[Joke/Non-Pursuit] Condemn Winner12345

by **Of the Free Socialist Territories** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:53 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
He did, but then Fris advised him that it wouldn't change you or be of any benefit, and now he doesn't want to condemn you. I read this thread. Either you haven't, or you're delusional about the desire of OP to condemn you.

"NON-PURSUIT" in the title is a pretty handy clue.

So i could probably ask him to if i could take the bill over, which i will ask him.

What's the point? Self-condemnations never pass.

by **Winner12345** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:55 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:So i could probably ask him to if i could take the bill over, which i will ask him.

What's the point? Self-condemnations never pass.

OK i agree, but you never know, it is me, i can manage to get it done, with enough campaigning.

by **Winner12345** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:57 am

And nothing about the Black Hawks and TBr(Member of both)

by **Of the Free Socialist Territories** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:57 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
What's the point? Self-condemnations never pass.

OK i agree, but you never know, it is me, i can manage to get it done, with enough campaigning.

Every other SC and GA proposal you've ever written has failed to reach quorum, let alone got to the voting stage and been defeated there. You self-condemning is even less likely to get anywhere.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:07 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:OK i agree, but you never know, it is me, i can manage to get it done, with enough campaigning.

Every other SC and GA proposal you've ever written has failed to reach quorum, let alone got to the voting stage and been defeated there. You self-condemning is even less likely to get anywhere.

Radical gun laws are nothing compared to a aself condemnation.

by **Drop Your Pants** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:07 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:What's the point? Self-condemnations never pass.

Except Resolution # 47, Condemn Swarmlandia. Proposed by his puppet and passed....then repealed

by **SunRawr** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:12 am

Winner12345 wrote:And nothing about the Black Hawks and TBr(Member of both)

What is your name on the TBH forum? If you are really one of us, I need to have a word with your trainer.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:14 am

SunRawr wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:And nothing about the Black Hawks and TBr(Member of both)

What is your name on the TBH forum? If you are really one of us, I need to have a word with your trainer.

I just applied. Anyways it is Winner12345. I will check my mail later.

by **SunRawr** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:18 am

Is it really wrote:
SunRawr wrote: What is your name on the TBH forum? If you are really one of us, I need to have a word with your trainer.

I just applied. Anyways it is Winner12345. I will check my mail later.

Don't lie.

by **The Great Destruction** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:18 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
What's the point? Self-condemnations never pass.

OK i agree, but you never know, it is me, i can manage to get it done, with enough campaigning.

You can get anything passed if you campaing in the small newly formed regions. Those delegates are just looking to get involved in something important and are, much of the time, too in experienced to realise that there is a discussion going on here. You could reach quorum fairly easily. The vote, however, would be another story. The proposal would have to be well written enough or vague enough that it makes complete sense without having to read the discussion. The power of ignorance would trump all of the votes the delegates of large regions would be able to muster.

by **Winner12345** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:31 am

The Great Destruction wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:OK i agree, but you never know, it is me, i can manage to get it done, with enough campaigning.

You can get anything passed if you campaing in the small newly formed regions. Those delegates are just looking to get involved in something important and are, much of the time, too in experienced to realise that there is a discussion going on here. You could reach quorum fairly easily. The vote, however, would be another story. The proposal would have to be well written enough or vague enough that it makes complete sense without having to read the discussion. The power of ignorance would trump all of the votes the delegates of large regions would be able to muster.

Very much aggre. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. :rofl:

by **The Great Destruction** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:36 am

I was only quoting you, not addressing you. Just because I was quoting you doesn't mean it was for your benefit.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:46 am

The Great Destruction wrote:I was only quoting you, not addressing you. Just because I was quoting you doesn't mean it was for your benefit.

Kinda sounded like you where

by **Bergnovinaia** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:33 am

I do not want any more posts by Winner12345 in this thread nor his puppet(s). Let's keep the thread on topic as a joke and non-pursuit proposal... nothing more.

by **Winner12345** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:48 am

Bergnovinaia wrote:I do not want any more posts by Winner12345 in this thread nor his puppet(s). Let's keep the thread on topic as a joke and non-pursuit proposal... nothing more.

I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

by **Of the Free Socialist Territories** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:50 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Bergnovinaia wrote:I do not want any more posts by Winner12345 in this thread nor his puppet(s). Let's keep the thread on topic as a joke and non-pursuit proposal... nothing more.

I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

Then you evidently haven't taken into account the fact that self-condemnations never, ever,, ever get passed - except for that 1 that was mentioned, which was sent in by a completely different puppet and soon repealed, and even that one is the exception proving the rule.

Also, by self-condemning you'll lose whatever respect others within the SC have for you.

by **Bergnovinaia** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:57 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Bergnovinaia wrote:I do not want any more posts by Winner12345 in this thread nor his puppet(s). Let's keep the thread on topic as a joke and non-pursuit proposal... nothing more.

I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

False... I have asked you politely to stop and now you have been reported.

Good day.

by **Retro Lyra** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:59 am

Winner12345 wrote:
Bergnovinaia wrote:I do not want any more posts by Winner12345 in this thread nor his puppet(s). Let's keep the thread on topic as a joke and non-pursuit proposal... nothing more.

I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

Actually, I believe when the OP asks you to leave a thread, you have to leave. Otherwise, it is actionable.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:00 am

Retro Lyra wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

Actually, I believe when the OP asks you to leave a thread, you have to leave. Otherwise, it is actionable.

I thought that was just NS Sports and Roleplay threads. I don`ty think that applys to OOC threads.

by **Jamie Anumia** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:00 am

Retro Lyra wrote:
Winner12345 wrote:I can post as much as i want, if i want, whenever i want. I think that this proposal could pass, and would pass easily.

Actually, I believe when the OP asks you to leave a thread, you have to leave. Otherwise, it is actionable.

I don't believe so actually. I don't believe thread ownership applies to non-RP threads.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:01 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:
Retro Lyra wrote:
Actually, I believe when the OP asks you to leave a thread, you have to leave. Otherwise, it is actionable.

I don't believe so actually. I don't believe thread ownership applies to non-RP threads.

I weas told the same thing by multiple Mods

by **Of the Free Socialist Territories** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:01 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:
Retro Lyra wrote:
Actually, I believe when the OP asks you to leave a thread, you have to leave. Otherwise, it is actionable.

I don't believe so actually. I don't believe thread ownership applies to non-RP threads.

My comrade is correct, as has been proved by my recruitment thread on several occasions. *shudders*

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:03 am

Now that that is cleared up, this is very well written. I bet i could campaign for you and the bill. I would do it as much as you wanted.

by **Bergnovinaia** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:07 am

Is it really wrote:Now that that is cleared up, this is very well written. I bet i could campaign for you and the bill. I would do it as much as you wanted.

Since you have blatantly ignored my asking you to stop your spammy posts here, I have asked the mods to lock this thread. If you continue with this idea, Winner12345, not only will you look like an even greater n00b for wanting to condemn yourself, but I will not even momentarily hesitate in asking the mods for a newspaper if you plagiarize my proposal.

by **Is it really** » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:09 am

It appears that Bergo has dropped the effort to get me off his thread. But it also appears he wants to have this thread locked.

And what does newspapers have to do with anything. All i do is post 1 post for or against and responed to new posts.

[Joke/Non-Pursuit] Condemn Winner12345

Who is online