NationStates

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Tinhampton wrote:There are very clearly four candidates for Earl. Three Earls must be elected. It follows that at least one of Oliverlandiana and Cossack Khanate will be elected as an Earl.

There are six candidates [...]

Tinhampton wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:There are six candidates [...]

So why - in the interests of transparency, at least - were we not told who the other two were?

The Tribunus Review

---

Breaking News - Farkas Sentiments on the Elections

---

Attention, Attention, Farkasfalkan Community.

---

A Message From

Farkas Vungar

---

"The position of Earl in Farkasfalka has ever since its creation been the commoner's wing, so to speak, of our region's administration. The use of elections at a minimal level has allowed for the members of Farkasfalka to elect representatives to deal with the relevant, however, less pressing issues of Farkasfalkan society. Of course, for the pressing and urgent issues the region faces, myself and my Primors who I hand pick are ready to handle. Overall, Farkasfalka through this method of governance has seen a stable, positive trend in development in areas from nation-count to activity as a region in NationStates.

As for the newly elected earls, I send my congratulations! Yebloin, who I believe we have all known for some time, has given us continuously wonderful readings from the many books of the Bible and more, allowing us to reflect upon the Lord's word and His intentions for us, His humble servants, more often. Terra Gloria Sanctus and Oliverlandiana have both joined recently, as within a matter of only a few months. It is within this short time, however, that they have contributed plenty of activity on the RMB and regional discord. These two new nations have a reputation to build and thus far it is well under way. I am excited to see how they continue!

It is my belief that from their service as government members we will all benefit -- the new servers and the served. I am optimistic of the future and how its events will be handled by this new administration."

- Király Farkas Vilmos I

Stay tuned to the Farkasfalka Regional Thread for further updates.

---

Lehet a Farkasfalka Diadal!

Xoriet wrote:Speaking of Farkasfalka and NQ in particular, do any of you care to explain this tidbit from the Moderation subforum?

viewtopic.php?p=37310615#p37310615

(Image)

Tinhampton wrote:1 day 11 hours ago: The National Syndicated Fiefdom of Kustonia deleted a regional poll.
1 day 12 hours ago: The Holy Empire of Terra Gloria Sanctus created a new regional poll: "Who gets visa priority for the ethnostate?".

Yes, Farkasfalka, you just voted this guy in I assume... the first Earl election poll (which TGS appears to have won) was deleted before its conclusion

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Xoriet wrote:Speaking of Farkasfalka and NQ in particular, do any of you care to explain this tidbit from the Moderation subforum?

viewtopic.php?p=37310615#p37310615

(Image)

That's a statement I made on my own behalf. If you'd like to debate my morality then you may do so in my telegrams.

Xoriet wrote:Rule One of Regional Government: You lose the ability to express an individual opinion without your region taking the heat for your statements for the entirety of your term. Especially when implying that doxxing is okay as long as it doesn’t happen onsite. You know, given what we learned about Farkasfalka and CCD’s private chat and what you people suggested.

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Xoriet wrote:Rule One of Regional Government: You lose the ability to express an individual opinion without your region taking the heat for your statements for the entirety of your term. Especially when implying that doxxing is okay as long as it doesn’t happen onsite. You know, given what we learned about Farkasfalka and CCD’s private chat and what you people suggested.

That sounds more like your rule, because Farkasfalka doesn't have any documents stating it's residents or officials are required to give up their personal freedom of expression, bear reasons of ToS and spam.

Xoriet wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:That's a statement I made on my own behalf. If you'd like to debate my morality then you may do so in my telegrams.

Rule One of Regional Government: You lose the ability to express an individual opinion without your region taking the heat for your statements for the entirety of your term. Especially when implying that doxxing is okay as long as it doesn’t happen onsite. You know, given what we learned about Farkasfalka and CCD’s private chat and what you people suggested.

Jar Wattinree wrote:This is a fact of foreign affairs universal in this game of politics and words. That you choose to disregard this will be to your detriment, not that Farkasfalka has a good name or reputation to begin with.

Wayneactia wrote:

Xoriet wrote:Rule One of Regional Government: You lose the ability to express an individual opinion without your region taking the heat for your statements for the entirety of your term. Especially when implying that doxxing is okay as long as it doesn’t happen onsite. You know, given what we learned about Farkasfalka and CCD’s private chat and what you people suggested.

According to NQ the mods are all corrupt as well, [...]

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:we've taken the 'don't lynch people because of their politics' route, however unpopular that may be.

Yokiria wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:we've taken the 'don't lynch people because of their politics' route, however unpopular that may be.

Don't what people?

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:We'll take the personal freedoms route, just like we've taken the 'don't lynch people because of their politics' route, however unpopular that may be.

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Yokiria wrote:
Don't what people?

'Don't lynch people'.

Yokiria wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:'Don't lynch people'.

And you qualified that position by saying "however unpopular that may be"?

I understand it may be the unpopular stance in Farkasfalka, for obvious reasons, but 'Don't lynch people' is quite the popular stance in general.

Xoriet wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:That's a statement I made on my own behalf. If you'd like to debate my morality then you may do so in my telegrams.

Rule One of Regional Government: You lose the ability to express an individual opinion without your region taking the heat for your statements for the entirety of your term. Especially when implying that doxxing is okay as long as it doesn’t happen onsite. You know, given what we learned about Farkasfalka and CCD’s private chat and what you people suggested.

Drop Your Pants wrote:

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:We'll take the personal freedoms route, just like we've taken the 'don't lynch people because of their politics' route, however unpopular that may be.

Coming from a region with a butchered swastika flag, freedom is humorous to hear.

Honeydewistania wrote:Why are we arguing with fascists? Just ignore them until Vungar inevitably ceases to exist then we can start noticing this hellhole again

Honeydewistania wrote:Why are we arguing with fascists? Just ignore them until Vungar inevitably ceases to exist then we can start noticing this hellhole again

Xoriet wrote:

Honeydewistania wrote:Why are we arguing with fascists? Just ignore them until Vungar inevitably ceases to exist then we can start noticing this hellhole again

Mostly because I'm curious when they decided it was cool for government members to implicitly condone doxxing as long as it happens offsite. And I hope I'm mistaken, but apparently that is now being described as a political opinion. I wasn't aware that community safety had anything to do with politics.

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Xoriet wrote:Mostly because I'm curious when they decided it was cool for government members to implicitly condone doxxing as long as it happens offsite. And I hope I'm mistaken, but apparently that is now being described as a political opinion. I wasn't aware that community safety had anything to do with politics.

What happens offsite has nothing to do with community safety.

Nouveau Quebecois wrote:

Xoriet wrote:Mostly because I'm curious when they decided it was cool for government members to implicitly condone doxxing as long as it happens offsite. And I hope I'm mistaken, but apparently that is now being described as a political opinion. I wasn't aware that community safety had anything to do with politics.

What happens offsite has nothing to do with community safety.