[DEFEATED] Condemn Royal Lagrangian

[Elegarth]

Oh right. I meant TWI.

Approving no legislation is just as bad as approving every last proposal imo.

Did I say TWP doesn't approve any proposal? No, I said rarely. Those ones which deserve approval get it. The vast majority are like the present proposal, undeserving.

Unfortunately, proposals rarely reach the quality level I personally like to approve them, or deal with topics I find particularly important/interesting for me to bypass a bit on the quality.

I'm not forced or required to approve every nonsense that comes via the proposal system. But I'm tged daily about new proposals nonetheless.

This one, I'm surprised it made it, I hope our WA community knows better than to pass it.

[Wrapper]

I absolutely refuse to approve or vote for a proposal when I receive two telegrams from the author asking for approval/vote. Against.

[Galiantus VII]

I absolutely refuse to approve or vote for a proposal when I receive two telegrams from the author asking for approval/vote. Against.

It's a personal feud gone wild, and both sides involved are very immature about it.

[Vendar Republic]

voting for but a tad worried. the whole story seems extremely divided.

[Vancouvia]

i vote in favor

You gotta join the WA first

[The Silver Sentinel]

i vote in favor

You gotta join the WA first

Who says they don't have a WA puppet?

[We Are Not the NSA]

You gotta join the WA first

Who says they don't have a WA puppet?

43 minutes ago: Vendar Republic was admitted to the World Assembly.
46 minutes ago: Vendar Republic applied to join the World Assembly.

[We Couldnt Agree On A Name]

voting for but a tad worried. the whole story seems extremely divided.

Welcome to the security counsel, there's punch and tin pots by the door.

Committing a coup and attempting a coup are not the same thing, regardless of what one's gameplay ideology may be. If he is truly harassing other players, and if he really does have some magic way of removing approvals, simply filling out a GHR would be much more efficient than wasting time condemning them.

The ethics of an action are not dependent on success. Regardless he did not merely attempt a coup, he committed it. Yes he was eventually toppled, but not before used his position to disrupt the region.

And it's not impossible to remove approvals without drawing the ire of the moderators as I'm sure you know. You could for example send a couple loyal nations to the region to endorse someone else, It doesn't even have to be someone loyal to you, once the delegate is replaced by anyone the approval is removed. In many regions this doesn't even take more then one or two endorsements.

So no this is not a matter for the moderators, this is exactly the sort of thing condemnation is for, expressing shock and dismay.

[Galiantus VII]

And it's not impossible to remove approvals without drawing the ire of the moderators as I'm sure you know. You could for example send a couple loyal nations to the region to endorse someone else, It doesn't even have to be someone loyal to you, once the delegate is replaced by anyone the approval is removed. In many regions this doesn't even take more then one or two endorsements.

You mean, like what I did to remove five approvals yesterday - by myself? I'm flattered, really.

I am honestly surprised no raider organizations do this against liberation proposals. They regularly field 2 or 3 taggers per update - sometimes 5 or 6 - and because of the extra help in the would-be target regions from other natives with endorsements, it would be - no, it is easier than tag-raiding.

[Wallenburg]

"I oppose this resolution on several simple grounds. First, it was never put through any drafting phase, either ignorance or arrogance driving the premature submission of this resolution. Second, largely as a result of the first issue, this resolution is sloppy and, in some cases, incomprehensible. While I may support a condemnation of the target nation, I cannot understand the particulars of this resolution's argument, and my office has not the funds to conduct an investigation into such an obscure nation and its history. Third, the loud campaigning to support this resolution in its proposal phase demonstrates the same level of maturity and effort as the resolution itself, and could quite easily be mistaken for junk mail.

"On these grounds, I do not necessarily oppose a condemnation of the Royal Lagrangian, but I vehemently oppose a resolution with little thought or work put into it."

[Soviet Vernosk]

As someone who has experienced the tyranny of Lag, I fully support a condemnation. He has deceived those who called him friend, he has weakened a bustling rp community, and he must be punished.

[We Are Not the NSA]

voting for but a tad worried. the whole story seems extremely divided.

Welcome to the security counsel, there's punch and tin pots by the door.

Committing a coup and attempting a coup are not the same thing, regardless of what one's gameplay ideology may be. If he is truly harassing other players, and if he really does have some magic way of removing approvals, simply filling out a GHR would be much more efficient than wasting time condemning them.

The ethics of an action are not dependent on success. Regardless he did not merely attempt a coup, he committed it. Yes he was eventually toppled, but not before used his position to disrupt the region.

And it's not impossible to remove approvals without drawing the ire of the moderators as I'm sure you know. You could for example send a couple loyal nations to the region to endorse someone else, It doesn't even have to be someone loyal to you, once the delegate is replaced by anyone the approval is removed. In many regions this doesn't even take more then one or two endorsements.

So no this is not a matter for the moderators, this is exactly the sort of thing condemnation is for, expressing shock and dismay.

While I do agree that ethics play a role in whether an individual nation deserves to be condemned, I believe that said nation's level of success while using condemnable ethics is far more important. There are many, many people on this site who harbor ill intent, however very few of those people ever accomplish anything notable. If we simply condemned people based off of intent, every raider would have a black and red badge, even if they had only been on a single tag raid. For months, most SC writers refused to write or vote in favor of a resolution to condemn DEN, and the reason that many sited for this was the fact that DEN had yet to do anything worthy of a condemnation. Up until very recently the SC had high standards regarding condemnations that this one most certainly does not meet in its current form.

Additionally, I am perfectly aware of the ways of messing with that approval system. I assumed that he was referring to the illegal methods of doing it because I have serious doubts that he has the man power required to use legal methods. Either way, this goes back to what I said in the previous paragraph because while he made it clear that he was willing to use these less than ethical methods of removing approvals, he very clearly did not succeed in doing so.

You mean, like what I did to remove five approvals yesterday - by myself? I'm flattered, really.

I am honestly surprised no raider organizations do this against liberation proposals. They regularly field 2 or 3 taggers per update - sometimes 5 or 6 - and because of the extra help in the would-be target regions from other natives with endorsements, it would be - no, it is easier than tag-raiding.

First, I will point you to what I said above: you clearly failed to keep this from going to vote.

Second, there are several reasons why that second paragraph is false, starting with the fact that Liberations tend to have more approvals than are necessary, making the volume of hits required much higher. For example Liberate St Abbaddon had like twenty something extra approvals when it went to vote, and the second proposal for the same thing had a ridiculously high number of approvals by the time it was removed. Next, you are assuming that it is possible to plan hits ahead of time. Raiders can target a region during an update where there are only a handful of planned hits, but a large volume of specific targets requires a level of precision that I have never seen anyone achieve. Random targets are easy to hit in large numbers, but the amount of time and effort that would need to go into that sort of operation would be ridiculous.

However, the main reason that raiders do not mess with the WA's proposal quorum is that none of us care. Many of us do not participate actively in WA debates, and do not pay attention to the upcoming proposals. Those of us who do participate usually don't care enough to go out of our way to affect the SC in any major way, because our time could be better spent on other projects. I do not debate against Liberations, and I would not attempt to keep one from being voted upon, because I am above using such tactics (except in one extreme case, in which I used a similar tactic), and I don't know anyone who would. Frankly, when we start an occupation, we are neither surprised nor distraught when the region gets liberated, because it is an inevitability. We start every occupation expecting a liberation to come sooner or later, and plan accordingly.

[Galiantus VII]

You mean, like what I did to remove five approvals yesterday - by myself? I'm flattered, really.

I am honestly surprised no raider organizations do this against liberation proposals. They regularly field 2 or 3 taggers per update - sometimes 5 or 6 - and because of the extra help in the would-be target regions from other natives with endorsements, it would be - no, it is easier than tag-raiding.

First, I will point you to what I said above: you clearly failed to keep this from going to vote.

An hour before it was to be taken off the floor the proposal in question still needed 4 approvals, and in the six hours up until then it had only received slightly less than one every hour. Yes I failed, but the point was that We Couldnt Agree On A Name actually suggested what I had already attempted before I decided to bring it up, and in such a close threshold as this my actions were a legitimate threat to this resolution. I think that reflects well on the legitimacy of the tactic.

Second, there are several reasons why that second paragraph is false, starting with the fact that Liberations tend to have more approvals than are necessary, making the volume of hits required much higher. For example Liberate St Abbaddon had like twenty something extra approvals when it went to vote, and the second proposal for the same thing had a ridiculously high number of approvals by the time it was removed. Next, you are assuming that it is possible to plan hits ahead of time. Raiders can target a region during an update where there are only a handful of planned hits, but a large volume of specific targets requires a level of precision that I have never seen anyone achieve. Random targets are easy to hit in large numbers, but the amount of time and effort that would need to go into that sort of operation would be ridiculous.

Fair enough. However, for other proposals I guarantee any dedicated organization could have a profound effect by using these tactics. If I had a partner in opposing this proposal it would probably not be at vote right now.

What I am really getting at is that I am not as experienced as raiders at doing things like this (I don't even know how to trigger!), and this was my first attempt at anything in a long time. If I can swoop in alone and come this close to blocking a proposal like this one, imagine the potential any trained military has.

However, the main reason that raiders do not mess with the WA's proposal quorum is that none of us care. Many of us do not participate actively in WA debates, and do not pay attention to the upcoming proposals. Those of us who do participate usually don't care enough to go out of our way to affect the SC in any major way, because our time could be better spent on other projects. I do not debate against Liberations, and I would not attempt to keep one from being voted upon, because I am above using such tactics (except in one extreme case, in which I used a similar tactic), and I don't know anyone who would. Frankly, when we start an occupation, we are neither surprised nor distraught when the region gets liberated, because it is an inevitability. We start every occupation expecting a liberation to come sooner or later, and plan accordingly.

That makes sense. But I am not a raider, so I guess that all didn't occur to me at first. Just consider that I think you are overestimating the difficulty involved in carrying out operations such as these.

[We Are Not the NSA]

First, I will point you to what I said above: you clearly failed to keep this from going to vote.

An hour before it was to be taken off the floor the proposal in question still needed 4 approvals, and in the six hours up until then it had only received slightly less than one every hour. Yes I failed, but the point was that We Couldnt Agree On A Name actually suggested what I had already attempted before I decided to bring it up, and in such a close threshold as this my actions were a legitimate threat to this resolution. I think that reflects well on the legitimacy of the tactic.

Second, there are several reasons why that second paragraph is false, starting with the fact that Liberations tend to have more approvals than are necessary, making the volume of hits required much higher. For example Liberate St Abbaddon had like twenty something extra approvals when it went to vote, and the second proposal for the same thing had a ridiculously high number of approvals by the time it was removed. Next, you are assuming that it is possible to plan hits ahead of time. Raiders can target a region during an update where there are only a handful of planned hits, but a large volume of specific targets requires a level of precision that I have never seen anyone achieve. Random targets are easy to hit in large numbers, but the amount of time and effort that would need to go into that sort of operation would be ridiculous.

Fair enough. However, for other proposals I guarantee any dedicated organization could have a profound effect by using these tactics. If I had a partner in opposing this proposal it would probably not be at vote right now.

What I am really getting at is that I am not as experienced as raiders at doing things like this (I don't even know how to trigger!), and this was my first attempt at anything in a long time. If I can swoop in alone and come this close to blocking a proposal like this one, imagine the potential any trained military has.

However, the main reason that raiders do not mess with the WA's proposal quorum is that none of us care. Many of us do not participate actively in WA debates, and do not pay attention to the upcoming proposals. Those of us who do participate usually don't care enough to go out of our way to affect the SC in any major way, because our time could be better spent on other projects. I do not debate against Liberations, and I would not attempt to keep one from being voted upon, because I am above using such tactics (except in one extreme case, in which I used a similar tactic), and I don't know anyone who would. Frankly, when we start an occupation, we are neither surprised nor distraught when the region gets liberated, because it is an inevitability. We start every occupation expecting a liberation to come sooner or later, and plan accordingly.

That makes sense. But I am not a raider, so I guess that all didn't occur to me at first. Just consider that I think you are overestimating the difficulty involved in carrying out operations such as these.

I see the point you're trying to make. In certain cases it is a valid tactic, specifically on submissions with low approval ratings. Liberations tend to have high approval rates, as there usually isn't an argument against them, unlike commendations and condemnations. It isn't particularly useful to raiders, but other organizations could fin it useful.

Anyways, this has gotten off track, so [/threadjack]

[The Great Land of Groth]

I have a question: has Lagrangian actually destroyed a region that they were not the founder of?

He "liberates" regions by kicking everyone to the curb.

[North Francia (Ancient)]

From the thread, getting the impression that the condemnation may have more approval if it went through a draft phase and received input from other members? Is this a correct assumption? Can a proposal be revised and resubmitted if it is defeated on the floor?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

If this doesn't pass I'm noting the WA is full of filthy conservatives.

Hahahahaha. That's cute.

[The Royal Lagrangian]

This region has been harassing my region for sometime now, they have used the mods as a threat and reporting false info to them about me. For the sole purpose to have me deleted and for this sole called puppet of mine that did a coup in there region was given a government postion with full powers by the founder himself. The region UCN was distroyed by them and there spamming thats when the UCN merged with us and thats when they started harassing my region. All those other regions I had nothing to do with them. This is nothing more then a personal vendetta and harassment. The founder even admitted to purposely annoying me as you can see below:

Zexiunum
11 hours ago
Oh it is pissing him off more and that was half the point of it. You see when he gets mad he shows his true colors and when he does that that makes the condemnation proposal have a better chance of succeeding. The original point was a condemnation and still is but now it is a tool to show the world how childish he really is.

[Vancouvia]

This region has been harassing my region for sometime now, they have used the mods as a threat and reporting false info to them about me. For the sole purpose to have me deleted and for this sole called puppet of mine that did a coup in there region was given a government postion with full powers by the founder himself. The region UCN was distroyed by them and there spamming thats when the UCN merged with us and thats when they started harassing my region. All those other regions I had nothing to do with them. This is nothing more then a personal vendetta and harassment. The founder even admitted to purposely annoying me as you can see below:

Zexiunum
11 hours ago
Oh it is pissing him off more and that was half the point of it. You see when he gets mad he shows his true colors and when he does that that makes the condemnation proposal have a better chance of succeeding. The original point was a condemnation and still is but now it is a tool to show the world how childish he really is.

Finally, The Real Truth, straight from the horse

[Paffnia]

The opinion of the 10000 Islands is that this is a small-scale squabble that does not deserve the SC's time, much less 7(!) campaign TGs, including two from the target nation (one for, one against, unless I misread...). I have voted AGAINST.

[Sternberg]

"While our nation has been spared from the allegedly seven TGs passed during the author's, erm, 'enthusiastic' campaign, we do not believe that the current proposal (as is) stands to scrutiny. The lack of a drafting and consultation process - which could have caught errors in the proposal, as well as allegations of what appears to be a "small-scale squabble" running amok completely baffles us as to why this matter was brought to the Security Council directly, rather then sorted out via arbitration between between the two parties.

As a voting nation within the World Assembly, we must therefore vote AGAINST this proposal, citing our displeasure (if TRL's allegation is correct) that a private squabble has resulted in a Condemnation proposal to be misused in such a fashion, thereby wasting the Security Council's time."

Henry Melverry
Royal Consul, Sternberg Legislative Assembly

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

From the thread, getting the impression that the condemnation may have more approval if it went through a draft phase and received input from other members? Is this a correct assumption? Can a proposal be revised and resubmitted if it is defeated on the floor?

If you had submitted it to a draft phase then you probably would have received help in the drafting, obvious illegalities, poor grammar, poor phrasing etc., pointed out and suggestions made for improvement.

I doubt it would have made any difference to the outcome. Most are seeing this as a dummy spit between two minor regions that should never have made it to the floor. I don't see that redrafting and resubmitting this will change those opinions.

[North Francia (Ancient)]

From the thread, getting the impression that the condemnation may have more approval if it went through a draft phase and received input from other members? Is this a correct assumption? Can a proposal be revised and resubmitted if it is defeated on the floor?

If you had submitted it to a draft phase then you probably would have received help in the drafting, obvious illegalities, poor grammar, poor phrasing etc., pointed out and suggestions made for improvement.

I doubt it would have made any difference to the outcome. Most are seeing this as a dummy spit between two minor regions that should never have made it to the floor. I don't see that redrafting and resubmitting this will change those opinions.

It does seem that those who really support the proposal are those who have a history with the nation in question. Though we don't know if any GHR on the game side is being investigated or looked into.

As for those here in the thread who claimed they received seven telegrams? That's rather disconcerting.

This region has been harassing my region for sometime now, they have used the mods as a threat and reporting false info to them about me. For the sole purpose to have me deleted and for this sole called puppet of mine that did a coup in there region was given a government postion with full powers by the founder himself. The region UCN was distroyed by them and there spamming thats when the UCN merged with us and thats when they started harassing my region. All those other regions I had nothing to do with them. This is nothing more then a personal vendetta and harassment. The founder even admitted to purposely annoying me as you can see below:

Zexiunum
11 hours ago
Oh it is pissing him off more and that was half the point of it. You see when he gets mad he shows his true colors and when he does that that makes the condemnation proposal have a better chance of succeeding. The original point was a condemnation and still is but now it is a tool to show the world how childish he really is.

Finally, The Real Truth, straight from the horse

Truth is objective, rather than subjective. If this telegram really exists, where's his screencapped proof? Besides, if it's harassment like he claims, did he file a GHR? We'll certainly be doing that in the future rather than bring it up to the Security Council.

[Jersey Republic]

This region has been harassing my region for sometime now, they have used the mods as a threat and reporting false info to them about me. For the sole purpose to have me deleted and for this sole called puppet of mine that did a coup in there region was given a government postion with full powers by the founder himself. The region UCN was distroyed by them and there spamming thats when the UCN merged with us and thats when they started harassing my region. All those other regions I had nothing to do with them. This is nothing more then a personal vendetta and harassment. The founder even admitted to purposely annoying me as you can see below:

Zexiunum
11 hours ago
Oh it is pissing him off more and that was half the point of it. You see when he gets mad he shows his true colors and when he does that that makes the condemnation proposal have a better chance of succeeding. The original point was a condemnation and still is but now it is a tool to show the world how childish he really is.

Shut up falvanize, you threatened to destroy TURA, and we banned you for that, you aren't an angel

[Neo-Vinnland]

This whole thing is a shenanigan, and makes the SC seem like a playground of children singling others out to be scolded by people who have no idea what is going on.

This is clearly a personal vendetta.