i resign

i hereby hand in my resignation.
though i may have pretty much left already, i would like too make it official and binding.

my free connection will be no more and i cant afford cable and theres no way im paying for a dial up connection.

not too worry as its not like i spend hours each day on the net downloading things and such, comic reading and game thinging anyway.

fuck it.

*turns, kicks a stone and slowly walks into the sunset*

 

Maybe it's Narzaniztan for all you know. Though such country doesn't exist. :smile:

 

well the fact is i leave this magical world by april the, well end.
yes im new zealand and no we dont have AOL here. we have been spared but the upperclass have the great invention of cable.

what you gonna do except from me then, create stupid threads and destroy all my credibility.
no... i leave that too the pros. loo or 1oo or Loo, what ever you are these days.
keep it trucken.
go the 80s.
you love it

 

Why can't you find a good cheap dial-up plan carlstar? I'm sure there's something around.

Secondly, can you imagine AOL trying to justify the A in New Zealand? I mean, are they going to call themselves NZOL? Hell no. In some ways, you guys are lucky...Although, one question. Where the hell is Zealand? If there's a New Zealand, then there must be an original Zealand somewhere musn't there?

 

Re: Old Zealand

Zeeland is a province of the Netherlands :smile:

 

to elaborate:
from This Page:

The naming of New Zealand

There were actually two New Zealand's at first.

The very first time the name "New Zealand" appeared in history was in 1620, when the Dutch ship "Duyfken" set off on a search for gold and riches, rumoured to be somewhere in the Spice Islands region. During the excursion, the Captain of the Duyfken, Captain Willem Jansz, discovered an island off the coast of New Guinea, which he named "Nieu Zelandt."

The name "Nieu Zelandt" remained on maps until at least 1792.

The second New Zealand
Abel Tasman's discovery

It was sometime between 1643 and 1645, once it was discovered that the "Staten Landt" of Tasman was not part of the great Southern Continent, that the name was changed to Zelandia Nova (the Dutch equivalent of Nieeuw Zeeland), after the Dutch province of Zeelandt. The name Zelandia, or Zeeland, appeared on maps for the first time around 1645.

There appear to be no records which explain precisely how New Zealand received its name. One theory is the possible link between New Zealand and Hollandia Nova, the original name given to Australia. The two Dutch provinces of Holland and Zeelandt were separated by sea, the same as Hollandia Nova (Australia) and Zelandia Nova (New Zealand)

 

Thanks for that. More than I ever really wanted or needed to know, but now I do.

Tasmania had the coolest name - Van Diemen's Land. I realise it's probably named after an explorer or something like that, but it's still a cool name.

 

lol, yeah, it even still is called after an explorer you know :smile:.

That, and I used to live some 40 kilometers from the border of old zeeland :smile:.

We (the dutch) may not do an awfull lot of public stuff nowadays (though more than you'd think), we sure did a lot of stuff in the past :smile:.

 

Hum... I'm confused by carlstar... what you gonna do except me?.. what?

 

it's like what happened to the british... once upon a time the sun never set on their empire... now they have a royal scandal and feel lucky in the u.s. notices...

 

That's not strictly true. Barring music and films, there is very little concern here about whether the US reads our news. It's the same everywhere - you don't pay much attention to current affairs of other countries. Even people who feel well-informed are usually a long way off the understanding of nationals.

Regarding the old British Empire: I'm bloody glad it's gone. Most of it was operated on the proceeds of exploitation, and god knows how much cultural diversity we lost because of it.

All those colonial empires were the same, including those of Holland, France, Spain, Portugal and Germany. I hope we're nearing the point where the world can agree that right of conquest is no right at all.

 

while i agree with the whole three cheers for defunct world powers, i gotta applaud the powers that got my ass on this continent, even if it was ancestorial ass...

 

I absolutely despise the mentality "If I can do it, then it's my right to do so". While it might be the ultimate anarchist statement, strong and brainless morons tend to use it to justify their actions, and anarchists are rarely those type of people.

It was also the mentality of the colonists, which I find absolutely shocking. I'm glad the days of imperialism are over - look at how badly they screwed the world over. WW1 had it's roots in imperialism.

 

double post, yay! :smile:

As for what happened to the dutch..
For one, we were at war with Spain during the great conquests (c. 1600-1700), during which England also screwed us over several times. c 1800 France occupied us, during which time England 'took over' what is now called Indonesia, though I think we kinda took it back, cos it was a colony till after WWII even. We also traded New York for Surinam some time earlier than that - I think under the threat of Cannons or something :smile:. Around 1830 Belgium also split off, making for even more internal struggles.

Also most of the colonies were not a National enterpise, most of them were Private enterprises, and unlike the French who went for domination & francofication, we were mainly interested in trading, most of the dutch settlements are on the shores, rarely did anyone venture into the inlands of the Colonized country.

So basically we got screwed over several times by the surrounding nations, costing us a lot of power and influence, ah well, such is life. :smile:

To answer DU's question: Yes, someone did sink our fleet, more than once even :smile:.