NationStates

Words cannot express just how much I don't care about this crap. What Macedon did to Belgium was scummy, but entirely legal. It is not the World Assembly's job to even the score. Passing this will do nothing else but encourage a host of defenders to submit their own "Liberation" requests, no matter how frivolous or false the charges are, or pointless the purpose (see the "Liberate Belarus" thread) -- and if TannerFrankLand's NAZI EUROPE shenanigan is any indication, flagrant abuse of this category as well. "My former region wasn't nice to me waaah - oh, I know - LIBERATE!!!" This has got to be the worst idea in NationStates history. And coming from the game that brought you C&Cs, that's saying something.

[OOC: [violet] has said that she doesn't want the imposition of a secret password to be an automatic "game over" for regions that have been invaded. If you have a better solution to this problem, then feel free to head over to the Tech Forum and suggest it.

IC response to claims of "it's legal so it's okay" coming later.]

I see problems and potential for abuse with Liberations, but I agree with THIS one. The nation of Mexar votes For.

We acknowledge, of course, that there exists the potential to abuse the Liberation proposal. But there exists the potential to abuse any form of proposal. "Max Barry Day" was an abuse of the United Nations' resolution power, but we do not feel that it constitutes a reason that the United Nations (or its successor) should no longer have the ability to pass resolutions. We included language in this resolution reflecting our wish that Liberation resolutions be used in limited circumstances. It is a fact that ambassadors will propose foolish Liberation proposals, just as foolish proposals on every other subject matter are routinely submitted. Ultimately, it is the role of the Delegates to ensure that World Assembly resolutions be necessary and proper for floor consideration.

We also wish to respond to those that argue that we should accept the permanent occupation and eventual destruction of Belgium simply because it is legal. Just because an action is legal does not mean it is morally correct. We cannot abdicate our views on whether something is RIGHT to the question of whether it can be done without violating the rules. It is completely true that actions in relation to Belgium have been legal -- this is not in dispute. This resolution will not even make them retroactively illegal. However, we hold that they have been morally reprehensible, and seek to use the new powers of the World Assembly to reverse them.

We have been accused of bringing politics into this affair. We do not disagree with this charge. Any question before the World Assembly is of necessity a political question; nothing we pass can be "above reproach". We are voting for this resolution because it is our view that the region of Belgium deserves a better fate than a slow death. But this is only our opinion. Members who would prefer to let Belgium twist slowly in the wind are free to vote against.

[float=right][/float][Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia

Meh. Abstain.

It's gonna pass and it's pathetic.

Vinoslavia wrote:It's gonna pass and it's pathetic.

Those who have been natives of Brlgium deserve the right to have there homeland back. The threat of abuse with liberation from the WA should not take away from the fact that they deserve access back into there region. Mencer and Macedonia should have forseen something like this comming, AND if anything when this resolution passes, a new legislation should be drawn up limiting the amount of times the WA can liberate regions.

Federal Angola wrote:

Vinoslavia wrote:It's gonna pass and it's pathetic.

Those who have been natives of Brlgium deserve the right to have there homeland back. The threat of abuse with liberation from the WA should not take away from the fact that they deserve access back into there region. Mencer and Macedonia should have forseen something like this comming, AND if anything when this resolution passes, a new legislation should be drawn up limiting the amount of times the WA can liberate regions.

We simulate what the real world is like non? In the very least, we try to rule nations as we see fit. Is that not correct? Is that not why we play this game?

I for one, find it amusing that the WA will allow this to go through. If men and women had the right to their homeland, then we wouldn't see a United States of America. We wouldn't see a Greece or a Belgium. After all, these nations in the real world originally belonged to someone else. Belgium in the real world used to be a part of the Netherlands. They both once belonged to Spain. The regions themselves once belonged to the Romans. Who through the ever victorious till his death on March 15th, Julius Caesar, conquered it from the Gauls. What I'm saying is actually quite clear.

History moves forward with or without nations. One day, even my little Omega Uliza will fade into history. One day, your nations will fade into history. A footnote. Maybe a paragraph? If you're lucky...a page or a chapter.

The act of conquering, to eject a previous government in the notion that you deserve to rule this land, is despicable. We loathe it. We hate it. We spit on it's name. But it is the machine of time. Major changes and progressions of mankind are made in a large part because of conquest.

When the Jews lost Israel, where were they to go? Europe ejected them from their nations en masse for over a millenia. The few nations kind to them, were swallowed whole....by conquest.

I neither support nor decline this proposal, because if it fails, it means the act of conquest is inherently right. If it succeeds, it shall mean that the act of conquest...is inherently right. That is the purpose of this proposal is it not? You don't believe that Macedon should rule this region, so you're trying to eject the government and install your own.

I see only conquest when you speak of "liberty".

Voted in Favor

I vote for. I'm in favour of the free movement of persons, goods, capital, services and labour. I've travelled a lot, but I never met someone from customs authorities who asked me: "What's the password for entering this country?"
In a few days, the NS Belgium will be like the real Belgium: two communities, on bad terms, forced to live with each other for the time being, speaking different languages (Dutch-Macedonian), both feeling they don't get the respect they deserve. And we will have a 'prime minister' (delegate) that belongs to one of these communities.
The real Belgians, however, will be accustomed to this situation, and will feel very comfortable.

Nicely observed, Kapellen, I didn't see it like that before!

Before I vote tell me how this works. Is there some kind of massive invasion to liberate it? Do we simply tell them "Give Belgium back to the Belgians"? How does the whole liberating process occur?

New Security Council resolution category: Liberation

This would allow a nominated region to be "liberated:" if passed as a WA resolution, the region's password (if any) is removed, and the region cannot activate password protection so long as the resolution stands.

That should answer your question.

New Xania wrote:Before I vote tell me how this works. Is there some kind of massive invasion to liberate it? Do we simply tell them "Give Belgium back to the Belgians"? How does the whole liberating process occur?

This resolution would just remove the password. The natives and their allies would still have to mount a liberation effort, and the occupiers would still have the opportunity to defend against the liberators.

Thank you both for the answers. All I can see happening with that though is a long violent war with power shifting back and forth. As such I vote against.

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Words cannot express just how much I don't care about this crap. What Macedon did to Belgium was scummy, but entirely legal. It is not the World Assembly's job to even the score. Passing this will do nothing else but encourage a host of defenders to submit their own "Liberation" requests, no matter how frivolous or false the charges are, or pointless the purpose (see the "Liberate Belarus" thread) -- and if TannerFrankLand's NAZI EUROPE shenanigan is any indication, flagrant abuse of this category as well. "My former region wasn't nice to me waaah - oh, I know - LIBERATE!!!" This has got to be the worst idea in NationStates history. And coming from the game that brought you C&Cs, that's saying something.

While of course it is your right to not care, not caring is grounds for apathy and not opposition. The resolution may, after all, safely be ignored by all but the affected parties. As for the risk of abuse of the category, I think that I have already expressed my reasons why would-be abusers will face great difficulty, and Goobergunchia has just explained a view that has most of the same points anyhow.

As for me, I'm for this. Whether you're a raider, defender or just want to keep away from the whole business, this is a fairly straightforward wrong to right. How effective it'll actually be remains to be seen.

New Xania wrote:Before I vote tell me how this works. Is there some kind of massive invasion to liberate it? Do we simply tell them "Give Belgium back to the Belgians"? How does the whole liberating process occur?

The resolution will simply remove the password, that's all. It will most certainly NOT just give back Belgium back to the 'Belgians'. (Who's a 'Belgian' and who's not?) About the 'massive invasion': I hope there will be a 'massive invasion', but we will have to see how many nations really care about Belgium!
In a nutshell: removing the password just makes it possible for everyone to enter Belgium again. And that is exactly what Belgian citizens want. A region, free to everyone, to join or to leave.

In a few days, the NS Belgium will be like the real Belgium: two communities, on bad terms, forced to live with each other for the time being, speaking different languages (Dutch-Macedonian), both feeling they don't get the respect they deserve.

Clever. Very Clever.

Invasion Rules - http://www.nationstates.net/page=influence

This is straight from the designers:

"With the introduction of Regional Influence, our rules governing "Invasion Griefing" are abolished.

That means we no longer have complicated rules dictating, for example, how many residents a Delegate can eject before the moderators consider it illegal "griefing." Delegates need not worry about whether they are allowed to eject, ban, or password-protect—instead, if the game lets you do them, they're legal.

This removes a major source of angst and uncertainty for players and moderators alike. In the past, some players didn't even know there were rules about ejecting nations until after they'd broken them. Even experienced players (and moderators!) sometimes found it difficult to separate genuine invasions from region griefing. We're very glad to be able to put this situation behind us."

Invasion Greifing apparently does not exist. Not trying to start anything, just saying.

It is true that the offense of Region Griefing has been abolished. However, some of us view actions that would have been previously characterized as Region Griefing to be reprehensible even if they are now legal.

[float=right][/float][Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia

Goobergunchia wrote:It is true that the offense of Region Griefing has been abolished. However, some of us view actions that would have been previously characterized as Region Griefing to be reprehensible even if they are now legal.

[float=right][/float][Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia

Many thanks for recognizing this.
I cast my ballot for this well written resolution and am urging fellow nations of NS to support it.

Aidsboat wrote:Invasion Greifing apparently does not exist. Not trying to start anything, just saying.

To paraphrase (and hopefully, add to) what Goobergunchia has said, region griefing is no longer punished by the game moderators, but this has made the act neither less offensive nor more socially accepted since.

The United Kingdom of Millwardistan, and the ruling Norsefire Party, vote IN FAVOUR of this bill. If the current delegates are as strong as they make themselves out to be, they should have no trouble holding off counter-invasions after the invisible wall comes crashing down.

I think people have a right to password their regions if they see fit. Players might just want a region with their friends and so would naturally put in place a password system. All this bill is going to encourage is people lying about some sort of invasion or conquest in order to get into a region which does not want them (probably to cause trouble). If this bill passes then they may as well remove the option to password a region. Because it will effectively be defunct.

The password acts much like a strict immigration quota or control. If a government does not want individuals of a certain group or nationality (as wrong as I obviously feel that this is in reality) or even just want's it's country to be of one group or nationality it will seek to limit others from coming in. And essential part of a game which seeks to encapsulate all aspects of the real governing of countries.

Omega Uliza wrote:

Federal Angola wrote:

Vinoslavia wrote:It's gonna pass and it's pathetic.

Those who have been natives of Brlgium deserve the right to have there homeland back. The threat of abuse with liberation from the WA should not take away from the fact that they deserve access back into there region. Mencer and Macedonia should have forseen something like this comming, AND if anything when this resolution passes, a new legislation should be drawn up limiting the amount of times the WA can liberate regions.

We simulate what the real world is like non? In the very least, we try to rule nations as we see fit. Is that not correct? Is that not why we play this game?

I for one, find it amusing that the WA will allow this to go through. If men and women had the right to their homeland, then we wouldn't see a United States of America. We wouldn't see a Greece or a Belgium. After all, these nations in the real world originally belonged to someone else. Belgium in the real world used to be a part of the Netherlands. They both once belonged to Spain. The regions themselves once belonged to the Romans. Who through the ever victorious till his death on March 15th, Julius Caesar, conquered it from the Gauls. What I'm saying is actually quite clear.

History moves forward with or without nations. One day, even my little Omega Uliza will fade into history. One day, your nations will fade into history. A footnote. Maybe a paragraph? If you're lucky...a page or a chapter.

The act of conquering, to eject a previous government in the notion that you deserve to rule this land, is despicable. We loathe it. We hate it. We spit on it's name. But it is the machine of time. Major changes and progressions of mankind are made in a large part because of conquest.

When the Jews lost Israel, where were they to go? Europe ejected them from their nations en masse for over a millenia. The few nations kind to them, were swallowed whole....by conquest.

I neither support nor decline this proposal, because if it fails, it means the act of conquest is inherently right. If it succeeds, it shall mean that the act of conquest...is inherently right. That is the purpose of this proposal is it not? You don't believe that Macedon should rule this region, so you're trying to eject the government and install your own.

I see only conquest when you speak of "liberty".

You want to compare this to RL? Then compare it to the RL UN defending South Korea against the North, or ordering the liberation of Kuwait from Iraqi control, or promoting the self-determination of East Timor. Conquest may have been quite widely considered acceptable in RL in the past, but that isn't the case under international law nowadays...

Vinoslavia wrote:I think people have a right to password their regions if they see fit. Players might just want a region with their friends and so would naturally put in place a password system. All this bill is going to encourage is people lying about some sort of invasion or conquest in order to get into a region which does not want them (probably to cause trouble). If this bill passes then they may as well remove the option to password a region. Because it will effectively be defunct.

The point that you're missing is that Belgium isn't rightfully the Macedonians' region, it's one that they stole from its former residents.

Vinoslavia wrote:a game which seeks to encapsulate all aspects of the real governing of countries.

Oh really? So when was the last time that you saw a player lose control of a nation because of an election result within it going against their regime?