New Democratic Party [NSG Senate | HQ]

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:06 pm

How about this for the larger complex?

by **Costa Alegria** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:08 pm

Soviet Canuckistan wrote:Any compulsory vote is a strict one.

No it isn't. Not when the safety of Aurentina is at stake.

Even our party has no compulsory votes so that everyone has the freedom to vote how they wish, shouldn't other coalition members have this form of freedom of expression.

I really don't give a flying rat's arse about what your party does.

If we need to remove unnecessary cancerous lumps to make the coalition progressive, I'd remove you first since you continue to impede progress by constantly disrespecting others and their different opinions.

I don't disrespect others for different opinions. I disrespect people who don't do anything to help the coalition, who demand ministries be given to them and then vote against every other coalition member on different acts. I disrespect people who endanger other people's lives out of an irrational fear of the political opposition.

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:09 pm

Costa Alegria wrote:
Mkuki wrote:What does that have to do with the bill you're complaining about?

Because I'd have expected them to pull their weight in the coalition if they want to prove themselves useful. I was against the USLP joining from the start and the bastard child of that party still has me wary. I'm fine with the Red-Greens. I'm fine with the one-man-band that is the Communist Party but I don't like the SAP, it's policies, it's history and it's membership.

Soviet Canuckistan wrote:Costa just hates everyone who has a different opinion so he'll critique anyone who has a different opinion then him, even if it was a past issue and isn't relevant to the discussion.

Ok. Tell me why this shouldn't be a free vote.

by **Ainin** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:09 pm

Divair wrote:How about this for the larger complex?
(Image)

I like.

by **Costa Alegria** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:12 pm

Mkuki wrote:Ok. Tell me why this shouldn't be a free vote.

Because it's playing with the lives of innocent people? If you allow people to walk around with machine guns freely, what's stopping them from opening fire? Why should we allow political extremists to have explosives so that they can feel "protected" from the opposition?

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:13 pm

Divair wrote:How about this for the larger complex?
(Image)

I prefer this one.

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:14 pm

Mkuki wrote:
Divair wrote:How about this for the larger complex?
(Image)

I prefer this one.

That's a very good one too.

by **Britanno** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:16 pm

Mkuki wrote:(Image)

I like this one more.

by **Beta Test** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:18 pm

How about this? Humility is everything.

by **Neo Rome Republic** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:19 pm

Beta Test wrote:(Image)

How about this? Humility is everything.

Not when you're the biggest party.

by **Britanno** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:21 pm

NEO Rome Republic wrote:
Beta Test wrote:(Image)

How about this? Humility is everything.

Not when you're the biggest party.

You're right.

http://i.imgur.com/wI4oVkS.jpg

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:21 pm

So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

by **Britanno** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:26 pm

How small?

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/41943035.jpg

by **Neo Rome Republic** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:26 pm

Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

I like this:

But it might be too big. What do you guys think?

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:27 pm

Britanno wrote:How small?

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/41943035.jpg

I'd prefer if we owned the ground floor (it seems like the ground floor contains stores rather than an entrance to the offices).

NEO Rome Republic wrote:
Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

I like this:

But it might be too big.

Too modern for downtown.

by **New Democratic Party of Aurentina** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:31 pm

Some changes:

Added Next Washington to member list
Gave party news a makeover
Removed PMP from ProgCo banner
Completed the table of contents
Threw the State of the Senate thing into the platform post, I have plans for something else in the fourth post
Made the ProgCo banner a bit more aesthetically pleasing

-Ain

by **New Democratic Party of Aurentina** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:33 pm

NEO Rome Republic wrote:
Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

I like this:

But it might be too big. What do you guys think?

It needs to be British architecture, circa 19th century (example: Whitehall, London).

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:38 pm

Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

~~Clearly we should move here.~~

Central building?
Maybe this?
One of these?

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:40 pm

Mkuki wrote:
Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

~~Clearly we should move here.~~

Central building?
Maybe this?
One of these?

None of those seem very office-y.

by **Ainin** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:40 pm

Mkuki wrote:
Divair wrote:So we have the one for the suburbs. Now what about the smaller one downtown?

~~Clearly we should move here.~~

Central building?
Maybe this?
One of these?

A Burger King? o_O

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:41 pm

Ainin wrote:
Mkuki wrote:~~Clearly we should move here.~~

Central building?
Maybe this?
One of these?

A Burger King? o_O

No, no. The one to the left of it. The brown one.

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:42 pm

Divair wrote:
Mkuki wrote:~~Clearly we should move here.~~

Central building?
Maybe this?
One of these?

None of those seem very office-y.

What looks office-y for 19th century Britain?

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:43 pm

Mkuki wrote:
Divair wrote:None of those seem very office-y.

What looks office-y for 19th century Britain?

It doesn't have to be straight out of the 19th century. It could be renovated based on a 19th century design.

by **Britanno** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:44 pm

by **Mkuki** » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:45 pm

Divair wrote:
Mkuki wrote:What looks office-y for 19th century Britain?

It doesn't have to be straight out of the 19th century. It could be renovated based on a 19th century design.

Like what? You, or someone, said Whitehall. That doesn't look too office-y to me.

New Democratic Party [NSG Senate | HQ]

If we were to reboot the Senate as a Baltic nation, what name should the NDP have?

Who is online