Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 813 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
TheHeat9 (0 DX)
12 Nov 11 UTC
LIVE GAME
Game called Lamp Post Startes in 10 min Pot is 6
0 replies
Open
Slyguy270 (527 D)
11 Nov 11 UTC
LIVE GAME!!!
GMS-4 starting in 10 min.! join now!!!
2 replies
Open
redhouse1938 (429 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Introducing a friend to diplomacy
Hey everyone,

A girl at work wants to learn to play diplomacy. Let's teach her :)
211 replies
Open
Tolstoy (1962 D)
06 Nov 11 UTC
Yet another attempt at a high-stakes World Game with experienced players
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=71672
24 replies
Open
rokakoma (19138 D)
11 Nov 11 UTC
Candy Paint N Texas Plates
6 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
10 reasons history will judge America as one of the most brutal empires in history
Thoughts? Additions?
76 replies
Open
Babak (26982 D(B))
11 Nov 11 UTC
I've decided to play a game...
join if you like. 750 buy-in. anon. WTA. classic. 48 hour phases.

gameID=71751
4 replies
Open
vamosrammstein (757 D(B))
09 Nov 11 UTC
Joe Paterno
Thoughts on his announcement of his retirement at the end of this season?
68 replies
Open
taos (281 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
midle east gameers only
10 replies
Open
jdog97 (100 D)
11 Nov 11 UTC
Fun Game
21 more minutes before the start fo world war 5 there are still 5 spots join soon.
gameID=71995
1 reply
Open
jdog97 (100 D)
11 Nov 11 UTC
join this game
Join this game now

gameID=71994
14 replies
Open
jdog97 (100 D)
11 Nov 11 UTC
join this game
Join this game now
gameID=71994
0 replies
Open
JohnnyB (0 DX)
10 Nov 11 UTC
come on then...
if u think u got what it takes..

gameID=71912
3 replies
Open
jdog97 (100 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
New game
Join world war three. Cheep classic game starts at 8 still need 6 people.
gameID=71995
0 replies
Open
General Maximus (1715 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
New Game:
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=71802

25 to join. 36 hr rounds. Just need one more player.
0 replies
Open
jdog97 (100 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
games
Join World war three in the next 10 minutes
2 replies
Open
stratagos (3269 D(S))
10 Nov 11 UTC
Multi Accounting Cheating Bastard!
Read within
11 replies
Open
Spartan22 (344 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
How to contact a mod
I am wondering how you contact a mod for an issue within a game. Our game was paused by the Webdiplomacy system and we have 2 NMRs that won't be able to vote unpause. I assume a mod would be able to fix the issue, however I don not know how to contact one. Any help would be appreciated
3 replies
Open
taos (281 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
moral dilema
if i am playing anonimous game and i discovered who is one of the players and know him well(very close friend)
how should i act?
cancel the game?
is not fair for the rest of the players
8 replies
Open
kestasjk (95 DMod(P))
10 Nov 11 UTC
Disk space issues
Details on the disk space issues, which caused a freeze on game processing, within.
10 replies
Open
orathaic (1009 D(B))
07 Nov 11 UTC
Companies oppose legislation...
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/11/04/Google_Microsoft_Starbucks_Say_DOMA_Hurts_Their_Businesses/

isn't it normal for companies to buy politicians and pay lobbiest to do this sort of thing?
Page 5 of 6
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
@Mafia - I can see where you might view the Civil Union thing as a set back and I agree it could backfire, so maybe contiuing to fight for a more borad definition of marriage and telling the moral minority to go F- themselves is the way to go.

Yes, what I meant about our lifetimes was the elimination of anti-LGBTQ sentiment and full acceptance. I believe it will eventually happen and *could* be in 40 or 50 years when I'm in my late 80s or 90s, but people like my 84 year old Mom-in-law and even my mid-60 year old parents have to be gone and their influence wiped out first. So while general acceptance may happen in the next half century, complete acceptance and getting it out of the backwoods and the Bible belt will be a lot longer. Hell, the black community has been fighting this a hell of a lot longer than the LGBTQ community and they still have a ways to go before "the Black Community" instills positive feelings for everyone, not just the blacks. It instills unnecessary and unwarranted fear in some who are just emotional and irrational right now the same as "the LGBTQ Community" makes those on the extreme right think "Oh my God! They'll molest my baby and turn him gay!" Even though equating having feelings and desires for others of the same sex or desiring to be/appear of a different sex does *not* equate to being a child molester, they still think it does because they have been brainwashed by the evangelical preachers who won't let them think for themselves that your choice is worng and sinful and all that bullshit.

@Jacob - Spotuing the Bible (and especially the creation *story*) as fact doesn't make it fact. You probably either believe the dinosaur fossils are the tools of the devil or that dinosaurs and man coexisted and that the earth is only 6-8000 years old. Sorry bud, but Abraham and Moses mad eup or were given (if you want to believe God told them these things, fine) that were something simple man who had no ideas of evolution or a round earth or that there was anything outside a few hundred square miles in the middle east could understand. It is a story to inspire early civilization outside of Greece into becoming a more civilized gorup of people by instilling a common fear in them - the fear of a jealous and vengeful God. "Vengence is mine," sayeth the Lord, "I will repay." and he supposedly floods the entire world (not!). So you r truth is a deception and you are the deceived.

Jesus brought a great message and He may well have been the Son of God, but the God of the OT isn't that God. The God of the OT is an evil creature in and of himself, not a God of Love.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
@Santa - Please don't view my postings about the OT as anti-semitic. I have the utmost respect and admiration for the Jewish people. they have a strong sense of community and some of the greatest traditions. I may disagree on the nature of God as he is presented in the OT, but I think much of Judaism is far superior to Christianity and it's "moral superiority" it projects even (especially?) today.
I don't think they are anti Semitic, I think they are ridiculous, and constituting a completely new religion, but not anti Semitic. Basically by suggesting that Judaism worships a false god while Christianity follows the true one, what you did is exactly what I do (in reverse) that sends you into a tizzy every time. Except, of course it is against everything that Jesus and the apostles and every Church father has preached for 2000 years, but oh well. I guess when you make up a religion you might as well go all out.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Actually, I don't think Christianity follows a true one either. I said "Jesus may have been" not "Jesus was" and one of my vengeful quotes i from the New Testament (the first one). I have been studying a lot lately when time permits and come to the realization I'm a true Deist. My Christian leanings ar eonly in the positive message of Jesus, not in a devout following of him as Son of God or of the idea that he was ressurected or anything. I'm what would be called a heretic even by my own church, so I don't exactly let these feelings be known by people who know me IRL. So yeah, you could say I made it up the same as any other religion is made up (including, sorry, Judaism). any God written about in a book is a made up God. Made up by man to explain his past and his current lot in life. Man creates and recreates God in his own image on the time. God is a bit busy to worry about us individually (hence I'm a deist, not a theist) but we will eventually have to answer for our actions and thoughts. But I believe we answer for them now in many ways: our own conscience, how others perceive us (outside of family and friends as they will overlook a multitude of flaws), and how history remembers us, if at all.
How can any god be "busy," If got is omnipotent, and omnipresent, he is not limited whatsoever, so therefore it is impossible for god to be "busy." And if god "in the books" is made up what the hell are you studying? What exactly do you believe in? If Jesus is just a man, which is what you seem to be implying, why the heck are you listening to that homophobe when there are so many other voices. Finally, how absolutely arrogant do you have to be to believe that you have unlocked the secrets of the universe and can declare what parts of the bible mean something, and which don't?
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
That depends on your definition of God obviously. And by busy, it's more of a "he doesn't give a shit about the little crap we go through. Not so much busy as uninvolved and not caring. As far as Jesus and the message, it is both tainted by interpretation and tainted by the times he was in. Homophobia ran rampant at the time and even the OT God you worship was homophobic. Is there not a law that makes it a sin to look upon a naked person? Beign naked isn't the sin, but looking at them is.

As far as what I have been studying... I can study a book and see it is full of lies with my own intellect without having to find other sources to confirm it is lies and I don't have to believe any of the books I've read (which include LeVay's Satanic Verses) to be true in part or in whole.

For all I give a hit, God could be many Gods. His Noodliness may actually exist. I don't know and I don't care. The key is to treat others with respect and compassion just as I wish to be treated. That is the core message (and, as it happens, the Golden Rule) of Jesus' teachings. Beyond that, his words are a reflection of his times and, in the end, he developed a God complex. I know, sacrilidge, heretic, etc., etc. I honestly don't give a fuck as it's what we do here and now that matters, not what some writings from various authors over thousands of years have to say about subjects when they were influenced by the powers that be of the time.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
And I never claimed to have unlocked anything. I just don't believe what others claim to have unlocked is such. Saying I don't believe X does not mean I believe Y. That is a logical fallacy.
Putin33 (111 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
The NT is replete with Anti-Semitism. The Book of John is one of the most anti-Semitic tracts ever written. No amount of "but I love teh Jewz" or Christian Zionism gets around that fact.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Whatever, Putin.
Jacob (2466 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Draug, I entered this thread because it was stated that the Christian churh opposes homosexual marriage due to the power and money it brings the church.

As a member of that community, and even a leader in some ways, I felt quite comfortable stating that that is not why the Christian church opposes homosexual marriage. I was correcting an assertion made by another user and using the bible (which is the collection of documents the Christian church accepts as authoritative for matters of faith and doctrine) to explain the Christian position.

I never attacked anyone.

In return, you are now blasting my religion and faith. I believe that is well off the topic of this thread so I won't respond here, but show a little respect man.
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
" it was stated that the Christian churh opposes homosexual marriage due to the power and money it brings the church."

This is incorrect - you are misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I said, Jacob.

I didn't said it opposed homosexual marriage for that reason - the emphasis was on the church protecting its hegemony over marriage as an institution - and that part (read it, PART) of the implicit (read it, IMPLICIT) reasoning was the power, influence, money, and relevance having control of this institution provides the Church. This is nothing to do with opposing homosexuals - it is about protecting its own power.

If you can't see the Church as a structure interested, even slightly, in maintaining power and authority, then you are looking at it through rose-tinted glasses.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
I didn't "blast" you faith. I merely clarified my own to Santa. You may not agree with my views and I clearly don't hold yours hard and fast (my minister doesn't even hold yours hard and fast as Genesis is a "mythology" from the OT and I pulled that from one of his sermoins, therefore God didn't make man as husband and wife, but the mythology of the Eden tale is a morality story).

But anyhow, more power to you for believing. But you have to admit you are, personally, close minded about LGBTQ persons and, if I'm not mistaken, you are probably of the belief it is a sin and they can choose not to be that way. I won't be able to change your mind nor will Santa or any of the members of that community on here. You are set on that belief and provide the perfect example why I say we won't be able to change everyone into accepting the LGBTQ community into the community at large in my lifetime. There will be poeple like you who think they are sinners and don't see that they are what they are and we should accept and embrace the differences that make us unique instead of forcing a "moral" code on them to make them conform.
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Draugnar's point illustrates further the point I made before that Jacob also misunderstood.

"Unfortunately some people are so wrapped up in the Christian world view that it is impossible for them to realise such details. It's annoying that such people even enter debates - the whole point of a debate is to exchange views, discuss and deliberate. Militant Christians come from a position where they are unwilling and unable to do this so debating becomes pointless, they just want to harangue you with their views, or rather 'the facts', until you are silenced."

@Jacob: I did not say the militant Christians should not enter the debate - merely that when they do, it no longer becomes an intellectual debate. Someone who has wholly dogmatic views that cannot bend or accept reasons/alternative thinking clearly cannot participate in the true definition and purpose of a debate. If you are set on your beliefs and enter an argument believing that you already possess 'the facts', 'the truth', then you are not really debating and engaging with the other side: and you are simply offering soapbox diatribe.
Draugnar (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
YEah, Sarg, I think we have Jacob pegged and he is probably pissed that he has no response except to quote more scripture as authority even though it is only an authority to itself and it's believers. you may as well try convincing a bunch of 13 year old Belieber's that Justing Bieber is a hack singer with no songwriting ckills because someone else does it for him. They all think he does everything... And the diehard Fundamentalist Christian believes God does everything and every word of the Bible is truth and fact.
Jacob (2466 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Lol. You guys are funny.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
08 Nov 11 UTC
how about we use the term wedlock instead of marriage, i mean the word used has changed before and will no doubt again... i think this ignores the problem

"Once legal marriage is abolished, how do you get it unabolished, and provide access to it for LGBTQ people?" - you build a new institution with it's own meaning, which is what you're trying to do anyway...
orathaic (1009 D(B))
08 Nov 11 UTC
as for the whole 'Jesus is the son of God' thing; i believe that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the son of God, in the same sense that we are all created by God and thus his children (and God used super nova to create the molecules we are made from, and thus also the children of star dust... actually this recent article was fairly interesting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15458636 )

When picking and choosing which voices to listen you are basically making your own morality based on the best you can find in others, thus not starting from scratch but also not limiting yourself to one source. I can admire that in any person.
Jacob (2466 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
To read your own Post sarg. When you brought up the issue of power and money you didn't say it was a PART and you didn't say anything about t beig IMPLICIT. are you just making up stuff now?

"annoying that such people even enter debates - the whole point of a debate is to exchange views, discuss and deliberate. Militant Christians come from a position where they are unwilling and unable to do this so debating becomes pointless, they just want to harangue you with their views, or rather 'the facts', until you are silenced."

so let me get this straight. If I have a "fact" then I can't join a debate? If I have an already established view then I can't join a debate? What, only people who have no clue what they think and believe that everyone's opinions are equally valid can debate?

According to yOur own definition The whole point of debate is to exchange views, discuss and deliberate, yet you have no problem belittling and dismissing my point of view.

You guys are being hypocritical.
Mafialligator (239 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
"you build a new institution with it's own meaning, which is what you're trying to do anyway..." But you miss the point. Any new institution would lack all the history and meaning that is attached to the old one. That's what we want access to. The same institution that everyone else has had access to for centuries, and as such has built up meaning, and positive connotations, and legitimacy. A brand new institution lacks all that, and is, therefore a setback, rather than a step forward. And with full marriage equality available in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa and Sweden, as well as Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont, suddenly taking it away from the Americans who already enjoy marriage equality and asking American LGBTQ people to suddenly accept some other status is a pretty bitter pill to swallow. If this solution was ever going to be implemented, the time has passed.
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Jacob: "so let me get this straight. If I have a "fact" then I can't join a debate?"

That's precisely the point though. What you were relying your argument on is simply not a fact. God is not a fact. It is a belief.
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Jacob: "I have a fact [...] yet you have no problem belittling and dismissing my point of view. You guys are being hypocritical."

Jacob, either you have a point of view/an opinion - or you have a fact. If you were arguing an opinion that's fine but you waded into the friendly debate and laid down rules of God and Church as if they were fact - there was no opinion in what you said (apart from your opinion to take belief as fact).
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
An opinion cannot be a fact.
Sargmacher (0 DX)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Jacob: "As a member of that [Church] community, and even a leader in some ways"

You say you see yourself as "a leader" in the church community but yet you can't even distinguish the difference between an opinion and a fact. To me, that says a lot about your church.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
08 Nov 11 UTC
" But you miss the point. Any new institution would lack all the history and meaning that is attached to the old one. That's what we want access to."

no, you're missing the point, the old one has gone through many changes, both in terms of what it stood for and who was allowed it and it's name... once more a new change is happening, and it doesn't really matter what you call it, or how you go about it, we both agree that this change is a good thing (for rights and equality)

I can't claim that this is a 'brand new' institution, because i'm talking about using the currents legal weight of marriage and renaming it. That's not in any way meaningfully 'brand new'.

The question of what happens in other countries is only important when you consider that there is an international agreement to recognise marriages between nations, so if you have a marraige in Canada, and you move to Australia you will still be considered legally married. That different countries signed different language version of this legal framework into their laws using different words doesn't make the meaning of this 'marriage' in each country any different... just a it doesn't matter much what you call your rights so long as you as entitled to them.
Mafialligator (239 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Also I'm not completely intransigent. I might buy the "build a new institution rather than fight for gay marriage" argument if gay marriage was a pipe dream that was completely out of the question, and would never happen in a million years. But uhhh...it's not. It's already legal in 10 different countries (including the one in which I actually live) and 6 states. Why is the LGBTQ movement suddenly supposed to start aiming lower, when the actual goal is within reach?
orathaic (1009 D(B))
08 Nov 11 UTC
honestly, this hanging onto the 'word' is almost as stubborn as the Churches who demand their holy sacrament not be defiled.

That said, if the government is willing to grant marriage licences to gay couples, then i've no problem with that either.

It's not a holy ceremony and the 'church' can't have a problem with that if it can see the distinction between their 'holy ritual' and the legal agreements which have for many years been largely unrelated.
orathaic (1009 D(B))
08 Nov 11 UTC
damn you mafia, denying being intransigent just as i call you stubborn!!
Mafialligator (239 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
"no, you're missing the point, the old one has gone through many changes, both in terms of what it stood for and who was allowed it and it's name... once more a new change is happening, and it doesn't really matter what you call it, or how you go about it, we both agree that this change is a good thing (for rights and equality)" - OK, but when it went through all these other structural changes it was still called "marriage" why is it that allowing same sex couples access suddenly necessitates a change in name to go along with the change in access. When interracial couples were first allowed to be married, the name didn't change? When it was limited for the first time to one wife per husband, the name didn't change? Why are same-sex couples so completely alien that we need to change the name to allow for them? I just don't see the logic.
Putin33 (111 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
Mafia, sorry to say but Ora & co have been asked that question about 10 times in about 10 different ways in this thread and still can't provide an answer.

" this hanging onto the 'word' is almost as stubborn as the Churches who demand their holy sacrament not be defiled."

Only because you refuse to appreciate what this word represents in terms of integrating an excluded group of people in order to make your argument.
Mafialligator (239 D)
08 Nov 11 UTC
In your defense orathaic, I didn't say I wasn't intransigent. I just said I wasn't <completely> intransigent. There's a difference. I think some intransigence is important in a debate over minority rights. If the civil rights movement had been conciliatory, I somehow doubt they'd have seen what success they did. If the first wave feminist movement hadn't actually stuck to their guns, would women be voting?

I think ultimately the religious people need to realize, the gay marriage debate has nothing to do with their holy sacrament. All we're talking about here are marriage licenses that can contain a man's name and a woman's name, two women's names, two men's names or one or two names belonging to people with not entirely distinct gender identities.

Page 5 of 6
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

170 replies
Mujus (1495 D(B))
10 Nov 11 UTC
Game 69351 Problem with Pause
Game 69351 says it's paused, but it's not, or at least, it accepted my orders. The players didn't pause it, so I don't know what's up.
1 reply
Open
abgemacht (1076 D(G))
09 Nov 11 UTC
RPN
So, this thread may be a flop, but I'll try anyway.

Are there any RPN users out there? If so, which calculator do you have?
32 replies
Open
Tolstoy (1962 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
Help!
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=69351
Orders were processed and the turn progressed, but the map won't draw.
16 replies
Open
idealist (680 D)
10 Nov 11 UTC
anyone up for gunboat live tonight?
if so, post and we'll make a game
0 replies
Open
Owerbart (484 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
Cheating?
Ok, first of all, I'm not mad about the game, but look at England and France:
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=71918
Is really THAT much of coordination possible in a gunboat? I think they are communicating with each other or it's the same person.
7 replies
Open
goldfinger0303 (3157 DMod)
09 Nov 11 UTC
The Masters: I need emails!
Hey, so to get this running as easy as possible for me, I'll need all of your emails so I can contact you directly, rather than PM'ing all 49 of you several times each
3 replies
Open
Ges (292 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
A consequential voting day?
Tuesday was weirdly quiet in California. Usually we have a host of ballot initiatives, the evil intentions of which are only partially masked by their purposefully poor writing. Any other 'Murcans, except for Buckeyes, have a lot at stake on Tuesday?
5 replies
Open
Jacob (2466 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
Momentum and Efficiency
Do you have trouble growing quickly? Do you hang on for one or two thirds of the game but never really get anywhere? Do you find yourself participating in a lot of draws as a minor power or simply being eliminated much of the time? Help is within..
8 replies
Open
Slyguy270 (527 D)
09 Nov 11 UTC
LIVE GAME!!!
live game starting in 4 min. 3 players needed game name gms 3 password brandon
0 replies
Open
Page 813 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top