend off these people saying how we cant be called a republic? This quote will now be used to prove my point. A republic is a system where you vote for who you want to lead you. A democracy is one where everyone votes on the major issues. We at the US vote for our leaders do we not? That would make us a republic, yet we call ourselves a democracy. So why can't Zormite call themselves a republic when they are more like a monarchy? You should try talking to the leaders of the country if you wish to continue to support your ideas. Check and Mate.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by busyrobot

If Saddam Hussien can call himself a president who wins a popular vote in a Republic (even still from his trial no less), then I think Zormite can call itself whatever it wants.

I'm sorry, but I'm debating the accuracy of the name 'Zormite Republic'. I'm not sure what you hoped to accomplish by providing me with an example of another inaccurate name.

Originally Posted by falco10291029

We at the US vote for our leaders do we not? That would make us a republic, yet we call ourselves a democracy.

We're a republic. Specifically, we are a representative democracy. This is a type of democracy, but it is not pure democracy. People who call it a pure democracy do not really understand how our government works and sound quite foolish.

So why can't Zormite call themselves a republic when they are more like a monarchy?

Well, they most certainly can, if they want to sound as foolish as the folks I mentioned earlier.

You should try talking to the leaders of the country if you wish to continue to support your ideas.

I somehow don't think that a letter from the president would convince you folks if reason and logic can't.

Check and Mate.

If you say so.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by falco10291029

Ok, want me to help fend off these people saying how we cant be called a republic? This quote will now be used to prove my point. A republic is a system where you vote for who you want to lead you. A democracy is one where everyone votes on the major issues. We at the US vote for our leaders do we not? That would make us a republic, yet we call ourselves a democracy. So why can't Zormite call themselves a republic when they are more like a monarchy? You should try talking to the leaders of the country if you wish to continue to support your ideas. Check and Mate.

Wrong.

Democracy:
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
Majority rule.

[falco10291029]

Pfft thats a laugh most times we are called a democracy, anything where you vote on a leader is eithet representative democracy or a republic, but not just democracy. It's no different then Zormite calling ourselves a republic. And I didnt say contact them to convince us, i said ud have to take the same argument to them concerning calling us just democracy!

[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by Lance

I'm sorry, but I'm debating the accuracy of the name 'Zormite Republic'. I'm not sure what you hoped to accomplish by providing me with an example of another inaccurate name.

Come on lance, horses come from eggs around here, lighten up.

When you say 'another inaccurate name' you are referring to a name (the Republic of Iraq) that is on all the maps, recorded in the Library of Congress, cited in countless debates and speeches in the US Senate and Congress, and has been acknowledged by the UN, the EU, and just about every government body around the world. You have a lot of people to reach, they need you Lance.

If you want to debate the 'accuracy' of the name please give it a rest - no one cares enough for a deep philosophical exchange.

The only question on the table for debate is 'does zormite have the right to call itself a republic without being hounded by strangely obsessed people that want to debate every political government structure from the Roman era onward as it relates to the historical and idealogical context of the term republic and its use by zormite?'


Zormite is a Republic, even though they don't vote.

Dustari is a Monarchy, even though at least half of all the royal family members throughout its history have been adopted while still being related to twelve different families.

CP are pirates even though they have a castle and even have a special medival shield event item in their honor.

KJ is an ancient japanese society even though they use warhammers and mithril armor etc.

Forest is an elven kingdom even though....I don't even know what's happening with Forest.

Horses and monkeys come from eggs. People die of farts. You play a flute to make plants grow. Barbarians master wizardry in 30 seconds with 1.4k worth of scrolls.

Zormite has some decent distinction and has developed its own style, and if you think it is not perfect enough for your taste - look around and promptly get over it. Personally I am not convinced that a republic can only be called such one if voting is involved....but I actually don't care and it does not matter. All that matters is, is that Zormite is a decent enough Republic that if they want to be one, then so be it. They may, and may do so in peace without this being rehashed constantly.

This topic is dead, the only reason I am even posting is to try to convey, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to a handful of oddly obsessed people, that this old, retired, dead, trivial debate has been exhausted to the point of such lifelessness that it really doesn't ever need to be raised again.

Here lies 'The Republic Debate', raised from the dead for the umpteenth time but finally buried one last time here, fini, done, over.

[darkemporor]

That topic is dead... and apparently so's this one.

*thread closed* or not. Why are my moderator rights removed?

Wren

[falco10291029]

Originally Posted by busyrobot

Come on lance, horses come from eggs around here, lighten up.

When you say 'another inaccurate name' you are referring to a name (the Republic of Iraq) that is on all the maps, recorded in the Library of Congress, cited in countless debates and speeches in the US Senate and Congress, and has been acknowledged by the UN, the EU, and just about every government body around the world. You have a lot of people to reach, they need you Lance.

If you want to debate the 'accuracy' of the name please give it a rest - no one cares enough for a deep philosophical exchange.

THANK YOU!

Also i just came up with a new idea that SHOULD shut most people up.


"Zormite Republic" can be just a name, i could call myself King Falco and it doesnt mean i rule over anyone


EDIT: Oops sop sorry wren i think i must have tried posting after u but i was typing and didnt refresh and i bet that reopened the thread if u closed....oops

[LordZen]

Originally Posted by Lance

But when you convert to a monarchy, you cannot and should not call this a Republic. It wasn't one to begin with, really, and this has not changed. Zen picked Wren. Wren picked Aki. Continue cycle.

It did not convert to a monarchy. It converted to a Republic, from being a monarchy. My picking of Wren, and Wren picking of Aki was justified by the constitution. The office becomes heriditary only when the senior official of the ruling party steps down or dies (whatever) while that party is in power, because that creates a vaccant office in government which cannot be filled by the election of a new party (because the same party is in power). Wren was part of my family, and when I could no longer rule, she was my most direct relative, and was educated in my ideology. That doesnt mean its not a republic, because that only deals with leadership change within the same legitimately elected regeime, between election cycles.

Originally Posted by Lance

I'll further note that the phrase 'early leaders of the Zormite Republic' is humorous.

Wow, man, I was describing to you the RP story behind the situation. When talking about how an entire kingdom's revolution, do think that story would only consist of the handful of players who were actually in the kingdom? No, obviously you would presume a nation to consist of millions apon millions of people. That is very shallow to presume I meant that strictly literally, and speaks well of you and your own ability to participate in such fictional invented roleplaying situations, "King *Tseng".

Originally Posted by Lance

A new government where the same Emperor who forfeited his right to rule the land suddenly became the Dictator...? Man, your argument is weaker when you're giving explanations now than it was when it just occurred without explanation.

He forfeited his divine sovereignty to appease the fears of the populace, and managed to regain the right to rule through popular consent. Dictator is just the title given to the supreme office of the land. It could just as well have been Prime Minister, or President, or First Regent, or whatever. Then your statement would not seem so far fetched and more plausible. Your using the term Dictator out of context, because as it applies to the Zormite Republic's government...Dictator is a legitimately attainable position through consent of the majority.

Originally Posted by Lance

okay so you wrote a nice little paragraph about why you got to keep power wow that's so cool

it's just a story though

If you are so against the use of stories to describe situations in a roleplaying enviornment, then why did you even trouble yourself with getting involved with an RP Kingdom, or anything of the like?

Originally Posted by LordZen

Except that the conversion to the Zormite Republic with you as dictator happened instantaneously. I was online at the time.

Yea, thats about how long it takes to change the kingdom name and a title of a rank in the KGUI in-game.

[falco10291029]

dang thems good arguing skills

[Nappa]

Their is too much to reply too, so little time. Plus I'm too lazy. Zen I'm pretty sure hereditary changes in government aren't voted upon - thus these people were never elected by anyone but the previous leader which isn't the populous.

[LordZen]

Every member of the Supreme Court is appointed for life by a sitting President.

It is not nessisary for every person in office to be voted to that position. Also you are ignoring a large part of my argument, or didnt understand it fully.

You say that hereditary changes in government are not voted apon, this is true. But whenever a Vice President replaces a President between elections, that is not voted on, either. Neither would the 3rd in the line of seccession for President be voted on, and that individual wasnt even on the presidential ballot to begin with. As I have previously stated, a line of seccession is established as a backup in order to keep an important, normally elected office, occupied incase the current holder of that office for whatever reason can no longer occupy it during their term.

Glad you were civil about that, though. Thanks.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by busyrobot

Come on lance, horses come from eggs around here, lighten up.

When you say 'another inaccurate name' you are referring to a name (the Republic of Iraq) that is on all the maps, recorded in the Library of Congress, cited in countless debates and speeches in the US Senate and Congress, and has been acknowledged by the UN, the EU, and just about every government body around the world. You have a lot of people to reach, they need you Lance.

Iraq has new leadership now. Irrelevant, anyway.

If you want to debate the 'accuracy' of the name please give it a rest - no one cares enough for a deep philosophical exchange.

Apparently enough care to wish to discuss the topic. Apparently you care enough to reply. Apparently a few people are more than none.

The only question on the table for debate is 'does zormite have the right to call itself a republic without being hounded by strangely obsessed people that want to debate every political government structure from the Roman era onward as it relates to the historical and idealogical context of the term republic and its use by zormite?'

Wow, so you're telling me what I'm trying to debate? I am in awe of your omniscience. I'm saying the name is inaccurate. That is what I am debating. Stop trying to lead the issue elsewhere.

Zormite is a Republic, even though they don't vote.

Right-o. Let's have a republic, but instead of the people electing their representatives, we'll do it for them! It's brilliant!

No!

Dustari is a Monarchy, even though at least half of all the royal family members throughout its history have been adopted while still being related to twelve different families.

CP are pirates even though they have a castle and even have a special medival shield event item in their honor.

KJ is an ancient japanese society even though they use warhammers and mithril armor etc.

Forest is an elven kingdom even though....I don't even know what's happening with Forest.

Horses and monkeys come from eggs. People die of farts. You play a flute to make plants grow. Barbarians master wizardry in 30 seconds with 1.4k worth of scrolls.

That's nice, but I'm talking about Zormite, a kingdom which thinks itself awesome enough to defy the meaning of its own name.

Zormite has some decent distinction and has developed its own style, and if you think it is not perfect enough for your taste - look around and promptly get over it.

Or, alternatively, I could note where a name is inaccurately applied. I'm not doing this for my own benefit - Zormite is what looks foolish for the inaccuracy, not me.

Personally I am not convinced that a republic can only be called such one if voting is involved....but I actually don't care and it does not matter. All that matters is, is that Zormite is a decent enough Republic that if they want to be one, then so be it. They may, and may do so in peace without this being rehashed constantly.

Okay, then I hereby proclaim myself Lance the wind god. I am decent enough and I want to be one, then so be it. Now, you will have to respect my decision and only refer to me as Lance the wind god. Let me be the wind god in peace!

This topic is dead, the only reason I am even posting is to try to convey, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to a handful of oddly obsessed people, that this old, retired, dead, trivial debate has been exhausted to the point of such lifelessness that it really doesn't ever need to be raised again.

You are not the sole arbiter of whether or not topics are alive or dead.

Folks want to debate about a topic -> it is still very much alive. That's just common sense, man.

Here lies 'The Republic Debate', raised from the dead for the umpteenth time but finally buried one last time here, fini, done, over.

Except it's not buried unless it's resolved. That's another one of those by-definition things, but the trend seems to be to ignore them.

Originally Posted by darkemporor

That topic is dead... and apparently so's this one.

*thread closed* or not. Why are my moderator rights removed?

Your modpowers rested on your leadership position in Zormite. That is gone, thus you no longer moderate this forum.

Originally Posted by falco10291029

Also i just came up with a new idea that SHOULD shut most people up.

We've got...hiiigh hopes, we've got....hiiigh hopes...

"Zormite Republic" can be just a name, i could call myself King Falco and it doesnt mean i rule over anyone

Surely you would not think it reasonable to expect everyone else to believe you are actually a king, though...?

EDIT: Oops sop sorry wren i think i must have tried posting after u but i was typing and didnt refresh and i bet that reopened the thread if u closed....oops

Uh, if a thread is closed, it doesn't allow any more replies, man.

Originally Posted by LordZen

It did not convert to a monarchy. It converted to a Republic, from being a monarchy. My picking of Wren, and Wren picking of Aki was justified by the constitution. The office becomes heriditary only when the senior official of the ruling party steps down or dies (whatever) while that party is in power, because that creates a vaccant office in government which cannot be filled by the election of a new party (because the same party is in power). Wren was part of my family, and when I could no longer rule, she was my most direct relative, and was educated in my ideology. That doesnt mean its not a republic, because that only deals with leadership change within the same legitimately elected regeime, between election cycles.

Would you please list the various parties that currently exist in Zormite, how many members belong to each, etc?

Wow, man, I was describing to you the RP story behind the situation. When talking about how an entire kingdom's revolution, do think that story would only consist of the handful of players who were actually in the kingdom? No, obviously you would presume a nation to consist of millions apon millions of people.

How much will you type before you try to actually understand what I'm saying and why I might be saying it? It's funny because you are the 'early leaders of the Zormite Republic', and I found it humorous that you were trying to explain something about the way you decided to make things by referring to yourself in the third person. Time doesn't quite flow like that, you know.

That is very shallow to presume I meant that strictly literally, and speaks well of you and your own ability to participate in such fictional invented roleplaying situations, "King *Tseng".

That'd be nice, except for the problematic fact that I never went on a kingdom tag with my account as my nick...? Don't potshot my roleplaying skills. If anything, they're superior to yours. Still isn't the issue, though.

He forfeited his divine sovereignty to appease the fears of the populace, and managed to regain the right to rule through popular consent. Dictator is just the title given to the supreme office of the land. It could just as well have been Prime Minister, or President, or First Regent, or whatever. Then your statement would not seem so far fetched and more plausible. Your using the term Dictator out of context, because as it applies to the Zormite Republic's government...Dictator is a legitimately attainable position through consent of the majority.

Except that the way you explained the handing-down of the leadership didn't even bother mentioning the consent of the majority...?

If you are so against the use of stories to describe situations in a roleplaying enviornment, then why did you even trouble yourself with getting involved with an RP Kingdom, or anything of the like?

Don't put words in my mouth?

Yea, thats about how long it takes to change the kingdom name and a title of a rank in the KGUI in-game.

Mmmhm.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by falco10291029

Pfft thats a laugh most times we are called a democracy, anything where you vote on a leader is eithet representative democracy or a republic, but not just democracy. It's no different then Zormite calling ourselves a republic. And I didnt say contact them to convince us, i said ud have to take the same argument to them concerning calling us just democracy!

Wow dude you triple posted.

[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by Lance

Your modpowers rested on your leadership position in Zormite. That is gone, thus you no longer moderate this forum.

You don't have a clue regarding what you are talking about - if her mod rights were removed due to Aki's stepping in, then Aki would have been added - duh.




Regarding the rest of your rant Lance, the majority of the people here are not interested in debating the accuracy of the term 'Zormite Republic' as it pertains to historical Republics from the Roman age on. That majority includes the leaders of Zormite and a great deal of the members of Zormite.

The problem I am addressing is that while a thread going off topic once in a while is fine... the systematic use of old, worn out debates to derail every new thread's primary topic is not fine.

Many people have cited reasons why even by irl standards, Zormite would be allowed to call itself a republic. I mean hell - for crying out loud the "People's Republic of China" contains what, half of the world's population?

Don't give me that 'I am not talking about them I am talking about Zormite' crap either - if you don't want to 'talk about' anything that points out you are flat out wrong then you really are the Wind God, at least of Hot Air.


I know - lets debate Global Warming, 98% of the world's scientists can demonstrate the impact of pollution and you can take the other side and repeat the phrase 'is not' and thus ensure that a lively and on going debate till the end of time. Then, anytime anyone posts a new thread on any other topic, you can bring up global warming and keep repeating the 'is not' mantra and derail another 50 threads.

You usually have good forum manners lance, your petty grudges against Zen are kinda getting the better of you at this point though.


Do I have to say it again? People's Republic of China

And if you think graal, with its Pirate Castles, Horse Eggs and Flaming Farts somehow needs to be held to a higher standard than the freak'n United Nations then you really really really need relax and expand your range of hobbies.

I say this debate is dead for the following reasons:

1) instead of debating valid counter arguments you content "I am not talking about..." - all logic within this debate has become stale and 95% of the points are being ignored in favor of little quips over the most trivial elements.

2) The debate you are contenting, that the name 'Zormite Republic' should not be used, is irrelevant, as even if by some manipulation of the fabric of space and time you were correct, it does not matter as Zormite is not a Republic, but a group in a game that calls itself a republic, that has been allowed to call itself a republic, and unless Stefan chooses to reverse the allowance of this name that has persisted since about '04-25-2003' no amount of debating, complaining, whining, or crying is going to change it.

The important part is that the people currently IN Zormite can speak for themselves if they don't like it.

3) This is not the result of a happy 'lets have a debate' topic that just merrily popped up, essentially its more along the lines of 'we want you zormites to be forced to use fish head gfx' line, of attacking Zormite's right to use the name it has rightfully chosen to use. You do not have people happily engaging in an intelectual discourse with you but a '**** we can do this and you are wrong to say otherwise' defense of the GK nation they have chosen to build.

You will always find people will debate (ie disagree) with you if you use any variation of the 'you suck' argument as a basis for a 'debate'.

Since the start of this argument, you have been aptly flogged on every front of logic, and the only reason it is still going on is you find new ways of saying 'but what you are missing is my point that you still suck' without any basis.

You think you are 'selflessly saving the Zormite's from embarrassing themselves'? Excuse me? You need to look up the definitations of 'Altuism' and 'Egomaniac with a god complex' and rethink your stance here. If you want to save someone from embarassment, start with yourself.

Did I mention the People's Republic of China?

[Lance]

Originally Posted by busyrobot

You don't have a clue regarding what you are talking about - if her mod rights were removed due to Aki's stepping in, then Aki would have been added - duh.

Not really. The removal of ex-kingdom leaders does not necessitate the addition of the new ones.

Regarding the rest of your rant Lance, the majority of the people here are not interested in debating the accuracy of the term 'Zormite Republic' as it pertains to historical Republics from the Roman age on. That majority includes the leaders of Zormite and a great deal of the members of Zormite.

You're not the majority. Don't presume to speak for them. Speak for yourself. Besides, numbers don't particularly matter.

The problem I am addressing is that while a thread going off topic once in a while is fine... the systematic use of old, worn out debates to derail every new thread's primary topic is not fine.

Except every new thread hasn't been derailed. Some have, perhaps, but some is never equivalent to all.

Many people have cited reasons why even by irl standards, Zormite would be allowed to call itself a republic. I mean hell - for crying out loud the "People's Republic of China" contains what, half of the world's population?

Uh, no. No valid reasons have been presented. Again I'll note that numbers are irrelevant. That's a pretty basic one right there.

Don't give me that 'I am not talking about them I am talking about Zormite' crap either - if you don't want to 'talk about' anything that points out you are flat out wrong then you really are the Wind God, at least of Hot Air.

But it doesn't point out that I'm "flat out wrong." It points out that you can cite examples of other countries whose names may or may not be appropriate. That is wholly irrelevant to the current discussion.

I know - lets debate Global Warming, 98% of the world's scientists can demonstrate the impact of pollution and you can take the other side and repeat the phrase 'is not' and thus ensure that a lively and on going debate till the end of time. Then, anytime anyone posts a new thread on any other topic, you can bring up global warming and keep repeating the 'is not' mantra and derail another 50 threads.

We're not talking about global warming.

You usually have good forum manners lance, your petty grudges against Zen are kinda getting the better of you at this point though.

I have no grudge against Zen. He's a nice guy.

Do I have to say it again? People's Republic of China

Do I have to spell it out? I-r-r-e-l-e-v-a-n-t.

And if you think graal, with its Pirate Castles, Horse Eggs and Flaming Farts somehow needs to be held to a higher standard than the freak'n United Nations then you really really really need relax and expand your range of hobbies.

So, if other things in graal are inaccurate, this can be inaccurate too? Doesn't matter - I'm not debating whether or not it should be changed. My original statement (and continued discussion since then) is that the name is inaccurate.

I say this debate is dead for the following reasons:

Look: This debate is not dead as long as it is being debated. This is a very simple concept, and I'm not sure why you can't get it.

1) instead of debating valid counter arguments you content "I am not talking about..." - all logic within this debate has become stale and 95% of the points are being ignored in favor of little quips over the most trivial elements.

Perhaps that's because 95% of the points used against me are invalid...? The only things I've ignored are:

a) Irrelevant
b) Stories in which time flows in a circle

2) The debate you are contenting, that the name 'Zormite Republic' should not be used, is irrelevant, as even if by some manipulation of the fabric of space and time you were correct, it does not matter as Zormite is not a Republic, but a group in a game that calls itself a republic, that has been allowed to call itself a republic, and unless Stefan chooses to reverse the allowance of this name that has persisted since about '04-25-2003' no amount of debating, complaining, whining, or crying is going to change it.

I said the name is inappropriate. Once it is recognized that the name is inappropriate, Zormite can decide whether or not it wishes to keep it, though it'd be kinda foolish to.

The important part is that the people currently IN Zormite can speak for themselves if they don't like it.

Uh, most people won't even notice it as they simply do not spend much time considering the kingdom's name.

3) This is not the result of a happy 'lets have a debate' topic that just merrily popped up, essentially its more along the lines of 'we want you zormites to be forced to use fish head gfx' line, of attacking Zormite's right to use the name it has rightfully chosen to use.

I'm really starting to get annoyed by this. Please don't tell me what I'm trying to debate. Others may be trying to debate that, but I am not.

You do not have people happily engaging in an intelectual discourse with you but a '**** we can do this and you are wrong to say otherwise' defense of the GK nation they have chosen to build.

Why paraphrase the defense of the kingdoms as '**** we can do this and you are wrong to say otherwise'...?

Aside from that, I am happily willing to engage in intellectual discourse with anyone who wishes to do so.

You will always find people will debate (ie disagree) with you if you use any variation of the 'you suck' argument as a basis for a 'debate'.

Except that pointing out flaws in people's logic is not equivalent to saying 'you suck', though I suppose saying they suck at making cohesive arguments wouldn't be too big of a stretch.

Since the start of this argument, you have been aptly flogged on every front of logic, and the only reason it is still going on is you find new ways of saying 'but what you are missing is my point that you still suck' without any basis.

By my count, there have been very few valid arguments used against me. I could be wrong, though, so feel free to show me some examples, please, of this awesome flogging by logic.

You think you are 'selflessly saving the Zormite's from embarrassing themselves'? Excuse me? You need to look up the definitations of 'Altuism' and 'Egomaniac with a god complex' and rethink your stance here. If you want to save someone from embarassment, start with yourself.

But I am! I am Lance, the wind god! Have you not paying attention?

Did I mention the People's Republic of China?

Did I mention irrelevant?

[LordZen]

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

Would you please list the various parties that currently exist in Zormite, how many members belong to each, etc?

Have you read the Zormite Constitution recently? Maybe you should re-educate yourself.

Amendment I. Party Legality (Added: 06-09-2003)
Only the National Archist Party of Zormite (NAPZ) shall be recognized by the government of the Zormite Republic, in that only members of that party will be considered valid candidates for public office. All other political parties are henceforth banned from participating in government of the Zormite state. This means that only one party will be considered legal, internally. The government may still actively work with and cooperate with political groups governing other nations, and political groups that are not specific to any one state (international organizations).

You see, I understood the limitations presented to me within the basic structure of the Kingdom system. It was designed to work strictly as a top down structure, a pyramid, where most power lies at the top with a few, and there is a king figure in charge of everything. Allowing 2 people with equal maxed rights without a parent rank poses a problem because then they are able to remove the other person if they get into an argument. I had always wished that the KGUI was updated so that there was an option screen, even if it was simply checkboxes, that would help to individualize how each of the kingdoms ran. So I wanted to change the form of government, to a Republic. But to have a republic under such a limited system designed for absolute monarchs, its obvious that a truly democratic republic would be impossible. Only a more repressive republic would be supported. If you really let the members vote on the new leader, how do you force that new leader to step down after their term is up? You cant, without staff intervention.

You know, we even tried elections a few times, tried to even schedule it for every 2 weeks I think, in the Archigos Assembly Hall. It didnt work.

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

It's funny because you are the 'early leaders of the Zormite Republic', and I found it humorous that you were trying to explain something about the way you decided to make things by referring to yourself in the third person. Time doesn't quite flow like that, you know.

You completely missed my point. I had just explained to you that I was not refering to actual members of the kingdom from that time period when I used the term "early leaders of the Zormite Republic". And no, I was not refering to myself in 3rd person. I was refering to the story, which involves many more fictional people then there are that even plays GraalOnline.

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

That'd be nice, except for the problematic fact that I never went on a kingdom tag with my account as my nick...? Don't potshot my roleplaying skills. If anything, they're superior to yours. Still isn't the issue, though.

Thats funny, I distinctly recall somebody going by "King *Tseng (Dustari)" for a time, and Zalinto Rahz believes *Tseng is what you almost always used as prince. I'm sure there are probably some other witnesses still around if they spoke up. *Shrug*

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

Except that the way you explained the handing-down of the leadership didn't even bother mentioning the consent of the majority...?

Strange, I recall mentioning "election periods" several times in my original post on the subject in this thread. I guess left you to assume too much there.

Oh wait, I also said this:

Originally Posted by LordZen

So as long as NAPZ was able to remain the ruling party, through consent of the people, they in effect accomplish a secondary goal which was to preserve the monarchy in some form, but in a modernized, more stable architecture of government.

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

Don't put words in my mouth?

True, I made an unfair generalization based on my assesment of how you've reacted to only one instance of somebody using a background story to explain current Roleplaying circumstances. And then I posed a question. I appologize. I will make it more direct and focused.

"What is your problem with my use of a Background story to explain current RP circumstances in Zormite? While others on GK get away with far less thought out and/or much more far fetched RP background stories, you choose to attack one which was detailed, documented, and attempted to have a semi-realistic basis. Consider that the modern day real world consists of very un-liberal, oppressive, and officially Republican states.

China (Officially 'The People's Republic of China')
North Korea (Officially 'The Democratic People's Republic of Korea')

As long as it works a certain way on paper, legally, that is what defines it. Curroption and/or abuse of those laws does not mean the legal structure becomes void.

Just because a nation decides to describe itself as a Republic does not denote that its populace enjoys a large amount of personal freedoms, or any at all.

Furthermore, if your imagination is so limited that you cannot even accept a background RP story in a GAME which references to similar real life examples, why do you even bother wasting your time participating?"

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

Mmmhm.

What? You disagree with that assesment?



EDIT:

While writing this, everything from padren's last reply on was newly posted after I had last read the thread.

Just wanted to get across that I think Lance is a respectable global staff member. We've said good things about each other in the past, and we've worked together a couple of times regarding some PW issues. I dont know him super well on a personal level, but we get along perfectly fine on a professional level when it comes down to it.

I have no personal beef against you, either, Lance. We just dont agree on this subject, and I guess we both stand by our own convictions rather passionately.

[protagonist]

Grrrrr. So much ill logic.

Lance, Republic is not a title. There is no universal title system for any set of countries or governments. Republic is part of the name, just like Crescent is/was part of Crescent Pirates. Does that mean people think "OMFG THEY CALL THEM CRESCENT PIRATES! THEY MUST BE SHAPED IN A CRESCENT MANNER OR WE ARE BEING MISLED!"? I hope not.

The United States of America. I don't see any reference to government structure. Does that mean that the government doesn't exist? Same with Canada or England or any other number of countries; including the government structure is not necessary. Conversely, including references to government structures does not make that reference true. It is the burden of other people to realize the government structure, not the burden of the government to make its structure known to everyone. Especially to people not in the kingdom.

[Splke]

-blinks-...

[Crono]

Zormite sucks, why even bother typing up so much argument text? It should be a bunch of fish running around with a dictator

[Splke]

Zormites okay.. their leaders suck.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Splke

Zormites okay.. their leaders suck.

Zormite should have like, half-zormite fish half human breeds, not humans. It's boring seeing 3 human kingdoms which in my opinion are all the same, then KJ who just stand out because of their clothing / building styles.

[Splke]

Originally Posted by Gerami

Zormite should have like, half-zormite fish half human breeds, not humans. It's boring seeing 3 human kingdoms which in my opinion are all the same, then KJ who just stand out because of their scammers / ****s.

Zormite is cool, they've got good background, but their leaders suck. Dustari is good, but they haven't had a good leader for awhile.. (no offense Lance).

CP hasn't been good since Ghost, and it NEVER will be.

[protagonist]

I have exclusive pictures of a real life Zormite guy:

[Crono]

lawl @ VT, i thought posting pictures like that was illegal?

[Splke]

Originally Posted by protagonist

I have exclusive pictures of a real life Zormite guy:

Ahaha.. yeah, he looks like a Zormite should.. not the fish1.png face.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Gerami

lawl @ VT, i thought posting pictures like that was illegal?

I wonder what more restrictions "they" can think of.

[Monkeyboy_McGee]

Originally Posted by Lance the Wind God

You're not the majority. Don't presume to speak for them. Speak for yourself. Besides, numbers don't particularly matter.

Neither are you the majority, lance; and yes, numbers do particularly matter in this case. You claim that we look "EVER SO FEWLIHS OMGBBQ!111" yet we are not bothered by your claims. As padren said, the people currently in zormite will speak out if they disagree with it, and as you can clearly see, none of us do. The only people at all who disagree with it are nappa and yourself, and possibly cyrin, i'm not sure.

You say we look foolish, but I personally don't give a goddamned crap what you and your goon think I look like - I don't know about the others but i can probably guess. So, since it is only Lance the Wind God and his faithful skydog Nappa who share your feelings, there is no problem, and Zormite is absolutely fine the way it is. In this case, numbers do matter

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Monkeyboy_McGee

Neither are you the majority, lance; and yes, numbers do particularly matter in this case. You claim that we look "EVER SO FEWLIHS OMGBBQ!111" yet we are not bothered by your claims. As padren said, the people currently in zormite will speak out if they disagree with it, and as you can clearly see, none of us do. The only people at all who disagree with it are nappa and yourself, and possibly cyrin, i'm not sure.

You say we look foolish, but I personally don't give a goddamned crap what you and your goon think I look like - I don't know about the others but i can probably guess. So, since it is only Lance the Wind God and his faithful skydog Nappa who share your feelings, there is no problem, and Zormite is absolutely fine the way it is. In this case, numbers do matter

Can I ride on clouds? =(

[busyrobot]

Originally Posted by Lance

You're not the majority. Don't presume to speak for them. Speak for yourself. Besides, numbers don't particularly matter.

1) Numbers matter. It makes the difference between a merry debate, and an entire happy republic putting up with a few whiney people that seem to believe they are both one half of the debate and also the debate arbraters, able to determine what information is irrelevant and what is to the point, in an objective and rational manner...who never stop complaining.

Originally Posted by Lance

Except every new thread hasn't been derailed. Some have, perhaps, but some is never equivalent to all.

Take a look around and start counting threads, and how many posts are on the original topic, and how many are on completely off beat tangents. Then look at who starts the majority of the tangents.

Originally Posted by Lance

Uh, no. No valid reasons have been presented. Again I'll note that numbers are irrelevant. That's a pretty basic one right there.

I hope you never try your hand at becoming a trial lawyer, 'I think that is irrelevant' is a very very bad defense when you don't back it up with anything other than your 'trust me I am smart' attitude.

Originally Posted by Lance

But it doesn't point out that I'm "flat out wrong." It points out that you can cite examples of other countries whose names may or may not be appropriate. That is wholly irrelevant to the current discussion.

If we cannot go by What the entire world uses in practical and actual sense demonstrated over long lengths of time and with millions upon millions of legal documents because one wind god thinks its 'irrelevant' yet quotes one website's dictionary as if it was holy sacred text - then this is not a debate.
It is you, the plaintiff and judge, trying to look smart by picking and choosing what you think applies and ignoring whatever you don't like.

Originally Posted by Lance

We're not talking about global warming.

Stop playing dumb. You know no one alledged we were. The point that was clearly made was that global warming is a case in point where merely 'is not' is used as a counter argument to prolong a debate without actually citing any valid reasoning and where a debate is generally considered closed anyway, as this type of tactic is not widely respected.

Originally Posted by Lance

I have no grudge against Zen. He's a nice guy.

I am not going to get into the private conversations you have had with me, but I could easily point out threads in which you did have some major problems with him.

Originally Posted by Lance

So, if other things in graal are inaccurate, this can be inaccurate too? Doesn't matter - I'm not debating whether or not it should be changed. My original statement (and continued discussion since then) is that the name is inaccurate.

How about you continue to think you are right, we'll all continue to feel you are wrong, we all agree there is no problem with zormite keeping its name and that this topic, in regards to whether zormite should change its name, be retired permenantly and the people of zormite can choose to change it whenever they see fit, based on their own discussions.

That would be pleasant.

My point of graal 'inaccuracies' is that this game does not and has never claimed to hold to some great level of representation of the real world. While you may feel Zormite Republic is a bad name and others of us feel it is perfectly valid, and that a real world nation with a similar constitution could be recognized by the title 'Zormite Republic' by government bodies, the debate itself is irrelevant as the degree of accuracy/innaccuracy, if any, would still be well within the line of more accurate elements within the context of the game graal.

Originally Posted by Lance

Look: This debate is not dead as long as it is being debated. This is a very simple concept, and I'm not sure why you can't get it.

Simply going on with cyclic ways of saying "is not" and then claiming that as if you were an objective third party all arguments made that show your wrong are 'irrelevant' does not constitute a 'continuing debate'.

Originally Posted by Lance

Perhaps that's because 95% of the points used against me are invalid...? The only things I've ignored are:

a) Irrelevant
b) Stories in which time flows in a circle

Enough hot air there mr wind god, or we will have to bring global warming into this debate. As I said, you like to say 'Irrelevant' without anything to back it up. This doesn't make you right or your points magically valid.

Originally Posted by Lance

I said the name is inappropriate. Once it is recognized that the name is inappropriate, Zormite can decide whether or not it wishes to keep it, though it'd be kinda foolish to.

Uh, most people won't even notice it as they simply do not spend much time considering the kingdom's name.

You have not made any new points regarding why you think the name is inappropriate in probably at least a day now, all you have done is called every other post 'irrelevant' and mentioned how you are getting annoyed and such.
News flash: People of Zormite long ago debating this topic...you made your feelings known in the past (as you stated yourelf in your opening comments) and decided long ago the name as appropriate.

If you are going to pull a Matlock do it already, you haven't made a case yet and haven't added anything fresh to your arguments in the last several posts. It looks like you may be wrong.

Originally Posted by Lance

By my count, there have been very few valid arguments used against me. I could be wrong, though, so feel free to show me some examples, please, of this awesome flogging by logic.

First of all, when it is pointed out that in the real world, the People's Republic of China is considered a Republic, is called a Republic, and is recognized as a Republic, the best defense you have is

Originally Posted by Lance

Did I mention irrelevant?

Somehow, if you quote a dictionary, it is sacred holy text, yet when it is pointed out that in the real world half of the world's population lives in a republic inconsistent with your ideas on the term, that is 'irrelevant'.

Sorry, until you can actually debate that point, and many others, without resorting to using your wind powers to determine relevance based on your own bais in the topic, you are not making a case, nor convincing anyone that the zormite republic is 'inappropriate', and not liable to strike a cord with those in the nation.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by LordZen

Have you read the Zormite Constitution recently? Maybe you should re-educate yourself.

It wasn't for self-education, it was to make a point. You say a ton of things about other parties having the full capability to assume power if they disagree with your rule. But. These parties don't exist.

You see, I understood the limitations presented to me within the basic structure of the Kingdom system. It was designed to work strictly as a top down structure, a pyramid, where most power lies at the top with a few, and there is a king figure in charge of everything. Allowing 2 people with equal maxed rights without a parent rank poses a problem because then they are able to remove the other person if they get into an argument. I had always wished that the KGUI was updated so that there was an option screen, even if it was simply checkboxes, that would help to individualize how each of the kingdoms ran. So I wanted to change the form of government, to a Republic. But to have a republic under such a limited system designed for absolute monarchs, its obvious that a truly democratic republic would be impossible. Only a more repressive republic would be supported. If you really let the members vote on the new leader, how do you force that new leader to step down after their term is up? You cant, without staff intervention.

Right.

You know, we even tried elections a few times, tried to even schedule it for every 2 weeks I think, in the Archigos Assembly Hall. It didnt work.

But you can't have it both ways. Either you have elections and can use it as a valid point, or you don't have elections and can't use that to justify the name.

You completely missed my point. I had just explained to you that I was not refering to actual members of the kingdom from that time period when I used the term "early leaders of the Zormite Republic". And no, I was not refering to myself in 3rd person. I was refering to the story, which involves many more fictional people then there are that even plays GraalOnline.

There are many more fictional people in between when you were the monarch of Zormite and when you were the first selected dictator of the Zormite Republic?

Thats funny, I distinctly recall somebody going by "King *Tseng (Dustari)" for a time, and Zalinto Rahz believes *Tseng is what you almost always used as prince. I'm sure there are probably some other witnesses still around if they spoke up. *Shrug*

All I can say is that you must be remembering incorrectly. If it ever happened it was by accident and corrected within a minute. I was one of the most vocal advocates against such things - in fact, I punished and removed those who went on tag with their account name. "Set a proper nickname" was the warning.

The two people who I remember doing that frequently were Larrien and MarkB. Perhaps you're thinking of them, I don't know.

Strange, I recall mentioning "election periods" several times in my original post on the subject in this thread. I guess left you to assume too much there.

But they didn't work? So that's kinda moot?

Oh wait, I also said this:

Granted.

True, I made an unfair generalization based on my assesment of how you've reacted to only one instance of somebody using a background story to explain current Roleplaying circumstances. And then I posed a question. I appologize. I will make it more direct and focused.

"What is your problem with my use of a Background story to explain current RP circumstances in Zormite? While others on GK get away with far less thought out and/or much more far fetched RP background stories, you choose to attack one which was detailed, documented, and attempted to have a semi-realistic basis. Consider that the modern day real world consists of very un-liberal, oppressive, and officially Republican states.

I have no problem with it, except when it's contradictory as I already noted.

China (Officially 'The People's Republic of China')
North Korea (Officially 'The Democratic People's Republic of Korea')

As long as it works a certain way on paper, legally, that is what defines it. Curroption and/or abuse of those laws does not mean the legal structure becomes void.

Just because a nation decides to describe itself as a Republic does not denote that its populace enjoys a large amount of personal freedoms, or any at all.

Never said they should enjoy personal freedoms. Just said the name was inappropriate.

Furthermore, if your imagination is so limited that you cannot even accept a background RP story in a GAME which references to similar real life examples, why do you even bother wasting your time participating?"

My imagination isn't limited. See two points above.

What? You disagree with that assesment?

Nope.

I have no personal beef against you, either, Lance.

I'm glad, as that'd be nonproductive.

We just dont agree on this subject, and I guess we both stand by our own convictions rather passionately.

Indeed. I feel the name is inappropriate.

Originally Posted by protagonist

Grrrrr. So much ill logic.

I could not agree more.

Lance, Republic is not a title.

It's a form of government, like I said it was...?

There is no universal title system for any set of countries or governments.

What?

Republic is part of the name, just like Crescent is/was part of Crescent Pirates. Does that mean people think "OMFG THEY CALL THEM CRESCENT PIRATES! THEY MUST BE SHAPED IN A CRESCENT MANNER OR WE ARE BEING MISLED!"? I hope not.

There's a difference between a name and a form of government.

The United States of America. I don't see any reference to government structure.

Someone doesn't understand our government's structure.

Might be VT.

Does that mean that the government doesn't exist?

*g*

Same with Canada or England or any other number of countries; including the government structure is not necessary. Conversely, including references to government structures does not make that reference true. It is the burden of other people to realize the government structure, not the burden of the government to make its structure known to everyone. Especially to people not in the kingdom.

If a Kingdom's name makes reference to a government structure, is it not unreasonable to expect the structure of the kingdom to follow its name?

Originally Posted by Monkeyboy_McGee

Neither are you the majority, lance;

I never claimed to be the majority. I merely claimed to be correct.

and yes, numbers do particularly matter in this case.

No, listen, they don't. The amount of people that believe a statement to be true does not affect the truth of the statement.

You claim that we look "EVER SO FEWLIHS OMGBBQ!111" yet we are not bothered by your claims.

So what? Perhaps you should be. Some of you are bothered enough to hotly debate this with me, when I am making one simple point.

As padren said, the people currently in zormite will speak out if they disagree with it, and as you can clearly see, none of us do. The only people at all who disagree with it are nappa and yourself, and possibly cyrin, i'm not sure.

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, man. It's a matter of an inaccurate name.

You say we look foolish, but I personally don't give a goddamned crap what you and your goon think I look like

Okay? Your loss, buddy.

I don't know about the others but i can probably guess. So, since it is only Lance the Wind God and his faithful skydog Nappa who share your feelings, there is no problem, and Zormite is absolutely fine the way it is.

Hey, it's not like there was a minority who had the right idea about the shape of the world, or about astronomy. Oh wai...

[Lance]

Too long to put them all in one, so:

Originally Posted by busyrobot

1) Numbers matter.

1) No. I'll restate it in case you don't want to read my earlier explanation of this: The amount of people who believe a statement to be true does not affect the truth of that statement.

It makes the difference between a merry debate, and an entire happy republic putting up with a few whiney people that seem to believe they are both one half of the debate and also the debate arbraters, able to determine what information is irrelevant and what is to the point, in an objective and rational manner...who never stop complaining.

I'm not whining. I'm pointing out an inaccurate name. I am not complaining.

Information is irrelevant because information is irrelevant, man. It doesn't matter if other countries have inaccurate names. That has no bearing on whether or not the name 'Zormite Republic' is inaccurate for this kingdom.

Take a look around and start counting threads, and how many posts are on the original topic, and how many are on completely off beat tangents. Then look at who starts the majority of the tangents.

You have trouble with the whole "burdon of proof" thing. If you make a claim, back it up. Don't shift the burdon of proof - that's a fallacy.

I hope you never try your hand at becoming a trial lawyer, 'I think that is irrelevant' is a very very bad defense when you don't back it up with anything other than your 'trust me I am smart' attitude.

Instead of debating about my attitude, why not debate the points? Stop the ad hominem, okay?

If we cannot go by What the entire world uses in practical and actual sense demonstrated over long lengths of time and with millions upon millions of legal documents because one wind god thinks its 'irrelevant' yet quotes one website's dictionary as if it was holy sacred text - then this is not a debate.

A dictionary is a reference.

An example of another country with an inaccurate name is just that. You have yet to demonstrate how it is relevant to this case.

It is you, the plaintiff and judge, trying to look smart by picking and choosing what you think applies and ignoring whatever you don't like.

Demonstrate the relevance, fool.

Stop playing dumb. You know no one alledged we were. The point that was clearly made was that global warming is a case in point where merely 'is not' is used as a counter argument to prolong a debate without actually citing any valid reasoning and where a debate is generally considered closed anyway, as this type of tactic is not widely respected.

Okay, so you can show me another debate. Kindly establish the relevance...?

I am not going to get into the private conversations you have had with me, but I could easily point out threads in which you did have some major problems with him.

I've disagreed with him in the past, but he's perfectly aware that there is no grudge. Yaknow, someone doesn't have to have a grudge against someone to disagree with them, otherwise I should perhaps claim that you must have a grudge against me to be arguing so vehemently over such a simple statement of mine.

How about you continue to think you are right, we'll all continue to feel you are wrong, we all agree there is no problem with zormite keeping its name and that this topic, in regards to whether zormite should change its name, be retired permenantly and the people of zormite can choose to change it whenever they see fit, based on their own discussions.

This isn't a matter of 'thinking' someone is right or wrong. Again, see the part where I explained that whether or not people believe a statement to be right or wrong does not actually influence the truth of that statement.

That would be pleasant.

Except you condemn it throughout this thread. Hypocrite.

My point of graal 'inaccuracies' is that this game does not and has never claimed to hold to some great level of representation of the real world.

Where have I said that it did? Stop putting words in my mouth. It's getting old.

While you may feel Zormite Republic is a bad name and others of us feel it is perfectly valid, and that a real world nation with a similar constitution could be recognized by the title 'Zormite Republic' by government bodies, the debate itself is irrelevant as the degree of accuracy/innaccuracy, if any, would still be well within the line of more accurate elements within the context of the game graal.

If the debate is so irrelevent, why in the world do you keep posting?

Simply going on with cyclic ways of saying "is not" and then claiming that as if you were an objective third party all arguments made that show your wrong are 'irrelevant' does not constitute a 'continuing debate'.

Except that I am being objective here, dude. You failed to demonstrate relevance. It's irrelevant.

Enough hot air there mr wind god, or we will have to bring global warming into this debate. As I said, you like to say 'Irrelevant' without anything to back it up. This doesn't make you right or your points magically valid.

I never said that my indications of where your statements were irrelevant had any effect on the relevance of the statement. They were irrelevant, plain and simple.

You have not made any new points regarding why you think the name is inappropriate in probably at least a day now, all you have done is called every other post 'irrelevant' and mentioned how you are getting annoyed and such.

It's a very simple point, but people just don't seem to understand it. They keep thinking that I am trying to debate something which I am not, and answering to that. At this point, I note such and try to explain where their mistake is.

News flash: People of Zormite long ago debating this topic...you made your feelings known in the past (as you stated yourelf in your opening comments) and decided long ago the name as appropriate.

Since when does debating a topic in the past precludes any further debate about it...?

Also, what does it matter what the people of Zormite believe? Again, that doesn't affect the accuracy/inaccuracy of the name.

If you are going to pull a Matlock do it already, you haven't made a case yet and haven't added anything fresh to your arguments in the last several posts. It looks like you may be wrong.

"Pull a Matlock"? I'm unfamiliar with this term.

First of all, when it is pointed out that in the real world, the People's Republic of China is considered a Republic, is called a Republic, and is recognized as a Republic, the best defense you have is

There's a difference between a parodical statement and a 'defense'. I'd suggest learning it.

Somehow, if you quote a dictionary, it is sacred holy text, yet when it is pointed out that in the real world half of the world's population lives in a republic inconsistent with your ideas on the term, that is 'irrelevant'.

Listen. A dictionary is a reference. I cited it to back up my claim that the name is inaccurate. Pointing out another inconsistent country in no way affects either its accuracy or the accuracy of the name "Zormite Republic."

Sorry, until you can actually debate that point, and many others, without resorting to using your wind powers to determine relevance based on your own bais in the topic, you are not making a case, nor convincing anyone that the zormite republic is 'inappropriate', and not liable to strike a cord with those in the nation.

Except that I am debating each relevant, cohesive point that is given, and noting where the others are not so.

---

I would also like to thank you all for acknowledging my status as the wind god.

[CheeToS2]

News flash: People of Zormite long ago debating this topic...you made your feelings known in the past (as you stated yourelf in your opening comments) and decided long ago the name as appropriate.

I've been a Zormite for years. I don't like the name "Zormite Republic." The last time I looked, it was run more like a dictatorship. Plain "Zormite" sounds better and makes more sense. I haven't rejoined after the leadership/name change because it has become a cesspool.

[falco10291029]

Originally Posted by Lance the HOT AIR god ;)

But it doesn't point out that I'm "flat out wrong." It points out that you can cite examples of other countries whose names may or may not be appropriate. That is wholly irrelevant to the current discussion.

I am sorry, but your im smart attidtude is basically opposite of the truth for this matter. As has been said many times, you just ignore what you cant fight off or say it doesnt matter, i, as well as most other people believe: THAT IS WRONG!!! You have yet to successfully backup your side of the argument, and i doubt you can, since you are ont eh losing side, with little evidence avaialable to back up your position. Nothing you say, even if it makes sense, proves your point in the least biot, it just shows your stubbornness! Any example of a similar situation is relevant, no matter what the "Wind God" proclaims! people say you are basically using a you suck argument, but i disagree, a you suck argument would be better backed up .

[Lance]

Originally Posted by falco10291029

I am sorry, but your im smart attidtude is basically opposite of the truth for this matter.

How is an attitude false...?

As has been said many times, you just ignore what you cant fight off or say it doesnt matter, i, as well as most other people believe: THAT IS WRONG!!!

Except that you're ignoring my points and responding with this incoherent blathering. Hypocrisy? I think so!

You have yet to successfully backup your side of the argument, and i doubt you can, since you are ont eh losing side, with little evidence avaialable to back up your position.

I have already, doofus. My argument is that the name is inaccurate. I provided supporting evidence and an explanation of why it is such. Other folks are introducing other irrelevant information and are misunderstanding my point. Some are confusing me with other people. I'm a patient guy, so it doesn't terribly bother me. Pointing out where people are making this mistake is growing annoying, though.

Nothing you say, even if it makes sense, proves your point in the least biot, it just shows your stubbornness!

This is a pretty awesome statement right here. Care to explain?

Any example of a similar situation is relevant, no matter what the "Wind God" proclaims!

Then can you please tell me just how is it relevant? That's all I'm asking. If you're so right, it should be relatively easy to explain. Otherwise, you're just slinging baseless statements.

people say you are basically using a you suck argument, but i disagree, a you suck argument would be better backed up .

You kinda need to work on that 'making sense' part.