[Defeated] Repeal "Liberate NAZI EUROPE"

[Evil Wolf]

There are two possibilities, and I'd like you to consider them:

I like the third possibility myself. The possibility where you don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about. Some of us have been at this a while. A good long while at that. We watch the voting trends, and know how things are going to go within the first twelve hours. So my suggestion is to remove your foot from your mouth, sit down, shut the hell up, and listen to what is being said to you. You could of course ignore that advice, and continue to make a complete ass out of yourself. Your call.

Yeah, Tantricia, how dare you have an opinion that runs contrary to Terravoss' beliefs! Don't you know who he is? He's a really big deal who knows everything about anything ever and you should do whatever he says because he is right about all the things and stuff!

Again, I'm not sure why anyone would ever take offense to being spoken to in such a totally polite, not at all rude, manner. It's sure to bring people over to the Repeal "Liberate NAZI EUROPE" viewpoint by the scores.

[/sarcasm]

[Shadow Afforess]

It doesn't matter if the fascists stand for freedom. Protecting the freedom of all speech, even hate speech is important. After all, what is "hate" speech? Speech that makes you uncomfortable? Who decides? Tyranny of the majority? It is better to protect all speech, no matter how unsavory, then submit to mob rule.

Apparently you decide to do nothing, look the other way when people build genocidal representations. What a free society you represent. It's not about naughty words, it's about the millions that suffered immensely under Nazi Germany. You could be a denier for all I know. Put this way champ, how would you like to see a representation of a group that did horrible things to people you know and be allowed to rub it in your face? That's why the Nazi flag isn't allowed on this game. There are people that have the holocaust as a part of their ancestry here. There's nothing "free" about the way you think, in fact, it's oppressive to the people that died or survived Nazi Germany; all because some liberal child thinks it's fun. Tyranny is found in inaction and apathy.

Tyranny isn't born from freedom, it's the other way around. Look at Greece, where the golden dawn is growing popular. Their Greek government rules against the wishes of the people, stealing from the people, destroying the economy. All of Europe cheers as they destroy Greece and impoverish the citizens. That is where tyranny can grow. Not in a free society.

I don't have to look far to find flags that represent those who harmed my ancestry. I'm Irish in ancestry - the British intentionally starved millions of us to death simply to meet export quotas. Starving, my ancestors were kidnapped and sold as servants to America. Should the British flag too be banned? Mentions of the British monarchy banned?

I fail to see the difference.

[Topid]

Then they came for the furries...but I joined in because furries are weird

I forgot we had that debate. Ah, memories.

[Casita]

Apparently you decide to do nothing, look the other way when people build genocidal representations. What a free society you represent. It's not about naughty words, it's about the millions that suffered immensely under Nazi Germany. You could be a denier for all I know. Put this way champ, how would you like to see a representation of a group that did horrible things to people you know and be allowed to rub it in your face? That's why the Nazi flag isn't allowed on this game. There are people that have the holocaust as a part of their ancestry here. There's nothing "free" about the way you think, in fact, it's oppressive to the people that died or survived Nazi Germany; all because some liberal child thinks it's fun. Tyranny is found in inaction and apathy.

Tyranny isn't born from freedom, it's the other way around. Look at Greece, where the golden dawn is growing popular. Their Greek government rules against the wishes of the people, stealing from the people, destroying the economy. All of Europe cheers as they destroy Greece and impoverish the citizens. That is where tyranny can grow. Not in a free society.

I don't have to look far to find flags that represent those who harmed my ancestry. I'm Irish in ancestry - the British intentionally starved millions of us to death simply to meet export quotas. Starving, my ancestors were kidnapped and sold as servants to America. Should the British flag too be banned? Mentions of the British monarchy banned?

I fail to see the difference.

It's the same policies that you encourage that allows for groups like the golden dawn to thrive. What does that tell you about your concept of freedom?

Ofc, you fail to act, to do anything at all. If I were you I'd look to fight american/British imperialism in anyway possible. Not playing lap dog to a bunch of liberal politicians. Alas, one person or group cannot oppose all the injustices of the world, nevertheless, Nazis are a good place to start.

[Firstaria]

I'm happy to see how people here are clearly incapable of removing their "dream goggles" and look at the reality of the matter. And you here are suppose to be example for others new to the WA!

You are blaming this on the lemmings, really? You are not getting at all why this proposal failed:

THERE ARE PEOPLE OUTSIDE THAT SUPPORT NAZI EUROPE INVASION, AND WILL SUPPORT IT EVEN IF YOU MAKE THEM FULLY UNDERSTAND THE POINT YOU ARE MAKING HERE.

Why?

BECAUSE IN THE MOMENT YOU POINT OUT THE RULES, THEY WILL POINT OUT THERE IS NO RULE AGAINST THE USAGE OF THIS PROPOSAL IN THIS WAY.

Do they realize that this opens the door to liberations-invasions? YES. Do they realize they are destroying a region and there is no rule in the world that say they will not be next? YES.

They voted this because we are humans. As in a trial you can say to a jury to ignore something, once they see it they have seen it! It doesn't matter how many times in the rules mod and admin or even Max Barry says to discern real world from NS world, people will read Nazi and will give the noun the meaning you find in the real world.
There is, and there will always be a strong hate against Nazi Europe for what it symbolizes. You can't get rid of it, hell for some people the existance of Nazi Europe is something they see as illegal!

What this means in terms of NS? Pretty simple:

WHEN SOMEONE PROPOSED TO USE THE WA LIBERATION IN A LEGAL WAY TO GET RID OF SOMETHING GENERALLY HATED, THE ONLY STOP SAID PERSON COULD ENCOUNTER, THE POPULAR VOTE, SAID "WE ARE FINE WITH IT".

What this means? THE WA IS FINE WITH THIS RESOLUTION. Period.


What you should all show now is the maturity to accept this decision and open a debate to make sure this new instrument will not be misused. If you keep crying over it and propose this again and again like 2nd class politicians, I can assure you that the liberation-invasion will be wrongly used before you even have the time to realize it.

So lock this topic, go into a general area, open a debate and start realizing the truth: THE PEOPLE HAS SPOKEN, AND THE LAW HAS CHANGED. Our job as WASC members is to now make this new law something decent, not a precedent that will be whored by invaders.

[The Black Hat Guy]

First of all, no one is trying to claim that the target resolution is against the rules. It's clearly not, and none of the major proponents of this repeal have tried to claim that it is. Don't make strawman arguments, especially not in gigantic bold prints - it does absolutely nothing to further your case.

Do they realize that this opens the door to liberations-invasions? YES. Do they realize they are destroying a region and there is no rule in the world that say they will not be next? YES.

Oh, don't I wish this was true. It's not. I hate to be the cynical one here, but the average WA voter has no clue what the implications are of this resolution. They barely even know what a resolution does - look at the Deep Space vote for all of the example you need for that.

In fact, let's look further at the case of Deep Space. A resolution that was awful on the face of it. It had zero logical backing, zero supporters among the SC regulars, and even a cursory glance at the target of the resolution revealed how asinine the proposal was.

Yet it still almost passed. Why? Because it looked good on the face of it, and because a couple major delegates voted for it either because they were just as ignorant or for the fun of it, thus spurring the passage. Now, given that the average WA voter doesn't even bother to look that much, there's no reason to believe that the average WA voter will know or think about anything close to the complexity of precedent, and the consequences. They simply vote based on a cursory glance at the resolution itself, and then ignore that and vote with the majority (obviously that's a bit of an exaggeration, but for the purposes of the "average" voter, it holds true).

If you keep crying over it and propose this again and again like 2nd class politicians, I can assure you that the liberation-invasion will be wrongly used before you even have the time to realize it.

So you're saying that those trying to stop it will ignore it when it happens again? Do you think we're blind? Look at Chester Pearson's resolution, and the near instant opposition it garnered - is that the kind of "before you even have the time to realize it" that your'e referring to?

See, in our eyes, any use of the liberation-invasion technique is wrongful use, and thus deserves to be struck down. And in attacking the opposite side with ad hominems and strawmen without any true logical backing, you betray a lack of understanding of the mechanics of the WA and the average SC voter.

[People Who Say Ni]

The average SC voter just jumps on the bandwagon. The fate of a proposal is generally determined within the first few hours of voting (with a few exceptions, of course).

[Firstaria]

Don't you love people who use the quote instrument to take only the parts of a speech they want to hear? I'm sure if Christianity is the true religion, there is a circle of hell just for those people.

I never said to ignore it, I said to discuss it! You think 8k of people are only the people who bandwagon? I think not. I can say for a fact those people are around 3 to 5 thousand up to usually 10k of votes played around here.

There is a group of people who voted clearly for the reasons I've listed that you are completely ignoring on purpose trying to blame the whole thing on something that not only existed even before the WA, but has never been solved. Even if your ideology is right, you are still doing it wrong crying over me instead of discussing that second problem.

In this chamber, we are showing the epitome of the "discharging the problem to another one". I'm not saying you are wrong, but I'm saying that the problems are TWO.

1) A general disinterest in the proposal.
2) A new concept of the liberation proposal.

And both problems have to be discussed, not cried here!

[The Black Hat Guy]

Don't you love people who use the quote instrument to take only the parts of a speech they want to hear? I'm sure if Christianity is the true religion, there is a circle of hell just for those people.

I don't generally feel the need to quote everything someone says, as I feel it leads to unnecessary clutter. I don't feel that I missed any of your salient points, but if you feel that I did, feel free to point it/them out.

I never said to ignore it, I said to discuss it! You think 8k of people are only the people who bandwagon? I think not. I can say for a fact those people are around 3 to 5 thousand up to usually 10k of votes played around here.

I truly can't make heads or tails out of this sentence. It lacks context, I can't tell what "it" is, and it's riddled with grammatical errors that inhibit understanding. Please clarify as to your purpose, then I'll respond.

There is a group of people who voted clearly for the reasons I've listed that you are completely ignoring on purpose trying to blame the whole thing on something that not only existed even before the WA, but has never been solved. Even if your ideology is right, you are still doing it wrong crying over me instead of discussing that second problem.

There is certainly a group of people that voted against for the reasons you've listed. I've never denied that, and I never will. That said, this "group" that you refer to is minuscule in comparison to the number of voters in the WA. My side is also minuscule in comparison to the number of voters in the WA. That's because, as I said earlier, most WA voters don't truly understand what they're voting for. They vote with the pack based on a cursory glance at the resolution and nothing more.

Obviously the Lemming Effect has never been solved. But that doesn't mean that it's not the reason that this resolution failed. It very clearly is - just as if the resolution passed, it would likely be the reason why it passed. Very, very few resolutions are so universally supported that they could stand on their own merit against the Lemming Effect. It's sad, and there's no obvious solution, but it's true.

So yes, I'd love to garner support from those that oppose this resolution for legitimate, thought out reasons. And I've done so - I've done much debate, on and off this thread, with other ambassadors about the germane bits of this resolution. But in the end, unless I'm talking to a major Delegate, no amount of debating and changing minds is going to amount to anything, because any single vote I change has no significant impact on the resolution as a whole. I have done so and I will continue to debate the relevant bits of this resolution (mostly off this thread so far, but meh), but that doesn't mean that I'm not going to call out the reason why this failed (and the reason why it will pass, if it does), and try to ameliorate that. To do that would be to be willfully ignorant of reality, and that's not an ideology to which I'd like to subscribe.

Things like your statement here:

What this means? THE WA IS FINE WITH THIS RESOLUTION. Period.

Which you've yet to support with any sort of logic are why I replied - that's not true, and to leave the impression that it is does harm the future of this resolution - again, group-think is a powerful force in the WA, and the more I can combat that, the more good I've done.

In this chamber, we are showing the epitome of the "discharging the problem to another one". I'm not saying you are wrong, but I'm saying that the problems are TWO.

1) A general disinterest in the proposal.
2) A new concept of the liberation proposal.

And both problems have to be discussed, not cried here!

And I'm interested in discussing both problems, and have done so in the past and will continue to do so! But that doesn't mean that I'm going to ignore the reasons why this resolution failed and try to ameliorate them. That doesn't mean I'm going to completely ignore the bits of information that truly make or break any resolution.