16,999 vs. 1: The DCM

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

Honestly, no, but if they did it they really have no other options.

Do you think it's okay for someone to kill themselves?

That's how I view a new player joining their main nation to the WA. They are selling their national soverignty to the regional delegates of all the largest regions, or commiting national suicide. And half of them don't even realize it! So yes, I am going to use force and military might to stop the WA. But I am not going to just replace one tyrant with another. I am just going to make the WA completely irrelevant, so that the regions can be the highest power. The way it's supposed to be.

I agree 100%. While I was a member of the WA (for the short time that I was) I had attempted to argue in the forums about how national governments know what is better for their people than any international body could ever hope too. And besides that not all national governments are the same for example the CAS enjoys an income tax of 0% and is extreme anarcho-capitalistic while another nation is extremely communistic or a totalitarian police state. Whats stopping someone in the WA from adopting measures that force nations who are ideologically different from forcing their way of life on the other nation. Like forcing me to adopt policies that go counter to what I would have said on an issue. Different things work for different people. I'm joining this fight to help end global tyranny and let the people decide for themselves how to govern their nations. The Confederation of American States will no longer allow the WA to dictate how we run ourselves and declare our independence from the WA formally! We will fight to free nations across the map of the dictation of the will of a majority! Bring the sovereignty of governance back to the nations and away from a global governing body!

[Fischistan]

That's how I view a new player joining their main nation to the WA. They are selling their national soverignty to the regional delegates of all the largest regions, or commiting national suicide. And half of them don't even realize it! So yes, I am going to use force and military might to stop the WA. But I am not going to just replace one tyrant with another. I am just going to make the WA completely irrelevant, so that the regions can be the highest power. The way it's supposed to be.

I agree 100%. While I was a member of the WA (for the short time that I was) I had attempted to argue in the forums about how national governments know what is better for their people than any international body could ever hope too. And besides that not all national governments are the same for example the CAS enjoys an income tax of 0% and is extreme anarcho-capitalistic while another nation is extremely communistic or a totalitarian police state. Whats stopping someone in the WA from adopting measures that force nations who are ideologically different from forcing their way of life on the other nation. Like forcing me to adopt policies that go counter to what I would have said on an issue. Different things work for different people. I'm joining this fight to help end global tyranny and let the people decide for themselves how to govern their nations. The Confederation of American States will no longer allow the WA to dictate how we run ourselves and declare our independence from the WA formally! We will fight to free nations across the map of the dictation of the will of a majority! Bring the sovereignty of governance back to the nations and away from a global governing body!

If you think your national government does better than the WA, resign.

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

I agree 100%. While I was a member of the WA (for the short time that I was) I had attempted to argue in the forums about how national governments know what is better for their people than any international body could ever hope too. And besides that not all national governments are the same for example the CAS enjoys an income tax of 0% and is extreme anarcho-capitalistic while another nation is extremely communistic or a totalitarian police state. Whats stopping someone in the WA from adopting measures that force nations who are ideologically different from forcing their way of life on the other nation. Like forcing me to adopt policies that go counter to what I would have said on an issue. Different things work for different people. I'm joining this fight to help end global tyranny and let the people decide for themselves how to govern their nations. The Confederation of American States will no longer allow the WA to dictate how we run ourselves and declare our independence from the WA formally! We will fight to free nations across the map of the dictation of the will of a majority! Bring the sovereignty of governance back to the nations and away from a global governing body!

If you think your national government does better than the WA, resign.

Already has been done and thats not the point. The point is to stop the WA from imposing laws, acts, regulations etc etc on other nations and to stop the WA from having the authority to condemn and attack non-member nations. For fun as well.

[Fischistan]

If you think your national government does better than the WA, resign.

Already has been done and thats not the point. The point is to stop the WA from imposing laws, acts, regulations etc etc on other nations and to stop the WA from having the authority to condemn and attack non-member nations. For fun as well.

1) all the laws ever do is change around some numbers, the countries have no real obligation to obey them.
2)Those that get condemned generally want to be condemned.
3)The WA can't attack nations.
4)It's for fun because this is a game, and games are supposed to be fun.

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

Already has been done and thats not the point. The point is to stop the WA from imposing laws, acts, regulations etc etc on other nations and to stop the WA from having the authority to condemn and attack non-member nations. For fun as well.

1) all the laws ever do is change around some numbers, the countries have no real obligation to obey them.
2)Those that get condemned generally want to be condemned.
3)The WA can't attack nations.
4)It's for fun because this is a game, and games are supposed to be fun.

Well the way I see it is that in theory they should be obeyed and even if they just change some number still a threat to sovereignty. I understand that a lot want to be condemned which is fine but you say generally so that must not always be the case? if I'm wrong thats fine just wondering. I guess I stated that wrong about the WA attacking as well I meant member states being encouraged. What I meant by for fun is that trying to stop the WA is done out of fun, hell if anything it adds more of a realistic factor seeing as their are countries and people of different countries who vehemently oppose the UN and try to stop either their nation from joining it or try to stall it or make it inefficient or cease to exist in RL.

[Fischistan]

1) all the laws ever do is change around some numbers, the countries have no real obligation to obey them.
2)Those that get condemned generally want to be condemned.
3)The WA can't attack nations.
4)It's for fun because this is a game, and games are supposed to be fun.

Well the way I see it is that in theory they should be obeyed and even if they just change some number still a threat to sovereignty. I understand that a lot want to be condemned which is fine but you say generally so that must not always be the case? if I'm wrong thats fine just wondering. I guess I stated that wrong about the WA attacking as well I meant member states being encouraged. What I meant by for fun is that trying to stop the WA is done out of fun, hell if anything it adds more of a realistic factor seeing as their are countries and people of different countries who vehemently oppose the UN and try to stop either their nation from joining it or try to stall it or make it inefficient or cease to exist in RL.

Changing numbers is not a threat to sovereignty. The vast majority of the time, those who get fancy badges want those badges. If you don't want your trend lines to be a little but more squiggly, resign or join with a puppet.

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

Well the way I see it is that in theory they should be obeyed and even if they just change some number still a threat to sovereignty. I understand that a lot want to be condemned which is fine but you say generally so that must not always be the case? if I'm wrong thats fine just wondering. I guess I stated that wrong about the WA attacking as well I meant member states being encouraged. What I meant by for fun is that trying to stop the WA is done out of fun, hell if anything it adds more of a realistic factor seeing as their are countries and people of different countries who vehemently oppose the UN and try to stop either their nation from joining it or try to stall it or make it inefficient or cease to exist in RL.

Changing numbers is not a threat to sovereignty. The vast majority of the time, those who get fancy badges want those badges. If you don't want your trend lines to be a little but more squiggly, resign or join with a puppet.

Thats the plan

[Demirysis]

If you think your national government does better than the WA, resign.

Already has been done and thats not the point. The point is to stop the WA from imposing laws, acts, regulations etc etc on other nations and to stop the WA from having the authority to condemn and attack non-member nations. For fun as well.

Oh, so you're forcing your "Freedom" on nations who have willing joined the WA - no, that's totally not tyrannic at all...

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

Already has been done and thats not the point. The point is to stop the WA from imposing laws, acts, regulations etc etc on other nations and to stop the WA from having the authority to condemn and attack non-member nations. For fun as well.

Oh, so you're forcing your "Freedom" on nations who have willing joined the WA - no, that's totally not tyrannic at all...

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

[Cinistra]

Oh, so you're forcing your "Freedom" on nations who have willing joined the WA - no, that's totally not tyrannic at all...

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

Don't worry. You can always reintroduce the death penalty through your daily issues, thus negating any unwanted effects of those pesky WA resolutions. That goes for any WA resolution, of course.

[Fischistan]

Oh, so you're forcing your "Freedom" on nations who have willing joined the WA - no, that's totally not tyrannic at all...

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

It's not a form of tyranny if they are free to opt out without any pressure.

When a president is democratically elected, is that tyranny? The majority is deciding who will be your ruler.

[Demirysis]

Oh, so you're forcing your "Freedom" on nations who have willing joined the WA - no, that's totally not tyrannic at all...

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

Simple - We would leave. Let individual nations decide when a resolution affects them too much - they will leave of their own accord.

Plus, a resolution completely banning the death penalty would never pass, I'm certain of it.

[Cinistra]

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

Simple - We would leave. Let individual nations decide when a resolution affects them too much - they will leave of their own accord.

Plus, a resolution completely banning the death penalty would never pass, I'm certain of it.

This is NS. Be careful with claiming any form of certainty.

[Viritica]

You know, you have to be a member of the WA to raid. Are you willing to do that?

With puppets I am.

I hope you realize you're only allowed to have one nation in the WA. Any more than that will get you deleted.

[Confederation of American States (Ancient)]

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

It's not a form of tyranny if they are free to opt out without any pressure.

When a president is democratically elected, is that tyranny? The majority is deciding who will be your ruler.

I would say that that could be seen as a form of tyranny. Suppose that the president is democractically elected. That president then declares that he is going to confiscate property from different groups of individuals which a majority of people approve of (assuming there is no constitution or other legal document to prevent things like this). Wouldn't that be tyranny of the majority? What if the majority of people democratically elect someone who ran on the platform of confiscating property or simply killing of a certain ethnic group? Does that make it ok simply because the majority of the people willed it?

[Mike the Progressive]

Er, what?

[Great Nepal]

Since, largest margin proposal passed by is 9350, you will need to organize 4674 unique nations to vote against every motion of WA except repeals. However organizing that number of people on internet is impossible.

[The Corparation]

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

Don't worry. You can always reintroduce the death penalty through your daily issues, thus negating any unwanted effects of those pesky WA resolutions. That goes for any WA resolution, of course.

This I can only think of a handful of instances when a WA proposal changed anything about my nation. Those few times it has, I've changed it back within a week or so. Usually faster.

[Galiantus]

And having a resolution effect your nation based on the fact that the majority wills it isn't? What if a resolution to abolish the death penalty is adopted and some nations the death penalty has been something that works for them why then must they cede their right to practice what works for them in their nation? Answer that without saying they can leave and I'll be willing to listen. But nonetheless just because the majority wills something and imposes it on the minority doesn't make it right and is still a form of tyranny.

Don't worry. You can always reintroduce the death penalty through your daily issues, thus negating any unwanted effects of those pesky WA resolutions. That goes for any WA resolution, of course.

So the WA doesn't have any point? I agree with you there. ...

[The Corparation]

Don't worry. You can always reintroduce the death penalty through your daily issues, thus negating any unwanted effects of those pesky WA resolutions. That goes for any WA resolution, of course.

So the WA doesn't have any point? I agree with you there. ...

Its point is that its a fun model UN-like body that people can participate in if they wish. You don't have to join, you don't even have to acknowledge that it exists.

[Galiantus]

So the WA doesn't have any point? I agree with you there. ...

Its point is that its a fun model UN-like body that people can participate in if they wish. You don't have to join, you don't even have to acknowledge that it exists.

The regions do, and that's a fact. A founderless region must have a WA delegate to change the WFE, moderate the RMB, protect from invaders, etc. If you want to be in a founderless region it is almost completely neccessary to join the WA. Is that just? I don't think so.

[Astrolinium]

Its point is that its a fun model UN-like body that people can participate in if they wish. You don't have to join, you don't even have to acknowledge that it exists.

The regions do, and that's a fact. A founderless region must have a WA delegate to change the WFE, moderate the RMB, protect from invaders, etc. If you want to be in a founderless region it is almost completely neccessary to join the WA. Is that just? I don't think so.

Life ain't fair, kid.

[The Corparation]

Its point is that its a fun model UN-like body that people can participate in if they wish. You don't have to join, you don't even have to acknowledge that it exists.

The regions do, and that's a fact. A founderless region must have a WA delegate to change the WFE, moderate the RMB, protect from invaders, etc. If you want to be in a founderless region it is almost completely neccessary to join the WA. Is that just? I don't think so.

You don't like it, start your own new region. Nobody is forcing you to join a founderless region.

[Galiantus]

The regions do, and that's a fact. A founderless region must have a WA delegate to change the WFE, moderate the RMB, protect from invaders, etc. If you want to be in a founderless region it is almost completely neccessary to join the WA. Is that just? I don't think so.

Life ain't fair, kid.

The least I can do is try to make it better, and that's what I am doing by fighting the WA. I am at least trying to make the world a better place.

[Galiantus]

The regions do, and that's a fact. A founderless region must have a WA delegate to change the WFE, moderate the RMB, protect from invaders, etc. If you want to be in a founderless region it is almost completely neccessary to join the WA. Is that just? I don't think so.

You don't like it, start your own new region. Nobody is forcing you to join a founderless region.

Really? This still violates national soverignty! The WA is obligating players to either stay out of founderless regions or join the WA. Neither of which is a good option. Players should be able to choose which region they want to be a part of without ever having to deal with the WA.