[SUBMITTED]Condemn La Navasse

[Democratic Empire of Romania]

Upon the following arguments:

THE REPEATED USE of liberations, self-styled as 'neo-liberations', against regions considered 'Fascist'. However, these liberations are used with no sense.

SHOCKED by the final votes in thse resolutions. Revealing that a large part of players aren't agreeing with them.

CONSIDERING that the trust in the Security Council hit a record-low following these resolutions.

NOTING that they became a political too, neither a resolution to 'stripe away Delegate-imposed barriers to free entry in a region'.

WISHING to stop this trend of 'neo-liberations'

The Security Council, through this resolution, CONDEMNS LA NAVASSE

[Arkeyana]

'bout time someone's made this.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I'm opposed to proposals attempting to give badges to spammers. However that is, it does not favours to the proposal that it was submitted without any review.

[Aclion]

There's a better draft here.

[Paxiosolange]

Support.

[Kokoku]

It’s unfortunate that commendations and condemnations have no effect on gameplay.

Nevertheless, I support.

[Tinhampton]

CONSIDERING that the trust in the Security Council hit a record-low following these resolutions.

Nope. That would probably be July 2010, when Condemn Der Fuhrer Dyszel (which contained exactly the same words as the author's later SC#31) was defeated, sheerly out of protest (by the once-mighty Three-Walled Bar) of the recent introduction of Rule 4.

[Consular]

There are already two other condemn La Nav drafts on this page. What the fuck guys

[Eiron V Fluffykins]

the title says submitted but i can't see it in the list of proposals... was it actually submitted?

[Kaboomlandia]

It was submitted two weeks ago and would have either timed out or been declared illegal by the mods a long time ago.

[Wrapper]

If it was submitted it would have been marked as illegal under R4(b) ("players").

[Isvataan]

Dang, I was hoping the condemnation go through