NationStates

Goddess Relief Office wrote:Chester, what's the chance of you coming to the SC again in a week or two to ask for another Liberation when this region gets invaded or when the delegate turns out to be not really who you think he is?

Why would I need to? Topid is already do that....

Chester Pearson wrote:

Goddess Relief Office wrote:Chester, what's the chance of you coming to the SC again in a week or two to ask for another Liberation when this region gets invaded or when the delegate turns out to be not really who you think he is?

Why would I need to? Topid is already do that....

That is not a draft I am actually going to pursue. When this goes south even if someone submitted another Lib, it would take quite a bit of convincing to get even me on board. If this goes as I expect I would expect a prevailing attitude of "let it go."

Topid wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
Why would I need to? Topid is already do that....

That is not a draft I am actually going to pursue. When this goes south even if someone submitted another Lib, it would take quite a bit of convincing to get even me on board. If this goes as I expect I would expect a prevailing attitude of "let it go."

What draft? http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vie ... 1414960897 looks like a proposal to me, unless there is another Topid out there submitting proposals? Also as you are so unconcerned, why did you point out the "raid" that incoming by the now NINE multies here?

Sometimes when I submit proposals, I do not intend to campaign for them. But they are totally not joke proposals for the record.

Multis inherently look like raiders, especially if they start grouping right before an update. Though usually puppet themes can be traced to the region, for the life of me I couldn't come up with where they might be headed with Christopher Walken... Suppose that makes sense now.

Yes. Please repeal this. *laughs* I will not support the 'Liberate Liberal Haven' when it gets proposed in about a week, however.

Chester Pearson wrote:

Redsward wrote:No. NO. Isn't this another attempt to capture the region with the Doom Squad? The defeated resolution of the same name was just that.

What the hell are you babbling about?

There was a failes attempt to repeal Liberate Liberal Haven, but it was defeated. The liberation was authored by a puppet of a Doom Squad member, and they were going to raid the region and PW it after the repeal passed.

Redsward wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
What the hell are you babbling about?

There was a failes attempt to repeal Liberate Liberal Haven, but it was defeated. The liberation was authored by a puppet of a Doom Squad member, and they were going to raid the region and PW it after the repeal passed.

Unless YOU are planning on raiding Liberal Haven, I think you are reading way too much into this....

Perhaps you may want to read that bottom line of my signature. The centered one....

Avron Wolves wrote:Yes. Please repeal this. *laughs* I will not support the 'Liberate Liberal Haven' when it gets proposed in about a week, however.

Why of course dear Caesar. Just exactly what we needed, Black Rider support to ensure this passes /sarcasm

I moved in a puppet to endorse so they hopefully won't be overrun by a taggers run

Chester Pearson wrote:

Asquithania wrote:And if you hadn't abandoned the region through some misplaced sense of loyalty to raider unity then we would not be going through this farce right now.
Belgium shows how a liberated founderless region can continue to thrive and survive if the will is there.

As for Chesters assertion that I was attempting to refound the region, with or without the consent of the inhabitants, it is at best erroneous and at worst slanderous - it can never be substantiated because it is not true.

Chesters wording is deliberately misleading the Security Council and the WA members into voting on a resolution to further his own political agenda, irrespective of the consequences for liberal haven.

The current delegate has also commenced ejecting nations from the region without a democratic mandate. Approving this repeal will signal that the Security Council sanctions the actions of dictators raiders and tyrants, allowing them to trample on the freedoms that every region is entitled to

What political agenda?

The one to further your own reputation as a resolution mavens perhaps?

Pray tell what exit strategy will the Security Council and/or The World Assembly adopt to prevent the region being sniped by a hostile re-founder seeing as the coalition that enforced the original resolution collapsed quicker than Applebanias integrity?

I, as World Assembly Delegate of Camelot, have voted against this resolution for three reasons.

1. A refound attempt by Cartanis will not work. He has two high-influence titans to deal with, and doesn't have that many endorsements (Though he does have more endorsements than before). Of course, that could be fixed by calling in Defender reinforcements.

2. Do we even -really- know who Cartanis is? For all we know, he could be another Doom Squad sleeper, or worse, a nazi sleeper! He also somehow didn't notice that Narcoleptic Dreams was in the region before I pointed it out. For all we know, he could be in league with TDS.

3. Alright, I'm going to say it, I don't personally want a refound to happen. Really, it would be a waste of potential to refound rather than actually try to build the region up as a founderless region: We really don't get enough large founderless regions. Asquith's vision for the place was a region that could exist as a founderless region with liberation and still be strong and not repeatedly raided, and I agree with that vision. Sorry if I'm sounding incoherent.

Does anyone know if Liberal Haven is telegram recruiting? I ask because the Delegate has received four new endorsements since yesterday, three of which came from nations that have entered the region in the past 24 hours.

As anyone who has ever even casually defended knows, when this happens in a founderless region that isn't telegram recruiting, the region is being raided. I would strongly urge well meaning Delegates to change their votes to against this resolution, and I will be campaigning against it later today. Unless Chester would like to campaign against it first, since he's been pointing out that he's a UDL Merryman.

Cormac Pendragon wrote:Does anyone know if Liberal Haven is telegram recruiting? I ask because the Delegate has received four new endorsements since yesterday, three of which came from nations that have entered the region in the past 24 hours.

As anyone who has ever even casually defended knows, when this happens in a founderless region that isn't telegram recruiting, the region is being raided. I would strongly urge well meaning Delegates to change their votes to against this resolution, and I will be campaigning against it later today. Unless Chester would like to campaign against it first, since he's been pointing out that he's a UDL Merryman.

You really need to calm the fuck down. Two of those nations are part of the Union Defense Forces, and one of them was Blood's. If you are really that concerned, make YOUR WA mobile, and get in there.....

Chester Pearson wrote:You really need to calm the fuck down. Two of those nations are part of the Union Defense Forces, and one of them was Blood's. If you are really that concerned, make YOUR WA mobile, and get in there.....

What in the world are the "Union Defense Forces"? And am I supposed to be reassured that raider Port Blood -- I assume that's who you're referring to -- is one of the endorsements?

My WA is already mobile, I keep it in Camelot unless it's deployed elsewhere. One place it won't be deployed: Liberal Haven, endorsing a questionable Delegate who may later banject me and sarcastically thank me in Gameplay for my assistance in raiding the region.

Cormac Pendragon wrote:And am I supposed to be reassured that raider Port Blood -- I assume that's who you're referring to -- is one of the endorsements?

Just wanted to point out that Port Blood was a defender last time I was intimately following Gameplay and resided in Gay, a defender leaning region. Now this might have changed in the past 2 months but it's not as if you're putting Mall or myself in the delegacy.

Anywhos, carry on.

Venico wrote:Just wanted to point out that Port Blood was a defender last time I was intimately following Gameplay and resided in Gay, a defender leaning region. Now this might have changed in the past 2 months but it's not as if you're putting Mall or myself in the delegacy.

Anywhos, carry on.

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. If that's the case, my apologies to him for that -- but my concerns about the so-called "native" Delegate stand. We don't know anything about him and given Liberal Haven's history, I don't think we should just take for granted that he has the region's best interests in mind.

Anyway, I'm not planning to campaign against this after all. Given how far ahead it is, I think it would just be a waste of time and resources. I'll just wait for the inevitable and propose another liberation resolution if necessary, unless someone beats me to it.

Venico wrote:

Cormac Pendragon wrote:And am I supposed to be reassured that raider Port Blood -- I assume that's who you're referring to -- is one of the endorsements?

Just wanted to point out that Port Blood was a defender last time I was intimately following Gameplay and resided in Gay, a defender leaning region. Now this might have changed in the past 2 months but it's not as if you're putting Mall or myself in the delegacy.

Anywhos, carry on.

He helped on something I did not too long ago....
Maybe we should just call him Independent?

Cormac Pendragon wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:You really need to calm the fuck down. Two of those nations are part of the Union Defense Forces, and one of them was Blood's. If you are really that concerned, make YOUR WA mobile, and get in there.....

What in the world are the "Union Defense Forces"? And am I supposed to be reassured that raider Port Blood -- I assume that's who you're referring to -- is one of the endorsements?

My WA is already mobile, I keep it in Camelot unless it's deployed elsewhere. One place it won't be deployed: Liberal Haven, endorsing a questionable Delegate who may later banject me and sarcastically thank me in Gameplay for my assistance in raiding the region.

Union Defense forces, as in forces from The North American Union....

Applebania wrote:I, as World Assembly Delegate of Camelot, have voted against this resolution for three reasons.

1. A refound attempt by Cartanis will not work. He has two high-influence titans to deal with, and doesn't have that many endorsements (Though he does have more endorsements than before). Of course, that could be fixed by calling in Defender reinforcements.

2. Do we even -really- know who Cartanis is? For all we know, he could be another Doom Squad sleeper, or worse, a nazi sleeper! He also somehow didn't notice that Narcoleptic Dreams was in the region before I pointed it out. For all we know, he could be in league with TDS.

3. Alright, I'm going to say it, I don't personally want a refound to happen. Really, it would be a waste of potential to refound rather than actually try to build the region up as a founderless region: We really don't get enough large founderless regions. Asquith's vision for the place was a region that could exist as a founderless region with liberation and still be strong and not repeatedly raided, and I agree with that vision. Sorry if I'm sounding incoherent.

So we will just have to snipe the regions and let the new founder CTE - conversely we snipe and establish a tyrannical Fonder instead to highlight the folly of putting trust in Founders as the panacea to the raiding dilemma.

And since when did the DSE renounce its Isolationist stance Chester?

Asquithania wrote:And since when did the DSE renounce its Isolationist stance Chester?

Who in the hell is the DSE?

Venico wrote:

Cormac Pendragon wrote:And am I supposed to be reassured that raider Port Blood -- I assume that's who you're referring to -- is one of the endorsements?

Just wanted to point out that Port Blood was a defender last time I was intimately following Gameplay and resided in Gay, a defender leaning region. Now this might have changed in the past 2 months but it's not as if you're putting Mall or myself in the delegacy.

Anywhos, carry on.

My residency in Gay has no influence on my GP alignment - my WA in LH is just because I don't people just steamrolling a region because the SC did something stupid

I'm a full-blown raider/anti bullshit on the alignment scale

Port blood is a raider through and through. Honest.

Blood is a raider

Berdanvia wrote:Everybody vote to Repeal Liberate Liberal Haven!!! It will help the natives secure their region with a password, without one, they are an easy target for invasion.

it would have made more sense for the native to look for a larger region to help defend them and go the way of clogging the WA with more native regional things, which don't have any effect on anyone.

Fresh Meat wrote:

Berdanvia wrote:Everybody vote to Repeal Liberate Liberal Haven!!! It will help the natives secure their region with a password, without one, they are an easy target for invasion.

it would have made more sense for the native to look for a larger region to help defend them and go the way of clogging the WA with more native regional things, which don't have any effect on anyone.

English please?

Chester Pearson wrote:

Fresh Meat wrote:
it would have made more sense for the native to look for a larger region to help defend them and go the way of clogging the WA with more native regional things, which don't have any effect on anyone.

English please?

Contact UDL and GTFO the SC