The council of the Intellectuals

Read the text this being wrote after the quote you mentioned. If 2 opinions can’t co-exist, they can however find a compromise at least in this thread. The objective of a peaceful discussion is not trying to convert someone to another ideals but exposing a statement about why according to someone, his ideal is better than the other and why not. After everyone exposed their thesis and anti-thesis, every involved person will finish the experience remembering to have learnt something new, even if useless or against his thoughts. That’s what they also call “a cultural exchange”.
Remember, however, that the guy who is agree also with absurd theories and ideologies that promote the self-extinction of the humanity can consider the latter a good thing and the other ones bad things. They can call it a crazy man, a stupid man but it’s his opinion at last, one of infinite ones existing. That’s the proof that nobody can say that his thought can be the perfect one amongst all because the world is very various and different in every angle of the earth.

Ok, so let’s start with a small topic:


It’s from months that this being proved his facts and his thoughts through these things called “Intergalactic definitions” and there’s some people who, sometimes, doesn’t understand what kind of point of view is that thing: Gallentean? Minmatar? Amarr? Caldari? Jovian? CONCORD? To know that we could make also a small scientific experience. First of all, try to define the “Intergalactic definition” term.

The term itself is fatally flawed. ‘Intergalactic’ itself would require multiple galaxies to be involved. The New Eden cluster is less than 120 light-years across. Galactic diameters tend more toward tens or hundreds of thousands of LY.


A noble idea, a foolish implementation,.

One cannot debate issues that are worth debating without the risk of agitating some party.

Are words not a peaceful enough means by themselves?

I find it better to simply set a good example.


Nor, I think, should ‘agitating some party’ be considered a danger to be avoided. There are, no matter how fervently some try to deny it, demonstrably foolish ideas and opinions. They can be engaged, and their folly demonstrated, without rancor. However, to insist that meeting determined, unrepentant folly with the plain and direct declaration that it is folly… that is among their number.

Folly, especially repeated, willful, stubborn folly, should be mocked and derided. If its adherents become agitated, then so much the better.

1 Like

What purpose would an intellectual discussion as you describe it serve? Its merits ring hollow as it would eventually devolve into a circle of people tacitly agreeing with eachother, just so they can get their turn to speak. Only to be agreed with by others, a neverending, self-reinforcing cycle.

It goes against everything human. Every giant leap forward for mankind has been made through overcoming adversity. Ever since one of my ancient ancestors bashed the skull of his neigh our with a rock and dragged his wife into his cave, humanity has moved forward using a very simple mechanism - survival of the fittest. An aeon of strife has passed since then, and here we are, still walking down through the centuries as princes of the universe. But that has not been achieved through discussion, rather than by action.
Take ancient space flight history: there was an attempt to escape the planet’s gravity well which ended disastrously. The vessel suffered catastrophic failure and disintegrated in mid air, still within the atmosphere. None of the crew survived. Did that stop us? No, we pressed on, rebuilding and trying again, even though the danger was more apparent than ever.

So, every time you undock and activate your warp drive, you’re walking down a path that has been beaten by people who did not stop to have an intellectual discussion about moving forward. They just did. And so shall we.

It´s still pew pew, but with words.

Nice proposals, capsuleers.

It’s obvious that some word can be used for metaphoric purposes and if we everybody here have the purpose to make New Eden a better place, then there’s also a minimal possibility to agree for at least some ideals, one of these is the survival of the humanity.

Now, returning to the topic, let’s do a small game: After you declared your thoughts about the term in question, please take your dictionary (or encyclopedias, empire databases, GalNet…) and transcribe here the definition of the following term:


Are you seriously trying to claim you were using ‘intergalactic’ metaphorically?

Well, the “IGS” itself maybe does, unless Anoikis (or the Abyss) is in another galaxy?

It seems mostly like a basic marketing misnomer (“puffery” or something), but … meh?

The IGS is likely marketing, yes… but marketing hardly ever tries to claim to be ‘intellectual’.

It sometimes might when it’s trying to appeal to intellectuals. It’s a niche market but it exists.

… although, come to think of it, it’s probably a troublesome market: full of people who will analyze your marketing down to its last troubling nuance just on principle and think critically about what you’re trying to get them to do and whether it’s in any way a good idea.

Maybe more trouble than it’s worth to try to market to? That might account for why you don’t see people try it much. I mean, this thread (as a “product”) might even be a good example of why you might not want such people’s attention: even if they purchase what you’re selling they’re apt to take it apart in public to vividly show why nobody else should buy it.


Should we then rename the IGS to Intragalactic Summit?

Well … I think it’s been named this since before Anoikis or the Abyss was a thing (we knew about), Ms. des Larmes. But, technically, maybe, sure.

It doesn’t roll off the tongue in quite the same way, though? Or seem as exciting.

Maybe we could think of it as being aspirational? It might not be intergalactic yet, but some day…!

(Or, again, maybe already depending on where the Abyss and Anoikis are.)

Unless there are literally direct insults without any proofs (like a simple “go to hell”) we’re not off topic. Now you can reply at what you call lies with your reality of facts with your proofs.

(( Welcome to the Intergalactic Summit, which is an in-character forum. No players, no developers, no ‘2003’, no CCP, and the only ‘EVE’ is the gate in the New Eden system. ))


Following policies set forth by the CRC Communications Policy, 10* messages have been removed from this thread for being Out of Character.

Edit: Missed one

Thank you,

~Alexandre Arthie

Alexandre Arthie,
Directive Enforcement Department
CONCORD Assembly


“Council” still open.

What are your opinions about these kind of projects?

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.