[PASSED] Liberate Hippiedom

[Cinistra]

At the moment, 6203 FOR, 1425 AGAINST. That's a landslide victory.

I for one am glad to see common sense winning.

Common sense leads only to stagnation. No need to celebrate the lemmings.

[Lazzarania]

I for one am glad to see common sense winning.

Common sense leads only to stagnation. No need to celebrate the lemmings.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/ ... 081903.htm

[Mallorea and Riva]

Attempting to undermine the Raider Delegate's control over the region is not without consequences.

The endorsement gap was over 20, and not decreasing. It's not like they were much of a threat to your control of the region.

See: Hell. We removed troops, needed to keep the gap existing.

And the griefing starts.

So, any of those who felt this resolution wasn't needed want to change their opinion?

Anyone see the native threat to hack our forums and feel like changing their opinion?
You know why we kicked them, and you know our patterns. Your fascination with calling us griefers will not cause us to change our methods or tactics.

[Fratt Armed Forces]

The endorsement gap was over 20, and not decreasing. It's not like they were much of a threat to your control of the region.

See: Hell. We removed troops, needed to keep the gap existing.

Which basically means you created the threat ...
This could be used to justify pretty much everything.

[Mallorea and Riva]

See: Hell. We removed troops, needed to keep the gap existing.

Which basically means you created the threat ...
This could be used to justify pretty much everything.

Silly Fratt We're not using it to justify anything... if we want to kickban we will. We won't make up justifications. The point is that there is actually a reason.

[Fratt Armed Forces]

You created the threat, you weakened the security of your own pointman by moving nations out.
You "punish" natives for something they cannot avoid. >_>

At this point you could even ask all of them to resign WA and leave the region. Every endorsement, every bit of native influence, is some sort of threat, no?

[Mallorea and Riva]

You created the threat, you weakened the security of your own pointman by moving nations out.
You "punish" natives for something they cannot avoid. >_>

At this point you could even ask all of them to resign WA and leave the region. Every endorsement, every bit of native influence, is some sort of threat, no?

We could ask, but they never listen. Don't think of it as punishment, think of it as collateral damage.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

You created the threat, you weakened the security of your own pointman by moving nations out.

No see, we didn't weaken our security, because that move was coupled with native ejections. It was a strategic decision.

You "punish" natives for something they cannot avoid. >_>

NOW you're on the right track. I wouldn't call it punishment, though. It's not like we're saying "Naughty natives, endorsing the delegate! Go to time out in TRR!" We're just saying "Hey, we're gonna relocate a few of you's to solidify our position here." We even said it was nothing personal.

Everybody takes it so personal.

[Fratt Armed Forces]

Which is like saying: "It's not our fault. Had you not been in the region in first place, we would have not banned you".

[Ora Amaris]

Which is like saying: "It's not our fault. Had you not been in the region in first place, we would have not banned you".

"It's not our fault. If you weren't in the way, the bullet wouldn't have hit you!"

[Mallorea and Riva]

Which is like saying: "It's not our fault. Had you not been in the region in first place, we would have not banned you".

Well it's true

[Eist]

Which is like saying: "It's not our fault. Had you not been in the region in first place, we would have not banned you".

"It's not our fault. If you weren't in the way, the bullet wouldn't have hit you!"

This is raider mentality summarised perfectly.

[Mallorea and Riva]

"It's not our fault. If you weren't in the way, the bullet wouldn't have hit you!"

This is raider mentality summarised perfectly.

What happened to not grouping all raiders/defenders into a single mindset or action?
Would you guys mind moving this conversation to the actual Hippiedom thread? None of this actually relates to the proposal anymore, which is relatively well written and fairly certain to pass.

[Zevassa]

which is relatively well written and fairly certain to pass.

This is a very poorly written document if you ask me. It's certain to pass, sure, but it's really not well-written by any stretch of the imagination.

[Mallorea and Riva]

which is relatively well written and fairly certain to pass.

This is a very poorly written document if you ask me. It's certain to pass, sure, but it's really not well-written by any stretch of the imagination.

Relatively speaking it's par for the course with the SC.

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

which is relatively well written and fairly certain to pass.

This is a very poorly written document if you ask me. It's certain to pass, sure, but it's really not well-written by any stretch of the imagination.

Morozova raised her left eyebrow at these words and perhaps a touch peevishly asked, "May I ask what particular concerns you have with the text, so I can pass them on to my staff?"

[Fotar]

I studied this raid quite a bit before deciding how I would vote. In the end though, this is a textbook example of why I don't like SC liberations. TBH had a plan and executed it perfectly. They won this battle fair and square. At this point, a liberation is just a cop out to force what the defenders failed to do. Having this passed is not a black mark on the record of TBH...but it is on the record of defenders.

Members of Hippidom- Please do not misconstrue my statements to be unsympathetic towards your plight. I am sorrowful for your loss, which is why I lean towards defenderism and would not participate in such a raid myself. I know what it is like to lose years of history and hard work. If the Council of Narnia was up to full strength, we would have attempted to help in the defense.

A note to founderless regions: Consider refounding your region yourself before this sort of thing happens. When The Council of Narnia lost its founder, I went to great strides to ensure it would never fall under raider control. Ultimately, this meant refounding the region. I believe it was the best decision and we are now secure and thriving. Be proactive about the security of your region. Don't wait for it to be too late.

[Eist]

TBH had a plan and executed it perfectly. They won this battle fair and square. At this point, a liberation is just a cop out to force what the defenders failed to do. Having this passed is not a black mark on the record of TBH...but it is on the record of defenders.

You studied this too hard, and lost sight of what really is going on. Simply, raiders locked a region that didn't deserve it in any way, and the liberation proposed seeks to remove it. Could defenders have done more earlier? Perhaps. But now the NS community is required to take the long route to achieve independence for the region once again.

Instead of it being a "cop out", it's all just part of the game.

[Zevassa]

This is a very poorly written document if you ask me. It's certain to pass, sure, but it's really not well-written by any stretch of the imagination.

Morozova raised her left eyebrow at these words and perhaps a touch peevishly asked, "May I ask what particular concerns you have with the text, so I can pass them on to my staff?"

To be frank, no. Anything that I or anyone else could bring up would ultimately be useless as it's already up for vote. I'm not trying to be rude, there's just no point in getting worked up over it.

[Xanthal]

I studied this raid quite a bit before deciding how I would vote. In the end though, this is a textbook example of why I don't like SC liberations. TBH had a plan and executed it perfectly. They won this battle fair and square. At this point, a liberation is just a cop out to force what the defenders failed to do. Having this passed is not a black mark on the record of TBH...but it is on the record of defenders.

Members of Hippidom- Please do not misconstrue my statements to be unsympathetic towards your plight. I am sorrowful for your loss, which is why I lean towards defenderism and would not participate in such a raid myself. I know what it is like to lose years of history and hard work. If the Council of Narnia was up to full strength, we would have attempted to help in the defense.

A note to founderless regions: Consider refounding your region yourself before this sort of thing happens. When The Council of Narnia lost its founder, I went to great strides to ensure it would never fall under raider control. Ultimately, this meant refounding the region. I believe it was the best decision and we are now secure and thriving. Be proactive about the security of your region. Don't wait for it to be too late.

Refounding is time consuming, risky, and often impractical. It also erases much of the very history you're talking about. This isn't about raiders or defenders, this is about natives.

[Fotar]

I haven't lost sight of anything. I know many defenders hate raiders and so on and so forth. Frankly I am tired of that debate and I think many others are too. Raiding is part of the gameplay, and if you don't take steps to protect against it...don't be surprised when it happens. Being founderless is a risk. If you want to take the risk and get raided and not refound...that is your call.

You know...I have heard time and again from many people that raiding a region is just as bad as forum destruction. Well, when my region's forums got destroyed, there was no magic pill to get it back. Sure we got lots of 'sorry it happened'...and they were appreciated. But after that, it was a done issue, as it should be. We moved on, and we struggled a lot. But through hard work and community, we are finally rebounding. No one on the outside helped us, nor would I expect them to.

Getting a forum destroyed was not fun by any means...but it wasn't the end of the world...nor was it an excuse to lay down and die. Neither is being raided, even if the region was totally killed off, which I doubt was the going to be the case here.

[Unibot II]

Getting a forum destroyed was not fun by any means...but it wasn't the end of the world...nor was it an excuse to lay down and die. Neither is being raided, even if the region was totally killed off, which I doubt was the going to be the case here.

So if it was possible, hypothetically, you'd be opposed to a proposal that stopped people from destroying forums?

[Fotar]

Getting a forum destroyed was not fun by any means...but it wasn't the end of the world...nor was it an excuse to lay down and die. Neither is being raided, even if the region was totally killed off, which I doubt was the going to be the case here.

So if it was possible, hypothetically, you'd be opposed to a proposal that stopped people from destroying forums?

Absolutely not. I do not share the sentiment that the two are equal. I was simply pointing out that there are many who support this liberation (and others) who do consider them equal. My whole point was that if regions can recover from a forum loss with a little hard work and determination, so can a raided region without getting the WA stomping all over. Forum destruction isn't part of gameplay. Raiding is. Neither are the end of the world people make them out to be.

[Sichuan Pepper]

I do not see what that has to do with the liberation resolution currently at vote Unibot. You could just telegram him.

Natives have been ejected by a non-native and a password put in place. No matter how invaders want to spin it clearly natives have lost important rights in the region and need the SC to take some action.

[Unibot II]

Absolutely not. I do not share the sentiment that the two are equal. I was simply pointing out that there are many who support this liberation (and others) who do consider them equal. My whole point was that if regions can recover from a forum loss with a little hard work and determination, so can a raided region without getting the WA stomping all over. Forum destruction isn't part of gameplay. Raiding is. Neither are the end of the world people make them out to be.

But if you'd support WA Intervention against Forum Destruction, but you also admit that Forum Destruction was "not the end of the world".. than denying WA Intervention to block a password on the basis that "Region Destruction isn't the end of the world" would be logically contradictory.

If it is not necessary for X to be "the end of the world" to justify WA Intervention, then it shouldn't be necessary for Y either.

Bear in mind this does not prove Liberations are necessary, simply that your reasons for voting against are contradictory.