Talk:The Citadel

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Mortars. That is all. TyJFBANBSRADA 19:51, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Reportedly, the community (and wall) are not designed to defend against the government or other force, but only against a "collapse scenario." So just roving bands of cannibals, I guess.--ADtalkModerator 19:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I wonder what exactly would prevent a cannibal from operating a mortar. Or a 155mm howitzer. Or even a good ol' satchel charge... It's like your brains shut down and the arsenals empty the moment you taste human meat. :) --ZooGuard (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Surely "curtain wall" and "libertarian" are mutually exclusive? Peter Droid whisperer 20:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
(EC) improvised mortars exist. Hell, make a catapult. TyJFBANBSRADA 20:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
On a basic level, a mortar is just a potato gun that fires either a bomb (delayed blast or compression) or a big rock (the earliest mortars fired large metal balls). It wouldn't be very difficult to make or use. Or you could just take that weapon and use it as an improvised rocket launched and blow the fuck out of the defenses.--Just relax, and stay funny (talk) 00:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
What's interesting is how bland they want it to seem -I was about to poke fun, but at first blush, it seems they don't want the dudes who are trying to ragequit the nation after Obama's election (Like Eric Dondero). --TheLateGatsby (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Problems ahead[edit]

I see at least two problems here...

The first issue is the matter of leasing property. This allows the landlord to call the shots, and will lead to some resentment. Something closer to the model of a co-operative would have some desirable effects -it encourages participation, while of course keeping in line with Libertarian thought (rich people should be in charge) by giving more power to those with the most shares -which presumably would still be the III Arms Company.

The second problem is that this project looks to be heading straight to the creation of a factory town. What industries will there be besides gunsmithing and farming? --TheLateGatsby (talk) 16:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I really want to see this happen, if only for the hilarity value. They plan to become a tourist attraction with perhaps a boarding school. Ty[[User

talk:Tyrannis|JFBANBSRADA]] 16:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Possibilities: any service industry, but in particular:
  • Security - in a place where everyone has guns, it's a good idea to have someone guarding your back.
  • Prostitution - something tells me that the gender ratio of this utopia will skew male...
They will also tend to attract the kind of people who would like to live in a place where outside law enforcement is extra cautious and unobtrusive...--ZooGuard (talk) 16:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

'Somebodies' have been reading/watching too many Westerns.

Will the bod with the biggest gun(s) be elected sheriff?

Will there be a separate encampment for 'observers of society' to watch and analyse what happens?

Will it be a case of the lunatics building the asylum which they intend taking over? (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I expect the real economic concern will be the ubiquity of celebrity endorsements for its various stores. Which one is your real favorite, Commander Shepard?!

I'd take my chances with the ADAM and Plasmids. --Revolverman (talk) 06:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Yeah... I just finished Bioshock Infinite and I think that's a fair assessment. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 19:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If those who 'wish to ride off into the sunset all guns blazing' could be encouraged to create their own version of The Citadel (Thomas Hobbes ville? - the war of all against all) there should be general support.

Those who like playing with their guns will be able to do so and likewise those who wish to live quietly.

Perhaps a guns version of Big Brother (TV series) - and who will grow the roses?

Wasn't it Chairman Mao who said power grows out of the barrel of a gun? (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Problems aside, does anybody else here think it would be really awesome for us lefties to chip in funding a libertarian utopia project? That way they can go off and do their thing without dragging the rest of us into it? If it works out in the long run, awesome. If it doesn't, we get to laugh at them. ConfusedLiberal (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The basic problems[edit]

How do 'they' get enough money to pay for weapons, food that cannot be killed, 'assorted entertainment', roads, healthcare, sanitation... (talk) 16:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh the Irony[edit]

They seemingly accidentally named their "stronghold" after the fortification from Half-life 2 which was inhabited by the tyrannical enemies known as the Combine. I know this is written in the main page but, seriously the irony is almost palpable. Crustacean27 (talk) 17:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

No they didn't. Citadel is a term that's been around for hundreds, probably thousands of years. WèàšèìòìďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 18:12, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Kids these days and their video games... *shakes walking stick at the sky* On a more serious note, the article is... not very good. --ZooGuard (talk) 18:56, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
You mean it wasn't named after the arcologies in the Galactic Center books? Or the prison in Adventure Time? 192․168․1․42 (talk) 20:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
The article is OK in places, but irrelevant references to video games & petering out into one-line sections doesn't help any. WẽãšẽĩõĩďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:38, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
You don't seem to understand what I was saying. I said accidentally, as in they had bo knowledge of it, not that they meant to do it. It is one of many Citadels in pop culture and one of many more in the world. Crustacean27 (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Can the intro be updated ('As of March 2016) - and would a reference to [1] be apposite? (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Sure, updates to make pages timely (or, removing timely language) is always helpful. I don't think that book (about medical ethics) has any relevance to the page, however. Petey Plane (talk) 15:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Brits are more likely to think of the novel or the JWs than this place. (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Good point. Note added to top of page. Petey Plane (talk) 18:07, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

The irony part 2[edit]

The namesake novel and its links to the founding of the NHS. Anna Livia (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)