NationStates

Kuriko wrote:Nice to see that while I've been doing things nicely, and fairly, others are fighting dirty and trying to make me look like an a**hole in front of the entire WA. I'm not naming names, we all know who it is, but I am a little upset about the telegram and its view of me.

Attacking new players for voicing opinions is your idea of nice? Wow i'd hate to see you on a bad day then.

Drop Your Pants wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Nice to see that while I've been doing things nicely, and fairly, others are fighting dirty and trying to make me look like an a**hole in front of the entire WA. I'm not naming names, we all know who it is, but I am a little upset about the telegram and its view of me.

Attacking new players for voicing opinions is your idea of nice? Wow i'd hate to see you on a bad day then.

I don't see how asking them for clarification on their stance as a new player and then correcting their region name and clarifying there's a new proposal is attacking them DYP. Mind pointing out how that is?

Kuriko wrote:I don't see how asking them for clarification on their stance as a new player and then correcting their region name and clarifying there's a new proposal is attacking them DYP. Mind pointing out how that is?

I'll drop you a TG later about it, I don't fancy a threadjack loom.

Drop Your Pants wrote:

Kuriko wrote:I don't see how asking them for clarification on their stance as a new player and then correcting their region name and clarifying there's a new proposal is attacking them DYP. Mind pointing out how that is?

I'll drop you a TG later about it, I don't fancy a threadjack loom.

Well, okay I look forward to it. If I came off as attacking or being rude to the new person, my apologies to them. I wasn't trying to be that way, just working from 5am to 3pm and getting up at 4am makes you a little short with people and explanations.

Excerpt from the campaign sent by the “no” side:

I, on the other hand, am not bored. I have things to do, like collect food donations for the local food bank, toiletries for the homeless shelter, and cash to help fund their Christmas dinner. I need to wind up things at my full time job, as I start a new one on 2nd January. I have over 100 presents to wrap, and an extended-family Christmas to prepare for. I really have better things to spend my time on, and better things to spend $25 on than telegram stamps campaigning against a destructive resolution like this one.
So please, make my time and money worth it.

lol

EDIT: and this addendum from the same telegram:

I've wasted $25 on telegram stamps, when I could have used it for charity. To help get my karma back, please drop a couple of coins in the next charity box you see. Thanks, and Merry Christmas!

I look forward to a long future of WA attack ads.

Wallenburg wrote:I look forward to a long future of WA attack ads.

You speak as if that's something new

Kuriko wrote:Nice to see that while I've been doing things nicely, and fairly, others are fighting dirty and trying to make me look like an a**hole in front of the entire WA. I'm not naming names, we all know who it is, but I am a little upset about the telegram and its view of me.

I'm going on the record by saying I don't know who it is, but it's not me, just in case anyone thought that. Mods are free to check that. As a matter of fact, I hope they do check and let folks know it isn't me, because I don't really want to be stigmatized in all of this. I'm not prepared to deal with that drama, especially when I've had no part in this whatsoever.

I'm the original author of SC1. I'll miss SC1, but it was poorly-written and I'm not going to send out a TG like that. I'm not going to pull a 'this could've been used for charity' stick, because that's wrong. I'm also not going to spend 25 bucks to send out a TG either.

Todd McCloud wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Nice to see that while I've been doing things nicely, and fairly, others are fighting dirty and trying to make me look like an a**hole in front of the entire WA. I'm not naming names, we all know who it is, but I am a little upset about the telegram and its view of me.

I'm going on the record by saying I don't know who it is, but it's not me, just in case anyone thought that. Mods are free to check that. As a matter of fact, I hope they do check and let folks know it isn't me, because I don't really want to be stigmatized in all of this. I'm not prepared to deal with that drama, especially when I've had no part in this whatsoever.

I'm the original author of SC1. I'll miss SC1, but it was poorly-written and I'm not going to send out a TG like that. I'm not going to pull a 'this could've been used for charity' stick, because that's wrong. I'm also not going to spend 25 bucks to send out a TG either.

I don't think anyone thought it was you for the record, or at least I didn't

Concrete Slab wrote:The Security Council,

Understanding SC 1 is a historical resolution notable for being the first resolution in the Security Council.

Believing two condemnations is illogical for a region that, as well as its allies, is no longer active.

Adding a SC resolution should provide substantial evidence a target deserves a condemnation.

Noting the first condemnation was deserved, however, the resolution did not sufficiently explain why Macedon was deserving of condemnation.

Acknowledging Kuriko's condemnation of Macedon in SC #269 goes much further in depth about why Macedon deserves a condemnation.

Noting the aforementioned second condemnation resolution was drafted and passed with the intent of repealing SC 1.

Understanding SC #1 has been replaced and is no longer needed.

Hereby repeals Condemn Macedon

Co- authored by Lord Dominator, Kuriko, and Praeceps


UPDATED!

Tel me what you guys think!

Macedon is innocent of all charges against him and shall be dropped

Soviet Antarctica wrote:Macedon is innocent of all charges against him and shall be dropped

Macedon is a region, not a person

Lord Dominator wrote:

Todd McCloud wrote:I'm going on the record by saying I don't know who it is, but it's not me, just in case anyone thought that. Mods are free to check that. As a matter of fact, I hope they do check and let folks know it isn't me, because I don't really want to be stigmatized in all of this. I'm not prepared to deal with that drama, especially when I've had no part in this whatsoever.

I'm the original author of SC1. I'll miss SC1, but it was poorly-written and I'm not going to send out a TG like that. I'm not going to pull a 'this could've been used for charity' stick, because that's wrong. I'm also not going to spend 25 bucks to send out a TG either.

I don't think anyone thought it was you for the record, or at least I didn't

Oh, I see. Sorry if I overreacted, folks - I can be kind of dense as far as foxes go.

Todd McCloud wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:I don't think anyone thought it was you for the record, or at least I didn't

Oh, I see. Sorry if I overreacted, folks - I can be kind of dense as far as foxes go.

An understandable concern given the nature of the content of the telegram.

Not for an instance did I consider you as the author, nor in any of the discussions I have been in has your name been brought up. I do not think you would do that.

How in the Hell is this passing?? I don't mind the second resolution better outlining things, but this is a piece of NS history! How dare anyone vote for this.

The Stalker wrote:How in the Hell is this passing?? I don't mind the second resolution better outlining things, but this is a piece of NS history! How dare anyone vote for this.

It's not as if repealing destroys the document. It's still active, just not in force.

We don't need to be removing the SC's most ancient (and admittedly funny) history for the sake of a few badge-hunters.

This IRREVERSIBLE destruction of priceless history and heritage for ego inflation, prestige, and badge-hunting is veritably disgusting and emblematic of so many of our current problems today, as is the swathes of support this resolution is receiving.

United Provinces of Atlantica wrote:We don't need to be removing the SC's most ancient (and admittedly funny) history for the sake of a few badge-hunters.

This IRREVERSIBLE destruction of priceless history and heritage for ego inflation, prestige, and badge-hunting is veritably disgusting and emblematic of so many of our current problems today, as is the swathes of support this resolution is receiving.

Atlantica you, and others, really need to drop the badge hunting shtick when it comes to me. I don't care about any dam badges, I write SC proposals because I like writing proposals. No matter how much you and others try to push this line of thinking it will never apply to me.

Todd McCloud wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Nice to see that while I've been doing things nicely, and fairly, others are fighting dirty and trying to make me look like an a**hole in front of the entire WA. I'm not naming names, we all know who it is, but I am a little upset about the telegram and its view of me.

I'm going on the record by saying I don't know who it is, but it's not me, just in case anyone thought that. Mods are free to check that. As a matter of fact, I hope they do check and let folks know it isn't me, because I don't really want to be stigmatized in all of this. I'm not prepared to deal with that drama, especially when I've had no part in this whatsoever.

I'm the original author of SC1. I'll miss SC1, but it was poorly-written and I'm not going to send out a TG like that. I'm not going to pull a 'this could've been used for charity' stick, because that's wrong. I'm also not going to spend 25 bucks to send out a TG either.

Hey Todd, no worries. We know it wasn't you, and I knew it wasn't you to begin with.

Isn't "badge hunting" an accusation usually leveled at people who don't yet have a badge, rather than someone who has already authored eight Security Council resolutions, and co-authored two others? Kuriko is one of the Security Council's most prolific and accomplished authors, not a "badge hunter."

I do realize Kuriko is no longer the primary author of this proposal, but I'm not seeing how the "badge hunter" argument is anymore applicable to the person who submitted the proposal or the other co-author. It seems like those opposed to repeal are just grasping at straws and trying to see if any old attack line will stick, including the really bizarre charity stuff in one of the campaign telegrams, which almost came across as shaming people for spending time on Security Council proposals when they could be volunteering instead. Literally, what? This has to be one of the most bizarre counter-campaigns I've ever witnessed, and I've been playing this game a long time. I really don't know what you folks are hoping to accomplish with these smear tactics.

If the only argument opponents of repealing SC#1 have is "something something historical, blah blah badge hunting, yadda yadda charity," there apparently is no real argument for keeping SC#1. Or at the very least, if a strong argument in favor of keeping SC#1 does exist, none of you have spent any time at all actually making it. Color me completely unimpressed by this smear campaign against an esteemed author and her co-authors. Do better.

Lol badge hunting accusations against people who already have the badge. You don't get your whole page covered in badges when you pass more resolutions, you know.

I'm a sucker for preserving history, so I will be voting against the repeal.

I think it's better to keep it on the books even if there's a better condemnation. It's symbolic in a way. I don't think there's any reason to repeal it since the new resolution fills in all the holes the old one had.

Hydronica wrote:I'm a sucker for preserving history, so I will be voting against the repeal.

I think it's better to keep it on the books even if there's a better condemnation. It's symbolic in a way. I don't think there's any reason to repeal it since the new resolution fills in all the holes the old one had.

Exactly. All the holes are filled. The first proposal is not needed, especially for an inactive region

Cormactopia Prime wrote:If the only argument opponents of repealing SC#1 have is "something something historical, blah blah badge hunting, yadda yadda charity," there apparently is no real argument for keeping SC#1. Or at the very least, if a strong argument in favor of keeping SC#1 does exist, none of you have spent any time at all actually making it.

Well spoken, Cormac.

Nice to know I remain a part of the WA Eilte, @Jocospor

Lord Dominator wrote:Nice to know I remain a part of the WA Eilte, @Jocospor

I see I've been added to that list, if I wasn't on it before . With the added bonus of yet another badge hunter decree being levied against me

Aclion wrote:

The Stalker wrote:How in the Hell is this passing?? I don't mind the second resolution better outlining things, but this is a piece of NS history! How dare anyone vote for this.

It's not as if repealing destroys the document. It's still active, just not in force.

I agree and nationstates is changing so we can't keep the document forever!