[Horde Perspective Only] Do you like Baine as a character?

[Super Dickmann]

Yes, and my argument is that your claim cannot be proved - this isn't a strawman, it's a pretty basic counter-argument that I've backed up (and calling something a strawman isn't an automatic "I win" button, you have to prove this is true as well). There is no verifiable way to know who is who, even their post history can be called into question, and secondarily the poll itself isn't properly representative to begin with so it is meaningless twice over. The fact that the pro-Baine vote is the minority isn't in question, and I said that several exchanges ago, but you continue to make implications that they either don't exist or aren't valid - *that* is what I am telling you isn't the case. We can quibble about percentages all day and neither one of us will make much headway I'd wager, I have no idea the actual percentages and neither does anyone else. We both know the pro-Baine bloc is a minority, I am just saying that they exist and that they're a valid bloc even among Horde partisans.

You are being dishonest here. My claim, from the beginning, was that a significant portion of Baine voters are Alliance players. Against this argument, saying that some are Horde is moot, because that was never in question, nor do we disagree that they're a minority of Horde players in general. The strawman lies in you saying in the last page, and continuining to argue in this very paragraph, against the position that all Baine votes are Alliance. Against this position, which I don't hold, the argument that some who vote Baine are Horde is actually effective, because it directly disproves that position where it doesn't disprove my real argument. Hence, strawman fallacy. Instead of disputing my actual stance, you argue against a fictive stance that's easier to defeat.

My last call to you to prove that there's a significant Alliance-sided anti-Baine vote is because you allege that I impose a different standard on the pro and anti-Baine camp, and in turn I'm using this to demonstrate that this isn't the case. The situation of the anti-Baine vote doesn't show this kind of crossover vote in nearly the same volume as the pro-Baine vote.

[Schattenlied]

Horde is supposed to be brutal angry force

No it's not...

[Super Dickmann]

No it's not...

I mean, that's what it started out as and what it has been for the majority of its run, but continue.

[ArenaDk]

Who isn’t a traitor to the horde at this point ?

Garrosh ? To radical
Thrall ? Left the horde behind
Sylvanas ? A psycho bitch who doesn’t mind being compared to arthas

The goblin ? Sellout
Bloodelfs ? Wanted to leave in mop
Tauren ? Too peaceful
Trolls ? Seem fine
Saurfang ? Called a traitor since the war of thorns
Pandaren ? Serve both sites

The horde is made up or people who no one else wants , because they are a bad deal

[korijenkins]

Baine has no character, thats the writers fault.

That being said I don't hate him for opposing Sylvanas. If you think any rational person would stand around as she slaughtered innocents and burned cities for fun, I think you're an idiot.

Even Nathanos hesitated when ordered to burn the tree.

[valky94]

What do you mean by "and?".

Also, you must regret that decision for a long time, since you want to Horde to turn into Alliance lite.

i bet the only reason he plays horde is because alliance doesnt have belfs

[Schattenlied]

I mean, that's what it started out as and what it has been for the majority of its run, but continue.

The Orcish Horde was, this is not the Orcish Horde.

[Wilian]

Baine practically has no character.

[Super Dickmann]

The Orcish Horde was, this is not the Orcish Horde.

Tell you what, I won't retread the tired argument that there is no New and Old Horde, since there's no way you don't know this by now. So instead, let's go with the fact that 4 out of 7 expansions have had the Horde be under aggressive conquest-driven leadership, with another one being about this leadership already taking the charge in the new continent.

[Aucald]

You are being dishonest here. My claim, from the beginning, was that a significant portion of Baine voters are Alliance players. Against this argument, saying that some are Horde is moot, because that was never in question, nor do we disagree that they're a minority of Horde players in general. The strawman lies in you saying in the last page, and continuining to argue in this very paragraph, against the position that all Baine votes are Alliance. Against this position, which I don't hold, the argument that some who vote Baine are Horde is actually effective, because it directly disproves that position where it doesn't disprove my real argument. Hence, strawman fallacy. Instead of disputing my actual stance, you argue against a fictive stance that's easier to defeat.

I don't think I'm being dishonest at all, my argumentation is meant to underline to you that your hypothesis can't be tested or verified in any meaningful way alongside several reasons as to why that is. You don't know that a significant portion of the Baine voters are Alliance players, you don't know that they're *all* Alliance players, you can't know if *any* of them are Alliance players. I am negating all of these positions, which include yours. The very definition of "Alliance player" being used here is nebulous to the point that declaring it is both meaningless and paints an incorrect or invalid picture. This is also why I refer to the pro-Baine bloc and anti-Baine as all inclusive, e.g. including players who main both factions or of any disposition. I know many Alliance players who, lore-wise, are devoutly pro-Horde despite their Alliance main (they play Alliance because that's where all their friends who play WoW are), and vice-versa as well. I actually don't main a Horde character for lore-based reasons, I rolled my first Forsaken Warlock because all my friends wanted to play Horde and so that's where I went as I didn't have strong feelings either way. Now I have two mains for the most part, one Horde and one Alliance - although gameplay-wise I still prefer my Blood Elven Death Knight over my Void Elven Hunter.

My last call to you to prove that there's a significant Alliance-sided anti-Baine vote is because you allege that I impose a different standard on the pro and anti-Baine camp, and in turn I'm using this to demonstrate that this isn't the case. The situation of the anti-Baine vote doesn't show this kind of crossover vote in nearly the same volume as the pro-Baine vote.

I can't demonstrate to you that it's the case, because like you, I can't verify any the cases. What I can do, though, is provide you some possible reasons why an Alliance player might skew anti-Baine in a manner inconsistent with the intent of this vote:

- They are pro faction conflict and against any form of peacemaking. So their judgement isn't on Baine's story or characterization, per se; solely on the chance he could help end the conflict.

- They want the Horde to be uniformly villainous and Baine stands in the way of that. Voting against him isn't a reflection of his characterization just the fact that he pulls the Horde back from being stereotypically villainous.

- They have an external grudge (such as against Blizzard or Activision) and aren't willing or capable of differentiating. They hate everything about the game, including all its characters.

- The hate the story in general and everyone in it, which means that aren't really in either bloc but just uniformly derisive of everything.

This and other reasons detailed earlier are why these kinds of faction-based purity tests for either bloc are meaningless.

[Venziir]

Yes, yes I do. He is basically the only reasonable Horde leader left. The others are either absurd zombies or psychophants... Or completely forgotten such as Ji.

[Schattenlied]

Tell you what, I won't retread the tired argument that there is no New and Old Horde

Yes there is. The Horde we have now is not the Orcish Horde, and it is in fact called the New Horde in the lore.

So instead, let's go with the fact that 4 out of 7 expansions have had the Horde be under aggressive conquest-driven leadership, with another one being about this leadership already taking the charge in the new continent.

And the leadership in 2 of those "aggressive conquest-driven" expansions was deposed by his people.

[Super Dickmann]

Yes there is. The Horde we have now is not the Orcish Horde, and it is in fact called the New Horde in the lore.

No, there isn't. Doomhammer reformed the Horde and he passed leadership to Thrall. Thrall kept all the rules, iconography and even goals that Orgrim had. He had Orgrim's armor, Orgrim's hammer, his title and named his city after him and other Horde heroes from the Second War. There is direct continuity between them. The New Horde is a meme. It's all one Horde.

And the leadership in 2 of those "aggressive conquest-driven" expansions was deposed by his people.

Yes, and the leadership of muh honor got killed by a fodder demon and gave up because he realized his ideals were driving his people into deprivation and weakness to pass the buck to Garrosh respectively. The tenure of the aggressive Warchiefs is longer total even without including the actual birthplace of the Horde in WC1 and WC2.
@Aucald

You are setting aside the specific for the general in order to make a point you know is untrue. That a lot of the votes for Baine in this specific poll are Alliance posters and Alliance players is provable fact. Some have been named already, I can run the gamut for you if you like. The possession of characters does not eliminate one's preference for one faction or its themes over another. That I have a night elf doesn't mean I'm any less a Horde poster. That Shattenlied or whoever has a Horde character lying around them doesn't make him any less an Alliance poster.

You are reaching for general arguments that could hypothetically be true over the observable, factual reality in this specific instance that the numbers for Baine here are significantly inflated by Alliance posters, something you'd have to be willfully ignorant to ignore. On top of the fact that the positions you place for why Alliance could vote Baine hypothetically comprise very small numbers of actual posters. In the same instance while someone could vote Sylvanas while leaning Alliance in order to keep the war content going, the ones who would do so are very few.

[Schattenlied]

The New Horde is a meme.

Tell that to Blizzard, they are the ones calling it the new Horde.

The tenure of the aggressive Warchiefs

And also the other aggressive leader only got their position through a third party manipulating the one who named them Warchief.

Not so sure that one should count.

So, we have one warchief who was deposed for being too aggressive, and another one who was appointed falsely and is likely gonna get deposed at some point as well.


Also your 7 expansions thing is hilarious, because it leaves out the WC3-vanilla portion of the new Horde, which if included tips it heavily towards the non-aggressive/non-conquest side.

That Shattenlied or whoever has a Horde character lying around them doesn't make him any less an Alliance poster.

"This person doesn't agree with MY idea of what the Horde is, they must be an Alliance poster!"

Nice strawman there.

[Super Dickmann]

Also your 7 expansions thing is hilarious, because it leaves out the WC3-vanilla portion of the new Horde, which if included tips it heavily towards the non-aggressive/conquest side.

Not really, I'm actually doing you a favor by not including WC1 and WC2 which along with the gulf where they were the only version of the Horde significantly outweighs the tenure of muh honor.

So, we have one warchief who was deposed for being too aggressive, and another one who was appointed falsely and is likely gonna get deposed at some point as well.

And, what of it? Their versions of the Horde, where the Horde was about conquest, outweighs in length the tenure of the other two Warchiefs, one of whom, Thrall, who is the founder of the muh honor ideology, quit specifically because it wasn't working and resonating with his people and his green guilt had left them to languish in a shitty desert.

Blizzard can call it what they like, they're wrong. Direct continuity exists and no organisational changes took place.

[Eazy]

This poll is not biased at all. ~~

[Aucald]

Tell that to Blizzard, they are the ones calling it the new Horde.

"New Horde" is one of the labels used to differentiate the various incarnations of the Horde over the life of the Warcraft IP. I think it's a bit disingenuous to say "there is no New Horde" as it's long been a working term of use, but it is technically correct that the Horde as an organization sees itself as an unbroken chain stretching back to its formation on Draenor (they're not *proud* of that, but they also don't deny those prior organizations were also them). The Horde of Blackhand and Doomhammer is referred to as the "Old Horde" to differentiate it from Thrall's wide-ranging reforms of Orcish society, moving back to its Shamanic roots and away from the conflict that had previous defined it. You've also got the Dark Horde of Rend Blackhand made of those Old Horde members who refused Thrall's reforms, the Fel Horde that remained or were stranded in Draenor/Outland and so became even more Fel-corrupted due to Magtheridon (and then Illidan), and also Garrosh's True Horde who represented the xenophobic supremacists who rejected the rest of the Horde and derided them as not strong enough to be part of their view of what the Horde should be.

"New Horde" is a valid term, but only if you're explicitly comparing the current Horde to any of its previous incarnations or splinter groups.

[Rafoel]

Even Nathanos hesitated when ordered to burn the tree.

He hesitated because he was surprised by this order - he, like all others, thought they are going to conquer Teldrassil.

He couldn't care less about night elves. He is more evil than Sylvanas.

[Kuntantee]

Yet another traitor among our ranks that deserves a public execution.

[Schattenlied]

Not really, I'm actually doing you a favor by not including WC1 and WC2 which along with the gulf where they were the only version of the Horde significantly outweighs the tenure of muh honor.

No you're not, because we're talking about the New Horde, not the Old Horde. Leaving them out isn't doing a favor, it's just common sense, because they aren't part of the discussion.

And, what of it? Their versions of the Horde, where the Horde was about conquest, outweighs in length the tenure of the other two Warchiefs

Not if you include WC3-vanilla, which you are only not including because it makes your argument look better... The New Horde didn't start in TBC.

Blizzard can call it what they like, they're wrong.

It's cute that you think you have any say in what's canon in the lore.