Advertisement
by Fahran » Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:03 am
by Miporin » Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:36 am
by Lord Dominator » Tue Sep 24, 2019 10:01 am
Miporin wrote:Leaning towards a no vote on this one. Overly flowery language notwithstanding, the case can be made that Mikeswill's accomplishment only stands because mainstream raiding organisations refused to touch it- for a long time, he reciprocated by sending occasional military support through Ile de France.
Meanwhile, other delegates with similarly long tenures found themselves targeted and unseated, notably those of Antarctica, Texas, and Forest. Not to mention a concerted effort to pull down yet more delegacies by TBH- with NationStates once again left untouched.
Is the accomplishment still impressive? Sure. Does it deserve to be commended, given it's largely only happened due to the goodwill of condemnable groups? Not so much.
by WayNeacTia » Tue Sep 24, 2019 10:55 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:I see I was mistaken about Mikeswill not wanting the commendation. I was planning to still vote against this because a Regional Officer in NationStates had engaged in petty embassy closures over it, but it looks like that person went a bit rogue, as Mikeswill has cancelled the embassy closures in question.
I've switched my vote to being for this, not that it will matter. To those voting against it, if you're voting against it because you think it's hypocritical to give Mikeswill a commendation based on his opposition to the Security Council, I think that's valid -- though I disagree. If, on the other hand, you are voting against it because Jocospor is the author, I have argued in the recent past we shouldn't oppose General Assembly proposals based exclusively on their authorship, and I have to insist on a similar standard in the Security Council. The petty personalization that is spreading from gameplay and now infecting other parts of this game desperately needs to be rolled back. I don't care that Jocospor is the author. The proposal is decent enough to pass, and considerations about its authorship alone really shouldn't factor into it. Let's stop with all this personalized crap.
Elites voting based on authorship and the author not being part of the gameplay in-crowd are, ironically, validating everything both Mikeswill and Jocospor have always said about the Security Council, and everything lots of people are saying about gameplay these days. Congratulations for that, I guess.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac
wait
by Mikeswill » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:38 am
Related note - NewTexas of Texas will in a couple days hit the same 15 years, even when accounting for 1.5 days out of office due to 3 prior TBH-led dethronings.
by Lord Dominator » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:51 am
Mikeswill wrote:Related note - NewTexas of Texas will in a couple days hit the same 15 years, even when accounting for 1.5 days out of office due to 3 prior TBH-led dethronings.
NewTexas was always a day behind me because of a glitch which reset WA Delegacy start dates.
In reality NewTexas was Delegate at least six months longer than me, but alas, the unfortunate raid...
by Mikeswill » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:59 am
by WayNeacTia » Tue Sep 24, 2019 12:14 pm
Artismentabeyondia wrote:Mikeswill, that is good that is good.
The realm is (still) in good hands. Good. Good.
Imagine a situation you would have been consumed about 1000-1500 pints of beer during your last half year of delegacy. Its notoriously hard to watch those damn immigrants, twice per day. Better be sober.
Nothing against you, but when you go to a mundane counting of days in The NationStates, you're maybe ready for a vacation. As far as we can see, you're already near the edge.
Just drop. Everything will be easier thereafter.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac
wait
by Kuriko » Tue Sep 24, 2019 12:29 pm
by Anglia-Saxia » Tue Sep 24, 2019 1:40 pm
by Miporin » Tue Sep 24, 2019 1:57 pm
Kuriko wrote:Oh god, here we go with the WA Elite thing again. There's no such thing as a WA Elite, and that falacy really needs to end. There are multiple big delegates that vote based upon a democratic forum poll, 10000 Islands and TNP to name two of them.
by Kuriko » Tue Sep 24, 2019 2:03 pm
Miporin wrote:Kuriko wrote:Oh god, here we go with the WA Elite thing again. There's no such thing as a WA Elite, and that falacy really needs to end. There are multiple big delegates that vote based upon a democratic forum poll, 10000 Islands and TNP to name two of them.
to be fair, TNP's delegate, at the very least, is not required to follow the forum vote, and has decided not to in the recent past
by Fahran » Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:03 pm
Lord Dominator wrote:Miporin wrote:Leaning towards a no vote on this one. Overly flowery language notwithstanding, the case can be made that Mikeswill's accomplishment only stands because mainstream raiding organisations refused to touch it- for a long time, he reciprocated by sending occasional military support through Ile de France.
Meanwhile, other delegates with similarly long tenures found themselves targeted and unseated, notably those of Antarctica, Texas, and Forest. Not to mention a concerted effort to pull down yet more delegacies by TBH- with NationStates once again left untouched.
Is the accomplishment still impressive? Sure. Does it deserve to be commended, given it's largely only happened due to the goodwill of condemnable groups? Not so much.
Related note - NewTexas of Texas will in a couple days hit the same 15 years, even when accounting for 1.5 days out of office due to 3 prior TBH-led dethronings.
by Sensorland » Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:33 pm
by Kaboomlandia » Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:41 pm
Fahran wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:Related note - NewTexas of Texas will in a couple days hit the same 15 years, even when accounting for 1.5 days out of office due to 3 prior TBH-led dethronings.
Interesting. I've got a bit of fondness for Texas as a region and I wouldn't be adverse to a commendation of their delegate if a similar achievement can be documented.
To address the earlier accusations, I believe the argument regarding Mikeswill retaining his delegacy this long principally due to collaboration with condemnable organizations, who I shall not at this time name, bears greater consideration as an argument to vote against the resolution at vote. The accomplishment itself is commendable, though, it seems, the means by which it was achieved were not.
by Jocospor » Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:48 pm
Cormactopia Prime wrote:I see I was mistaken about Mikeswill not wanting the commendation. I was planning to still vote against this because a Regional Officer in NationStates had engaged in petty embassy closures over it, but it looks like that person went a bit rogue, as Mikeswill has cancelled the embassy closures in question.
I've switched my vote to being for this, not that it will matter. To those voting against it, if you're voting against it because you think it's hypocritical to give Mikeswill a commendation based on his opposition to the Security Council, I think that's valid -- though I disagree. If, on the other hand, you are voting against it because Jocospor is the author, I have argued in the recent past we shouldn't oppose General Assembly proposals based exclusively on their authorship, and I have to insist on a similar standard in the Security Council. The petty personalization that is spreading from gameplay and now infecting other parts of this game desperately needs to be rolled back. I don't care that Jocospor is the author. The proposal is decent enough to pass, and considerations about its authorship alone really shouldn't factor into it. Let's stop with all this personalized crap.
Elites voting based on authorship and the author not being part of the gameplay in-crowd are, ironically, validating everything both Mikeswill and Jocospor have always said about the Security Council, and everything lots of people are saying about gameplay these days. Congratulations for that, I guess.
by Jocospor » Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:03 pm
Wayneactia wrote:Cormactopia Prime wrote:I see I was mistaken about Mikeswill not wanting the commendation. I was planning to still vote against this because a Regional Officer in NationStates had engaged in petty embassy closures over it, but it looks like that person went a bit rogue, as Mikeswill has cancelled the embassy closures in question.
I've switched my vote to being for this, not that it will matter. To those voting against it, if you're voting against it because you think it's hypocritical to give Mikeswill a commendation based on his opposition to the Security Council, I think that's valid -- though I disagree. If, on the other hand, you are voting against it because Jocospor is the author, I have argued in the recent past we shouldn't oppose General Assembly proposals based exclusively on their authorship, and I have to insist on a similar standard in the Security Council. The petty personalization that is spreading from gameplay and now infecting other parts of this game desperately needs to be rolled back. I don't care that Jocospor is the author. The proposal is decent enough to pass, and considerations about its authorship alone really shouldn't factor into it. Let's stop with all this personalized crap.
Elites voting based on authorship and the author not being part of the gameplay in-crowd are, ironically, validating everything both Mikeswill and Jocospor have always said about the Security Council, and everything lots of people are saying about gameplay these days. Congratulations for that, I guess.
You seem to be missing one singular point here. Jocospor is only doing this as part of his grand badge hunt. There was zero emergency on this one. He could have done his research and posted a draft. There was nothing stopping him from posting this weeks ago, so it could have been worked on and fine tuned if Joscospor was actually acting in good faith on this.
by Praeceps » Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:26 pm
Miporin wrote:Kuriko wrote:Oh god, here we go with the WA Elite thing again. There's no such thing as a WA Elite, and that falacy really needs to end. There are multiple big delegates that vote based upon a democratic forum poll, 10000 Islands and TNP to name two of them.
to be fair, TNP's delegate, at the very least, is not required to follow the forum vote, and has decided not to in the recent past
by Imperium Anglorum » Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:41 pm
Cormactopia Prime wrote:I see I was mistaken about Mikeswill not wanting the commendation.
by Jocospor » Wed Sep 25, 2019 1:05 am
by Concrete Slab » Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:42 am
by Castelia » Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:54 am
Concrete Slab wrote:Doesn't look like this is going to win...
MineLegotia and Equestria wrote:If the vote suddenly goes to 'For', he gets a fancy badge. And so does Jocospor.
If the vote stays as it is, he proves his point that "the process is a popularity contest controlled by the powered elite devoid of merit.", " their ability to immediately Repeal almost any Resolution not authored by themselves.", and "proving the farce that is the Security Council."
Like i said, either way, Mikeswill wins. All the cards are in his hands. One result just so happens to benefit Jocospor. And the rest all mainly proves his and his own points
by Sllonsonnopia » Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:41 am
Wayneactia wrote:
You seem to be missing one singular point here. Jocospor is only doing this as part of his grand badge hunt. There was zero emergency on this one. He could have done his research and posted a draft. There was nothing stopping him from posting this weeks ago, so it could have been worked on and fine tuned if Joscospor was actually acting in good faith on this.
by WayNeacTia » Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:45 am
Sllonsonnopia wrote:Wayneactia wrote:
You seem to be missing one singular point here. Jocospor is only doing this as part of his grand badge hunt. There was zero emergency on this one. He could have done his research and posted a draft. There was nothing stopping him from posting this weeks ago, so it could have been worked on and fine tuned if Joscospor was actually acting in good faith on this.
Does it matter what intensions the author have, if it is or not just a badge hunt? Isn't this forum solely for discussing the merit or lack thereof of the resolution and wether the arguments presented in the resolution convince a pass or not?
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac
wait
by The New California Republic » Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:47 am
Sllonsonnopia wrote:Does it matter what intensions the author have, if it is or not just a badge hunt? Isn't this forum solely for discussing the merit or lack thereof of the resolution and wether the arguments presented in the resolution convince a pass or not?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement