Please fix FedCom's entry
Moderator: Staff
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Ah, I see.Andreas the Wise wrote:(FAOF is the date the first forum was started.) (First Appearance of Forum, probably)
Sorry, but I don't remember when our Iphorum board was first started, and it doesn't exist anymore.
Sometime in 2005, I think, because we moved to InvisionFree on 14 November 2006.
That was a couple of weeks before a hacker cracked my account at our old forum and deleted everything (he thought he was so clever, but didn't realize we had already moved, and were going to delete that forum anyway! ).
We've had a website since late 2004, we've been known as "FedCom" since mid-2001, and the oldest piece of memorabilia for our nation is printed with the date "05-27-93".
Yeah, we've been around for a while.
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Should have both founding date and forum date, I think. For those of us who spent ages offline first. Although I'm just thinking if I have anything Craitish that's dated from when I founded it...
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Were the Earth to disappear, so would your creations as well. If that sounds like a stupid thing to say, it's because it is. The Earth isn't going anywhere and neither is the internet. Face it; this quasi-existence that my words are being put into between the time I type them and the time you read them has real substance and real power, and it's not going anywhere any time soon. Traditional methods are okay as long as they still apply in modern times, but any individual or organization that spurns and mocks the power the internet is having on day-to-day operations on Earth is needlessly throwing away one of the most useful and powerful tools in human history.FedCom wrote:Were the internet to disappear, so would your creations... Ours are not so transient.
Simulations that exist fully on the internet are no less "real" than micronations that claim some Earth island already controlled by a world government. From one angle, they're both nonsense fantasty that won't ever come true; from the other, both legitimate claims to reality. Heck, since simulations get what we want on the internet and micronations rarely get what they want short of a few rusted oil drilling platforms, it's hard to say that we're not the more successful of the two groups! If nothing else, we're the more contented. There's a great old quote that goes something along the line of "success is the measure between insanity and genius." If anyone can get me the actual version of that with a source, I'll be much appreciative.
A highly suspect claim, at best. While some simulations clearly were inspired by micronations claiming real territory, no doubt a lot of them started out of a game or a fantasy dream of some sort. There are numerous stories of people declaring their own bedroom its own country and then growing from there. The Rasinate was one such example; its origin story is very fascinating.Besides, micronations were the inspiration for your "hobbies" in the first place.
Point is, don't flatter yourselves too much. Over the past 20-some years of modern micronational existence, you guys have yet to make as slash other than on page 12 of a minor newspaper on a very slow news day. When I see micronational leaders signing treaties with real governments, or a micronational army taking control by force, then you'll have the claims of legitimacy you desire and demand. Until then, you're no less weird than us, and the weird sort of self-hatred you've got for the "other side" of the hobby does nothing but make you look silly when you act all superior.
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Well...SaiKar wrote:The Earth isn't going anywhere and neither is the internet
If we don't change to IPv6 before 2011 the internet's going slowly to hell, also if we don't better protect our DNS systems following the recent vulnerabilities last year that's possible...
And if we don't cut carbon dioxide emissions SEVERELY* within years the earth could heat by 4 degrees in the next hundred years, in perspective, a 5 degree rise in global temperature over 20,000 years wiped out 90% of species on the planet...
*unless we use some geoengineering (doubtful as most people simply see it as crazy)
Woah, which micronations got those? they were pretty successful most get disused, partially flooded and flammable naval bases at best...SaiKar wrote:micronations rarely get what they want short of a few rusted oil drilling platforms
There is a little sampling error here perhaps, although your point still generally applies, but with places like kosovo that might have been considered a "micronation" getting independence to some extent they are considered a macronation so no longer apply to your rules anymore...SaiKar wrote:When I see micronational leaders signing treaties with real governments, or a micronational army taking control by force, then you'll have the claims of legitimacy you desire and demand.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Kosovars were an ethnic minority and had their own defined region within Serbia before they declared independence, so that's a pretty poor example really. I don't see how you can compare Kosovo to a micronation made-up of three old men and a field (par exemple).
Actually, if we go by some secessionist micronationalists' ideas, their nations are more worthy of statehood than the Roma people or the Sámi; which, apart from being untrue, is just downright silly...
Actually, if we go by some secessionist micronationalists' ideas, their nations are more worthy of statehood than the Roma people or the Sámi; which, apart from being untrue, is just downright silly...
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Well, the end of the human race entirely kind of makes the whole argument a little bit moot! I think it was a fair assumption that there's an implied "Unless society completely collapses somehow" in front of most arguments.dr-spangle wrote:And if we don't cut carbon dioxide emissions SEVERELY* within years the earth could heat by 4 degrees in the next hundred years, in perspective, a 5 degree rise in global temperature over 20,000 years wiped out 90% of species on the planet...
No, you know, I'll take that one. But that's "micronatonalism done right" in a sense. That's nothing even remotely close to what FedCom or any of the modern micronationalists I know of are aiming for. They sit around and draw fake flags for themselves and shake their fists at reality where the people in Kosovo actually went out into that bright real world and took what they wanted, violently if necessary. If a micronation was willing to do that sort of thing, you better believe I'd respect them. But the large majority aren't actually on that sort of level, which is why I won't stand for any mockery directed our way when they're little better at making their claims a reality.There is a little sampling error here perhaps, although your point still generally applies, but with places like kosovo that might have been considered a "micronation" getting independence to some extent they are considered a macronation so no longer apply to your rules anymore...
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
A micronation that gathers large and very strong localized opinion about a subject, can therefore get independence, but it has to have a following in the thousands or at least hundreds, with opinions strong enough to die for them. and it can't just be spread across the globe, it must all be inside a very small area with little resistance
- pawelabrams
- Posts: 3207
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:14 pm
- Location: Novograd, Interland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
It doesn't have to... You can just go to Pitcairn and make people think they need independence. It wouldn't be hard as Pitcairn has.... 47 citizens.
Anyway, that's MY plan, and if anyone wants to make it real should ask me for permission ;
Anyway, that's MY plan, and if anyone wants to make it real should ask me for permission ;
Pavel' Abramovic:, the President of Interland
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
That's a dependency now though, so has an respectable claim for wanting independence (not that it does). It's not like someone going "yeah, I'll secede my house from my home nation for no particular reason"pawelabrams wrote:It doesn't have to... You can just go to Pitcairn and make people think they need independence. It wouldn't be hard as Pitcairn has.... 47 citizens.
Obviously, FedCom's ideology is slightly different as they're wanting to create a new utopia-style nation, but most secessionists follow the aforementioned style...
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Well, now that we're getting off-topic...
Geologic history shows us the Earth's global temperature rose by 6 degrees Celsius in the 10,000 years that sparked the dawn of the Eocene (50-35 mya), and yet life flourished, both in diversity and quantity. Forests stretched from pole to pole, and everything between the equator and 45 degrees north & south was a tropical paradise. The oceans teemed with life: today, they are barren wastelands by comparison. Whales evolved, as did most of the current orders of mammals and birds.
As a species, humanity is not threatened by global warming. Some coastal areas would flood, but it would take many centuries, and there would be plenty of land left. Higher global temperatures and more CO2 would actually be beneficial, leading to healthier plants, longer growing seasons, and larger food yields. As it did in the Eocene, biodiversity would increase, the deserts would shrink, and storms would water the parched Earth. We can and will readily and easily adapt.
Seriously, the whole concept of global warming being caused by mankind is preposterous. We're too small to have such a massive impact on our planet. Environmentalist nuts make wild claims that we're pumping too much carbon into the atmosphere, but that's insane. Crunch the numbers, and see how ridiculous it really is: 70% of the planet is water, leaving just 30% as land for us to live on. Of that land, 12% consists of inhospitable frozen wastelands or scorching deserts. Of the remaining 18% of the world we can live on, less than 1% is urbanized. Global warming is caused by pollution coming from such a tiny fraction of the planet's surface? Pollution that comes from ever more efficient and cleaner technology? Give me a break...
A much more likely answer for global warming comes from the geologic record. That shows that the planet has a distinctive and regular warm/cold cycle, like a heartbeat, and that we are presently thawing out of very cold cycle. The arrogance of humanity to assume that we can stop a natural global cycle is, like the delusion that we're responsible for the excruciatingly slow rate of warming (1/4th of a degree per decade), is simply astounding.
Malatora (our name for FedCom's homeland) is already a tropical paradise, and since tropical regions have stable temperatures and consistent weather patterns, our world will not change. Rather than fear global warming or engage in scaremongering, as you westerners do, we embrace the idea; we're convinced that the world will be better off with a climate like that of the Eocene.
And where, do tell, did you get such information? Al Gore's self-congratulatory pandering film? Get the facts before echoing the media scaremongers. I can't say I share your view, as I have done my research, and come to a very different conclusion. The only thing we can probably agree on is that the planet is getting a little bit warmer. Zipity-doo-dah.dr-spangle wrote:...in perspective, a 5 degree rise in global temperature over 20,000 years wiped out 90% of species on the planet...
Geologic history shows us the Earth's global temperature rose by 6 degrees Celsius in the 10,000 years that sparked the dawn of the Eocene (50-35 mya), and yet life flourished, both in diversity and quantity. Forests stretched from pole to pole, and everything between the equator and 45 degrees north & south was a tropical paradise. The oceans teemed with life: today, they are barren wastelands by comparison. Whales evolved, as did most of the current orders of mammals and birds.
As a species, humanity is not threatened by global warming. Some coastal areas would flood, but it would take many centuries, and there would be plenty of land left. Higher global temperatures and more CO2 would actually be beneficial, leading to healthier plants, longer growing seasons, and larger food yields. As it did in the Eocene, biodiversity would increase, the deserts would shrink, and storms would water the parched Earth. We can and will readily and easily adapt.
Seriously, the whole concept of global warming being caused by mankind is preposterous. We're too small to have such a massive impact on our planet. Environmentalist nuts make wild claims that we're pumping too much carbon into the atmosphere, but that's insane. Crunch the numbers, and see how ridiculous it really is: 70% of the planet is water, leaving just 30% as land for us to live on. Of that land, 12% consists of inhospitable frozen wastelands or scorching deserts. Of the remaining 18% of the world we can live on, less than 1% is urbanized. Global warming is caused by pollution coming from such a tiny fraction of the planet's surface? Pollution that comes from ever more efficient and cleaner technology? Give me a break...
A much more likely answer for global warming comes from the geologic record. That shows that the planet has a distinctive and regular warm/cold cycle, like a heartbeat, and that we are presently thawing out of very cold cycle. The arrogance of humanity to assume that we can stop a natural global cycle is, like the delusion that we're responsible for the excruciatingly slow rate of warming (1/4th of a degree per decade), is simply astounding.
Malatora (our name for FedCom's homeland) is already a tropical paradise, and since tropical regions have stable temperatures and consistent weather patterns, our world will not change. Rather than fear global warming or engage in scaremongering, as you westerners do, we embrace the idea; we're convinced that the world will be better off with a climate like that of the Eocene.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Regardless of how much we're actually affecting the atmosphere, like you said; the planet's heating-up and if the Milankovitch cycle exists it won't be too long 'til we get past the tipping point.
Anyway, with the 1% thing, just because it's a small number doesn't mean it's not going to have a large effect (just look at alcohol percentages ), and I think technologies are only advancing to become cleaner because we've realised how bad they are in their current state. They've also been doing damage for a good 100 years already too.
And I think us westerners are maybe seeing the bigger picture (it'll still be getting warmer ater we've gone; sustainablility for future generations) and not being so naïve ("ooh, a couple more degrees won't hurt, we'll just have darker tans for longer ")...
Anyway, with the 1% thing, just because it's a small number doesn't mean it's not going to have a large effect (just look at alcohol percentages ), and I think technologies are only advancing to become cleaner because we've realised how bad they are in their current state. They've also been doing damage for a good 100 years already too.
And I think us westerners are maybe seeing the bigger picture (it'll still be getting warmer ater we've gone; sustainablility for future generations) and not being so naïve ("ooh, a couple more degrees won't hurt, we'll just have darker tans for longer ")...
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
Let's not forget that we're overdue for an ice age by about 2000 years ...
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
I have never seen Al Gore's film...FedCom wrote:Well, now that we're getting off-topic...And where, do tell, did you get such information? Al Gore's self-congratulatory pandering film? Get the facts before echoing the media scaremongers. I can't say I share your view, as I have done my research, and come to a very different conclusion. The only thing we can probably agree on is that the planet is getting a little bit warmer. Zipity-doo-dah.dr-spangle wrote:...in perspective, a 5 degree rise in global temperature over 20,000 years wiped out 90% of species on the planet...
I read peer reviewed science journals.
After mass extinctions you get mass flourishments as nature evolves to fill the newly open nichesFedCom wrote:Geologic history shows us the Earth's global temperature rose by 6 degrees Celsius in the 10,000 years that sparked the dawn of the Eocene (50-35 mya), and yet life flourished, both in diversity and quantity. Forests stretched from pole to pole, and everything between the equator and 45 degrees north & south was a tropical paradise. The oceans teemed with life: today, they are barren wastelands by comparison. Whales evolved, as did most of the current orders of mammals and birds.
We're too small to have an effect? there are over 6 billion of us and we terraform our surroundings to make our life better, it's understandable that things will change while we're changing themFedCom wrote:As a species, humanity is not threatened by global warming. Some coastal areas would flood, but it would take many centuries, and there would be plenty of land left. Higher global temperatures and more CO2 would actually be beneficial, leading to healthier plants, longer growing seasons, and larger food yields. As it did in the Eocene, biodiversity would increase, the deserts would shrink, and storms would water the parched Earth. We can and will readily and easily adapt.
Seriously, the whole concept of global warming being caused by mankind is preposterous. We're too small to have such a massive impact on our planet. Environmentalist nuts make wild claims that we're pumping too much carbon into the atmosphere, but that's insane. Crunch the numbers, and see how ridiculous it really is: 70% of the planet is water, leaving just 30% as land for us to live on. Of that land, 12% consists of inhospitable frozen wastelands or scorching deserts. Of the remaining 18% of the world we can live on, less than 1% is urbanized. Global warming is caused by pollution coming from such a tiny fraction of the planet's surface? Pollution that comes from ever more efficient and cleaner technology? Give me a break...
Various sources say we are either entering or leaving a cold stage. basically people take the view that supports their argument and use it, like you haveFedCom wrote:A much more likely answer for global warming comes from the geologic record. That shows that the planet has a distinctive and regular warm/cold cycle, like a heartbeat, and that we are presently thawing out of very cold cycle. The arrogance of humanity to assume that we can stop a natural global cycle is, like the delusion that we're responsible for the excruciatingly slow rate of warming (1/4th of a degree per decade), is simply astounding.
Either way, 1/4th of a degree per decade would be really really damn speedy, 40 years and that's 10 degrees, average temperature rises above core temperature for several area of the world, people die of the heat.
FedCom wrote:Malatora (our name for FedCom's homeland) is already a tropical paradise, and since tropical regions have stable temperatures and consistent weather patterns, our world will not change. Rather than fear global warming or engage in scaremongering, as you westerners do, we embrace the idea; we're convinced that the world will be better off with a climate like that of the Eocene.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... ntury.html
seems a great world eh?
here's a map for you
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images ... 971701.jpg
In the modern age and recent past we have already seen desertification speeding up...
and we're already seeing that as the world warms animals are moving towards the poles, basing sharks have been seen off the coast of the UK for example...
EDIT:
Remembered another lovely argument.
A cancer makes up less than 1% of your body. At that amount, it cannot cause any damage to you can it?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0541116073
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: Please fix FedCom's entry
You have a point but basking sharks have always lived off our coasts as far as I'm awaredr-spangle wrote:and we're already seeing that as the world warms animals are moving towards the poles, basing sharks have been seen off the coast of the UK for example...