NationStates

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 4:21 pm**

Quebecshire wrote:
Dawn Denac wrote:I'm still curious on my question of if a defender proposed this, would it be passable to defenders?

Defenders are not a monolith, but, I would likely still oppose it, though my predominant reason would no longer be "it's a blatant self-condemn".

Well, I'm guessing the initial opposition is likely defender-aligned but I could be wrong.

Regardless, thanks for the answer.

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 4:54 pm**

Wayneactia wrote:
Fachumonn wrote:Oh great, back to being snarky after being defeated. It's the only thing you know how to do.

I wasn't defeated. I simply don't want to get warned for spamming by continuing to yell at someone who closes their eyes and plugs their ears. As for your opinion of me? I am pretty sure you know exactly where it will be filed, so don't waste the keystrokes.....

My eyes were not closed when I was arguing with you... as us sauropods do not have external ears, you can guess whether I plugged my ears.....

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:10 pm**

Agree in principal, disagree in execution.

We recognize raiders as a threat to peace and stability but oppose this legislation on the vagueness of its approach and uncertainty of effectiveness.

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:12 pm**

Tetchuan wrote:Agree in principal, disagree in execution.

We recognize raiders as a threat to peace and stability but oppose this legislation on the vagueness of its approach and uncertainty of effectiveness.

What you're not realizing is that the proposal in question here was wrote by long time-raider for The Black Hawks, and is basically just looking for a self-recognition here.

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:46 pm**

The Federation of Underwater Sovereignties will not consider this proposal under any circumstances. We are alarmed that the tenets of raider unity are listed before the statement that raider unity is a global threat, and that the nation that drafted this proposal is a member of The Black Hawks. This proposal can therefore be seen as a way to covertly align with raider interests; upon first reading the proposal, it is unclear whether it aims to affirm raider unity or speak out against it. After having previously abstained, we will again vote against this proposal.

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 6:49 pm**

Fachumonn wrote:
Tetchuan wrote:Agree in principal, disagree in execution.

We recognize raiders as a threat to peace and stability but oppose this legislation on the vagueness of its approach and uncertainty of effectiveness.

What you're not realizing is that the proposal in question here was wrote by long time-raider for The Black Hawks, and is basically just looking for a self-recognition here.

Appreciate the added information. After further review, this obviously reinforces our vote AGAINST. We are extremely concerned at the proposed nations history in relation to this bill and will take this into account when considering any potential future proposals brought fourth.

Posted: **Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:07 pm**

The CMSR votes AGAINST “Declaration on Raider Unity”.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 2:40 am**

Tetchuan wrote:Agree in principal, disagree in execution.

We recognize raiders as a threat to peace and stability but oppose this legislation on the vagueness of its approach and uncertainty of effectiveness.

It's not legislation.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 5:22 am**

Wayneactia wrote:
Fachumonn wrote:Oh great, back to being snarky after being defeated. It's the only thing you know how to do.

I wasn't defeated. I simply don't want to get warned for spamming by continuing to yell at someone who closes their eyes and plugs their ears. As for your opinion of me? I am pretty sure you know exactly where it will be filed, so don't waste the keystrokes.....

Bruh raiders terrorized my regions and i need my revenge. People would rather listen to somebody who wrote 5 SC proposals rather then the guy who wrote NO SC props and submitted no SC Props in your life. So listen to the defedner now Wayne.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 6:25 am**

The Partnership for Sovereignty recommends a vote AGAINST "On Raider Unity”: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1675937

In terms of declarations that aim to recognize a world-wide threat, it is necessary to recommend a course of action for the world to diminish or eradicate said threat following its identification for the declaration to be of value. Yet, “On Raider Unity” fails to propose any actions to effectively combat Raider Unity, nor does it even encourage regions to find a way to tackle this issue. It therefore remains incomplete in its apparent mission to guide the world in combating Raider Unity and necessitates further drafting. Another point of contention is the author’s identity as a raider who strongly benefits from and promotes Raider Unity as a high official of the Black Hawks, a notable raider region. It simply does not make sense to allow someone who benefits from the existence and growth of a threat to dictate how exactly the world should view the said danger. To allow this resolution to pass would therefore mean allowing a resolution that is inherently biased by a raider perspective to define a threat whose very existence is encouraged by raiders. Read More...

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 6:30 am**

This is the most shitty ass proposal I've ever seen anyways

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 7:21 am**

Team Leo wrote:This is the most shitty ass proposal I've ever seen anyways

I remember when you where saying this was the one of the best you ever seen and that this was your "savior".

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 11:01 am**

Team Leo wrote:This is the most shitty ass proposal I've ever seen anyways

Very eloquent, as usual.

Why do you keep swapping nations just to say the same thing? It's not relevant to the proposal as is and just comes off as nasty.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 11:22 am**

Dawn Denac wrote:
Team Leo wrote:This is the most shitty ass proposal I've ever seen anyways

Very eloquent, as usual.

Why do you keep swapping nations just to say the same thing? It's not relevant to the proposal as is and just comes off as nasty.

A T T E N T I O N

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 11:33 am**

Madjack wrote:
Dawn Denac wrote:
Very eloquent, as usual.

Why do you keep swapping nations just to say the same thing? It's not relevant to the proposal as is and just comes off as nasty.

A T T E N T I O N

No no, it's gotta be

A T T E N T I O N

Memes aside, sad this doesn't seem to have a better chance of passing. Oh well, maybe some time in the future.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 11:53 am**

Fachumonn wrote:
Team Leo wrote:This is the most shitty ass proposal I've ever seen anyways

I remember when you where saying this was the one of the best you ever seen and that this was your "savior".

Bc I didnt read it. Duh.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 12:03 pm**

Madjack wrote:
Tetchuan wrote:Agree in principal, disagree in execution.

We recognize raiders as a threat to peace and stability but oppose this legislation on the vagueness of its approach and uncertainty of effectiveness.

It's not legislation.

Semantics. You know what I meant.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 12:47 pm**

Professor Albus Dumbledore wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:I wasn't defeated. I simply don't want to get warned for spamming by continuing to yell at someone who closes their eyes and plugs their ears. As for your opinion of me? I am pretty sure you know exactly where it will be filed, so don't waste the keystrokes.....

Bruh raiders terrorized my regions and i need my revenge. People would rather listen to somebody who wrote 5 SC proposals rather then the guy who wrote NO SC props and submitted no SC Props in your life. So listen to the defedner now Wayne.

Once again, maybe you should read: viewtopic.php?p=39445812#p39445812

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:00 pm**

Team Leo wrote:
Fachumonn wrote:I remember when you where saying this was the one of the best you ever seen and that this was your "savior".

Bc I didnt read it. Duh.

What a surprise! And in terms of shit proposals I think your SECfanatics attempt would take the prize.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:33 pm**

Wayneactia wrote:
Professor Albus Dumbledore wrote:Bruh raiders terrorized my regions and i need my revenge. People would rather listen to somebody who wrote 5 SC proposals rather then the guy who wrote NO SC props and submitted no SC Props in your life. So listen to the defedner now Wayne.

Once again, maybe you should read: viewtopic.php?p=39445812#p39445812

For what?

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Team Leo wrote:
Bc I didnt read it. Duh.

What a surprise! And in terms of shit proposals I think your SECfanatics attempt would take the prize.

ACtually it was a beautifully made prop, even you couldn't find a lot of criticism for it. It's better then any proposal you could write.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:54 pm**

Professor Albus Dumbledore wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:Once again, maybe you should read: viewtopic.php?p=39445812#p39445812

For what?
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:What a surprise! And in terms of shit proposals I think your SECfanatics attempt would take the prize.

ACtually it was a beautifully made prop, even you couldn't find a lot of criticism for it. It's better then any proposal you could write.

That's fine Leo. You go with that if it brings some small measure of happiness into your life....

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 2:35 pm**

Wayneactia wrote:
Professor Albus Dumbledore wrote:For what?

ACtually it was a beautifully made prop, even you couldn't find a lot of criticism for it. It's better then any proposal you could write.

That's fine Leo. You go with that if it brings some small measure of happiness into your life....

No need to be a meanie my guy. Can you just quit being snarky and sarcastic all the time please?

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 3:05 pm**

Wayneactia wrote:
Professor Albus Dumbledore wrote:For what?

ACtually it was a beautifully made prop, even you couldn't find a lot of criticism for it. It's better then any proposal you could write.

That's fine Leo. You go with that if it brings some small measure of happiness into your life....

*looms ominously* I agree with Leo. Sometimes it's better to just say nothing.

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 3:09 pm**

Farnhamia wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:That's fine Leo. You go with that if it brings some small measure of happiness into your life....

*looms ominously* I agree with Leo. Sometimes it's better to just say nothing.

Thanks my guy *leaves cookies for the mods*

Posted: **Wed Mar 16, 2022 3:12 pm**

Farnhamia wrote:*looms ominously*

That's my new online thing that I say when someone irritates me

NationStates

[DEFEATED] Declaration on Raider Unity