our latest interview is of the super-secret variety. its our first with a member of The Dark Flock. click the link below.
"It all depends on why they vetted (to Raven) From my understanding GUN is a temporary on Raven, and 6D9 was sick of Valor. People who change factions for good reason can always fly the new flag. Anyone who vets to ride coattails cannot, because they'll just leave when the coat changes hands again later."
Doesn't have to be brainwashing, if you know what you say effects the opinion of a larger group, even though what you say does not reflect hat group's views, self-censorship is a good idea.
Play Account: HeadhunterSweden - Valor
psnbloody: lmao cultlike? I remember a mafia quote from the last interview. The Dark Flock is a clan that prefers to keep to itself, and the people in the clan are actually pretty good at self-regulation. We are a No Drama clan, and we like to keep it that way.
--- From my experience, tdf can't shut up. So "keep to it's self" "self-regulation" and "no drama clan" don't fit.
bloodyking: If I was in it, then I remember very clearly. We were just messing around, bored out of our minds, and we were split evenly between letters.
--- Excuses.. excuses.. I can't remember a losing match others describe as a "blood bath" where I describe it as boring... Frustrating comes to mind, or exciting... but boring? That's just a write off / dodge... If he wasn't there, then yeah, I could except his response. But if he was, this is just a cop out to dismiss a valid loss as not real... when you're up 13 vs 8 at C... there are no excuses. Just admit you got beat.
This entire bit, I 100% agree with bloodyking on:
mww: tell me about the Rise of Raven.
bloodyking: OMG some guy on the forums was bugging me about that. We got roofs, players grew some balls and attitudes changed from "there is no way to win on Flores" to "We can do it!" That's the best I've got. People who jumped ship because we became the "New OP" contributed nothing.
The Rise of Raven really wasn't that big.
mww: how does it make you feel that you're the PMC of success now?
bloodyking: For me, I had played Raven for a long time, and had been around for several other times when we held all the contracts without any roofs, but as I played more, I stopped caring about the PMC and more about the people I played with. When I came back to Raven for the final time, I wanted to find a good home, and I did. That was all that mattered to me.
mww: GUN and 6D9 were among those "new ravens" can they truly fly the raven flag?
bloodyking: It all depends on why they vetted. From my understanding GUN is a temporary on Raven, and 6D9 was sick of Valor. People who change factions for good reason can always fly the new flag. Anyone who vets to ride coattails cannot, because they'll just leave when the coat changes hands again later.
mww: ah. well said.
mww: what's your opinion of The Fall of SVER?
bloodyking: And to prevent misunderstanding, I am not saying that either clan is riding coattails. There are a lot of people getting sick of Valor, and a deep-seeded hatred for SVER since it was the original "Easy Mode"
mww: copied and pasted that fast, didn't you? (it was obvious his handlers didn’t think his answer was PC enough)
bloodyking: SVER was just a mentality thing, like Raven. They heard the words "we got nerfed" and "Raven got buffed" and went pessimistic. It was like when people used to attack Absheron with randoms. Everyone though it was a fortress.
mww: but you agree they aren't the contract **bleep** they once were, yes? bloodyking: They still put up fights, but if you look some of them definitely switched to Acq, just as some Ravens switched out of it. Raven takes Dom, loses Acq, and vice versa for SVER
It's all give and take
To follow this block up (but not to derail my post or this thread)
I firmly believe that the damage timers for dom MUST be set to the same amount for any one to know what is really happening in this part of the shadow war... For all we know, the minutes trimmed from the requirement to defeat SVER, and the minutes added to the requirement to defeat Rav may be drastically skewing the current results.
tbh - it was an alright read... I agree with Total though - the interviewer should not press so much bias claiming blatantly that the interviewee is being fed answers... Part of a journalist's job is being objective. Obviously some slants will be placed based on the opinions of everyone taking this from it's raw form to publish... but it is your job to make it as objective as possible. These claims (unverified) of the interviewee being fed answers, or implying any cult like control... are ridiculous.
If you don't like the set up, don't publish it. You had 1 failed interview... maybe you should have looked for a new subject, rather than put up with a situation you don't like?