Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Melmil

Pages: 1 2
I think this needs a bump, now that I'm no longer ded.

Do you ever think of yourself as actually dead, lying in a box with a lid on it?

Regiments / Re: 9ème Regiment d'Infanterie Légère "l'Incomparable"
« on: July 03, 2013, 02:43:32 am »
So, I just remembered this and now I think if I ever TK someone while playing as Austria, I am going to say "Shit, thought you were an Ottoman."

Wait you mean the battle wasn't between the Ottomans and Austrians?

There seems to be some confusion as to whether Thomas ultimately re-registered as the 9eme in the big Regiment Index.

- Regiment Name : 9ème Regiment d'Infanterie Légère "l'Incomparable"
- Regiment Tag : 9eme_
- Faction : Empire Francais
- Class : Light Infantry, Skirmishers, Line Infantry (The regiment is already under light infantry, it just needs to be expanded to the rest.)
- Based : International
- Thread Link :

Go ahead and kill the Cossacks.

The 9eme was re-registered under Thomas on April 12, 2013, along with his clear termination of his claim to the Cossacks. The discussion might have moved beyond this point already, but I just wanted to clarify it so that people wouldn't come back to it.

EDIT: Linked to Regiment Index page to see sourcing.

Off Topic / Re: Zombies
« on: February 26, 2013, 01:41:35 am »
I'd be consumed by a mass of zombies as I feebly attempt to escape dense urban centers.

Alternatively, I'd be shot by someone in my town who considers me a threat to their survival.

Regiments / Re: 79th Regiment of Foot (Cameron Highlanders)
« on: January 16, 2013, 03:11:47 am »
There are two people name Thomas in this thread. My brain is now fried. Mind = blown.

As belated as this is, I feel obligated by my inner grammarian to point out a fairly interesting mistake made. (The afflicted word is in boldface for emphasis).

Servers / Re: Napoleonic Wars: Administrative Applications
« on: January 05, 2013, 08:57:56 pm »
Community name: Melmil
Steam Name: Melmil
Age: 16
Location/Timezone: Mountain Standard Time (No DST)
Applying for (Ts/Servers): US Servers
Regiments: 84e, 49e, Thomas' 79th + Various renumberings

About yourself: I'm currently a student who has an interest in playing unique video games such as this. I've played the Napoleonic Wars game since some time in MM, and have enjoyed nearly all of it. I have found myself fond of the community atmosphere which this game has, and I now want to contribute to it as much as I can.

Why you would be a good admin: I make every attempt to ensure that the game is enjoyable for all, and this goal would guide me as I enforce rules in order to ensure that the server remains happy and peaceful. In addition, I know a multitude of effective admins, and would hope that I have learned much from observation of their practices.

Previous Experience (if any): I've served as an administrator for other game servers, and was temporarily responsible for ensuring that a regimental server remained running for Thomas' 9eme.

Off Topic / Re: Post your desktop!
« on: January 03, 2013, 03:27:40 am »

Off Topic / Re: Gun Control Debate
« on: January 02, 2013, 10:17:34 pm »
Thus far, it looks like there's been some fairly staunch advocates and opponents of extremely strict gun control, thus scaring off all the moderates. So here's me waving the moderates back in hoping that some kind of compromise could be reached which would afford the greatest safety and preservation of rights, etc.

I've also noticed a lot of things said about gun crime and Mexico. I live in Arizona just north of the border, and I'm going to go ahead and offer a local perspective on how that works in this state:

On the border, gun crime is limited to individuals involved in the drug trade. On the Mexican border, various groups are vying for control in the hopes that they can spread their influence in the US, thus making the max profit. The nature of this competition is somewhat violent, and occasionally spills over into the US. Generally, however, it seems that the majority of the violence is in Mexico. The most common crimes on the US side seem to be the ranchers who are unfortunately killed or injured as drug transports run across their land, generally armed. Consequently, there's the occasional gunfight reported in news outlets. From what I've read, it seems that the ranchers who are armed are able to defend themselves more effectively, scaring off their attackers without any serious injury. As a result, I feel that firearms (to a degree) assist ranchers in the protection of their livelihood, as they are isolated.

All these stories about how gun crime in Mexico poses some kind of imminent danger to the metropolitan centers is grossly exaggerated. While the drug trade is a violent thing, it seems self-contained from my perspective, with violence (for the most part) being played out within the characters of the trade itself.

Off Topic / Re: Gun Control Debate
« on: December 16, 2012, 07:08:42 pm »
Why don't they just regulate hunting... Make some huge parks and hunters can go their, rent guns, and hunt, take their kills with them, and return back the guns.  Japan has one of the most enforced gun laws and there is hardly any gun related crime there.

In the US, that would likely be interpreted as a violation of the right to bear arms guaranteed under the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. If the guns are moderated by official organizations and distributed by the government, it would likely result in a Supreme Court Case, which would likely rule against such strict moderation in the interest of preserving the existing national livelihood.

That's just my take on that, anyway.

Regiments / Re: Browne's Gibraltar Flankers
« on: December 16, 2012, 05:03:40 am »
Good luck!

Off Topic / Re: Gun Control Debate
« on: December 16, 2012, 12:41:38 am »
I don't think we need any gun control.

Why get rid of these babies?

This is really going nowhere. You're going to have the ardent supporters and ardent opponents stuck in a wheel of circular reasoning, as the entire debate has become in reality.

The issue can't be resolved without serious alienation to one party, which makes society question who they want to alienate.

Off Topic / Re: Gun Control Debate
« on: December 15, 2012, 11:02:37 pm »
Since it seems like no other people have actually posted the text from the Congressional 2nd Amendment, I'll do it here:

Quote from: 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

What I find interesting about the phrasing of this amendment is that it's fairly ambiguous, and was probably intended to be so, so that the future citizens and statesmen of the United States can define it themselves. So far, I haven't seen it defined fairly definitively, and it seems that it will continue to be that way in my lifetime.

I'll just post how I read each little phrase and clause in this, primarily so I can find fallacies in my thinking with help from this community:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
In this particular line, a well regulated Militia could be many things, including a pool of able bodied people capable of being drawn for national defense, a specific defense service, a reserve army, or a privatized military group. In addition, the particular text refers to the militia as being necessary for the security of a free State. Consequently, that could mean that the free State requires the militia in order to remain secure.

Considering the role of volunteer military units in the War of American Independence, I would consider a militia to be a locally organized group responsible for the defense of their national ideas within their area of origin. In addition, due to the fact that the area was embroiled in a war, there was a general lack of security in communities, thus leading to the militias.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms

The citizens of the nation's right to keep and bear weapons, without any clear intention, is permissible and protected under law.

Due to the fact that this is included in the same sentence as the one about militias, I would think that citizens are able to keep weapons in order to be part of a militia quickly.

shall not be infringed.

The government maintains all abilities to revoke these rights at any time, and can brutally oppress their people using any objects or weapons which they wish.

The rights referred to in the earlier part of the sentence can't be violated.

Not sure how this plays out, but there's my take on this.

Off Topic / Re: [Fun] A song to describe your regiment/group's TS
« on: December 02, 2012, 10:25:43 pm »
9ème Regiment d'Infanterie Légère

Quote from: Any Criminal in Existence
How'd this get here? I didn't put it there! It's not mine, I swear!

Somehow, we've ended up on page three. I swear I didn't put us there. Kowalski said left at the tree, but never said which one.

No, I said left at the bush, then left onto Birch Road!

I suppose it's time to bump the thread. I only wish I had some amazing information to tell you all.

I wish you did, too.

Pages: 1 2