[DEFEATED] Condemn The World Assembly

by **Wadden-Amrum** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:35 pm

The Military Department of Freedonia wrote:I'm for this condemnation. However, I think it should be amended to add that the WA should be disbanded and a new international body should never exist. I say this because I support national sovereignty, and the WA is an assault on it

Aren't you the same guy who posted in a Forum 7 thread and kept complimenting yourself and tried to force people to choose you?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that is illegal.

by **A Colony Of Canadas** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 1:36 pm

We all realise that Bitely is behind this, right?

I mean, its beyond obvious.

by **True Refuge** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:43 pm

A Colony Of Canadas wrote:We all realise that Bitely is behind this, right?

I mean, its beyond obvious.

Well, it's reached quorum...

I severely doubt the legitimacy of the approvals.

by **Wadden-Amrum** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:47 pm

We just committed suicide, eh? Fantastic work everyone!

by **Wallenburg** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:47 pm

True Refuge wrote:
A Colony Of Canadas wrote:We all realise that Bitely is behind this, right?

I mean, its beyond obvious.

Well, it's reached quorum...

I severely doubt the legitimacy of the approvals.

I wonder how many puppets he has in the WA.

by **Bitely** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:59 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
True Refuge wrote:
Well, it's reached quorum...

I severely doubt the legitimacy of the approvals.

I wonder how many puppets he has in the WA.

Oh please. Just face the fact that there's many a nation unhappy with the WA and just jumping at the the chance to voice their disappointment in it's failings. Perhaps is time the WA Ambassadors took some accountability.

by **Wadden-Amrum** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:03 pm

I'd like to congratulate:

I'd like to ask Vancouvia, leader of one of the largest regions, why the hell he approved this. Special mentions go to British Empire Strikes Back, Asturan, The Fatherland, and pretty much anyone else who approved this and leads a medium-large size region.

I was sympathetic with Bitely a number of times before. Now is not the time to do this Bitely, try and get well-known for good reasons before you do anything controversial.

by **New Tuva SSR** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:04 pm

Creating a WA Proposal to condemn it the very body in which you are proposing it in, but then voting to destory the thing you are voting in, which in turn would make why you just voted irrelevant.

http://data.whicdn.com/images/108251491/large.gif

by **Wallenburg** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:04 pm

Bitely wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:I wonder how many puppets he has in the WA.

Oh please. Just face the fact that there's many a nation unhappy with the WA and just jumping at the the chance to voice their disappointment in it's failings. Perhaps is time the WA Ambassadors took some accountability.

When did I say there weren't? Don't attack arguments that aren't there.

by **The Military Department of Freedonia** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:06 pm

Ban the World Assembly!

Not the region, you morons! I mean ban the international organization.

by **The Military Department of Freedonia** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:07 pm

Wadden-Amrum wrote:
The Military Department of Freedonia wrote:I'm for this condemnation. However, I think it should be amended to add that the WA should be disbanded and a new international body should never exist. I say this because I support national sovereignty, and the WA is an assault on it

Aren't you the same guy who posted in a Forum 7 thread and kept complimenting yourself and tried to force people to choose you?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that is illegal.

No, I'm not that guy.

by **Wadden-Amrum** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:09 pm

The Military Department of Freedonia wrote:
Wadden-Amrum wrote:Aren't you the same guy who posted in a Forum 7 thread and kept complimenting yourself and tried to force people to choose you?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that is illegal.

No, I'm not that guy.

Yeah, no.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=349375&p=26138481&hilit=me+me#p26138481

---
On another slightly more upbeat note, this is doomed to fail.

by **Kaboomlandia** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:17 pm

How did this crap make quorum?

*gets out stomping shoes*

by **Wallenburg** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:19 pm

The Military Department of Freedonia wrote:Ban the World Assembly!

Not the region, you morons! I mean ban the international organization.

Why? Membership isn't compulsory. The door is right over there.

by **Balcones** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:24 pm

If this makes it to vote, we will be voting FOR for irony.

by **Vancouvia** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:39 pm

Balcones wrote:If this makes it to vote, we will be voting FOR for irony.

"We will also be voting For but for substance. Down with the WA Elite."

by **Central Asian Republics** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:57 pm

A Colony Of Canadas wrote:We all realise that Bitely is behind this, right?

I mean, its beyond obvious.

The use of the word "elite" gives it away.

by **Central Asian Republics** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 3:59 pm

Bitely wrote:there's many a nation unhappy with the WA

Pretending to be oppressed by a non-existent "elite"?

by **Riftey** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:01 pm

Kaboomlandia wrote:How did this crap make quorum?

*gets out stomping shoes*

Seriously? x'D

by **Wrapper** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:09 pm

Hmmm, this is interesting. Okay, why don't we break this down line by line:

APPLAUDING the founders of the World Assembly for their vision of a peaceful and brighter tomorrow;

ACKNOWLEDGING That the World Assembly has made great strives to see through this vision;

I don't know, I see nothing at all like that in the region's history. It seems they started it as an April Fools joke. What am I missing here?

NOTING that the World Assembly has become full of animosity, frivolity, and hostile debate;

Actually it's been very quiet for three and a half years, and before that it was mostly "Any questions? Anyone?" When was it ever full of animosity, frivolity and/or hostile debate? And, really, that's besides the point. Since when does spirited debate merit a condemnation?

REALIZING that the World Assembly has a habit of constantly repealing recently passed legislation;

Not seeing any legislation at all by this region. Repealed or passed.

HOPING that the World Assembly will get its act together and rise against the elitism that plagues it;

Hmmm okay, you may actually have a point there, that Ambassador nation does seem a little full of himself.

DISMAYED that we have let the World Assembly's useless folly continue for too long;

Well, I suppose that's arguable. Regions with three and a half years of inactivity could be seen as useless, but that seems a tad harsh, yes?

We the nations of the World Assembly hereby CONDEMN the World Assembly.

No, there are way, way too many factual errors here. I don't see what the region in question has done -- and, yes, goddammit, the fucking region -- to merit a condemnation. Against.

by **TURTLESHROOM II** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:12 pm

All of you are condemning the WA without mentioning the Legalize Prostitution Resolution?

That is like making a sandwich without bread.

by **Bitely** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:13 pm

Wrapper wrote:Hmmm, this is interesting. Okay, why don't we break this down line by line:

APPLAUDING the founders of the World Assembly for their vision of a peaceful and brighter tomorrow;

ACKNOWLEDGING That the World Assembly has made great strives to see through this vision;

I don't know, I see nothing at all like that in the region's history. It seems they started it as an April Fools joke. What am I missing here?

NOTING that the World Assembly has become full of animosity, frivolity, and hostile debate;

Actually it's been very quiet for three and a half years, and before that it was mostly "Any questions? Anyone?" When was it ever full of animosity, frivolity and/or hostile debate? And, really, that's besides the point. Since when does spirited debate merit a condemnation?

REALIZING that the World Assembly has a habit of constantly repealing recently passed legislation;

Not seeing any legislation at all by this region. Repealed or passed.

HOPING that the World Assembly will get its act together and rise against the elitism that plagues it;

Hmmm okay, you may actually have a point there, that Ambassador nation does seem a little full of himself.

DISMAYED that we have let the World Assembly's useless folly continue for too long;

Well, I suppose that's arguable. Regions with three and a half years of inactivity could be seen as useless, but that seems a tad harsh, yes?

We the nations of the World Assembly hereby CONDEMN the World Assembly.

No, there are way, way too many factual errors here. I don't see what the region in question has done -- and, yes, goddammit, the fucking region -- to merit a condemnation. Against.

It was ruled that this is an ideological condemnation. So your points are null.

by **Naginii** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:16 pm

Greater Soviet Ukraine wrote:One question: can we vote to eject a nation? The guy keeps on wasting our time with useless legislation. Plus, his crappy formatting is killing my eyes.

Typography matters.

by **Tinfect** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:18 pm

Good god, this actually made it to Quorum.

Do either of you (Bitely, Tab1of2) even realize that you would be condemning a Region, that has nothing to do with the World Assembly?

by **Naginii** » Sat Oct 03, 2015 4:21 pm

Vancouvia wrote:
Balcones wrote:If this makes it to vote, we will be voting FOR for irony.

"We will also be voting For but for substance. Down with the WA Elite."

This ^^ is why resos like this keep showing-up: you've got to stop encouraging and enabling them with your votes. Qualifying signing statements may feel good, i.e. "well I'm voting for this, but only for the joke value" — but then the joke is on you when the thing passes, and somebody is inspired to pen something equally stupid/insipid/pointless/etc.

Best thing to do with these, is ignore them.

[DEFEATED] Condemn The World Assembly

Like rain on your wedding day

FOR

Who is online