[DEFEATED] Repeal "Liberate Republicans"

[Crazy girl]

The Security Council,

Aware that Republicans was invaded and passworded by The Greater German Reich on December 20, 2010,

Affirming that the Republicans has since been refounded by Jeffersonian Republicans,

Noting that Jeffersonian Republicans has barred executive powers to any would-be delegates,

Confident that SC#41 has served it's purpose and should no longer be in effect,

Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution #41 "Liberate Republicans.

[Todd McCloud]

The Security Council,

AWARE that Republicans was invaded and passworded by The Greater German Reich on December 20, 2010,

AFFIRMING that Republicans has since been refounded by Jeffersonian Republicans,

NOTING that Jeffersonian Republicans has barred executive powers to any would-be delegates,

CONFIDENT that SC#41 has served it's purpose and should no longer be in effect,

HEREBY repeals Security Council Resolution #41 "Liberate Republicans.

I made a few edits - mostly changing some words around and removing some redundancies. Just my personal edits though.

[Wolfstar WA Mission]

I appreciate the insight Todd. I will edit those in.

[The Stalker]

Defunct as it may be, I know the found and region would prefer to keep the liberation in place. I see no good reason to repeal it against their wishes, it's a little piece of NS history.

[Wolfstar WA Mission]

Defunct as it may be, I know the found and region would prefer to keep the liberation in place. I see no good reason to repeal it against their wishes, it's a little piece of NS history.

Since the region has been refounded, and the delegate can no longer exercise executive power, what is the point to leaving it in place. Once the region is liberated, or in this case refounded, the security councils obligation to the region ends. All it is now is trophy badge, so they can say they have one.

[The Stalker]

Maybe so, but Mr WA Mission, might I suggest being a little more original in your resolutions, there are better ways to earn your authorship badge than clipping someone's wings.

[Wolfstar WA Mission]

Maybe so, but Mr WA Mission, might I suggest being a little more original in your resolutions, there are better ways to earn your authorship badge than clipping someone's wings.

Who's wings are being clipped? Their region is totally secure. This is nothing more than housecleaning, that I see happening here all the time. And it is Ogrim Frostwolf for your information. It is right there in my signature Mr. Strawberry.

[The Stalker]

Well like I said, defunct or unnecessary as it may be I know the founder would be disappointed to have this repealed. I know your looking for your authorship badge, i'm just saying there are better ways to do that than taking someone else's away. It's apart of NS history, and shouldn't be repeal against the residents' wishes.

[Wolfstar WA Mission]

Submitted.

[Topid]

Will of course be voting against this should it get to vote. Natives want the Lib, and the founder could CTE again.

[Zaolat]

Will of course be voting against this should it get to vote. Natives want the Lib, and the founder could CTE again.

Agreed slightly, and will do likewise.

[Cormac Stark]

I don't see anymore point in repealing the resolution than in keeping it. It has no effect either way while the region has a Founder, and if the Founder should cease to exist again in the future this will keep the region safer than it would be without the liberation resolution in place. If natives don't want it repealed, I'm definitely against repeal.

[Chester Pearson]

I don't see anymore point in repealing the resolution than in keeping it. It has no effect either way while the region has a Founder, and if the Founder should cease to exist again in the future this will keep the region safer than it would be without the liberation resolution in place. If natives don't want it repealed, I'm definitely against repeal.

Does Westwind want his commendation repealed? If not, you should definitely be against that repeal.....

[Cormac Stark]

I don't see anymore point in repealing the resolution than in keeping it. It has no effect either way while the region has a Founder, and if the Founder should cease to exist again in the future this will keep the region safer than it would be without the liberation resolution in place. If natives don't want it repealed, I'm definitely against repeal.

Does Westwind want his commendation repealed? If not, you should definitely be against that repeal.....

Yeah, because the nominees for commendations are exactly the same as the natives in liberated regions.

[Chester Pearson]

Does Westwind want his commendation repealed? If not, you should definitely be against that repeal.....

Yeah, because the nominees for commendations are exactly the same as the natives in liberated regions.

A dead region at that. Hell why don't we liberate every puppet dump out there while were at it?

[KaelThas Quilor]

Does Westwind want his commendation repealed? If not, you should definitely be against that repeal.....

Yeah, because the nominees for commendations are exactly the same as the natives in liberated regions.

....

Did I just agree with Cormac? Well, I mean the current model.

*X-files tune plays*

[Austropia]

Yeah, because the nominees for commendations are exactly the same as the natives in liberated regions.

A dead region at that. Hell why don't we liberate every puppet dump out there while were at it?

Perhaps there is some medium to repealing the liberation and leaving it totally in place. If the council could monitor the region while it is rebuilt, the local populous could grow healthily into a self-sustaining region. Then we could repeal the liberation in full. As to "Liberating every puppet dump", Austropia feels that it is the duty of the world assembly to aid those in need to better life for all. No matter their situation or belief.

[Aeryis]

I can't pretend to understand the history of the situation here, but I do see that the author is no longer a WA member... and I vote against proposals submitted by folks who enroll, submit, and immediately resign on principle.

[Unibot III]

I can't pretend to understand the history of the situation here, but I do see that the author is no longer a WA member... and I vote against proposals submitted by folks who enroll, submit, and immediately resign on principle.

Good point. The author himself is pretty sketchy.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Voting against. This is a safeguard against the horrors of the past conducted on the region.

[Evil Wolf]

Voting against. This is a safeguard against the horrors of the past conducted on the region.

I'd like to think the founder still existing and the WA Delegate controls being turned off do that just fine.

[Cormac Stark]

Voting against. This is a safeguard against the horrors of the past conducted on the region.

I'd like to think the founder still existing and the WA Delegate controls being turned off do that just fine.

The Founder has ceased to exist before. Let's not pretend that you care about safeguards.

[Evil Wolf]

The Founder has ceased to exist before. Let's not pretend that you care about safeguards.

And yet we repeal Liberation Proposals against founderless regions all the time. They don't have a founder or blocked WA controls, and yet we deem those regions, most of which have just recently been raided, safe enough to repeal their Liberate.

How is it that those regions are now suddenly safe but this one, which was refounded three years ago after being raided nearly half a decade ago and has a founder, is so unsafe we can't repeal its Liberation?

The logic seems to be misplaced.

[Naginii]

Defunct as it may be, I know the found and region would prefer to keep the liberation in place. I see no good reason to repeal it against their wishes, it's a little piece of NS history.

Interesting. So, the region is no longer under threat, has an active founder and can protect itself — but the because the founder still wants the protection, and it's a piece of history, we should vote to keep this in place.

No. That was never the point of the Liberation tool, and the WA shouldn't be in the business of handing out favors to founders to protect their feelings.

Further:

1. WA-imposed Liberations were never meant to be kept in place in perpetuity — they were a quick method to open a founder-less region back to natives.
2. A region with an active founder doesn't need this to protect their region; their finger on the banject button keeps a region safe from usurpation and raid. It's in the FAQ: run the region as you wish.
3. Feelings of the founder should give way to longterm considerations of legal precedent. Keeping this under Liberation keeps the region out of free and fair competition on the gamemap, and sets a legal precedent for continuance for other similar conditions in the future. Consider the long term affect this will have on the future of the game. You do it once, for the wrong reasons, you can find yourself swamped with regions wanting the same WA favor in the future, and for less noble or worthy rationales.

The feelings of the founder, or the original author, shouldn't be germane to this. Further, I find it very unsettling that one of the metrics for measuring a proposed WA legislation's viability, is the affect passage or repeal will have on someone's authorship badge or WA career. That should be the last thing under consideration by this group if it wants to keep and hold credibility as an objective governing body.

Legislate on facts, not feelings.

[Topid]

The Founder has ceased to exist before. Let's not pretend that you care about safeguards.

And yet we repeal Liberation Proposals against founderless regions all the time. They don't have a founder or blocked WA controls, and yet we deem those regions, most of which have just recently been raided, safe enough to repeal their Liberate.

How is it that those regions are now suddenly safe but this one, which was refounded three years ago after being raided nearly half a decade ago and has a founder, is so unsafe we can't repeal its Liberation?

The logic seems to be misplaced.

The logic is we should only take the four days to repeal a Liberation if the natives want it repealed. Most Liberations get repealed because the natives want the freedom to place a password if they want to later. Many like Belgium's don't get repealed because it would be a waste of time.

For the record, this founder is not the original founder. The original founder did not CTE, he was deleted, and was a horrid person. He was banned from The Conservative Coalition back in '08 and spent years trying to get even. I think most of the people in Republicans even by the time of the Liberation never even met the guy - but I'm not sure.

Anyway, back on point. No one gains anything by repealing this against the native's wills, except of course the author who would get to say he'd authored an SC resolution. There's no point in this vote.