Aside from Griffin, Yankee, and Windjammer...

[Adam Griffin]

...so presumably my name is being dropped in the pursuit of political capital, or...?

[Adam Griffin]

...so presumably my name is being dropped in the pursuit of political capital, or...?

Why would mentioning your name gain anyone political capital?  This attack doesn't even make sense on it's own terms (although I do like how even you aren't disputing the substance of the OP).

You're implying I'm against fixing the game. Putting me and certain others on one side of the equation is a rallying cry for some; a way to accrue political capital for a cause. I haven't weighed in because it's an absolute custerfluck and people have knee-jerked historically against what I say and do on matters like these. Also, including that bolded part admits what you were trying to do here (otherwise, it wouldn't be a concern of yours worth noting) - you're so bad at this!

[Adam Griffin]

...so presumably my name is being dropped in the pursuit of political capital, or...?

Why would mentioning your name gain anyone political capital?  This attack doesn't even make sense on it's own terms (although I do like how even you aren't disputing the substance of the OP).

You're implying I'm against fixing the game. Putting me and certain others on one side of the equation is a rallying cry for some; a way to accrue political capital for a cause. I haven't weighed in because it's an absolute custerfluck and people have knee-jerked historically against what I say and do on matters like these. Also, including that bolded part admits what you were trying to do here (otherwise, it wouldn't be a concern of yours worth noting) - you're so bad at this!

You are against fixing the game though.  Once again, regarding the bolded part, your attack/smear doesn't even make sense.  So in your mind, pointing out that you didn't even bother to dispute the point I made means...err...what exactly?

No, I'm not. I've been trying to fix it for years now, when many said it wasn't necessary and many others wanted to haggle over the most asinine of details. As far as I'm concerned, this recent dialogue is vindication! And again: you wouldn't have bothered to point out what I bolded (even if it's wrong, you thought you were making some clever point) if that's not what you were trying to paint by making this thread in the first place. You wanted to say "haha look, Griffin doesn't agree!". Fail. And it makes absolute sense.

Oh, and heads-up: the cool kids aren't going to like you any more for doing this.

[Adam Griffin]

...so presumably my name is being dropped in the pursuit of political capital, or...?

Why would mentioning your name gain anyone political capital?  This attack doesn't even make sense on it's own terms (although I do like how even you aren't disputing the substance of the OP).

You're implying I'm against fixing the game. Putting me and certain others on one side of the equation is a rallying cry for some; a way to accrue political capital for a cause. I haven't weighed in because it's an absolute custerfluck and people have knee-jerked historically against what I say and do on matters like these. Also, including that bolded part admits what you were trying to do here (otherwise, it wouldn't be a concern of yours worth noting) - you're so bad at this!

You are against fixing the game though.  Once again, regarding the bolded part, your attack/smear doesn't even make sense.  So in your mind, pointing out that you didn't even bother to dispute the point I made means...err...what exactly?

No, I'm not. I've been trying to fix it for years now, when many said it wasn't necessary and many others wanted to haggle over the most asinine of details. As far as I'm concerned, this recent dialogue is vindication! And again: you wouldn't have bothered to point out what I bolded (even if it's wrong, you thought you were making some clever point) if that's not what you were trying to paint by making this thread in the first place. It makes absolute sense.

Oh, and heads-up: the cool kids aren't going to like you any more for doing this.

You're against doing what is necessary to fix it (dissolving the current game and starting some sort of new election sim).  Regarding the bolded part, you're clearly not going to enlighten the rest of the world as to whatever point you thought you were making, but whatever.

Oh really? Or maybe I was just keeping my mouth shut because whenever I've advocated for reform, a whole cadre of people knee-jerk against it. Looks like I can't even RIP anymore without some cretin being proactive in name-dropping, though.

At any rate, my Atlasian pay grade is too high to be debating anything of substance with those who have no influence whatsoever over affecting it, so bye-bye!

[Adam Griffin]

This place could sustain the number of offices it currently holds if it actually offered something interesting. Right now it's a glorified circle jerk that only welcomes the same tired wankers. The game is not accessible to new players because it has drifted so far from reality that it's not even worth playing. Add onto that the fact that we've already tackled the big issues, and it's no surprise people have lost interest.

We do not need to lower the bar. We need to cast it aside and use a completely new bar. Atlasia? What's that? We need a new country, a new system of government, a new process for electing officeholders, and a blank slate. Period. Consolidation will not solve anything. Because in two years we wouldn't have enough players for three-region Atlasia, either.

Drastic change.

Griffin won. And look where we are because of it.

!?!

You're so full of sh**t. First of all, way to blame it on me: everybody remembers you doing all of the same things I once did but failing miserably at them. I suppose that failure gives you a clean conscience and the ability to forget about how you were every much a machine politician and powerplayer at one point as I once was too. Your hands aren't clean: you were literally the number one element of obstruction to changing this game at several points over the past two years because "muh regions" and "muh federalism".

Not even two months ago - in the midst of this trend that has been present for months, no less - you were still harping about how nothing was wrong with the game, the regions were fine, status quo blah blah blah. You can pretend that your qualm was against the changes to the game that I wanted to bring for over two years now, but the truth of the matter is that you've never put forward any substantive idea to reform or alter the game yourself because you never believed in changing the game. Do I really have to go dig up dozens of quotes from you over time to show that this has been your consistent position for years?

As the Chairman of what was throughout many points of 2013-2014 the largest political party in the game, you had the ability to champion reform - you chose not to, and that says all that needs to be said. Your track record of opposition wasn't one of "this doesn't go far enough to fix the game"; it's always been one of "nothing is wrong, keep everything the way it is, and stop trying to fix what isn't broken". Now all of a sudden, you're speaking as if you've been a messenger for change this whole time. Hilarious. Way to blame it all on me, too - the one person who has actually consistently pushed for new and tangible reforms to both the regions and the game that don't involve scraping the bustbin of history for solutions. None of them were ever accomplished because of you. If you do end up de-registering and decide to come back at some point, maybe try not being so bitter and resistant to everything new.