NationStates

Any further thoughts before I move to submit this at a completely arbitrary time in the near future?

Consular wrote:Any further thoughts before I move to submit this at a completely arbitrary time in the near future?

Aside from my previous gripe about which regions are included as examples of what they hit, no.

Some questions were raised earlier regarding the LKE's position on the proposal. His Supreme Majesty Emperor Theoden planned to post here himself to remove any doubts about our stance. Unfortunately, in the aftermath of Typhoon Ompong he is still without internet access and is having to drive from his home simply to communicate with us. Under the circumstances, the Emperor has asked me to speak in his stead. The LKE opposes this resolution due to its major inaccuracies and poor drafting, but we have no specific concerns about the idea of being condemned itself.

The Land of Kings and Emperors is content and relaxed about the prospect of receiving a condemnation resolution in principle. The LKE has never acted with much concern for the opinion of the public at large in foreign policy. After 13 years this October, we are not going to start changing our ways now. It is of course always nice to be recognized. A condemnation resolution will not make any negative difference to any of our activities. In fact, our expectation is that, if it passes, this resolution will open a new avenue of recruitment up to the LKE for a market which has previously been dominated by pure raider regions. On the Emperor's command, the Imperial Government is already preparing plans to capitalize on this in the event that the resolution passes. Beyond that, we don't think that this resolution passing would alter anything.

A couple of you have referenced the LKE's past successful opposition to previous condemnation resolutions. In each of those cases, our opposition was driven by the inaccurate content of the specific proposal presented to the World Assembly, rather than concern over the prospect of a condemnation resolution itself. Indeed, on previous occasions, many citizens in the region were in fact enthused by the prospect of condemnation and disappointed by our opposition to those resolutions due to their inaccuracies. As the reigning Emperor today, Emperor Theoden is comfortable with the prospect of a condemnation resolution. All senior regional officials support the Emperor in this decision. The LKE has no issue with being condemned in principle.

As for this resolution, our stance is that contained in the Lord High Steward's previous response on behalf of the Emperor. Namely, while we do not mind being condemned in principle, this specific proposal is littered with significant factual inaccuracies. Consular's draft is poorly researched and badly written. In the event that it does pass, the accuracy of the resolution makes little difference to the LKE's direct interests, as a condemnation is a condemnation and a badge is a badge. However, the Emperor is also conscious of the utility of the Security Council as a future instrument of foreign policy. In light of the inaccuracies identified by the Lord High Steward, the long-term credibility of the WA Security Council will be destroyed if a resolution so inaccurate and poorly written is passed as a means of settling Consular's petty squabbles. The LKE is concerned about the future credibility of the Security Council, bearing in mind that our allies in Europeia and Balder have previously enjoyed great success in passing favorable Security Council resolutions. The Security Council's track record will be seriously damaged if it passes a proposal as nonsensical as this one. We do not wish to see a body set up to promote international security undermined by the personal vendettas of Consular.

Put simply, this is a bad resolution. Whatever the LKE's feelings about the potential benefits of a condemnation for our region, this proposal does not deserve to pass. The Imperial Crown therefore advises all parties to vote against the resolution.

Did you write that big post yourself, Linkin? Or was it written for you as usual?

Full support.

Linkin Nights wrote:<snip>

Did it really take that wall of text to say that you're trying to pretend you don't mind a condemnation, in hopes defenders and other anti-imperialists will buy the ridiculous attempt at reverse psychology and vote this down for you, when in reality you're going to oppose this for its "inaccuracies" just like you vehemently opposed the past condemnation attempts? Because that's all that wall of text says. It required no more words than I've just used.

Regarding the inaccuracies -- how about naming them? That's why we have this forum. Consular addressed all the inaccuracies NES brought up.

Cormactopia Prime wrote:Did it really take that wall of text to say that you're trying to pretend you don't mind a condemnation, in hopes defenders and other anti-imperialists will buy the ridiculous attempt at reverse psychology and vote this down for you, when in reality you're going to oppose this for its "inaccuracies" just like you vehemently opposed the past condemnation attempts? Because that's all that wall of text says. It required no more words than I've just used.

Regarding the inaccuracies -- how about naming them? That's why we have this forum. Consular addressed all the inaccuracies NES brought up.

We're not pretending anything; we don't mind a condemnation. I for one quite like the idea. More than that, I know our original founder, Emperor Lucius, would have loved the notoriety, and so will anyone else who remembers him. The LKE merely disagrees with this proposal because it is bad, just like we oppose any other objectively bad proposal. Defender delegates and other assorted enemies of the LKE will doubtless do whatever they like.

The inaccuracies have already been specified by the Lord High Steward. Some issues have also been noted by others unaffiliated with the LKE. The inaccuracies have not been been adequately addressed. They have been dismissed with a shrug of the shoulders, dealt with through quick fixes which miss the real point, or just ignored altogether. We are also aware that Consular boasted earlier on the NSGP Discord server that he is "peddling misinformation" and intends to outright ignore any rebuttal posted by the Emperor Emeritus. The Imperial Crown has responded in detail, and we refuse to humor him with repeating our points.

Apart from the numerous errors and half-truths, the writing is not appropriate to be a diplomatic/legal document. This should be apparent to anyone who reads it.

Was that one written for you as well?

I actually adopted one or two of NES' suggestions. There is nothing inaccurate in this proposal. It doesn't exactly show the LKE in a positive light -- but that would be because there really isn't anything positive to say about your region.

Onderkelkia wrote:Alas, the LKE and our ally TNI have faced multiple failed attempts to condemn us previously. This seems to be the latest in that long line of attacks from disgruntled foes.

So the LKE is totally cool with getting condemned, but any attempt to do so will be viewed as an attack. Good to know.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:

Onderkelkia wrote:Alas, the LKE and our ally TNI have faced multiple failed attempts to condemn us previously. This seems to be the latest in that long line of attacks from disgruntled foes.

So the LKE is totally cool with getting condemned, but any attempt to do so will be viewed as an attack. Good to know.

Not "any attempt". Rather, just those attempts which constitute "attacks from disgruntled foes", such as this proposal and the previous ones.

My characterisation, "attack", speaks to the purpose of the proposer, not any actual effect of the proposal. The LKE is capable of recognising the hostile intent behind the proposal even if the effect of condemnation is harmless at worst and beneficial at best. The reason why what the LKE thinks either way is being discussed with such interest is because some individuals with grudges against us are desperate to receive affirmation that they are annoying us.

Unfortunately for you, the LKE has no worries about a condemnation, even if we don't concur in Consular's attempts at rewriting history.

Onderkelkia wrote:My characterisation, "attack", speaks to the purpose of the proposer, not any actual effect of the proposal. The LKE is capable of recognising the hostile intent behind the proposal even if the effect of condemnation is harmless at worst and beneficial at best.

If I don't really care about something, I don't write a response to it. At least not 8 paragraphs long.

Onderkelkia wrote:Unfortunately for you, the LKE has no worries about a condemnation.

Ah damn, a real shame. My secret plan to push this resolution through has been foiled.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:

Onderkelkia wrote:My characterisation, "attack", speaks to the purpose of the proposer, not any actual effect of the proposal. The LKE is capable of recognising the hostile intent behind the proposal even if the effect of condemnation is harmless at worst and beneficial at best.

If I don't really care about something, I don't write a response to it. At least not 8 paragraphs long.

You are misrepresenting my post. If you had read my response, you would have seen that it was not primarily a response to the condemnation itself.

Instead, it consisted of (1) a rebuttal to a deeply offensive segment of the resolution claiming that the LKE engaged in non-rule-compliant recruitment practices and scapegoated Bob Moran, and (2) a reply to specific claims, which were not contained in the condemnation, but separately in a later post by Xoriet, concerning TNI. Indeed, my post expressly noted that I do not have time to discuss the condemnation more widely and declined to address it.

On behalf of all the innocent individuals who have been involved in recruitment throughout the LKE's history, I make it my practice to intervene whenever the April 2015 recruitment scandal is unfairly used for political purposes. That is why I singled out that point and ignored the other various distortions.

In any case, it is perfectly possible to refute specific allegations contained within a condemnation, and even to oppose a specific condemnation due to the inaccuracies it contains, without being concerned about the consequences of a condemnation more generally. Those are two distinct positions.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:

Onderkelkia wrote:Unfortunately for you, the LKE has no worries about a condemnation.

Ah damn, a real shame. My secret plan to push this resolution through has been foiled.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:I'm against.

It is immaterial to the comment you are quoting there whether or not you are for or against the proposal. Rather, it only matters whether you care about showing that the LKE has a particular opinion on condemnations (i.e. that a condemnation would annoy the LKE). After all, you just said:

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:If I don't really care about something, I don't write a response to it.

That is how you have just said that you decide what to post about, only posting responses in reply to things you "really care" about. If so, and you don't actually care about whether the LKE is annoyed by the resolution, then why are you posting here, vainly trying to tell the LKE what our views on condemnations are?

You clearly do "really care" about whether the LKE is worried about a condemnation or else by your own logic you would not be posting about it.

However, in any case, the "you" in that segment of my post was not meant in reference to you as an individual so much as it was concerned with addressing the enemies of the LKE collectively. Forgive me for not taking the time to draw distinctions between the various unhappy malcontents wishing us ill.

I fully support this resolution.

So Onder can see it: I am not Osiris, so Osiris does not support this resolution.

<_<

I'm not worthy of being blessed with an Onderwall. I will do the dumb thing and respond to it.

Onderkelkia wrote:In any case, it is perfectly possible to refute specific allegations contained within a condemnation, and even to oppose a specific condemnation due to the inaccuracies it contains, without being concerned about the consequences of a condemnation more generally. Those are two distinct positions.

1) Resolution is harmless.
2) It contains harmful distortions that need to be addressed.
These two cannot be true at the same time. That is my point.
Either admit that you oppose the contents of this resolution and want to see it failed (since it contains harmful lies according to you), or admit that it does not matter either way (therefore it does not require addressing at length). If you oppose something, it means that you care to oppose this thing. And if all those inaccuracies "make little difference to the LKE's direct interests," then why do Emperor Emeritus, Lord High Steward, and Crown Prince all choose to address this resolution and at such ungodly lengths?

Onderkelkia wrote:That is how you have just said that you decide what to post about, only posting responses in reply to things you "really care" about. If so, and you don't actually care about whether the LKE is annoyed by the resolution, then why are you posting here, vainly trying to tell the LKE what our views on condemnations are?

You are correct, I care about something. I care about that it appears as if you first produced a rebuttal to see this resolution defeated and then created an "I don't care" statement just in case your effort fails.

I don't wish ill upon the LKE, I would very much like to focus on building a community than plotting the destruction of the existing one. I'm just boring that way.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:<_<

Either admit that you oppose the contents of this resolution and want to see it failed (since it contains harmful lies according to you), or admit that it does not matter either way (therefore it does not require addressing at length). If you oppose something, it means that you care to oppose this thing. And if all those inaccuracies "make little difference to the LKE's direct interests," then why do Emperor Emeritus, Lord High Steward, and Crown Prince all choose to address this resolution and at such ungodly lengths?

The point about them getting wrecked in Moldavia isn't a lie no matter how much spin they put on it. Moldavia stands!

Onder is welcome back though. We like his insane ramblings and his words are the biglyest. A shame about king lucy but the stress of enforcing total compliance amongst the drones and nuking any dissent in the ranks probably got to him.

ALL IS WELL!

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:

Onderkelkia wrote:In any case, it is perfectly possible to refute specific allegations contained within a condemnation, and even to oppose a specific condemnation due to the inaccuracies it contains, without being concerned about the consequences of a condemnation more generally. Those are two distinct positions.

1) Resolution is harmless.
2) It contains harmful distortions that need to be addressed.
These two cannot be true at the same time. That is my point.
Either admit that you oppose the contents of this resolution and want to see it failed (since it contains harmful lies according to you), or admit that it does not matter either way (therefore it does not require addressing at length). If you oppose something, it means that you care to oppose this thing. And if all those inaccuracies "make little difference to the LKE's direct interests," then why do Emperor Emeritus, Lord High Steward, and Crown Prince all choose to address this resolution and at such ungodly lengths?

You are failing to distinguish between:

(1) The position that condemnation resolutions have a negative effect and to be condemned by the WA Security Council is inherently undesirable and;
(2) The position that specific arguments are inaccurate (in whatever they context that they appear in, including in a condemnation resolution).

The LKE argues against lies about our region all the time. This says nothing about whether we are happy to be recognised by a condemnation or not.

A player can oppose a specific commendation or condemnation resolution for a particular nation/region on the grounds that the text of the proposal is wrong while still being happy for that nation/region to receive a commendation or condemnation badge. There is no inconsistency between those positions.

The Crown Prince has already stated expressly that we oppose this proposal due to its inaccuracies but that, equally, we are happy to be condemned.

Contrary to the impression you seek to create, on any reasonable metric, the LKE has been restrained so far in arguing about the resolution. The Lord High Steward communicated our concerns. Beyond that, we have little intention of arguing further about the specifics in this discussion.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:You are correct, I care about something. I care about that it appears as if you first produced a rebuttal to see this resolution defeated and then created an "I don't care" statement just in case your effort fails.

That is not a fair or accurate description of my earlier post, which expressly ignored the core arguments of the resolution and corrected Xoriet's remarks about my actions in TNI. The only aspect of the resolution it picked up on was the recruitment issue. As any reader can clearly, that section of my post was about the offensiveness of that argument itself rather than opposing the resolution on those grounds. As I explained in my previous post, I make it my practice to intervene whenever the April 2015 recruitment scandal is unfairly used for political purposes. I do so on behalf of all the innocent individuals who have been involved in recruitment throughout the LKE's history. If you had been in the LKE in mid-2015, you would understand why we find that so offensive and seek to challenge it wherever it rears its ugly head. Our opposition on that score says nothing about our attitude to condemnation resolutions.

The Lord High Steward's post identifies several of the major inaccuracies in this resolution, but expressly endorses the idea that the LKE is theoretically worthy of condemnation. From the start. It is a shame that Consular has produced a poor proposal in his attempt to be irritating, but that is his nature.

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:I don't wish ill upon the LKE, I would very much like to focus on building a community than plotting the destruction of the existing one. I'm just boring that way.

If you didn't wish ill on the LKE and were genuinely more concerned with community building, you wouldn't be so highly concerned about this.

It bothers you that the LKE isn't bothered about this resolution.

For the most part, this thread is merely a collection of the LKE's assorted enemies coming to wallow in their own frustration and inability. If the Security Council does indeed choose to pass the resolution in spite of its errors and bad style, then we shall gladly take the recognition and the population boost.

I think if I yawned any harder there my jaw might actually have unhinged.

Onderkelkia wrote:For the most part, this thread is merely a collection of the LKE's assorted enemies coming to wallow in their own frustration and inability. If the Security Council does indeed choose to pass the resolution in spite of its errors and bad style, then we shall gladly take the recognition and the population boost.

And some dear friends of yours too Onder! We wallow in frustration nightly crying into our pillows. Even though you blow hot n' cold with us since our tryst we took it upon ourselves to pen you a song. It will be enscrivened into the stone plinth upon which your statue rests (actually we will probably just use alphabeti spaghetti as we have a LOT of that lying around thanks to an issue with the Amazon Echo we use in our boardrooms when we play corporate twister).

We hope you enjoy it.


You - change our facts - lock them down - nice & tight
Yeah, you - PMd me - like a lot - I would know
And you - over-speak - always talk - biggerly
We should know - that you're no good for us

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

Were you wrong to take flight?
How can we put it right?
We fight, we break up
Let's kiss & make up

(You) You don't really wanna stay, no
(You) But you don't really wanna go

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

We - used to be - living close - so in sync
Then you - ran away - why was that? - did we stink?
We got banned - for only - tryin' to talk - in forums
I should know - that you're not gonna change

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

Were you wrong to take flight?
How can we put it right?
We fight, we break up
Let's kiss & make up

(You) You don't really wanna stay, no
(You) But you don't really wanna go

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

Someone - call the doctor
Did we once love one another?
Stuck here in - great Moldavia
Can't get off this high

You - change our facts - lock them down - nice & tight
Yeah, you - PMd me - like a lot - I would know

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

Were you wrong to take flight?
How can we put it right?
We fight, we break up
Let's kiss & make up

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down

Were you wrong to take flight?
How can we put it right?
We fight, we break up
Let's kiss & make up

(You) You don't really wanna stay, no
(You) But you don't really wanna go

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're "Yes" then you're "No"
You're in (Moldavia) then you're out
You're up then you're down


ALL IS WELL!

So Onder is in here constantly talking about how the LKE isn't worried about this. I'm utterly confused. Though, calm and aloof silence in the face of minor issues is hardly Onder's normal MO, as that doesn't result in textwalls, so I suppose it is to be expected.

In honour of this proposal, Phthisis is pleased to announce a limited edition of the classic "I tried to invade Moldavia (again) and all I got was this lousy t-shirt".

Special Shrew sizes are also available.

Former WAD of one of the regions they've destroyed, throwing in my support.

Man, even if this doesn't pass, watching flustered LKE officials trying to respond to the proposal makes this thread worth it alone.

Basically hoping the liberation spam will blow over before I submit this.

Consular wrote:Basically hoping the liberation spam will blow over before I submit this.

Given that you presumably want this to get to vote, be wary that the queue has had a bit of fatigue that getting things to vote can take longer than normal and be pretty close to the wire in terms of time left.

Yeah I submitted this. Enjoy!