tetradite Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Yes, I do promise. I don't even have an Imperial axe to grind here. Besides you change the basis of your position (from "current" to "future" Skyrim), more fronts mattering (it was your own point) then not mattering, state things as fact then revert them to speculation when challenged, ignore or write-off any evidence against your position as biased while refusing to acknowledge any bias in your own sources etc etc etc that it's impossible to hold an actual debate about this with you. It's like arguing with a Christian about the existence of God. No amount of evidence, cajoling, or argument will shift you even one iota (even when it's not even the core of your belief being challenged you just will not accept any possibility that you are wrong). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraeten Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Yes, I do promise. I don't even have an Imperial axe to grind here. Besides you change the basis of your position (from "current" to "future" Skyrim), more fronts mattering (it was your own point) then not mattering, state things as fact then revert them to speculation when challenged, ignore or write-off any evidence against your position as biased while refusing to acknowledge any bias in your own sources etc etc etc that it's impossible to hold an actual debate about this with you. It's like arguing with a Christian about the existence of God. No amount of evidence, cajoling, or argument will shift you even one iota (even when it's not even the core of your belief being challenged you just will not accept any possibility that you are wrong). That about it sums it up. I see now why he was on someone's ignore list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacSuibhne Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Why don't either one of you make up a small list of things that I've stated as fact in this thread and then later recanted or changed to speculation? If you can't do that it gives the lie. I had a fellow tell me that he was amazed I posted to forums where the average age was about 14. I think I know what he meant because I've been there and done that...and trying as hard as I can to hold myself to hard facts and irrefutable evidence when appropriate and the rational progression of one idea to the next when facts won't suffice, it still feels like arguing with teenagers. PS...if you can ignore the basic facts and indisputable evidence, I don't know why you need an ignore list. It doesn't speak well to self-control. Edited June 21, 2012 by MacSuibhne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tetradite Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Kraeten: I didn't know we could ignore people's posts. Took a bit of digging in the menus to find out how (since the search isn't working atm) but what a great little feature that is. Thanks for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RighthandofSithis Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) you believe that Skyrim on its own could do what the Empire, including Skyrim, couldn't do? assuming that Ulfric could actually unite Skyrim with so many Nords supporting the Empire.Skyrim on its own, even united under a high king, wouldn't have a chance against the Dominion.the Empire, including a united Skyrim and the Dragonborn, has a much better chance of defeating the Dominion. anyone who thinks the Empire has gone along with the ban on Talos should have a look around the Empire controlled cities of Whiterun and Markath. both openly allow Talos worship in defiance of the Dominion. It doesn't matter if the Stormcloaks could defeat the Dominion by themselves. The battle is between the Dominion and the Empire. (Actually, ultimately, the real battle is between the Thalmor and men). Both powers know this. If Skyrim were independent it could be...probably would be, given their history with the Thalmor...a strong ally to the Empire in any future confrontation with the AD. And an independent Skyrim means that the Thalmor would have two fronts instead of one. If the Stormcloaks are defeated and held unwillingly in the Empire, they are going to not only be reluctant to support the Empire, but depleted of resources and men. Unless of course it takes the Empire another thirty years to finally decide that being the Dominion's bumboy is unacceptable. If the Empire just let Skyrim go...allowed Skyrim to be independent..there would be no civil war. There would be no drain on Imperial resources needing to hold a rebellious and sullen population in check. The Empire would be free to do what it...somewhat disingenuously in my mind...claims it wants to do--build up its military and gather its strength. No more excuses, in other words. And Skyrim would be free to take on the Thalmor patrols and the killing of its sons and fathers. Even if an independent Skyrim couldn't kick the Thalmor entirely out of Skyrim, it would force the Dominion to divide its resources and thus weaken it. The situation would be reversed...with the AD on its heels and stretched thin rather than the nations of men. The Dominion knows this too...even if no one else does. As far as the Talos thing...anyone who has played the game for more than a little while has run across Thalmor patrols leading away hapless Skyrim citizens (ostensibly Imperial citizens) to be tortured and beheaded under a judicial system that is independent of Imperial or Skyrim laws. It begs the question: If the Empire cannot or will not protect its citizens from these kinds of depredations by a foreign power, how does it have any claim to legitimacy? As you had asked, I will give you my opinion on this argument. The Thalmor would not be able to assault Skyrim without making a path to it first. It would either have to fight through High Rock, Hammerfell or Cyrodiil. And even if they made it, it has an incredibly hostile environment, not only is it incredibly cold (and the counter argument that the Thalmor would use magic to heat themselves means they would deplete their magicka), it is mountainous (as I pointed out on another post, Hannibal tried this and lost a good number of men), and full of dangerous creatures (sabre cats, frostbite spiders, trolls, dragons etc). This would make it a nightmare to try an lead an army through (and yes, the Dragonguard did succeed, but if I remember, the Nords were completely disunited). Furthermore, if Skyrim secedes from the empire, the empire will collapse. Its already ruined economically and Cyrodiil is in a state of chaos. And that's while its making money from Skyrim and High Rock. If Skyrim leaves, it will not pay tax or tribute to the Empire, and High Rock will not be able to contact Cyrodiil (or have troubled contact), and will return to its traditional feudalism. Therefore, If SKyrim wins, Cyrodiil will not be a major power capable of combating the Thalmor. It will either become a complete client state of the Dominion (and I mean fully, no independence), or some of the cities may become client states of neighboring provinces (ie Bruma to Skyrim), or it will completely collapse and fight amonst itself, or it may look a bit like TES Online (maybe). However, I will not rule out the possibility of the Dragonborn making a claim to the Imperial Throne, and allying/uniting it with Skyrim. I believe that Skyrim and Hammerfell would be the major powers opposed to the Dominion. And indeed, they would unite, as both of these states are opposed to the Dominion (my enemies enemy is my friend). WW2 proves this. The Western Allies were at odds with the USSR, however, they eventually united against fascism (and then went into the cold war). EDIT: I've just thought of something that may be worth noting (possibly an Imperial argument, but also a possible Stormcloak argument). At the start of the game, the only Jarls that have committed themselves to Ulfric cause are those of the Old Holds (albeit, Falkreath had its Jarl deposed). The Old Holds are known to uphold traditional Nord values very strongly, and have have been isolated from the rest of Tamriel politically. Edited June 22, 2012 by RighthandofSithis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robanybody2000 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Why don't either one of you make up a small list of things that I've stated as fact in this thread and then later recanted or changed to speculation? If you can't do that it gives the lie. I had a fellow tell me that he was amazed I posted to forums where the average age was about 14. I think I know what he meant because I've been there and done that...and trying as hard as I can to hold myself to hard facts and irrefutable evidence when appropriate and the rational progression of one idea to the next when facts won't suffice, it still feels like arguing with teenagers. PS...if you can ignore the basic facts and indisputable evidence, I don't know why you need an ignore list. It doesn't speak well to self-control. Your opinion that the Empire will be forever under AD control is not indisputal evidence nor hard facts. As for the age, you could be 14 aswell. Constantly reminding us how old and wise you are and labeling us as teenagers (not in the good way) could easly offend anyone. Beeing born 70'ish years ago doesn't label you as smart or intelligent. At your age (if that is your true age), and with your posted experience in life you should disolve conflicts and let others regard your posts as facts or evidence, without insulting everyone if they don't see it your way. It's your second post (from the ones i've read) that you sucumb at insulting others based on their age. For all I care we can all be 14 if we could have a decent debate but it seems your self-control overwelms all other posts but yourown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacSuibhne Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) Why don't either one of you make up a small list of things that I've stated as fact in this thread and then later recanted or changed to speculation? If you can't do that it gives the lie. Your opinion that the Empire will be forever under AD control is not indisputal evidence nor hard facts. I never said it was. Quote the line or paragraph where I say that....?! As for the age, you could be 14 aswell. Constantly reminding us how old and wise you are and labeling us as teenagers (not in the good way) could easly offend anyone. Well, a cursory check of my profile would make it clear that I am not. Beyond that, I have not really mentioned age, that I can recall, in any other thread or post but this one. So "constantly" is inappropriate. I really don't care about age. I strongly suspect you care more about it than I do. I'm indifferent to anything except the content of the post I'm responding to. I don't consider myself particularly wise, or smart...I just don't have much tolerance for posts that mis-state facts (or put known facts on an ignore list), make demonstrably false statements (as your post does), are disjointed and irrational in terms of the progression of ideas, and emotional almost to the point of hysteria. Why should anyone be tolerant of that? There does seem to be a point in a person's life, however, when this emotional rollercoaster ride rolls to a stop...or maybe, it just loses its appeal. As far as that goes, insult is in the eyes of the beholder. I suspect people take insult because they can't deal with what is being presented. What is amazing to me...and certainly no indication of my intelligence...is that what sets people off is almost always information that is from the Lore, eye witness accounts (by a player), etc., which is available to anyone who really cares to check. Or...as in this case...when someone challenges them to provide proof in the form of verifiable facts or eye witness accounts, and they cannot. I hesitate to raise the specter but the issue of Stormcloak or Ulfric's racism is a prime example (and a good way to bring this back on topic). No evidence exists to support the notion but people get so entrenched with their emotions and emotional reactions to the idea...and feeling good about themselves...that they become incensed when challenged to prove it. Good discussion always involves disagreement and a certain give and take. But always...always...with an eye to the evidence and basic, verifiable facts. For the simple reason that communication and exploring ideas is the goal (not simply spewing), and neither of those goals can be achieved when emotions and opinion and even fantasy are conflated with reason. I believe in the presumption of innocence and I believe in the right of the accused to confront the accuser...that said, I'm done on this subject but reserve the right to address the main topic as I deem fit. Edited June 22, 2012 by MacSuibhne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robanybody2000 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 If you would follow your "rules" of posting we wouldn't have this discussion now. And if you check my profile now you'll see that i am 97. (yes it is that easy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacSuibhne Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 If you would follow your "rules" of posting we wouldn't have this discussion now. And if you check my profile now you'll see that i am 97. (yes it is that easy). I am sure it is...for some people. As for my "rules"... no rules at all, just observations. What authority do I have to make rules?(hint--the correct answer is "none".) I don't care what those other guys said, I don't think you want to make this personal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robanybody2000 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Just making a point. Ofcourse nothing personal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts