SUBMITTED: Liberate Feudal Japan

[Janet Dobinson]

After witnessing the numerous ejections over in Feudal Japan today, I thought it would be appropriate to bring this very rough draft for the region's liberation to the SC's attention.

Please give me your thoughts on this:

Description: recognizing that the region of Feudal Japan was liberated on 1st October by the combined forces of FRA, TITO, Equilism, Texas, Europeia, 00000 A World Power, Yggdrasil, The United Kingdom, Crusaders of Justice, Liberty Alliance, Antarctica, Royal Federation of Nations and residents of Tokugawa Japan.

NOTING that this invasion, which took opportune advantage of the ‘free-entry’ mandated by resolution SC6 and the removal of the secret password this entailed, has once again brought about the regrettable imposition of a new secret password and the systematic ejection of resident nations, nations which had merely taken advantage of the ‘free-entry’ initially accorded to them.

UNDERSTANDING that the ability to install a password in the region was initially sequestered to prevent such acts, acts which the wider community have generally found to be distasteful and regressive.

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate in Feudal Japan, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the repeal of SC6, has subsequently used the password in such a nefarious and disreputable way.

FURTHER NOTING that the initial liberation of Feudal Japan in this instance has been used to do exactly what it was meant to prevent.

The World Assembly hereby removes the ability to institute a password the in stated region until such time as it sees fit.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

1; I know nothing on this subject.. so I won't support nor disprove of this movement to re-liberate LJ until I get some answers.

2; You should wait to propose this till after [violet] separates the WA's voting streams, because this proposal is very 'circular' (if you know what I mean) making it a prime target to be voted down for "wasting time".

recognizing that the region of Feudal Japan was liberated on 1st October by the combined forces of FRA, TITO, Equilism, Texas, Europeia, 00000 A World Power, Yggdrasil, The United Kingdom, Crusaders of Justice, Liberty Alliance, Antarctica, Royal Federation of Nations and residents of Tokugawa Japan.

Capitalize the R on Recognizing, Switch around "1st" and "October" (unless you wish to say "the 1st of October"), and tell us the year of the liberation -- because remember, if the proposal is passed, it should make 'sense' in a couple of years to onlookers of Charlotte's Index. Oh and use a different word, or phrase than 'liberation' (to avoid confusion) .. or ...

RECALLS that SC#7 notes "..forces of the FRA, TITO, Equilism, Texas, Europeia, 00000 A World Power, Yggdrasil, The United Kingdom, Crusaders of Justice, Liberty Alliance, Antarctica, and Royal Federation of Nations ... neutraliz[ed] the act of invasion perpetrated by Catlandatopia, Fox Rite, The Cathedral, and Blades of Conquest upon the region Feudal Japan as it was cited in .. [retired] resolution [SC#6]" on October 1st, 2009;

NOTING that this recalled invasion took opportune advantage of the ‘free-entry’ mandated by resolution SC#6 and the removal of the secret password this entailed;

AWARE that this has once again brought about the regrettable imposition of a new secret password and the systematic ejection of resident nations -- residents which had merely taken advantage of the ‘free-entry’ initially accorded to them by the World Assembly;

Some changes made there.

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate of Feudal Japan, The Koz, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the retiring of SC#6, has subsequently exploited this power to ban several nation unwarranted, including...
Yamamoto Kansuke,
Mandy Mandelson,
The Imperial Fists,
Ern Nest,
Kanbei,
Feudal Japan Girl,
Utilax,
Bolivarian Alternative,
Jambudvipan Envoy XIV,
Sunset Bay;

Specifics are good. You also should mention that this wide-spread banning is for a campaign to increase the delegate's influence level... and possible quote the region's WFE..."All non-WA nations: please LEAVE the region in order to support the delegate's influence level. "

FURTHER NOTING that the initial liberation of Feudal Japan in this instance has been used to do exactly what it was meant to prevent;

Now explain to me why this liberation will be different.

[Janet Dobinson]

Thanks for your constructive criticism Unibot. With your permission I will add your amendments if that is ok? I know what you mean by 'wasting time' but the opponents of this resolution know that time is of the essence.

As for

Now explain to me why this liberation will be different.

This liberation will be a more legitimate and balanced liberation. The first was used as a means to invade Feudal Japan with the expressed aim of taking the delegacy. This one is to prevent the current delegate from hiding behind a password while he ejects nations, actions which go against the spirit of the initial liberation proposal. In a sense then, it is something of a punishment for the way the password was (ab)used after the ability to re-institute it was granted by the SC.

[Unibot]

Thanks for your constructive criticism Unibot. With your permission I will add your amendments if that is ok? I know what you mean by 'wasting time' but the opponents of this resolution know that time is of the essence.

As for

Now explain to me why this liberation will be different.

This liberation will be a more legitimate and balanced liberation. The first was used as a means to invade Feudal Japan with the expressed aim of taking the delegacy. This one is to prevent the current delegate from hiding behind a password while he ejects nations, actions which go against the spirit of the initial liberation proposal. In a sense then, it is something of a punishment for the way the password was (ab)used after the ability to re-institute it was granted by the SC.

Okay, great. Remember to put a clause nearing the end explaining your reasoning, which you just discussed.

You can use my amendments, thats what they're there for.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

Oh, but you should probably use a paragraph instead of a list,

so...

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate of Feudal Japan, The Koz, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the retiring of SC#6, has subsequently exploited this power to ban several nation unwarranted, including...
Yamamoto Kansuke,
Mandy Mandelson,
The Imperial Fists,
Ern Nest,
Kanbei,
Feudal Japan Girl,
Utilax,
Bolivarian Alternative,
Jambudvipan Envoy XIV,
Sunset Bay;

..should become..

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate of Feudal Japan, The Koz, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the retiring of SC#6, has subsequently exploited this power to ban several nation unwarranted, including...Yamamoto Kansuke, Mandy Mandelson, The Imperial Fists, Ern Nest, Kanbei, Feudal Japan Girl, Utilax, Bolivarian Alternative, Jambudvipan Envoy XIV and Sunset Bay;

And you should do some research, and find more nations that were banned in the sweep, if there were more.

EDIT: It appears as if the region has shed about half (or 45%) of its mass since the banningfest began, or 23 nations.

[Crabulonia]

Liberation proposals just open the floodgate for more to enter. Last Liberation it was used to depose a raider delegate, but this just allows a new battlefront for raider/defender game. With a Liberation, it doesn't get rid of intruders, it merely allows more in.

Are Liberation proposals endorsed by defender regions? Surely takes some work therefore fun from the whole raider/defender battle.

[Todd McCloud]

Liberation proposals just open the floodgate for more to enter. Last Liberation it was used to depose a raider delegate, but this just allows a new battlefront for raider/defender game. With a Liberation, it doesn't get rid of intruders, it merely allows more in.

Are Liberation proposals endorsed by defender regions? Surely takes some work therefore fun from the whole raider/defender battle.

There is nothing different here, if the facts are correct. Well, I take that back, there is one difference. The prior delegate *called* himself a raider and oppressed some natives (let's be honest, most nations), whereas the current delegate does not call himself or herself a raider and oppresses some natives.

You have my support.

[Janet Dobinson]

Liberation proposals just open the floodgate for more to enter. Last Liberation it was used to depose a raider delegate, but this just allows a new battlefront for raider/defender game. With a Liberation, it doesn't get rid of intruders, it merely allows more in.

Are Liberation proposals endorsed by defender regions? Surely takes some work therefore fun from the whole raider/defender battle.

There is nothing different here, if the facts are correct. Well, I take that back, there is one difference. The prior delegate *called* himself a raider and oppressed some natives (let's be honest, most nations), whereas the current delegate does not call himself or herself a raider and oppresses some natives.

You have my support.

Exactly right.

Thanks!

[Sedgistan]

Well I think we know the source of this resolution: viewtopic.php?p=828968#p828968

Anyhow, going through the actual text of the resolution, the first clause is correct - the region was liberated, as stated, by those defender groups.

NOTING that this invasion, which took opportune advantage of the ‘free-entry’ mandated by resolution SC6 and the removal of the secret password this entailed, has once again brought about the regrettable imposition of a new secret password and the systematic ejection of resident nations, nations which had merely taken advantage of the ‘free-entry’ initially accorded to them

However, suddenly you change to calling it an invasion, rather than a liberation?

UNDERSTANDING that the ability to install a password in the region was initially sequestered to prevent such acts, acts which the wider community have generally found to be distasteful and regressive.

The whole intention of SCR#6, as always stated, was to return Feudal Japan to native control. I know, because I wrote it.

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate in Feudal Japan, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the repeal of SC6, has subsequently used the password in such a nefarious and disreputable way.

SCR#7, written by the native delegate, was passed, repealing my liberation resolution. Its neither nefarious nor disreputable, its to allow him to password-protect the region, to enable a safe re-founding of Feudal Japan, so that they didn't have to worry about being invaded again.

FURTHER NOTING that the initial liberation of Feudal Japan in this instance has been used to do exactly what it was meant to prevent.

No, again incorrect. As stated above, the resolution was there to restore native control to the region. Now they have that, they can do as they wish with the region - which is re-founding.
[hr]
As for the recent ejections, they are non-WA nations who are being removed in order to facilitate re-founding. To re-found, one needs to empty a region first, and that is being done slowly & steadily, in a secure manner. You may also note that most of those nations are defender puppets who dropped WA status in order to defend elsewhere. They will not have any objections to having been ejected.

If you want proof that the delegate is a long term native, then see here: http://nswiki.net/index.php?title=Knigh ... did=194541

Its the old wiki page of Knights of Zion, from back in 2006, clearly stating he's a member of Feudal Japan.

[Naivetry]

Frankly, I've always thought the natives of Feudal Japan would've been better off keeping the Liberation than trying to refound. It would've been safer, rather than risking the region being snatched by a raider at refounding.

But they decided to refound instead, and the ejections are a necessary element of that process, given that raiders stash puppets in the region to impede it, and that a number of defenders haven't kept good track of their puppets.

What it comes down to is the will of the community that built up this region to begin with. They're willing to risk refounding, so who are we to get in their way?

Is the World Assembly going to dictate to the original members of a community what they can and cannot do with their own region? Are we going to see raiders proposing "Liberations" every time a native delegate attempts to refound?

And for whose benefit exactly, Janet Dobinson, are you proposing this resolution? Have you contacted any of the ejected members to see if they mind?

[Krioval]

Is the World Assembly going to dictate to the original members of a community what they can and cannot do with their own region? Are we going to see raiders proposing "Liberations" every time a native delegate attempts to refound?

Considering the difficulty sometimes in ascertaining the "original members of a community", whenever the WA passes a liberation, they are dictating what can and cannot be done with a region. I certainly can see politically savvy raiders using the ejections prior to a refounding as grounds for a liberation proposal. Whether the SC buys the argument that "mass ejections" are ongoing prior to a refounding remains to be seen. Personally, I think that FJ should refound if it wants to, but it's no longer as easy to do, just as it's not as easy to crash a region - liberations can cut both ways.

[Janet Dobinson]

Well I think we know the source of this resolution: viewtopic.php?p=828968#p828968

Anyhow, going through the actual text of the resolution, the first clause is correct - the region was liberated, as stated, by those defender groups.

NOTING that this invasion, which took opportune advantage of the ‘free-entry’ mandated by resolution SC6 and the removal of the secret password this entailed, has once again brought about the regrettable imposition of a new secret password and the systematic ejection of resident nations, nations which had merely taken advantage of the ‘free-entry’ initially accorded to them

However, suddenly you change to calling it an invasion, rather than a liberation?

UNDERSTANDING that the ability to install a password in the region was initially sequestered to prevent such acts, acts which the wider community have generally found to be distasteful and regressive.

The whole intention of SCR#6, as always stated, was to return Feudal Japan to native control. I know, because I wrote it.

DISAPPOINTED that the current delegate in Feudal Japan, after being granted the ability to re-institute the password through the repeal of SC6, has subsequently used the password in such a nefarious and disreputable way.

SCR#7, written by the native delegate, was passed, repealing my liberation resolution. Its neither nefarious nor disreputable, its to allow him to password-protect the region, to enable a safe re-founding of Feudal Japan, so that they didn't have to worry about being invaded again.

FURTHER NOTING that the initial liberation of Feudal Japan in this instance has been used to do exactly what it was meant to prevent.

No, again incorrect. As stated above, the resolution was there to restore native control to the region. Now they have that, they can do as they wish with the region - which is re-founding.
[hr]
As for the recent ejections, they are non-WA nations who are being removed in order to facilitate re-founding. To re-found, one needs to empty a region first, and that is being done slowly & steadily, in a secure manner. You may also note that most of those nations are defender puppets who dropped WA status in order to defend elsewhere. They will not have any objections to having been ejected.

If you want proof that the delegate is a long term native, then see here: http://nswiki.net/index.php?title=Knigh ... did=194541

Its the old wiki page of Knights of Zion, from back in 2006, clearly stating he's a member of Feudal Japan.

Well I don't see how a resolution in and of itself can 'restore native control', as much as it may want. It can only grant 'free-entry'. Anything after that it is in-game, but that's another debate. Now 'free-entry' has been fatally restricted and the systematic ejection of resident nations has begun. It's the same scenario. One that gave rise to the last liberation proposal I might add. The only thing different, as Todd stated, is the labels surrounding them.

Trust me, not all of them are defender puppets. Some of those nations were just taking advantage of the 'free-entry', and do object to it! Plus, with regards to the re-founding issue, the last invader delegate could have easily invoked the same argument if he wanted to re-found! It's a bit of a non-sense.

[Janet Dobinson]

Frankly, I've always thought the natives of Feudal Japan would've been better off keeping the Liberation than trying to refound. It would've been safer, rather than risking the region being snatched by a raider at refounding.

But they decided to refound instead, and the ejections are a necessary element of that process, given that raiders stash puppets in the region to impede it, and that a number of defenders haven't kept good track of their puppets.

What it comes down to is the will of the community that built up this region to begin with. They're willing to risk refounding, so who are we to get in their way?

Is the World Assembly going to dictate to the original members of a community what they can and cannot do with their own region? Are we going to see raiders proposing "Liberations" every time a native delegate attempts to refound?

And for whose benefit exactly, Janet Dobinson, are you proposing this resolution? Have you contacted any of the ejected members to see if they mind?

Yeah, I've spoken to a couple. They do indeed mind. But that's immaterial really. The fact remains they have been ejected. If they wanted to leave, wouldn't they just, well, leave?!

[Sedgistan]

Well I don't see how a resolution in and of itself can 'restore native control', as much as it may want. It can only grant 'free-entry'. Anything after that it is in-game. Now 'free-entry' has been fatally restricted and the systematic ejection of resident nations has begun. It's the same scenario. One that gave rise to the last liberation proposal. The only thing as Todd states, is the labels.

Trust me, not all of them are defender puppets. Some of those nations were just taking advantage of the 'free-entry', and do object to it! Plus, with regards to the re-founding issue, the last invader delegate could have easily invoked the same argument if he wanted to re-found!

The resolution in itself didn't, it required a liberation by the aforementioned defender groups too. Anyhow, the resolution specifically said that it was to enable former residents to return - nothing about free entry:

AWARE that the nations formerly resident in Feudal Japan can return to the region only through the intervention of the Security Council

Liberation resolutions are't about turning a region into a 'free-for-all' where anyone can come & go, they were justified by [violet] as allowing natives a way to regain their regions. Now that has been done, I don't see the problem in Feudal Japan. What exactly are you hoping to achieve, and who for? The natives have control of their region again, why deny them that, seeing as they explicitly demanded (via the Repeal Liberate Feudal Japan resolution) that they wanted to be able to password their region.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

The whole intention of SCR#6, as always stated, was to return Feudal Japan to native control. I know, because I wrote it.

I disagree, the argument of SC#6 was not completely to "liberate FJ, just for the natives", the argument was a pro-community one, in others words... "the raiders have killed the community in FJ, so lets liberate it so residents who will give the region more life can occupy it -- like those natives over there." I know because I co-wrote it.

See this line for reference,

DISAPPOINTED that the region's current occupiers have left the region to rot and degrade into a mockery of its former self - with no indication of any community activity surviving the decay;

Unfortunately that argument isn't being upheld by the massive bannings, which look at first glance to be anti-community.

[Janet Dobinson]

Nothing about 'free entry'?!!!

Liberate Feudal Japan

"A resolution to strike down Delegate-imposed barriers to free entry in a region."

The whole thing is predicated on 'free-entry'.

What exactly are you hoping to achieve, and who for? The natives have control of their region again, why deny them that, seeing as they explicitly demanded (via the Repeal Liberate Feudal Japan resolution) that they wanted to be able to password their region.

Yes, the former residents do have control of 'their' region. But the thing is, the delegate is actually committing the same actions that created the opportinity for them to be re-empowered, i.e. the passwording of the region and the subsequent ejection of resident nations. My intention here is to remind delegates who have been granted the ability to re-institute a password that they should certainly not proceed to use it in the very same way that got the password removed in the first place. Essentially, that the SC won't be trampled all over by 'explicit demands'.

[Sedgistan]

So you're against delegates passwording regions entirely? Why not bring up this opposition during the repeal of Liberate Feudal Japan? Or were you there, just under a different name, and you're now looking to remove the password so you can try and invade the region?

[Sedgistan]

The whole intention of SCR#6, as always stated, was to return Feudal Japan to native control. I know, because I wrote it.

I disagree, the argument of SC#6 was not completely to "liberate FJ, just for the natives", the argument was a pro-community one, in others words... "the raiders have killed the community in FJ, so lets liberate it so residents who will give the region more life can occupy it -- like those natives over there." I know because I co-wrote it.

See this line for reference,

DISAPPOINTED that the region's current occupiers have left the region to rot and degrade into a mockery of its former self - with no indication of any community activity surviving the decay;

Unfortunately that argument isn't being upheld by the massive bannings, which look at first glance to be anti-community.

No, the ejections are pro-community. Most the nations are defender puppets/invader sleepers (perhaps the proposal author here was one of the latter?). Those nations have been asked to move to Tokugawa Japan while re-founding takes place. When the region is re-founded, Feudal Japan can get on with operating like a normal region, not having to worry about being invaded, and they might be able to recruit again, without worrying about invaders moving in sleepers.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

So griefing is OK as long as it's committed by people you approve of?

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

The whole intention of SCR#6, as always stated, was to return Feudal Japan to native control. I know, because I wrote it.

I disagree, the argument of SC#6 was not completely to "liberate FJ, just for the natives", the argument was a pro-community one, in others words... "the raiders have killed the community in FJ, so lets liberate it so residents who will give the region more life can occupy it -- like those natives over there." I know because I co-wrote it.

See this line for reference,

DISAPPOINTED that the region's current occupiers have left the region to rot and degrade into a mockery of its former self - with no indication of any community activity surviving the decay;

Unfortunately that argument isn't being upheld by the massive bannings, which look at first glance to be anti-community.

No, the ejections are pro-community. Most the nations are defender puppets/invader sleepers (perhaps the proposal author here was one of the latter?). Those nations have been asked to move to Tokugawa Japan while re-founding takes place. When the region is re-founded, Feudal Japan can get on with operating like a normal region, not having to worry about being invaded, and they might be able to recruit again, without worrying about invaders moving in sleepers.

I said, at first glance it looks to be anti-community.

And, as someone who is involved with FJ's refounding, you should be very worried about that.

[Sedgistan]

So griefing is OK as long as it's committed by people you approve of?

I don't see how the native delegate of a region, kicking out a few nations to assist in native approved re-founding can be seen as griefing. Is the definition of grieing now going to cover any delegate who ejects a nation from their region?

[Kalibarr]

so if a native is an evil dictator it's okay as long as your a native?

Edit:not that the Delegate of Fj is an evil dictator,just a general question about the last statement.

[Sedgistan]

so if a native is an evil dictator it's okay as long as your a native?

I didn't say that, and its not really relevant to this situation, since The KoZ is neither evil, nor a dictator.

[Daynor]

So griefing is OK as long as it's committed by people you approve of?

I don't see how the native delegate of a region, kicking out a few nations to assist in native approved re-founding can be seen as griefing.

So in other words, yes.

Without the words I striked you would be kicking and screaming, slamming your fists on the table, crying at the top of your lungs. But with the words I striked, fine.

[Kalibarr]

so if a native is an evil dictator it's okay as long as your a native?

I didn't say that, and its not really relevant to this situation, since The KoZ is neither evil, nor a dictator.

poor choice of words on my part,I meant you think a delegate can do anything he want's as long as he's native?