[Shelved] Liberate Arcem (SCUT)

[La Navasse]

I don't see how this is helping the case in any way.
I'm not playing the opposition's game of throwing as many long lists of links as I can at my opposition and judging who's lists are longer - I know I've already laid out my evidence, and I'm not in any urgent need to repeatedly quote and requote lists of irrelevant links in an attempt for legitimacy. The opposition is refusing to accept the evidence, and I don't think, Derps, that claiming there's fallacy in my reasoning (not that you've specified any) or trying to covertly allude to some meaningless end helps at all.

Ah yes, the 'force the reader to trawl through the entirety of a lengthy thread to see the nuances of my stance' gambit. Works every time.
Let's start simple, then. Boomer went out of his way to provide a list of links that *support* your case. In what way is that section incomplete or inadequate?

The exclusion of links related to FGGR's main dispatches, which he randomly dismissed, "discrediting" of SCUT opponents by outdated information, and the entire host of dispatches that can easily be found in the OP.

[Devi Vytherin]

Ah yes, the 'force the reader to trawl through the entirety of a lengthy thread to see the nuances of my stance' gambit. Works every time.
Let's start simple, then. Boomer went out of his way to provide a list of links that *support* your case. In what way is that section incomplete or inadequate?

The exclusion of links related to FGGR's main dispatches, which he randomly dismissed, "discrediting" of SCUT opponents by outdated information, and the entire host of dispatches that can easily be found in the OP.

-randomly here meaning explicitly stating that the two regions haven't worked together in months?
As for the dispatches in question, most of them also seem to point towards relations with regions that you personally find objectionable.

[La Navasse]

The exclusion of links related to FGGR's main dispatches, which he randomly dismissed, "discrediting" of SCUT opponents by outdated information, and the entire host of dispatches that can easily be found in the OP.

-randomly here meaning explicitly stating that the two regions haven't worked together in months?
As for the dispatches in question, most of them also seem to point towards relations with regions that you personally find objectionable.

So, you do not find FGGR and THRB objectionable?

[Devi Vytherin]

-randomly here meaning explicitly stating that the two regions haven't worked together in months?
As for the dispatches in question, most of them also seem to point towards relations with regions that you personally find objectionable.

So, you do not find FGGR and THRB objectionable?

To quote:

Your allegations against us are based on allegations against two regions - one of whom (The FGGR) we haven't had any relationship with for months, as I've said for probably the twentieth time now.

As for HRB, sure. They're objectionable. HRB itself, however, is more objectionable than a region that *happens to have a connection to them*
If you want to use HRB as a talking point, go write a liberation for them- a mere associate isn't exactly resolution-worthy, or we'd be liberating the numerous regions that associate with Kreich.

[Drop Your Pants]

Not going to read 20 odd pages but this line caught my eye.

Believing that liberating Arcem will serve as a warning to current and future authoritarian and fascist regions from further practicing their ideology;

How will it serve as a warning exactly? Or is it just another attempt at a catchy finisher? Like the end of 'Liberate The Communal Confederacy':

Believing that the region will not reach its fullest potential, which it had barely shown in its youth, without a SC Liberation;

Which is currently showing much activity with a Lily tag

[La Navasse]

So, you do not find FGGR and THRB objectionable?

To quote:

Your allegations against us are based on allegations against two regions - one of whom (The FGGR) we haven't had any relationship with for months, as I've said for probably the twentieth time now.

As for HRB, sure. They're objectionable. HRB itself, however, is more objectionable than a region that *happens to have a connection to them*
If you want to use HRB as a talking point, go write a liberation for them- a mere associate isn't exactly resolution-worthy, or we'd be liberating the numerous regions that associate with Kreich.

I see your point - I'll consider it. Thanks for the feedback.

Not going to read 20 odd pages but this line caught my eye.

Believing that liberating Arcem will serve as a warning to current and future authoritarian and fascist regions from further practicing their ideology;

How will it serve as a warning exactly? Or is it just another attempt at a catchy finisher? Like the end of 'Liberate The Communal Confederacy':

Believing that the region will not reach its fullest potential, which it had barely shown in its youth, without a SC Liberation;

Which is currently showing much activity with a Lily tag

Liberate Arcem is intended to threaten fascist and authoritarian regions that sympathize with fascists with Neoliberations. I wanted for TCC to be similar to Greece in regional community, though I believe that the former may take much longer to develop a healthy regional community.

[Indo-Malaysia]

I think we can agree that 'neoliberation' should not be used. Correct SC terminology is 'Offensive Liberation', which clearly describes its use. This fictional term created by Aimdar bears no meaning whatsoever.

I don't see how this is helping the case in any way.
I'm not playing the opposition's game of throwing as many long lists of links as I can at my opposition and judging who's lists are longer - I know I've already laid out my evidence, and I'm not in any urgent need to repeatedly quote and requote lists of irrelevant links in an attempt for legitimacy. The opposition is refusing to accept the evidence, and I don't think, Derps, that claiming there's fallacy in my reasoning (not that you've specified any) or trying to covertly allude to some meaningless end helps at all.

Ah yes, the 'force the reader to trawl through the entirety of a lengthy thread to see the nuances of my stance' gambit. Works every time.
Let's start simple, then. Boomer went out of his way to provide a list of links that *support* your case. In what way is that section incomplete or inadequate?

Except that when one trawls through the links and posts them, Aimdar refuses to debate any further.
I can provide a link if you wish: viewtopic.php?p=33829465#p33829465

[Kaboomlandia]

To quote:

As for HRB, sure. They're objectionable. HRB itself, however, is more objectionable than a region that *happens to have a connection to them*
If you want to use HRB as a talking point, go write a liberation for them- a mere associate isn't exactly resolution-worthy, or we'd be liberating the numerous regions that associate with Kreich.

I see your point - I'll consider it. Thanks for the feedback.

Not going to read 20 odd pages but this line caught my eye.


How will it serve as a warning exactly? Or is it just another attempt at a catchy finisher? Like the end of 'Liberate The Communal Confederacy':


Which is currently showing much activity with a Lily tag

Liberate Arcem is intended to threaten fascist and authoritarian regions that sympathize with fascists with Neoliberations. I wanted for TCC to be similar to Greece in regional community, though I believe that the former may take much longer to develop a healthy regional community.

I get why the TCC one was liberated, as it was a KReich password, but the natives also chose to give zero shits about the invaders and then either left or died off once the resolution passed. Your Greece comparison is misguided.

Also, it’s a little strange that the first post in a while that you actually respond constructively to is one suggesting you go write yet another offensive liberation against a foundered region.

[Kaboomlandia]

Ah yes, the 'force the reader to trawl through the entirety of a lengthy thread to see the nuances of my stance' gambit. Works every time.
Let's start simple, then. Boomer went out of his way to provide a list of links that *support* your case. In what way is that section incomplete or inadequate?

The exclusion of links related to FGGR's main dispatches, which he randomly dismissed, "discrediting" of SCUT opponents by outdated information, and the entire host of dispatches that can easily be found in the OP.

Bruh.

I went through all fifteen pages of the thread at the time. Those were the only three posts in the entire thread to either have anecdotal support for your resolution or a link to evidence in favour. All of them except one that I don’t care enough to investigate were debunked (so 2/3).

The request that you post hard evidence in the form of links isn’t unreasonable at all. The reason there isn’t a massive section of links in the “Supports” side of that one post I made is because there aren’t any.

Give it up, Navasse. Give it up. You have no evidence to support your argument, as shown by your constant sidestepping of one simple request.

[Queen Yuno]

So... I saw someone (accidentally) try to use my WA approval to spin it for their political purposes (out of misinterpreting my intent)- and would like to clarify that it doesn't mean anything. Every update, I mass-approve 10-20 random proposals because it's the only thing a former raider/defender can do being WA-locked without getting bored outta her mind at update.


"Yuno...why did you just approve Condemn TNP?"
"Shuddup you can't take my 1 release away from me ;-;"

Approvals do not mean commitments/promises, but good luck!

[Krualstiken]

Resubmitted? Are you kidding me? Has the almost entirely negative feedback here on the forums not clued you in that we KNOW for a FACT that what you're saying are blatant lies?

[Bedetopia]

Resubmitted? Are you kidding me? Has the almost entirely negative feedback here on the forums not clued you in that we KNOW for a FACT that what you're saying are blatant lies?

It's become clear at this point that the only way for him to learn his lesson is to crash into a wall (Maybe even the WALL). Major delegates know what's up, including but not limited to Yuno, you, Imperium Anglorum, Killer Kitty...

[New Legland]

A Message For the Delegates Concerning the Third Submission:
The proposal ended with 102 Approvals, only 4 below quorum. This clearly demonstrates strong support for this proposal from all Delegates, even though there were 3 countercampaigns sent out. This does not mean, however, that the proposal will not be resubmitted - it will be later next week.

Thank you, Delegates, for your strong and continued support. I promise that as soon as this proposal finally reaches quorum, we will be able to push through this Liberation and bring justice to SCUT.

A proposal receiving strong support from all delegates would not take more than three attempts to reach quorum, which only represents 6% of all delegates. If a proposal receives strong support, it should take one, if not two attempts to be presented to vote. And don't cite the three countercampigns sent out on the third attempt when you sent out five campaigns on the second attempt.

Even if this does reach quorum, it will be annihilated on the floor. Approval (especially from less than 6% of the game's delegates) certainly does not indicate support. There are many delegates who just approve everything they see and there are others who just think that everyone else deserves a chance to vote for it.

What you're doing here is very unprofessional. I would expect someone who prides themselves on being an author of several SC resolutions to understand that constantly resubmitting the same thing will not help anything. You are only losing support from people (who know what's happening here).

Whatever players in this thread that you're referencing are not representative of all the Delegates in the WA, nor of all of the Members, either.

However, the players on this thread are more representative of the superdelegates who will make or break this proposal's passage, should it reach quorum, since, while many delegates either believe what the proposal says or vote with the majority, superdelegates actually put thought into their votes and research the matter. And the feedback of this thread is indicative of how they would vote..

[New Legland]

Plus, trying to deem the fascist rivalry between SCUT and TIO as anything but an anti-fascist crusade would have been realistic. If you haven't forgotten, SCUT is a fascist sympathizer whose fascist allies are FGGR and THRB, and they don't want their potential audience swiped away by TIO, you know.

We've been at this for weeks and you still couldn't be more wrong.

[Hemuraile]

>never claimed

Yet when I look at the original original draft,

"Aggravated at the SCUT Emperor Morriband’s miserable attempt at disproving their fascist nature by referencing a powerless Senate, whose Senators are de facto appointed by the Emperor, in their SCUT Manifesto;"

"Denouncing the SCUT’s claim that it is a “federal republican union of regions” in their SCUT Manifesto as trickery and decievement to gain more members and to conceal their true fascist nature;"

Ok.

[Prydania]

>never claimed

Yet when I look at the original original draft,

"Aggravated at the SCUT Emperor Morriband’s miserable attempt at disproving their fascist nature by referencing a powerless Senate, whose Senators are de facto appointed by the Emperor, in their SCUT Manifesto;"

"Denouncing the SCUT’s claim that it is a “federal republican union of regions” in their SCUT Manifesto as trickery and decievement to gain more members and to conceal their true fascist nature;"

Ok.

You are an enabler of Nazism and fascism, and woefully unable to condemn LN for this ridiculous anti-SCUT resolution. Even if we did live in a twisted universe were SCUT was clearly a fascist group? You would still be championing their right to promote their hateful ideology.

Make no mistake about it. La Navasse is wrong. His continued attempts to paint SCUT as a Nazi or fascist region is nothing short of embarrassing.

Your shameful record of enabling fascism and Nazism, however, makes you ill-equipped to take him to task.

[Kaboomlandia]

The people against this resolution aren't pro-fascism or enablers at all. It's just that this resolution is a terrible way to go about getting the job done.

[Westfacto]

How is it pro-fascist for believing a region has the right and freedom to believe in an ideology without the SC attacking them purely out of ideology differences? If anything it is the opposite of fascism which suppresses free speech and individual freedoms.

[Hemuraile]

You are an enabler of Nazism and fascism, and woefully unable to condemn LN for this ridiculous anti-SCUT resolution. Even if we did live in a twisted universe were SCUT was clearly a fascist group? You would still be championing their right to promote their hateful ideology.

Make no mistake about it. La Navasse is wrong. His continued attempts to paint SCUT as a Nazi or fascist region is nothing short of embarrassing.

Your shameful record of enabling fascism and Nazism, however, makes you ill-equipped to take him to task.

"You are an enabler of Nazism and fascism, and woefully unable to condemn LN for this ridiculous anti-SCUT resolution."
Sounds pretty tu quoque to me.
And funny how you cherry-pick Nazism and fascism from my belief in freedom of thought. I'd also enable communism, liberalism, conservatism, egalitarianism, socialism, authoritarianism, libertarianism, capitalism, etc. when I believe in freedom of thought. Only when the ideologies that invade other's rights are practiced is when I say no, as it is action, not thought.

"Even if we did live in a twisted universe were SCUT was clearly a fascist group? You would still be championing their right to promote their hateful ideology."
Until they practice that hateful part of their ideology.
Also, lemme fix that: "You would still be championing their right, and other regions' rights, to promote their ideology."

"Your shameful record of enabling fascism and Nazism, however, makes you ill-equipped to take him to task."
Sounds pretty tu quoque to me.
And funny how you cherry-pick Nazism and fascism from my belief in freedom of thought. I'd also enable communism, liberalism, conservatism, egalitarianism, socialism, authoritarianism, libertarianism, capitalism, etc. when I believe in freedom of thought. Only when the ideologies that invade other's rights are practiced is when I say no, as it is action, not thought.

[Prydania]

The people against this resolution aren't pro-fascism or enablers at all. It's just that this resolution is a terrible way to go about getting the job done.

How is it pro-fascist for believing a region has the right and freedom to believe in an ideology without the SC attacking them purely out of ideology differences? If anything it is the opposite of fascism which suppresses free speech and individual freedoms.

I swear, it’s like some people don’t even bother reading before responding...

Kaboom- I’m against this resolution too, because it’s clear to me that SCUT is not a Nazi or fascist region. I was merely commenting that Hemuraile‘s stances in other threads have left him, in my opinion, with no right to cast moral judgements here.
Further? I have consistently been against this resolution my entire tenure in this thread. So I’m unsure why you think my comments directed at Hemuraile meant I was criticizing all opponents of this resolution. Especially when my post critical of Hemurail even called this resolution “embarassing.”

Westfacto- The above, plus the fact that I am under no moral obligation to tolerate ideologies such as Nazism and fascism that consider me “sub-human” and call for my death.
Nazis and fascists having the right to feeedom of speech (something that technically doesn’t exist in NS) but they do not have freedom from consequence.
Nazis and fascists facing repercussions from the community who disapproves of the speech they partake in isn’t a violation of anyone’s rights. It’s reminding a group of hateful people that actions have consequences.

And because people apparently don’t read? SCUT is neither fascist or a Nazi region and therefore I am against the current resolution.

[Hemuraile]

Nazis and fascists having the right to feeedom of speech (something that technically doesn’t exist in NS) but they do not have freedom from consequence.

And apparently you couldn't read either, as neither of them said "freedom of speech" but said "right and freedom to believe in an ideology", AKA what I've been saying "freedom of thought".

[Prydania]

And funny how you cherry-pick Nazism and fascism from my belief in freedom of thought. I'd also enable communism, liberalism, conservatism, egalitarianism, socialism, authoritarianism, libertarianism, capitalism, etc. when I believe in freedom of thought. Only when the ideologies that invade other's rights are practiced is when I say no, as it is action, not thought.

I have yet to hear a reason from you, or any other enabler of Nazism, as to why I, a Jewish person, should tolerate an ideology that calls for my denigration and death. Or why I should tolerate the people who cheerlead an ideology that saw my family murdered in death camps.

If you wish to partake in civil society? You need to accept some basic truths. The belief that some humans are “sub-human” and unworthy of equality runs counter to a core tenant of civil society and should be shunned.

[North Saitama]

The above, plus the fact that I am under no moral obligation to tolerate ideologies such as Nazism and fascism that consider me “sub-human” and call for my death.
Nazis and fascists having the right to feeedom of speech (something that technically doesn’t exist in NS) but they do not have freedom from consequence.
Nazis and fascists facing repercussions from the community who disapproves of the speech they partake in isn’t a violation of anyone’s rights. It’s reminding a group of hateful people that actions have consequences.

And because people apparently don’t read? SCUT is neither fascist or a Nazi region and therefore I am against the current resolution.

As I explained before, there is a huge difference between merely disagreeing and denouncing an ideology, and punishing thoughtcrime. The example I have given before is telling a Nazi he sucks, versus punching him in the face. In the former case, he is still free to hold his opinion, even if society hates him for his opinion. In the latter case, his opinion is being suppressed with force. Never mind that the whole reason for freedom of speech is to protect unpopular opinions; popular and/or sanctioned opinions do not need protection.

The latter is exactly what we have been facing with each of these resolutions. They aren't mere "criticisms" at all; they are active punishments for an ideology. If we take the WA to be a governing body of some sort, using the SC to liberate natives for purely ideological reasons is punishing them for their ideology, opening-up their region to invasion in a best case scenario, and interfering with their regional affairs otherwise.

I am opposed to the resolution, as I have been with every single one of La Navasse's so-called "neoliberations", for the same reason: it is an ideologically-charged witch hunt. I further urge La Navasse to just give up, and to stop resubmitting proposals that nobody but himself wants.

[Prydania]

Well North Saitama, congrats. Like everyone else who holds your naive opinion on this matter? You’ve failed to explain to me why I should tolerate an ideology that calls for my denigration and death.

You’ve got platitudes a plenty, but nothing to address my primary point. Why should I extend tolerance to those that are intolerant, and tolerate people who wish me harm?

[Arkhall]

Going to post this again because it continues to prove my point.

What's the bet that, because I'm defending Arcem(SCUT), La Navaraerasrs will go after my RP region? Another "Nazi collaborator".
I've had plenty of association with regions such as KR and Nazi Europa. I've hung out with the Black Hawks (The old one, back when raiding was more of a meme, not the one after new management that had a desire to raid and destroy, rather than put silly tags in the WFE). I hung out with the gals in FE. Does any of this hold relevance in the slightest? At ALL? Do the people I hang out with define me and the endeavors I seek out? That's the logic you're holding, La Navaneresere. Someone does not become a stripper by hanging out at strip clubs, someone does not become an arms dealer by knowing one. Someone knowing someone or hanging out with someone does not mean that they are collaborators, nor does it mean that they will convert or change their views by any means.

Your constant "liberations" and condemnations have lead the WA to forget this simple fact. Your hyperbole and blatant lies deface your own name, and the name of the SC. You turn into mockery what was once a moderately balanced and fun part of the game. "Ah, we can practice campaigning, debating, and observe the voting process." turned into "We can destroy and deface those that we don't like."

And everyone's growing tired of it. We know your claims are false. The smarter portion of the WA will oppose you at ever step of the way.