You are missing a key point I think the situation on the Ark didn't happen overnight. The refugees didn't pick up the slack additonal resources where needed to construct additional living spaces and power them etc. Also if the entire planet is flooded there is NO REASON TO GO SEARCH!

I agree its not a country there is no government, elections, money etc as you said. Still there was one group who was there orginial (AKA the Founders) hence their claim. We were hear first, we maintance the Ark. I see the founders as the scientist and engineers that help maintan the Ark. Your logic is that they are just freeloading and then making the freeloaders that came later do all the work (that they were apparently not doing)

Even if they own, build etc. They were there first, that which usually implies ownership.

The Ark pretty much is an ultimatum. I mean, if "the entire planet" is flooded, like you said, that means the Ark is the only place that can support life.

I think it was calculated that the entire planet cannot be flooded - not enough water in the ice caps. The other thing is security is the result of the resistance - before refugees came - there was no need in such a large security force and I think the ark was designed and developed with a thought that it will be sustainable with a certain number of people, resources and repairs done, therefore food/water rationing became a need only when refugees arrived. Also - most of the security (as it was said on the website) are volunteers that come from founders, so they pretty much have all the rights to decided what to do with the resources and equipment. Its like a sinking ship and not enough boats and there are some boats reserved for high class ppl so its their choice to allow more ppl on board or not (question of morality/humanity) imo

maybe chuck norris had to take a piss

By "entire planet," I am referring to livable areas, or areas which still have enough resources available to survive. Of course not physically the ENTIRE planet is flooded - like mountains for instance - It still doesn't give The Founder's/Security the right to use it as a "this or that" scenario against the refugee's for their own gain - They have no right. They have just as much right treating the refugee's unfairly as the refugee's have the right to fight for equality.


The Security is not a result of the Resistance, it was formed due to the arrival of all the people in general. The Resistance was formed due to the unfair treatment towards refugee's, so without The Security/Founder's, their would be no Resistance. Not ALL refugee's are part of the Resistance.


This is what I don't get - some you say it's the refugee's fault they have to ration, yet they have SELECTIVE rationing? If it was truly so bad that rationing was caused by the arrival of the refugee's, then EVERYONE would be on rations.


What does this even mean? They volunteer, so now they hold the key to the city? That makes absolutely no sense.


But who's right is it to say who is "high class?" A class system is designed to separate and pit humans against each other. It has no use in an environment such as the Ark. The logical thing to do would be make sure that individuals that can make contributions to society are kept alive, and I'm sure there are doctors, artists, scientists and engineers among the refugee's. What the Founder's/Security is doing is nothing more than petty greed and selfishness, and save me the "Human Nature" speech about greed - Human Nature doesn't exist, human behavior does.

And thats why we have a good setting for this game



What I ment is that rich ppl paid their money to get privat boats and its up to them to decide how to use the boats - maybe its a bad example :\
My thought was - that before the world was flooded - the ark was built using funds from a certain group of ppl - I assume - some of them are founders and also scientists and engineers were selected/hired cause they could contribute to the ark (again before the flood) therefore they originaly had a priority, so when the flood happend - priorities should have been shifted towards saving whats left of people in the world, so I guess not everyone on ark wanted to give up some of the comforts to help refugees - hence rations only for refugees and other limitations. Logic is not the only thing that drives ppls decisions
But, all I am trying to do is to look at the situation from different points of view (resistance and security) because its hard to say who is wrong and who is right and thats what makes it debatable and interesting

I'm glad you see this point. A lot of people just see is blindly as "Security deserves more and that's that." It's good see someone else see that it may not be so much that they get more because they deserve, but rather because they aren't willing to give them up.

exactly, and, I think, its understandable that its hard to give up what was originaly yours to help some random strangers, since most people tend to first worry about themselfs and their relatives rather than about others

Of course, there is the fact that in reality even if the entirety of both poles melted there would be no where near enough to flood the entire world. It would probably barely even go up the coasts.

Quiet you. :nono:

:P

Unless the deformation of the earth's plates happend and all the mainland went below sea level and some other parts went up

Of course they have the right to fight. Actually no one has the right persay but if they have the ability go for it!

Without the Security founders letting all the refugees on the Ark there would be no refugees and no Resistance.

I am not sure how things were before the Resistance and the Refugees I presume stable and continuable. We really need more history on the Ark.

I still say the Founders were there first and let the rest in so it makes sense they are in charge, hence PROTECT THE ARK. It doesn't give them the right to oppress the refugees.



The Security let them in out of the goodness of their hearts and get a rebellion out of it.

the security let them in? all the security is supposed to do is protect the people of the ark. the security didnt decide to let them in, i guess the founders did or the residents of the ark. im not sure

Well so far everyone has been assuming that the Founder protected by the Security are against the Resistance the supposed saviors, defenders, liberators, terrorists, freedom fighters of the Refugees.

Could the Founders be dead?

What alot of people are forgetting is that the founders are getting old the year is 2045 so if they started building in 2025 between the age of 30-50 the founders are now between 50-70 So maybe both sides are fighting less over resources and more over who is going to rule the ark because the founders are going to start to die off. I am just say this because if I was a founder I could sit back and let a war go on right in front of my face with trying to talk to both sides about stoping it and I do not think a group of the best people in society would either so they may have been removed from power.

I thought my post was different from a lot of others :/ oh well...

Anyway, I'm not saying the Security deserves more rations. I don't even think they have much more than they appear. I believe they are saying that they do to get recruits. And I'm not saying the refugees shouldn't be there in the first place, I'm just saying that they need to work to compensate for an extra person. You can't expect the original ~5,000 people to do enough work to ~25,000 people alive. Sure there are desperate people that need the water, but fueling a conflict, which is only draining resources, isn't a good idea. I'm on the Security's side for the sake of peace keeping. I do believe that the Resistance's acts are those of terrorism. I do not believe that the Resistance's idealogy is justified and I don't think that the Security's "special" treatment is justified. I find the whole conflict unnecessary and going back to my original point, no one is going to accomplish anything until differences can be settled.

No, I expect the 50,000 people that are there now to do enough work to keep 50,000 people alive - everyone chipping in equally, like how a healthy society should function. Not have the refugees pick up the slack like, "You guys are late to the party, so you gotta clean up."

That's my problem. I'd expect 50k people to do 50k people's work, but it doesn't look like that's happening and until it actually happens, there is going to be a lack of sufficient resources.

Sounds good in theory however if there are only a finite amount of resources and still they have spent the last 20 years in trying to accomodate everyone. Even if everyone has a job there will never be plenty.

That's besides the point - everyone should still be doing equal amounts of work regardless.

imo, in human society it will never happen - hence the conflict
there is always a competition for power

I really like seeing the security is going to be outnumbered online thats makes it more real to me though but it will also make the rebels have longer Ques and security will get into games faster. Im going to most likely join security to see how out number we are if its too balance ill join rebels.

thats only on this thread. all of the other ones are towards security

Gosh darn it these polls are rigged!!!!