Marokai/Purple State Platform Extravaganza!

[Purple State]

Instead of calling out Marokai's character, which seems to be all you do these days, why not actually engage in a policy discussion that we are trying to start and you seem loathe to join?

I just reviewed every post of Tmth's from the last two weeks and found that not one of them even referenced Marokai by name, much less did anything that could be construed as "calling out his character."  It seems to me that either your perceptive powers are extremely limited, or you're projecting.

That took you all of ten minutes, did it? Fast reader we have here.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

Instead of calling out Marokai's character, which seems to be all you do these days, why not actually engage in a policy discussion that we are trying to start and you seem loathe to join?

I just reviewed every post of Tmth's from the last two weeks and found that not one of them even referenced Marokai by name, much less did anything that could be construed as "calling out his character."  It seems to me that either your perceptive powers are extremely limited, or you're projecting.

That took you all of ten minutes, did it? Fast reader we have here.

Yes, it's only about 4 or 5 pages of one-liners with the occasional paragraph.  I suppose it's probably the powers of perception then, if that's too daunting a task for you.

[Jayhawker]

Instead of calling out Marokai's character, which seems to be all you do these days, why not actually engage in a policy discussion that we are trying to start and you seem loathe to join?

I just reviewed every post of Tmth's from the last two weeks and found that not one of them even referenced Marokai by name, much less did anything that could be construed as "calling out his character."  It seems to me that either your perceptive powers are extremely limited, or you're projecting.

That took you all of ten minutes, did it? Fast reader we have here.

Seriously, Purple State, if you’re going to try and attack my character by accusing me of attacking others, why don’t you back it up? Throughout this entire campaign, I have remained very civil and truthful with all candidates, and I think all of them have done a pretty good job as well. But you’ve crossed the line when it comes to attacking ones character. If you’re going to try and talk the talk, at least walk the walk. Aggression in this campaign has mainly come from your computer.

I stated at the beginning of this “discussion” that I disagree with your campaign’s position on term limits. I don’t think encouraging placeholders to get into the Senate is necessarily a good idea. If the people want their Senator out, they have a chance every 4 months to vote them out. I'm genuinely curious to your argument on this issue.

[Dallasfan65]

Apparently I've been out of the loop, since I haven't gotten any memos about character assassination. We have run a clean campaign and focused on issues that matter in this campaign.

I think claims that Tmth has been impugning others' character are a little off base.

[Purple State]

I will address this only once, though I'm still amazed that you are avoiding a policy debate for this petty stupidity.

So Tmth, you respond to my request for a policy debate with this:

What's extremely important here is which candidate has the leadership skills to bring all sides together working to make this nation better. Someone with a bi-partisan, independent record who has a history of getting along well with all sides.

Now, I asked for a discussion of policy. Snowguy had no problem with this. You, on the other hand, felt it necessary to avoid any discussion of policy and instead note who can get "along well with all sides." If you, wormyguy and Dallasfan can't read deeper into that than the words on the page... I'm just saying you three are either being disingenuous or thick.

So we've cleared that up. Now do you plan on having an intelligent debate about policy, as Snowguy has initiated on behalf of his ticket, or will you insist on focusing exclusively on irrelevant absurdities for the rest of this campaign?

[Jayhawker]

I am doing my best to run a clean campaign, and I think almost everyone can agree that I have run one. Therefore, I don’t appreciate you trying to attack my character by accusing me of attacking others. If you’re going to throw accusations like that out there in the open, all I ask is that you at least back it up with some proof, which you keep avoiding to do.


Obviously you didn’t even both to read my last post, as I did try to engage in policy discussion. This is the second time I have brought term limits into my discussion, yet instead of addressing that, you continue to show the same aggressive, spiteful behavior.

After my joking response, in which you appeared to take way too seriously, I spoke on my disagreement on term limits. Yet instead of addressing that, which someone who was really serious about “policy debate” would do, you continue to attack other elements of my post. I don’t know if you just don’t want to discuss term limits or are caught up in other drama too much, but I find it annoying that I’m brining in policy on multiple occasions and the person who is attacking me on not addressing policy fails to address it.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

May I ask what the hell is going on?

[afleitch]

We are becoming a 'Marokracy'

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

I'm not, naturally Tmthforu's presidential bid supporter, but I'm pretty sure during this campaign he never use any kind of a negative campaign. So what the hell is going on?

[Purple State]

I am doing my best to run a clean campaign, and I think almost everyone can agree that I have run one. Therefore, I don’t appreciate you trying to attack my character by accusing me of attacking others. If you’re going to throw accusations like that out there in the open, all I ask is that you at least back it up with some proof, which you keep avoiding to do.


Obviously you didn’t even both to read my last post, as I did try to engage in policy discussion. This is the second time I have brought term limits into my discussion, yet instead of addressing that, you continue to show the same aggressive, spiteful behavior.

After my joking response, in which you appeared to take way too seriously, I spoke on my disagreement on term limits. Yet instead of addressing that, which someone who was really serious about “policy debate” would do, you continue to attack other elements of my post. I don’t know if you just don’t want to discuss term limits or are caught up in other drama too much, but I find it annoying that I’m brining in policy on multiple occasions and the person who is attacking me on not addressing policy fails to address it.

I mentioned in a previous post that the term-limits debate really was already exhausted by Duke. We could rehash it, but I'm not sure there is much point to that.

So why not address my previous question about the deficit?

[President Marokai]

I'm not, naturally Tmthforu's presidential bid supporter, but I'm pretty sure during this campaign he never use any kind of a negative campaign. So what the hell is going on?

More simply that he's avoided getting knee deep in policy debates. I wouldn't personally say "negative campaigning" from Tmth, but I do think he focuses a bit too much on the personality aspect of the campaign and too little on the other.

[Purple State]

It gets a bit odd when I ask, in post after post, to have a policy debate, but every response avoids one and instead continues addressing an issue I don't really care about. And when Tmth asks me to provide proof or retract my comments, and I do provide proof, he locks the thread.

Seriously, stop goading me into the pettiness and just answer the one question I've asked over and over: If you are really committed to cutting the budget deficit, what specific programs do you plan to cut? Show me the money.

[Jayhawker]

It gets a bit odd when I ask, in post after post, to have a policy debate, but every response avoids one and instead continues addressing an issue I don't really care about. And when Tmth asks me to provide proof or retract my comments, and I do provide proof, he locks the thread.

Seriously, stop goading me into the pettiness and just answer the one question I've asked over and over: If you are really committed to cutting the budget deficit, what specific programs do you plan to cut? Show me the money.

I have a problem with my laptop mouse that when I press too hard on the pad, it "clicks", so many times, I accidently click something that I wasn't intending on. I imagine that's what happened last night, as I didn't even know I locked it until I read this.

If all of this was pettiness to you and you don't care about it, you wouldn't have brought it up. Plain and simple.

Regarding your question, I'll work on an answer either tonight or tomorrow, whichever is my earliest convinence. If not then, I will happily work it into the debate, where the three Presidential candidates, Marokai, Oakvale, and I, can discuss it. I've already made a brief outline of areas I would look to cut, but I'd be more than happy to go into more detail at a later time.

[Rowan]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

Some people are seeing NWO everywhere.

Some people are seeing bad Jews everywhere.

Some people are seeing alien abductors everywhere.

Rowan Brandon is seeing Hamilton socks everywhere.

[President Mitt]

In Rowan's defense though, he's right most of the time.

[Diabolical Minds Think Alike]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

Approve

[Purple State]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

Speaking for myself and not the ticket, I generally have no opinion on any of you as individuals, given this is a game over the internet where we all assume characters and try to have fun. As long as Jake isn't actively trying to ruin the fun, I couldn't care less.

[Diabolical Minds Think Alike]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

Speaking for myself and not the ticket, I generally have no opinion on any of you as individuals, given this is a game over the internet where we all assume characters and try to have fun. As long as Jake isn't actively trying to ruin the fun, I couldn't care less.

It seems as though Pound The Rock is out to prove that I am a non-human life form or merely a troll, which I am neither.

[Purple State]

I need to know what the respective campaigns opinions are of Jake Matthews.

Speaking for myself and not the ticket, I generally have no opinion on any of you as individuals, given this is a game over the internet where we all assume characters and try to have fun. As long as Jake isn't actively trying to ruin the fun, I couldn't care less.

It seems as though Pound The Rock is out to prove that I am a non-human life form or merely a troll, which I am neither.

I mean, Joe is usually a non-human life form and I don't think anything less of him for it. I just want people to enjoy the game. If everyone plays nice then that is good enough for me.

[Purple State]

I'm in the mood for another VP debate or an interview by any/all Atlasian papers. The paucity of substantive discussions so far is boring.