[DEFEATED] Liberate Ukraine (by United Terinova/RiderSyl)

[Malphe II]

I think it's vague enough that it just about dodges 4th wall rules? The only problem child might be CONCERNED about the situation developing in Ukraine, which I assume is responsible for the holdup on a legality ruling, but it doesn't reference any specific OOC events or anything so I think it's prolly fine.

That is indeed the fuzzy aspect of the proposal since in NS there's no situation developing in Ukraine, not as this moment.

I'd figure that 'situation' from an IC standpoint doesn't have to be anything major like an actual R/D invasion of the region, especially when the rest of the proposal reads as explicitly preemptive. Arguing that the proposal saying there's an unspecified situation happening in the region constitutes an OOC reference is a hard sell imo, though it gets really fuzzy & hypothetical the more I think about it.

[Free Algerstonia]

jesus some of you really need to chill out. against because it is a non-defensive liberation.

[Cheesy Tots]

Against.

Don't see a need for a preemptive liberation - just because a region may get raided does not mean it will, and it is a waste of time if indeed the region doesn't see a raid.

Additionally, the conclusion others have made about this very likely being a filibuster for Liberate TMC is one I agree with, and therefore further inclines me to oppose this proposal.

[Lenlyvit]

I think it's vague enough that it just about dodges 4th wall rules? The only problem child might be CONCERNED about the situation developing in Ukraine, which I assume is responsible for the holdup on a legality ruling, but it doesn't reference any specific OOC events or anything so I think it's prolly fine.

That is indeed the fuzzy aspect of the proposal since in NS there's no situation developing in Ukraine, not as this moment.

There never will be a situation in Ukraine. In the over ten years of regional history on it's history page the founder hasn't ceased to exist once. With an executive founder, a non-executive delegate, and literally a zero percent chance of the founder ever ceasing to exist unless the player running the script is DOSed it leaves me with the only conclusion this is based off of the RL situation in Ukraine against Russia. If the author had chosen any other region there wouldn't be an argument on it, but they didn't choose any other region they chose Ukraine.

[Madjack]

That is indeed the fuzzy aspect of the proposal since in NS there's no situation developing in Ukraine, not as this moment.

There never will be a situation in Ukraine. In the over ten years of regional history on it's history page the founder hasn't ceased to exist once. With an executive founder, a non-executive delegate, and literally a zero percent chance of the founder ever ceasing to exist unless the player running the script is DOSed it leaves me with the only conclusion this is based off of the RL situation in Ukraine against Russia. If the author had chosen any other region there wouldn't be an argument on it, but they didn't choose any other region they chose Ukraine.

And if they just wanted to comment on the RL situation in an IC way in the SC... well declarations are right now.

[RiderSyl]

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

[Hulldom]

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

Not particularly. I don't see it commenting on IC events. If there's something like this going on in the NS region Ukraine, fine. But otherwise, I just don't see the point in this.

[Not A Plant]

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

Hi Syl! Hope you're well!

I've actually been thinking alot about this proposal and just this question has kept popping up in my mind as to whether or not I would. I mean there is precedence for "keeping" a liberation open to be a preventative measure against future invasions, but I'm unsure if there has been a pre-emptive one before, if there is I don't recall. So I think a declaration is a safer bet to passage, but it also does nothing mechanically and for the type of bad actors who would invade the Ukraine, if anything it might paint a larger target.

It's all very complicated, because it relates to RL circumstance, so to be honest all I can offer is I'm not sure I can answer a yes or no to if I would vote for i but I would definetly be open to see something drafted on the forum in regards to it, or at least a more in depth discusion on the merits.

Either way good luck in your endeavors.

[Madjack]

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

If this were a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and still came before Liberate TMC, I'd still find it more palatable.

[South Reinkalistan]

Continuing the tradition by which prominent regions rife with nazis and fascists (albeit here in the real-life equivalent) are frequently liberated by the SC, this proposal has my full support!

[RiderSyl]

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

Not particularly. I don't see it commenting on IC events. If there's something like this going on in the NS region Ukraine, fine. But otherwise, I just don't see the point in this.

Um, Hulldom, respectfully... if I draft a symbolic Declaration about Ukraine, and make it about the NS region Ukraine, then that would be going against the very reason Declarations were created as a category.

Hi Syl! Hope you're well!

I've actually been thinking alot about this proposal and just this question has kept popping up in my mind as to whether or not I would. I mean there is precedence for "keeping" a liberation open to be a preventative measure against future invasions, but I'm unsure if there has been a pre-emptive one before, if there is I don't recall. So I think a declaration is a safer bet to passage, but it also does nothing mechanically and for the type of bad actors who would invade the Ukraine, if anything it might paint a larger target.

It's all very complicated, because it relates to RL circumstance, so to be honest all I can offer is I'm not sure I can answer a yes or no to if I would vote for i but I would definetly be open to see something drafted on the forum in regards to it, or at least a more in depth discusion on the merits.

Either way good luck in your endeavors.

Thanks! There have been pre-emptive liberations before, but not of this nature. "Pre-emptively liberate regions that will be targets forever cuz of RL political stuff" is an idea I've had floating around my brain for a while. Vandalism protection, essentially. And, ya, the exact train of thought you're describing w/ regards to my proposal is what I contended with while I was writing it.

If this was a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and came after Liberate TMC, would y'all find it more palatable?

If this were a Declaration instead of a Liberation, and still came before Liberate TMC, I'd still find it more palatable.

Noted!

[Pathoal]

It’s baffling and disingenuous that people, especially the author, are pretending that this anything but queue stuffing to delay the actual liberation in the queue.

[Rusvac]

omg

[RiderSyl]

It’s baffling and disingenuous that people, especially the author, are pretending that this anything but queue stuffing to delay the actual liberation in the queue.

K, I'll add you to the "expect an apology by the end of the week" list.

[Pathoal]

It’s baffling and disingenuous that people, especially the author, are pretending that this anything but queue stuffing to delay the actual liberation in the queue.

K, I'll add you to the "expect an apology by the end of the week" list.

Am I the one meant to be apologising, or you?

[RiderSyl]

K, I'll add you to the "expect an apology by the end of the week" list.

Am I the one meant to be apologising, or you?

[Numero Capitan]

With all due respect, you aren’t convincing anyone. You, a BC RO in TMC have everything to gain if Liberate TMC is delayed. At the very least, the optics are abysmal, with raiders seeming to use RL misery to win in a game.

Frankly, I think it's a disgusting tactic. Especially so since it capitalizes on an OOC situation to delay something IC.

I understand the desire to delay the Liberation to vote, but it doesn't dissuade those of us already not exactly fond of raiderdom that we should even trust their work in the SC when innocuous.

That's on me though, guess I'll have to step on the counter-campaigning medal faster and harder next time.

Is this just a filibuster? It seems like just a filibuster… that being said, yeah definitely against for capitalizing off of rl events.

Okay, no more arguing with you people. I know why I submitted this. I'm going to sit back, collect receipts, and when it is painstakingly obvious that this bullshit attack on my morals and my character is and was off-base, I'm going to be expecting apologies from y'all. Not backtracking. No if, ands, or buts. Apologies. Ya got that?

This is a very very bad look.

Create a dispatch to express your concern and get some upvotes if you're trying to be sincere. Right now the method betrays the motivation.

Disappointed this brand of raider tactics is making a return to prominence, noone is going to be apologising to you for calling this out

[Tim-Opolis]

The continued effort by the author to disingenuously maintain the claim that this is anything more than a lazy filibuster proposal is both embarrassing, and reflective of why this body shouldn't have much tolerance for Raiderdom moving forward

[The North Polish Union]

Assuming Ukrainian Cavask (the founder of Ukraine) is the same player as Cavask (the founder of Poland) which seems likely, there's a good chance the region becomes founderless at times until he returns to the game. Although he's never disappeared long-term, Cavask is hardly the most active regional administrator.

[Sedgistan]

Cavask (the Poland founder) is well known as being Todd McCloud's first nation (acknowledged publicly). Todd isn't so active these days, but he seems to be permanently around.

[RiderSyl]

This is a very very bad look.

Create a dispatch to express your concern and get some upvotes if you're trying to be sincere. Right now the method betrays the motivation.

Disappointed this brand of raider tactics is making a return to prominence, noone is going to be apologising to you for calling this out

Of course, if defenders were using my proposal to delay something akin to Mall's Liberate Haven, I'd be lauded as a fuckin' queen, right? "Method betrays the motivation" my ass. You just don't like that my proposal is being used in the meta-game against your side. That's all it boils down to - tribalism. "Just create a dispatch"? No.

I created a Liberation. It's in the queue. It's before Liberate TMC and it is indeed delaying it. Raiders campaigned for my proposal hard because they wanted to delay Liberate TMC. I submitted when I did because I knew raiders would campaign for my proposal hard. I immediately admitted to this quid pro quo to Lenlyvit, but the truth wasn't insidious enough to be satisfying to defenders.

Defenders have run 3 unapprove campaigns on my proposal, one defender that came in here and railed on me for delaying the passage of Liberate TMC had already submitted their own proposal that delayed the passage of Liberate TMC, I keep getting told what my intentions are as if I wouldn't know... So y'know what? Defenders can get over it, they can keep trying to shame me - I don't care anymore. This is going to go to vote unless you run 4+ unapprove campaigns and/or quorum raid. Raiderdom isn't going to care if this passes, I was only getting carried to the queue, so feel free to take out your frustrations with the delay in Liberate TMC on me during the voting phase. I'm sure it'll make you at least 1% happier.

[Apatosaurus]

This is a very very bad look.

Create a dispatch to express your concern and get some upvotes if you're trying to be sincere. Right now the method betrays the motivation.

Disappointed this brand of raider tactics is making a return to prominence, noone is going to be apologising to you for calling this out

Of course, if defenders were using my proposal to delay something akin to Mall's Liberate Haven, I'd be lauded as a fuckin' queen, right? "Method betrays the motivation" my ass. You just don't like that my proposal is being used in the meta-game against your side. That's all it boils down to - tribalism. "Just create a dispatch"? No.

Given how many defenders have come into here to argue against this capitalising off real-life events, I highly doubt this.

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Of course, if defenders were using my proposal to delay something akin to Mall's Liberate Haven, I'd be lauded as a fuckin' queen, right? "Method betrays the motivation" my ass. You just don't like that my proposal is being used in the meta-game against your side. That's all it boils down to - tribalism. "Just create a dispatch"? No.

Given how many defenders have come into here to argue against this capitalising off real-life events, I highly doubt this.

Yeah sure.

As a neutral I reckon Syl’s got this about right.

[Lenlyvit]

Alright, so I'm a little disappointed that this has been marked legal by multiple moderators but I'm not surprised. According to R2(b) Security Council resolutions cannot reference the real world, but this is written in such a way as it skirts that rule and passes muster under R/D jargon and tactics. I'm not going to quote it because I'm on a phone, but earlier in this thread the author said something about using preemptive liberations to protect NS regions named after real life places based on real life geopolitics.

I strongly caution against this tactic, as it would have a major impact on the use of the liberation category. Instead of having a few liberations in place, it opens up the possibility of having hundreds and takes away the importance behind the category which is to save regional communities from destruction. They aren't intended to save a regions name, that's impossible.

[Matthew the Man]

Cavask (the Poland founder) is well known as being Todd McCloud's first nation (acknowledged publicly). Todd isn't so active these days, but he seems to be permanently around.

This says more than anything else in this thread will, from a purely game orientated standpoint. Todd is around, he can handle regional security. Hard against. This proposal just dilutes the importance and usage of Liberations for something entirely trivial. And that's ignoring the more controversial details regarding the topic.