NationStates

Pergamon wrote:Opposed

Btw. a great factual error is to claim that the 84 updater force was the largest. The largest operation was the update against FEMDOM EMPIRE with a ~100WA nazi entrenchment, where a 90 people updater force showed up, which wasn't CAIN alone. 50 Updaters of this force alone belonged to the NPO and I should know because I raised the NPO army that was present.

Plus, don't forget both raiders and defenders love some fash bash - getting over 120 updaters together is no issue

Blood Wine wrote:

Pergamon wrote:Opposed

Btw. a great factual error is to claim that the 84 updater force was the largest. The largest operation was the update against FEMDOM EMPIRE with a ~100WA nazi entrenchment, where a 90 people updater force showed up, which wasn't CAIN alone. 50 Updaters of this force alone belonged to the NPO and I should know because I raised the NPO army that was present.

Plus, don't forget both raiders and defenders love some fash bash - getting over 120 updaters together is no issue

Defenders and Raiders do not update together. This is why we lost in FEMDOM EMPIRE despite our already legendary numbers.

Pergamon wrote:

Blood Wine wrote:

Plus, don't forget both raiders and defenders love some fash bash - getting over 120 updaters together is no issue

Defenders and Raiders do not update together. This is why we lost in FEMDOM EMPIRE despite our already legendary numbers.

I was a part of that jump. Good times, and if someone hadn't security checked we would have won earlier

May I just say to all of you guys, stop being so ridiculous and meta about this resolution and repeal, it makes you guys look childish.

Prydania wrote:

North Saitama wrote:Just because we object to interventionism, and support free speech and individual liberty, and the receiving end of this interventionism are Fascists, doesn't mean that we like or agree with them; we are making a principled stand for individual liberty. We want EVERYBODY to be able to be free to exercise their individual liberties, and not have them stamped-out for one reason or another.

It took you this long to go "I don't like fascists" after days of saying stuff like "it's just popular morality that says fascism is wrong!"

I appreciate the progress though. Maybe some day we can move to actually doing something fascism in a proactive manner

I pointed this out for the sake of indicating why this interventionism is wrong; you're forcing your own point of view on others, and trampling out anybody who dares have an abhorrent opinion and denying them their individual liberties. The whole point of freedom of expression is to protect unpopular views, as popular views do not need protection. As long as there is no action, you can decide what is right or wrong for yourself.

But nice attempt at an out of context "gotcha", to try and strawman me as a Fascist.

North Saitama wrote:

Prydania wrote:It took you this long to go "I don't like fascists" after days of saying stuff like "it's just popular morality that says fascism is wrong!"

I appreciate the progress though. Maybe some day we can move to actually doing something fascism in a proactive manner

I pointed this out for the sake of indicating why this interventionism is wrong; you're forcing your own point of view on others, and trampling out anybody who dares have an abhorrent opinion and denying them their individual liberties. The whole point of freedom of expression is to protect unpopular views, as popular views do not need protection. As long as there is no action, you can decide what is right or wrong for yourself.

But nice attempt at an out of context "gotcha", to try and strawman me as a Fascist.

I’ll continue to point out that with fascism? If you wait for action you’re often too late.
Again. Fascists on the internet were ignored for over a decade as losers who were confined to the fringe. And then Dylann Roof shot up an African-American church in Charleston. And then Charlottesville happened. And then fasciste were arrested in association with a shooting in Gainesville.
Those events didn’t appear out of nothingness. They were the culmination of fascist agitation in the online space, ignored by people like you (and me, because I once shared your opinion on the matter), bleeding out into the real world with real-life consequences.

Offensive liberations against fascist regions in NS is, at the very least, a proactive step towards marginalizing cancerous fascism within our own online community.

Forestavia wrote:

Prydania wrote:I’m just calling a spade a spade. You see plenty of the above sort active in this thread, and the thread of the target resolution.

Well, you don't have to worry about me. My trump suit is hearts. I'm definitely not a spade and I'm definitely not a fascist. So, what now?

Forestavia wrote:(Hail the Confederation!)

Oh dear.

Prydania wrote:

Forestavia wrote:Well, you don't have to worry about me. My trump suit is hearts. I'm definitely not a spade and I'm definitely not a fascist. So, what now?

Forestavia wrote:(Hail the Confederation!)

Oh dear.

I repeat: Only as a sign of symbolic support.
I just slapped Jocospor (who is technically my founder) in front of the whole world. Naturally, it makes sense to hail the confederation as a sign of respect. I don't want him to ban me from CCD until this ideologically motivated neoliberation is repealed. But also note that I placed the hail inside of a pair of parentheses so that I could downplay the hail in such a way as to communicate (with subtlety) to the rest of the world my true feelings of opposition towards fascism.

I don't think you appreciate how delicate and nuanced this situation is, Prydania. I've cornered myself and I must tread carefully as one does while stranded in the wilderness. I have many enemies and few allies.

Forestavia wrote:

Prydania wrote:

Oh dear.

I repeat: Only as a sign of symbolic support.
I just slapped Jocospor (who is technically my founder) in front of the whole world. Naturally, it makes sense to hail the confederation as a sign of respect. I don't want him to ban me from CCD until this ideologically motivated neoliberation is repealed. But also note that I placed the hail inside of a pair of parentheses so that I could downplay the hail in such a way as to communicate (with subtlety) to the rest of the world my true feelings of opposition towards fascism.

I don't think you appreciate how delicate and nuanced this situation is, Prydania. I've cornered myself and I must tread carefully as one does while stranded in the wilderness. I have many enemies and few allies.

Generally speaking? One probably should reconsider their position on a matter if they find themselves on the side of genocidal politics.

Prydania wrote:

Forestavia wrote:I repeat: Only as a sign of symbolic support.
I just slapped Jocospor (who is technically my founder) in front of the whole world. Naturally, it makes sense to hail the confederation as a sign of respect. I don't want him to ban me from CCD until this ideologically motivated neoliberation is repealed. But also note that I placed the hail inside of a pair of parentheses so that I could downplay the hail in such a way as to communicate (with subtlety) to the rest of the world my true feelings of opposition towards fascism.

I don't think you appreciate how delicate and nuanced this situation is, Prydania. I've cornered myself and I must tread carefully as one does while stranded in the wilderness. I have many enemies and few allies.

Generally speaking? One probably should reconsider their position on a matter if they find themselves on the side of genocidal politics.

I agree. At least I'm not on the side of genocidal politics. Just doing my duty standing up for regional sovereignty, native rights, while standing against the authoritarian interventionism of the World Assembly.

Prydania wrote:

North Saitama wrote:
I pointed this out for the sake of indicating why this interventionism is wrong; you're forcing your own point of view on others, and trampling out anybody who dares have an abhorrent opinion and denying them their individual liberties. The whole point of freedom of expression is to protect unpopular views, as popular views do not need protection. As long as there is no action, you can decide what is right or wrong for yourself.

But nice attempt at an out of context "gotcha", to try and strawman me as a Fascist.

I’ll continue to point out that with fascism? If you wait for action you’re often too late.
Again. Fascists on the internet were ignored for over a decade as losers who were confined to the fringe. And then Dylann Roof shot up an African-American church in Charleston. And then Charlottesville happened. And then fasciste were arrested in association with a shooting in Gainesville.
Those events didn’t appear out of nothingness. They were the culmination of fascist agitation in the online space, ignored by people like you (and me, because I once shared your opinion on the matter), bleeding out into the real world with real-life consequences.

Offensive liberations against fascist regions in NS is, at the very least, a proactive step towards marginalizing cancerous fascism within our own online community.

Obviously, you fail to understand that I still don't care about the ideology in question in regard to the discussion. Hammering me with "Fascism is bad" isn't going to change my mind that individual liberty is good, and interventionism is bad.

People can be wackos all they want; as long as they don't commit a crime, they shouldn't be punished for their opinion. Even if people commit actions in the name of such an ideology, you are moving on to guilt by association to justify criminalising the followers of said ideology, instead of merely punishing the criminals themselves for their individual actions.

If you want to stop Fascism, you don't need to stamp their faces out with jackboots. Use your own words, and your own individual liberties to convince others that Fascism is bad. Within NS, defend regions from Fascist raiders. I have far more respect for those that stand on soapboxes with tennis shoes than those that stand on the faces of others with jackboots.

North Saitama wrote:People can be wackos all they want; as long as they don't commit a crime, they shouldn't be punished for their opinion.

Why not?

Guys. Politics are irrelevant. The security council can't keep abusing liberations as a proxy for every ideology they hate, it's not a weaponized system until you turned it into one. It's designed to help abused regions, not help the abusers.

The security council isnt your own personal army, so stop turning it into one for every new hate fad then blowing up my inbox in a constant war of 'will they, won't they'.

Tldr; supporting this supports freedom of speech, thought, and consciousness, while being against this support censorship based on your skewed view of morality, and punishing a group of fascists because of what you assume a fascist is. Hur dur Hitlers bad, fascist bad, supress all fascists huuuur.

I'm sick of logging on and this crap turning up every couple of weeks because someone wants to pick on the unpopular kid to up their resolution count.

Vrolondia wrote:Guys. Politics are irrelevant. The security council can't keep abusing liberations as a proxy for every ideology they hate, it's not a weaponized system until you turned it intl one. It's designed to help abused regions, not help the abusers. The security council isnt your own personal army, so stop turning it into one for every new hate fad then blowing up my inbox in a constant war of 'will they, won't they'.

Tldr; supporting this supports freedom of speech, thought, and consciousness, while being against this support censorship based on your skewed view of morality, and punishing a group of fascists because of what you assume a fascist is.

Politics are irrelevant? I must be playing the wrong game, then. Also, there is no such thing as free speech online, much less on this game where The Rules (which is established by a private entity, not a RL government) dictate what can and cannot be done.

There's nothing that says the SC can't use the Liberations in that way, unless the community stops voting for them (which is extremely unlikely). Also, "personal army" is stretching rather far, because I don't see how a vote equals to a lot of raiders taking a delegacy in a founderless region.So would that mean the GA is the Defenders?

As for your inbox, you can block the WA Campaigns easily.

Blood Wine wrote:

Forestavia wrote:(Hail the Confederation!)

you're part of CoCD now?

do the normal thing, and replace the wine in the initiation ceremony with melted lead.

Jar Wattinree wrote:

Vrolondia wrote:Guys. Politics are irrelevant. The security council can't keep abusing liberations as a proxy for every ideology they hate, it's not a weaponized system until you turned it intl one. It's designed to help abused regions, not help the abusers. The security council isnt your own personal army, so stop turning it into one for every new hate fad then blowing up my inbox in a constant war of 'will they, won't they'.

Tldr; supporting this supports freedom of speech, thought, and consciousness, while being against this support censorship based on your skewed view of morality, and punishing a group of fascists because of what you assume a fascist is.

Politics are irrelevant? I must be playing the wrong game, then. Also, there is no such thing as free speech online, much less on this game where The Rules (which is established by a private entity, not a RL government) dictate what can and cannot be done.

There's nothing that says the SC can't use the Liberations in that way, unless the community stops voting for them (which is extremely unlikely). Also, "personal army" is stretching rather far, because I don't see how a vote equals to a lot of raiders taking a delegacy in a founderless region.So would that mean the GA is the Defenders?

As for your inbox, you can block the WA Campaigns easily.

First off, we have very different views of humanity if you don't believe in inalienable humans rights regardless of the platform, in which case this conversation will go nowhere. A liberation opens it up to that, it's happened before numerous times, raiders constantly try to use it to open password protected regions and i can count how many tkmes someone liberates a region because its fascist, community, looked at them funny, was mean or something. Just because it's a game play system doesn't mean it should be abused.

Vrolondia wrote:Guys. Politics are irrelevant. The security council can't keep abusing liberations as a proxy for every ideology they hate, it's not a weaponized system until you turned it into one. It's designed to help abused regions, not help the abusers.

This is a political game. If you don't like that then don't play.

And yes, the Security Council actually can keep "abusing liberations", and it probably will.

Vrolondia wrote:Hur dur Hitlers bad, fascist bad, supress all fascists huuuur.

What an intelligent expression

Consular wrote:

Vrolondia wrote:Guys. Politics are irrelevant. The security council can't keep abusing liberations as a proxy for every ideology they hate, it's not a weaponized system until you turned it into one. It's designed to help abused regions, not help the abusers.

This is a political game. If you don't like that then don't play.

And yes, the Security Council actually can keep "abusing liberations", and it probably will

Vrolondia wrote:Hur dur Hitlers bad, fascist bad, supress all fascists huuuur.

What an intelligent expression

Oh it will, it has for the 13+ years I've been playing and it's the main reason I left the SC cesspit.
Stop contributing to the problem by endorsing it.

Vrolondia wrote:

Consular wrote:This is a political game. If you don't like that then don't play.

And yes, the Security Council actually can keep "abusing liberations", and it probably will


What an intelligent expression

Oh it will, it has for the 13 years I've been playing and it's the main reason I left the SC cesspit.
Stop contributing to the problem by endorsing it.

See the thing is I don't see it as a problem.

North Saitama wrote: The whole point of freedom of expression is to protect unpopular views, as popular views do not need protection.

There's no such thing as freedom of expression in the game.

North Saitama wrote:
Obviously, you fail to understand that I still don't care about the ideology in question in regard to the discussion. Hammering me with "Fascism is bad" isn't going to change my mind that individual liberty is good, and interventionism is bad.

Obviously, you fail to understand you're playing a game that limits individual liberty.

North Saitama wrote:If you want to stop Fascism, you don't need to stamp their faces out with jackboots. Use your own words, and your own individual liberties to convince others that Fascism is bad.

Again, there's no such thing as individual liberty in the game. We can't use our own words to tell the far right what we really think of them—the way many of the Boston counter-protestors did last year when they drove the far right out of their town.

We can't enter Nazi and fascist regions to tell them they're full of shit and order them to get the fuck out of Dodge. We can't even say too much nasty stuff about them on our own RMBs or send them nasty TGs without being dinged by Moderation in a really big way.

An Offensive Liberation is the virtual equivalent of a protest march. Ten thousand plus protestors gave the middle finger to a fascist region that asked for it when their founder submitted a Commendation proposal, Insisting that the Security Council has the responsibility to recoginise the contributions of regions founded on less conventional systems of government

COCD may not have received the recognition they wanted, but they got what they deserved.

Consular wrote:

Vrolondia wrote:
Oh it will, it has for the 13 years I've been playing and it's the main reason I left the SC cesspit.
Stop contributing to the problem by endorsing it.

See the thing is I don't see it as a problem.

Then that's your problem then. Start seeing it as a problem obviously

Full support.

Captain Woodhouse wrote:

North Saitama wrote: The whole point of freedom of expression is to protect unpopular views, as popular views do not need protection.

There's no such thing as freedom of expression in the game.

North Saitama wrote:
Obviously, you fail to understand that I still don't care about the ideology in question in regard to the discussion. Hammering me with "Fascism is bad" isn't going to change my mind that individual liberty is good, and interventionism is bad.

Obviously, you fail to understand you're playing a game that limits individual liberty.

North Saitama wrote:If you want to stop Fascism, you don't need to stamp their faces out with jackboots. Use your own words, and your own individual liberties to convince others that Fascism is bad.

Again, there's no such thing as individual liberty in the game. We can't use our own words to tell the far right what we really think of them—the way many of the Boston counter-protestors did last year when they drove the far right out of their town.

We can't enter Nazi and fascist regions to tell them they're full of shit and order them to get the fuck out of Dodge. We can't even say too much nasty stuff about them on our own RMBs or send them nasty TGs without being dinged by Moderation in a really big way.

An Offensive Liberation is the virtual equivalent of a protest march. Ten thousand plus protestors gave the middle finger to a fascist region that asked for it when their founder submitted a Commendation proposal, Insisting that the Security Council has the responsibility to recoginise the contributions of regions founded on less conventional systems of government

COCD may not have received the recognition they wanted, but they got what they deserved.

An offensive liberation is nothing short of the security councils abuse of power towards a region that's don't nothing more than exist. if you want to protest condemn, leave liberations to the fendas.

North Saitama wrote:Obviously, you fail to understand that I still don't care about the ideology in question in regard to the discussion. Hammering me with "Fascism is bad" isn't going to change my mind that individual liberty is good, and interventionism is bad.

You're fallen into "the you don't agree with me? You must not understand my argument."
No, I understand it just fine. I find it naive, empty, short-sighted, arrogant, and overall lacking.

People can be wackos all they want; as long as they don't commit a crime, they shouldn't be punished for their opinion. Even if people commit actions in the name of such an ideology, you are moving on to guilt by association to justify criminalising the followers of said ideology, instead of merely punishing the criminals themselves for their individual actions.

My point is that people like you have played the "I don't agree with fascists, but I'll defend their right to be fascists" game for a while now.
And what we have seen is that abstract fascist thought leads to real world hurt and death at the hands of fascists. It is a sign that your way, which I was once a subscriber to, is lacking and needs to be re-evaluated.

If you want to stop Fascism, you don't need to stamp their faces out with jackboots. Use your own words, and your own individual liberties to convince others that Fascism is bad. Within NS, defend regions from Fascist raiders.

History has proven that fascism is best confronted with direct action.

"Use your words"? You act as if a political philosophy that hinges on racial supremacy and genocidal politics is just as valid as one that holds that maybe the rich should pay a bit more in taxes, or one that says maybe they should be pay a bit less.

If you feel I'm "strawmanning" you as a fascist, that's why. Your milktoast "just debate fascists, why are you trying to shut them down?" ideology normalizes it. It pulls fascism into the same space as conservatism, liberalism, democratic socialism, etc...
Essentially? Your attitude says "this political ideology that calls for oppression and genocide is totes ok and deserves to be counted alongside all of the ideologies that call for a free and open society."

Again, it's naive at best and dog whistle apologism at worst.

Vrolondia wrote: and punishing a group of fascists because of what you assume a fascist is. Hur dur Hitlers bad, fascist bad, supress all fascists huuuur.

I'm well aware of what fascism is. I've spoken to its victims first-hand. And yeah. Fascism is bad. And Hitler was bad. How are these controversial opinions to you?

Vrolondia wrote:An offensive liberation is nothing short of the security councils abuse of power towards a region that's don't nothing more than exist.

The mods have said using Liberations in this manner is not against the rules of the game. So you can cut the "abuse of power!" bs.

if you want to protest condemn, leave liberations to the fendas.

Condemnations are toothless to point of being seen as trophies by some pretty bad people.

At least an offensive liberation has teeth.

Vrolondia wrote:First off, we have very different views of humanity if you don't believe in inalienable humans rights regardless of the platform, in which case this conversation will go nowhere. A liberation opens it up to that, it's happened before numerous times, raiders constantly try to use it to open password protected regions and i can count how many tkmes someone liberates a region because its fascist, community, looked at them funny, was mean or something. Just because it's a game play system doesn't mean it should be abused.

I believe in the inalienable rights of foxes and space elves.

Using a Liberation to force open a passworded region is quite essentially the whole point, regardless of the part of the Raider/Defender spectrum you are on. What you are objecting to is putting a Liberation on a Foundered region whose Founder is obviously alive and well, and this is not so much as an attack against freedom of speech (as understood by the West), but rather an example of misplaced stamp money and campaigning.

However, historically, fascists in this game have flamebaited themselves into many DEATs and DOSes, and this includes founders of fascist regions. Account sharing of the founder nation won't bypass that, as the warnings accumulated on that nation can quite possibly DEAT a bunch of players when that nation breaks the rules (correct me if I'm wrong any mod reading this thread). Buying Postmaster-General, showing your support for the game, also won't give you a "get out of jail free" card, as the then founder of Union of the Fascist Nations, Union of the Fascist Reich, and Verites Reich discovered three times (before being DOS'd on the final time).

Being the genre-savvy salt-miners that they are, Gameplay has latched onto the idea of using Liberations to preemptively make sure the fascists don't have the playing field skewed in their favor (i.e. regional controls via the delegate and ROs). All perfectly legal if the game allows it, which it does. As a side-effect of this liberal usage of Liberations, perhaps an unintentional one in the long-run if the fascists wisen up, this ensures that there is a Sword of Reploid hanging over the targeted region's metaphorical head -- that should the Founder be so stupid enough to get his nation DEAT'd, all of his hard work in recruiting likeminded edgy teenage memers who have little to no understanding of history to his region has gone up in the smoke of a ruined sandcastle.