NationStates

Scarsaw wrote:To be honest TannerFrankLand, the fact that you submitted this condemnation over something petty and now want to repel it tempts me to propose you for condemnation. You abused the condemnation system and wasted the time of the SC, which is more damage to in NS then NE ever did.

Condemn a puppet? Probably a waste... If you discover the main, maybe.

Besides, it passed, if a majority of WA Voters vote FOR a resolution, shows they didn't think it was 'wasted' time. It's a little frustrating that this whole thing came from some form of fight., but it won't be the last time this happens

Georgetpwn wrote:response to that:


they should have let that mad sheep railgun proposal pass. that one would make more sense

Shut the hell up. Nobody asked you.

Daynor wrote:

Scarsaw wrote:It's a little frustrating that this whole thing came from some form of fight., but it won't be the last time this happens

Oh I'm sure it won't. In fact I can see "some form of fight" becoming the primary motivation for condemnations in the future. We'll probably have players condemning each other because one stole the other's girlfriend or cut them off in traffic.

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Daynor wrote:It's a little frustrating that this whole thing came from some form of fight., but it won't be the last time this happens

Oh I'm sure it won't. In fact I can see "some form of fight" becoming the primary motivation for condemnations in the future. We'll probably have players condemning each other because one stole the other's girlfriend or cut them off in traffic.

THAT would be flat out illegal. But, a nation who had his gf stolen could condemn another nation for a nuclear holocaust (RP) because the nuclear holocausting nation stole his gf in real life.

Does that make the nuclear holocaust less condemnable? No. Does it take anything away from the proposal? No. Does it take away from the proposer? Yep.

Daynor wrote:THAT would be flat out illegal.

Well now how could it be illegal? There aren't any rules for C&Cs.

edit: also, fix your quote tags.

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Daynor wrote:THAT would be flat out illegal.

Well now how could it be illegal? There aren't any rules for C&Cs.

edit: also, fix your quote tags.

Your tags are wrong not mine. (Attempted to say that nicely)

Real world refferances are illegal. There are rules, just not as many as some would like.

Daynor wrote:

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Daynor wrote:THAT would be flat out illegal.

Well now how could it be illegal? There aren't any rules for C&Cs.

edit: also, fix your quote tags.

Your tags are wrong not mine. (Attempted to say that nicely)

What?! You quoted me. Look again.

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:What?! You quoted me. Look again.

Oh, I didn't notice that, I thought we were talkiing about the fact that I said what you quoted the Scarsaw as saying in this post:

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Daynor wrote:

Scarsaw wrote:It's a little frustrating that this whole thing came from some form of fight., but it won't be the last time this happens

Oh I'm sure it won't. In fact I can see "some form of fight" becoming the primary motivation for condemnations in the future. We'll probably have players condemning each other because one stole the other's girlfriend or cut them off in traffic.

Daynor wrote:Real world refferances are illegal. There are rules, just not as many as some would like.

Obviously directly mentioning the gf or the bad driving would be illegal (well, as illegal as things ever get where C&Cs are concerned), but I bet I could mention it in an oblique way while concentrating on the genocide or whatever and get it to quorum and voted on. It might not pass, but getting it to vote would be doable.

"The player behind #whatevernation, being reckless and untrustworthy....etc."

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Daynor wrote:Real world refferances are illegal. There are rules, just not as many as some would like.

Obviously directly mentioning the gf or the bad driving would be illegal (well, as illegal as things ever get where C&Cs are concerned), but I bet I could mention it in an oblique way while concentrating on the genocide or whatever and get it to quorum and voted on. It might not pass, but getting it to vote would be doable.

"The player behind #whatevernation, being reckless and untrustworthy....etc."

So long as you're concentrating on the genocide part, it would be good enough to get my vote, so long as when you look at the resolution you can tell at a glance they were condemned for genocide.

Interesting enough NAZI EUROPE appears to be planning a world war to avenge their condemnation on the RMB... which makes me question a repeal... lol.

Daynor wrote:Interesting enough NAZI EUROPE appears to be planning a world war to avenge their condemnation on the RMB... which makes me question a repeal... lol.

They'll probably invade Poland!

Even if the irony of Mad Sheep surpass the EPIC, i think a repeal is necessary.

We can condemn them later for the world war, and tihs time with huge support from Firstaria.

Yes, Nazi's are bad. Everyone knows that. There's no need to write a condemnation for them, indeed, to do so could almost be seen as almost a form of vindicating their hateful ways.

Leave them to obscurity, where they belong.

Sigismund Ibsen,
WA Delegate of Lavinium

This has been passed...
Topic needs to be moved to WA Archives.

Allrule wrote:This has been passed...
Topic needs to be moved to WA Archives.

I believe the tradition is 12 hours after, which means not quite yet.