[DEFEATED] Repeal 'Civilian Aircraft Accord' (author Bitely)

[Kaboomlandia]

Responding to the points in this $20 campaign telegram:

1 and 4 have the same counter-argument: as I said earlier, radar range for an Area Control Centre doesn't extend past about 200 miles at most in real life, so a plane should be able to make it to the border if they are in radar range, and if they're too damaged to make it, then that's not the country's problem.

"Assistance" is intentionally left up to the discretion of the member nations. You're assuming that every occurrence of "assistance" is a fighter jet escort, which is ridiculous.

2: It's still illegal to shoot down civilian aircraft, as defined in the very resolution you're trying to repeal, making this argument moot.

3: Your convoluted hypotheticals are unnecessary and don't do what you think they do. In addition, under GA #25:

1) REQUIRES member states to take all effective measures at their disposal, subject to the rule of law, to prevent non-state actors from using their territory to commit terrorist acts against another nation.
(a)This shall include, but not be limited to, making it a criminal offense to conspire, aid, abet, fund, plan or carry out acts of terrorism across international borders. Member states shall prosecute those who violate such laws to the fullest extent possible within their nation.

2) BANS WA member states from providing funding, weapons, or any other form of assistance to any party committing terrorist acts against another nation, or from using other WA states or non-member states as a third party to conduct terrorist acts against another nation.

Bitely, did you actually read any other laws on the WA's books before you made up these fearmongering scenarios?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Bitely if you want the gratification of pay to win there's World of Warships and World of Tanks.

[Liberal Federal Republic Germany]

Yeah gonna be a hard no from me. Reason one is because of the mass telegram and reason two is because the post higher up actually makes a good point as to why this is bullsh*t essentially

[Waffia]

The resolution states that a WA member must provide assistance to any aircraft that SAYS that they're in distress. Doesn't give any exemptions for said nation to do a fly over and determine if they are in distress. According to the resolution the aircraft gets to determine if they are in distress.

"And the resolution doesn't describe the assistance one must render, which makes the scope of what you are obligated to offer extremely malleable. Keep up, ambassador, this is a basic case of ambiguity in a statute. It's something I would expect a first year law student to understand intuitively."

"The Secretariat succinctly explains why the concerns raised by the repeal's author are completely invalid. We, too, will vote against."

[Separatist Peoples]

"And the resolution doesn't describe the assistance one must render, which makes the scope of what you are obligated to offer extremely malleable. Keep up, ambassador, this is a basic case of ambiguity in a statute. It's something I would expect a first year law student to understand intuitively."

"The Secretariat succinctly explains why the concerns raised by the repeal's author are completely invalid. We, too, will vote against."

Ooc: point of clarity, I was not speaking in an official capacity there. That was me as a player.

[Kuriko]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

[Bananaistan]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

OOC: I've switched my vote to for on account of this sort of nonsense.

1) Players are entitled to use the tools the game provides.
2) The distrust and contempt large regions have for their own residents never fails to amaze me.

Incidentally, regions and regional delegates cannot exist IC.

[Kuriko]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

OOC: I've switched my vote to for on account of this sort of nonsense.

1) Players are entitled to use the tools the game provides.
2) The distrust and contempt large regions have for their own residents never fails to amaze me.

Incidentally, regions and regional delegates cannot exist IC.

OOC: I'll keep that in mind for next time, still new at making IC posts :/. However, they are entitled to using the tools I agree. As for your second point, what distrust and contempt?? The reason we wrote the law was so that our members can make up their own minds on how to vote on resolutions without outside interference, especially when that interference contains lies and slanders like Bitely wrote. The Co9, and the Delegate's of XKI, trust our member nations to make a decision on how to vote based upon their own feelings toward a resolution and their own believes and we would never ever have contempt against our member nations.

[Waffia]

"The Secretariat succinctly explains why the concerns raised by the repeal's author are completely invalid. We, too, will vote against."

Ooc: point of clarity, I was not speaking in an official capacity there. That was me as a player.

OOC: I understand. Can I still refer to you as a Secretariat in-character or is that not how it works?

[Bananaistan]

OOC: I'll keep that in mind for next time, still new at making IC posts :/. However, they are entitled to using the tools I agree. As for your second point, what distrust and contempt?? The reason we wrote the law was so that our members can make up their own minds on how to vote on resolutions without outside interference, especially when that interference contains lies and slanders like Bitely wrote. The Co9, and the Delegate's of XKI, trust our member nations to make a decision on how to vote based upon their own feelings toward a resolution and their own believes and we would never ever have contempt against our member nations.

OOC: You clearly don't trust them to be able to assess the truthfulness of TGs received for themselves or to block campaign TGs if they don't want to receive them. All I see is residents being prevented from receiving independent advice from outside the region. This idea that your "law" allows your residents to make up their own minds is spurious. I suspect the purpose of the "law" is to have the communications to your residents relating to WA resolutions only be from your regional WA minister.

And you can't reasonably say that you agree that players are entitled to use the tools when you're defending the practice of actively punishing players for using those tools.

[Kuriko]

OOC: I'll keep that in mind for next time, still new at making IC posts :/. However, they are entitled to using the tools I agree. As for your second point, what distrust and contempt?? The reason we wrote the law was so that our members can make up their own minds on how to vote on resolutions without outside interference, especially when that interference contains lies and slanders like Bitely wrote. The Co9, and the Delegate's of XKI, trust our member nations to make a decision on how to vote based upon their own feelings toward a resolution and their own believes and we would never ever have contempt against our member nations.

OOC: You clearly don't trust them to be able to assess the truthfulness of TGs received for themselves or to block campaign TGs if they don't want to receive them. All I see is residents being prevented from receiving independent advice from outside the region. This idea that your "law" allows your residents to make up their own minds is spurious. I suspect the purpose of the "law" is to have the communications to your residents relating to WA resolutions only be from your regional WA minister.

And you can't reasonably say that you agree that players are entitled to use the tools when you're defending the practice of actively punishing players for using those tools.

OOC: The telegrams are fine to be sent to XKI, but first and foremost they must seek permission from the WA Delegate before doing so. I for one, would not say no if I am asked permission before hand. Also, let me clear this up in case there's been a misunderstanding.

Bitely is not blacklisted from coming to XKI, nor is he blacklisted from making a case in our discussion thread on our forum. The blacklist that the ROVA refers to is a voting blacklist, meaning that the delegate would take into account past actions when deciding on how to vote in future proposals from this author. It's not permanent, since they can be removed at any time under the delegates prerogative.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

OOC: I've switched my vote to for on account of this sort of nonsense.

1) Players are entitled to use the tools the game provides.

The "vote against" button is a tool the game provides, is it not?
Also, where did Kuriko attempt to stop Bitely from using mass TGs, or say that they shouldn't be allowed to do so? Your statement implies that Kuriko attempted to limit or remove Bitely's power to send mass TGs, and not only is that wildly out of character for her, I don't see anything supporting it.

2) The distrust and contempt large regions have for their own residents never fails to amaze me.

No idea what you're referencing here, but if you mean the "I will vote 'against' no matter what the poll says" thing, it might be useful for you to know that "Against" was winning by a very large margin long before the mass TG. The ROVA didn't change anything other than making a note that Bitely's proposals should face harsher scrutiny from XKI in the future.

Incidentally, regions and regional delegates cannot exist IC.

I always figured that IC, regions were sort of like large alliances of nations (like NATO, for example), and the Delegate was the elected representative of that alliance. Guess I was wrong.
It's honestly baffling to me that such a key aspect of both the WA and NS as a whole apparently cannot be referenced in-character.
Like, if delegates and regions don't exist, how does the GA function in-character? Do some nations just get more votes than others for no reason? Does the quorum process even exist IC, and if so, how does it work? Do endorsements exist IC, and if so, what's the explanation for nations only being able to endorse each other if they share a region, given that regions cannot exist?
I trust your judgement on this, but your explanation creates a lot more problems than it solves.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: The telegrams are fine to be sent to XKI, but first and foremost they must seek permission from the WA Delegate before doing so. I for one, would not say no if I am asked permission before hand. Also, let me clear this up in case there's been a misunderstanding.

Bitely is not blacklisted from coming to XKI, nor is he blacklisted from making a case in our discussion thread on our forum. The blacklist that the ROVA refers to is a voting blacklist, meaning that the delegate would take into account past actions when deciding on how to vote in future proposals from this author. It's not permanent, since they can be removed at any time under the delegates prerogative.

OOC: There's no misunderstanding. It's perfectly obvious that forcing people to ask permission to speak to your residents is no more than infantilising your own residents. And then to attempt to defend it by saying that it somehow protects their independence is even worse. I'd have more respect for you if you called it for what it is: you don't like players paying to win even if it's a legitimate use of the game's tools.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

what even is this post

[Bananaistan]

The "vote against" button is a tool the game provides, is it not?
Also, where did Kuriko attempt to stop Bitely from using mass TGs, or say that they shouldn't be allowed to do so? Your statement implies that Kuriko attempted to limit or remove Bitely's power to send mass TGs, and not only is that wildly out of character for her, I don't see anything supporting it.

OOC: Bitely was supposed to ask permission, which could easily be denied, from one person before communicating with many more people. That is an attempt to limit Bitely's power to send mass TGs all day long.

No idea what you're referencing here, but if you mean the "I will vote 'against' no matter what the poll says" thing, it might be useful for you to know that "Against" was winning by a very large margin long before the mass TG. The ROVA didn't change anything other than making a note that Bitely's proposals should face harsher scrutiny from XKI in the future.

A region which says that TGs to its residents must be vetted by their delegate first does not trust its residents to be able to assess the TG for themselves. If that's not distrust and contempt for those residents, I don't know what is.

I always figured that IC, regions were sort of like large alliances of nations (like NATO, for example), and the Delegate was the elected representative of that alliance. Guess I was wrong.
It's honestly baffling to me that such a key aspect of both the WA and NS as a whole apparently cannot be referenced in-character.
Like, if delegates and regions don't exist, how does the GA function in-character? Do some nations just get more votes than others for no reason? Does the quorum process even exist IC, and if so, how does it work? Do endorsements exist IC, and if so, what's the explanation for nations only being able to endorse each other if they share a region, given that regions cannot exist?
I trust your judgement on this, but your explanation creates a lot more problems than it solves.

I find it's best not to think about it too deeply because IC the GA is just an association of nations.

[Separatist Peoples]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

OOC: FWIW, I think this is totally fair, if easily abused. Regions have a reasonable interest in combating telegram spam. Good on you.

[Bananaistan]

Rising from her seat, Empress Kuriko begins to address the assembled Ambassadors to the World Assembly.

"My fellow Ambassadors and Delegations to the World Assembly, I come before you today to voice my regions discontent with the authoring nations delegation. Earlier today a message was sent to the entire World Assembly by the delegation of Bitely, arguing for everyone to make a 'for' vote on the current resolution at vote. This message, as designed, went to every single WA nation that agrees to have them delivered.

Here in the 10000 Islands we have a law, called the Respect Our Vote Act, that pertains to such messages. This law lays out repercussions to be enacted for it being broken, and I now call those enactments to count. No matter what our regional poll shall be, the delegation from 10000 Islands shall maintain its vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, under Provision 3 of ROVA, I shall be adding Bitely to a blacklisting list for future Delegate's of 10000 Islands to vote against their proposals. From here on, 10000 Islands shall be stricter in its sanctions for breaking ROVA against any authoring nation or delegation breaking the Act. I also issue a warning, if any other delegation or ambassador decides to campaign against this proposal and it gets sent to 10000 Islands nations as a whole our delegation will be forced to withdraw our vote and add the offender to the black list as well. Thank you for your time."

OOC: FWIW, I think this is totally fair, if easily abused. Regions have a reasonable interest in combating telegram spam. Good on you.

OOC: Unless moderators have marked it spam, it's not spam.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: FWIW, I think this is totally fair, if easily abused. Regions have a reasonable interest in combating telegram spam. Good on you.

OOC: Unless moderators have marked it spam, it's not spam.

OOC: Not per site rules. Regions are free to set their internal rules at a more strict level. And let us not pretend this is anything but spam.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

OOC: The telegrams are fine to be sent to XKI, but first and foremost they must seek permission from the WA Delegate before doing so. I for one, would not say no if I am asked permission before hand. Also, let me clear this up in case there's been a misunderstanding.

Bitely is not blacklisted from coming to XKI, nor is he blacklisted from making a case in our discussion thread on our forum. The blacklist that the ROVA refers to is a voting blacklist, meaning that the delegate would take into account past actions when deciding on how to vote in future proposals from this author. It's not permanent, since they can be removed at any time under the delegates prerogative.

OOC: There's no misunderstanding. It's perfectly obvious that forcing people to ask permission to speak to your residents is no more than infantilising your own residents. And then to attempt to defend it by saying that it somehow protects their independence is even worse. I'd have more respect for you if you called it for what it is: you don't like players paying to win even if it's a legitimate use of the game's tools.

And I'd have more respect for you if you acknowledged that Kuri is doing nothing more than reacting to Bitely's actions in accordance with law, and there is no part of what she's doing that isn't using the game's mechanics. Bitely's free to mass TG. We are free to respond to that mass TG. You can't just say "if the game lets you do it, then reacting unkindly to it is wrong, so I'm voting against you" - not only is it refusing to acknowledge both forum posts and the votes themselves as game mechanics, you're doing the exact same thing, using both your vote and the NS forum to urge people to vote a certain way in reaction to somebody using game mechanics in a way you don't like. Please, either stop saying that it's wrong or stop doing it yourself.

The "vote against" button is a tool the game provides, is it not?
Also, where did Kuriko attempt to stop Bitely from using mass TGs, or say that they shouldn't be allowed to do so? Your statement implies that Kuriko attempted to limit or remove Bitely's power to send mass TGs, and not only is that wildly out of character for her, I don't see anything supporting it.

OOC: Bitely was supposed to ask permission, which could easily be denied, from one person before communicating with many more people. That is an attempt to limit Bitely's power to send mass TGs all day long.

We clearly have very different definitions of the term "limit".

No idea what you're referencing here, but if you mean the "I will vote 'against' no matter what the poll says" thing, it might be useful for you to know that "Against" was winning by a very large margin long before the mass TG. The ROVA didn't change anything other than making a note that Bitely's proposals should face harsher scrutiny from XKI in the future.

A region which says that TGs to its residents must be vetted by their delegate first does not trust its residents to be able to assess the TG for themselves. If that's not distrust and contempt for those residents, I don't know what is.

It's an attempt to have people judge proposals on their own merits instead of the merits of the creator's advertisement campaign. You might see that as an issue, but I don't.
If you'll notice, the ROVA provides several proper channels one can use to ask for XKI's support, and people frequently use them. If you choose not to, that's your problem, not ours. In addition, as near as I can tell, it doesn't actually require that the TGs be vetted by the delegate, but given that a delegate could easily withhold approval unless the TG meets their standards, I can understand why you'd read it that way (or, to put that another way: you're not wrong, I'm just trying to clarify).

I always figured that IC, regions were sort of like large alliances of nations (like NATO, for example), and the Delegate was the elected representative of that alliance. Guess I was wrong.
It's honestly baffling to me that such a key aspect of both the WA and NS as a whole apparently cannot be referenced in-character.
Like, if delegates and regions don't exist, how does the GA function in-character? Do some nations just get more votes than others for no reason? Does the quorum process even exist IC, and if so, how does it work? Do endorsements exist IC, and if so, what's the explanation for nations only being able to endorse each other if they share a region, given that regions cannot exist?
I trust your judgement on this, but your explanation creates a lot more problems than it solves.

I find it's best not to think about it too deeply because IC the GA is just an association of nations.

I suppose that is generally the correct course of action when trying to figure out how NS mechanics would work in a real world setting.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: Unless moderators have marked it spam, it's not spam.

OOC: Not per site rules. Regions are free to set their internal rules at a more strict level. And let us not pretend this is anything but spam.

OOC: It's not spam. It's relevant to the receiving nation's membership of the WA, the resolution at vote, and their vote on the resolution. It meets no reasonable definition of spam.

If you disagree with its content, you are free to also canvass voters. Although I'd be careful. Some regions might vote in favour just to spite you!

<snip>

Telling someone you will act against their interests, when you have significant power to so, if they take some action is a limit on their actions. Or in this case, not telling them and only acting against after the fact. This isn't just about this proposal and this TG. It's about all proposals, all authors and any TG they might want to send.

[Central Asian Republics]

Seeing the name of the telegram sender really piqued my interest for this one. This entire repeal seemed to be centred around a single insignificant clause in the target resolution. Is this another one of Bitely's attempts at badge hunting?

In regards to the telegram, the scenarios listed are all bogus. Although the target resolution seems to be rather vague on what "assistance" actually requires, it's safe to say that providing assistance to a civilian aircraft is unlikely to be seen as an act of war.
Point 4 is essentially an argument for any repeals in general (just under the context of the target resolution) and the consequence described is simply the result of having WA membership rather than anything wrong with the target resolution in particular. To use a generic retort against repeals in general, if a nation is unhappy with being affected by WA legislation, one can simply leave.

Regarding the actual resolution, most of the criticisms for this can be applied to the telegram as well. One point I would like to add however is in regards to the "REALIZING" clause which fails to further explain what "suspicious" actually means.

The ironic part is, had the telegram not been sent, this one would've easily slipped through my radar (no pun intended).

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Not per site rules. Regions are free to set their internal rules at a more strict level. And let us not pretend this is anything but spam.

OOC: It's not spam. It's relevant to the receiving nation's membership of the WA, the resolution at vote, and their vote on the resolution. It meets no reasonable definition of spam.

OOC: It categorically fails to convey information of value.

If you disagree with its content, you are free to also canvass voters.

Although I'd be careful. Some regions might vote in favour just to spite you!

I've little enough concern about 10KI's threat, because, as I generally respect how regions wish to self-regulate, I play by their rules.

[Imperium Anglorum]

The duty of the populace is to listen to foreign GA regulars. They may not legislate in their assemblies prescribed actions designed to deter against what they consider to be spam. We must accept all the lies and misrepresentations of the Jedi foreign interlopers. We must look with disdain, contempt, and distrust on the competence of regional assemblies and their exercise of self-determination. Many regions have an unstated policy to retaliate against WA telegrams. Maybe it's almost like the people dislike receiving spam. But instead of telling authors of that fact and attempting to warn them, regions should instead hide it and give no feedback.

Europe has such a policy. So, I guess, IA and other devious globalist dogs should ignore the expressed will of the people and break the laws fashioned by the people and voted in by the people to vote in favour of proposals themselves opposed by the people. Because Banana said so. IA wins an election with 387 voters every 12 hours. Banana won an election with five voters two years ago. But the policies overwhelmingly approved by the people? Executed by the representatives of the people? They are the ones with the democratic deficit.

[Bananaistan]

The duty of the populace is to listen to foreign GA regulars. They may not legislate in their assemblies prescribed actions designed to deter against what they consider to be spam. We must accept all the lies and misrepresentations of the Jedi foreign interlopers. We must look with disdain, contempt, and distrust on the competence of regional assemblies and their exercise of self-determination. Many regions have an unstated policy to retaliate against WA telegrams. Maybe it's almost like the people dislike receiving spam. But instead of telling authors of that fact and attempting to warn them, regions should instead hide it and give no feedback.

Europe has such a policy. So, I guess, IA and other devious globalist dogs should ignore the expressed will of the people and break the laws fashioned by the people and voted in by the people to vote in favour of proposals themselves opposed by the people. Because Banana said so. IA wins an election with 387 voters every 12 hours. Banana won an election with five voters two years ago. But the policies overwhelmingly approved by the people? Executed by the representatives of the people? They are the ones with the democratic deficit.

Perhaps discuss the issue at hand instead of making an ad hominem attack?

[Imperium Anglorum]

The ability of the people to determine their policies should be respected. You disagree with this statement. I support it. That is the main point of clash. Maybe discuss it. If you think I'm attacking you, report me.