Partnership for Sovereignty | SC Voting Bloc

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

Just block their telegrams if you don't want them.

Alternatively the PfS could not spam a large part of the game with unwanted tag:WA tgs that break the laws of their own member regions.

Just a thought.

[Quebecshire]

The same people complaining about the PfS doing something did it themselves within the subsequent hours, so at the very least you should admit that this is less about the moral highground and more about playing politics in a hypocritical fashion.

Cheap shots against XKI are rather thinly veiled, per usual.

[Haganham]

The same people complaining about the PfS doing something did it themselves within the subsequent hours, so at the very least you should admit that this is less about the moral highground and more about playing politics in a hypocritical fashion.

Cheap shots against XKI are rather thinly veiled, per usual.

That's not going to fly. For one I am Mingulay Isle, the guy who served as XKI's first Deputy WA Secretary, among numerous other positions.

For another, as far as I know, TNP does not have any law forbidding the use of wa telegrams in it's region, so it's not hypocritical for them to use it.

just because someone's your friend does not mean they can do no wrong.

[Tim-Opolis]

Seeing TNPers of all people try to once again posture about WA TG’s is hilarious.

If you don’t want campaign TG’s, block them. Otherwise, I’m sure you can find a way to survive.

[The Python]

Just block their telegrams if you don't want them.

Alternatively the PfS could not spam a large part of the game with unwanted tag:WA tgs that break the laws of their own member regions.

Just a thought.

The PfS can't but WALL can?

[Wallenburg]

Alternatively the PfS could not spam a large part of the game with unwanted tag:WA tgs that break the laws of their own member regions.

Just a thought.

The PfS can't but WALL can?

Rules for thee but not for me.

[Goobergunchia]

Alternatively the PfS could not spam a large part of the game with unwanted tag:WA tgs that break the laws of their own member regions.

Just a thought.

The PfS can't but WALL can?

Hey, I usually don't get invader propaganda in my main nation's inbox. Still not quite as funny as the time LWU (I think? Been a while) sent me a recruitment TG though.

[WayNeacTia]

Hmmmmm….. A defenders only organization, with League in its name. Hopefully this one fairs better than the last.

[Quebecshire]

Hmmmmm….. A defenders only organization, with League in its name. Hopefully this one fairs better than the last.

World Assembly Legislative League =/= Defender

Partnership for Sovereignty =/= Having the word "League" in its name

[Toerana]

Alternatively the PfS could not spam a large part of the game with unwanted tag:WA tgs that break the laws of their own member regions.

Just a thought.

The PfS can't but WALL can?

XKI takes a hard line stance against WA Campaign telegrams, and yet PfS sends one anyway.

The hypocrisy doesn't go away just because WALL did it too.

In fairness, I don't know the WA Campaign telegram policy held by all the other regions in PfS.

[Tim-Opolis]

Hmmmmm….. A defenders only organization, with League in its name. Hopefully this one fairs better than the last.

You really do always miss don't you?

[The Union of British North America]

Could NS nation-accounts be observers to the PfS? Voluntarily abide by the collective decisions yet have little to no role (aside from debate, if others accept that) as they are not a region and their region might be neutral towards something like this?

Just have affiliated voters for the Security Council recognized in some way?

[Homyland]

Seeing TNPers of all people try to once again posture about WA TG’s is hilarious.

If you don’t want campaign TG’s, block them. Otherwise, I’m sure you can find a way to survive.

Ok, I'll block them.
Oh, wait no, I can't! TNP's IFVs are marked with the "campaign" tag.

Anyways, it sounds a bit hypocritical that XKI is so opposed to tag:WA telegrams that their voting bloc sent one.

[Haganham]

Seeing TNPers of all people try to once again posture about WA TG’s is hilarious.

If you don’t want campaign TG’s, block them. Otherwise, I’m sure you can find a way to survive.

The issue isn't the TG's, its the hypocrisy of using tag:WA campaigns while treating the tag:WA campaigns of others as a violation of their sovereignty.

[Wischland]

If anyone wants to discuss XKI law with the Delegate of XKI and the one who makes the decisions on these kind of matters, my inbox is always open. In the meantime, stop misconstruing our laws and twisting our values to fit your own political needs. These kind of cheap shots are neither constructive nor particularly truthful.

Could NS nation-accounts be observers to the PfS?

While we don't yet have any official observer status, you're more than welcome to join our discord (see the link on the region WFE), where we always announce recommendations and would love to discuss them with you. That's also the fastest way to get updates on the PfS's work in expanding and opening up the bloc, including any potential creation of such an observer status.

[Dreadton]

If anyone wants to discuss XKI law with the Delegate of XKI and the one who makes the decisions on these kind of matters, my inbox is always open. In the meantime, stop misconstruing our laws and twisting our values to fit your own political needs. These kind of cheap shots are neither constructive nor particularly truthful.

"We have investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong."

[Wallenburg]

If anyone wants to discuss XKI law with the Delegate of XKI and the one who makes the decisions on these kind of matters, my inbox is always open. In the meantime, stop misconstruing our laws and twisting our values to fit your own political needs. These kind of cheap shots are neither constructive nor particularly truthful.

"We have investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong."

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

[Dreadton]

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

A kicked dog hollers.

[Wallenburg]

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

A kicked dog hollers.

Lol, I haven't even spent a day in TKI, your brilliant one-liners are going in the wrong direction. All I'm pointing out is that this is a nonsense argument against PfS's advocacy for the at-Vote SC resolution.

[WayNeacTia]

Hmmmmm….. A defenders only organization, with League in its name. Hopefully this one fairs better than the last.

You really do always miss don't you?

As long as it keeps you engaged and entertained, my job is complete.

[Tim-Opolis]

You really do always miss don't you?

As long as it keeps you engaged and entertained, my job is complete.

You give me an easy excuse to reply in the thread of an ally I wish to see remain high profile. I'm glad you spend your time both bumping their thread and looking ridiculous at the same time.

[Haganham]

"We have investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong."

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

Are you seriously suggesting it's not hypocritical because they got permission from XKI's delegate?

[Homyland]

"We have investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong."

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

Don't you see it? They forbid sending WA Campaign telegrams to their citizens, but send a WA Campaign telegram themselves. Case closed.

[Quebecshire]

Don't you see it? They forbid sending WA Campaign telegrams to their citizens, but send a WA Campaign telegram themselves. Case closed.

They forbid WA telegrams that aren't approved by the Delegate. Sure, people can say that they shouldn't have sent one to others when they typically oppose them. But if WALL really remotely cared about people being sent telegrams they didn't approve of, they wouldn't have also sent one within the following hours.

Usually, if someone wants to maintain a moral high ground, they should at least put some effort into not mimicking the behavior of the group they are upset with.

[Minskiev]

Guess I'll post.

I don't think it's too unreasonable for a Delegate of XKI (or at least an organization they're highly involved in) to send a mass telegram...to XKI. As well as the rest of the world, which we shouldn't have an issue with. Instead, all I'm seeing is a bunch of bad takes coming from North Pacificans.

When someone suggests you read the law you are talking about, it is wise not to loudly demonstrate you haven't done so.

NS 181-1 § 2: "Forbids WA campaigning by "mass telegrams" to islanders unless prior permission had been given by the Delegate;"
NS 181-1 § 3: "ALLOWS limited WA campaigning by native WA nations through the use of 'mass telegrams' if that nation had been in 10000 Islands and the WA for at least 3 months."

Don't you see it? They forbid sending WA Campaign telegrams to their citizens, but send a WA Campaign telegram themselves. Case closed.

Someone get me a clown emoji ASAP