NationStates

Twins of Hearts wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Not really sure why I was dragged into this when I have nothing to do with this proposal Koth.

Your hands are covered in the filth of offensive liberations, Lenlyvit, kuriko, whatever your next rebranding shall be.

Everyone knows you used la navasse as your cats paw to pass the first few junk liberations, but you were one of the lead brainchild behind it.

Wayneactia wrote:Letting defenders refound the region wouldn't serve much a purpose other than gloating. I would fully support the Hawks refounding the region, or even Mike and keeping it as a memorial to the good old days myself.

Wayne, I do not even know who you ar, but you presume too much, and know too little. I think you need to bone up on who is what etc.

I remain, staunchly against, discontent, nay on this junk liberation attempt.

Um, perhaps if you looked or asked you might find out that I opposed pretty much all of La Navasse's offensive liberation attempts. My voting has been 100% against offensive Liberations, even liberate Kaiserreich, and I made no secret of that either.

Public statements are meaningless, as we all know. Its what you did in private, lenlyvit...

Using la navasse as your personal in game guinea pig after the dank meme region failure is a well known fact. A move worthy of whitelist intervention, I dare say!

Twins of Hearts wrote:Public statements are meaningless, as we all know. Its what you did in private, lenlyvit...

Using la navasse as your personal in game guinea pig after the dank meme region failure is a well known fact. A move worthy of whitelist intervention, I dare say!

Wow, you've really lost your mind haven't you? La Navasse and I never really got along at all, so go on and keep making inaccurate guesses while everyone knows the truth of the situation. I wasn't even around when the Dank Meme thing originally happened.

Removed due to double post. Nice and tidy now.

Kuriko wrote:

Twins of Hearts wrote:Public statements are meaningless, as we all know. Its what you did in private, lenlyvit...

Using la navasse as your personal in game guinea pig after the dank meme region failure is a well known fact. A move worthy of whitelist intervention, I dare say!

Wow, you've really lost your mind haven't you? La Navasse and I never really got along at all, so go on and keep making inaccurate guesses while everyone knows the truth of the situation. I wasn't even around when the Dank Meme thing originally happened.

You are using simple rhetoric and misdirection to attempt and discredit the fact that you helped design offensive liberations. lenlyvit was most certainly “around” , and sniffing all around the whole thing. Your nation kuriko was not yet in existence.

I never asserted you and la navasse were friends, but asserting i have lost my mind is a reductive smear. I expected better from the delegate of 10ki and tito. I understand you are salty over your losses and challenges, so I forgive you for your OOC attack upon my person. Just try and be better next time! We all have bad days.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=434015

Hmmm....page 1 supporter.

Jakker wrote:<snip>

I think the general idea behind it is no safe haven, no platform for these people, and by working with them -- not only the so-called "blacklisted" folks, but also fascists -- Shadow has very much become one of these people by association, and of her own free will. Children of the Grave is a safe haven for her.

I don't really love this either, but either we're serious about depriving these people of safe havens and platforms when we can, or we aren't. I don't think Shadow should get a pass just because she hasn't done reprehensible things. She's enabling people who have done those things to continue pestering us through gameplay mechanics, by using her sleepers to engage in R/D and bother those of us who want absolutely nothing to do with them. Maybe she's not a bad person herself, I really have no idea, but she is enabling people who have done terrible things to continue antagonizing the gameplay community, including many of the people they have previously victimized, and that's on her. I don't feel bad for her one bit, because she could make different choices.

OOC: Opposed, offensive liberations do not belong in the SC.

Marxist Germany wrote:OOC: Opposed, offensive liberations do not belong in the SC.

Where in the SC’s rules does it say that?

Cormactopia Prime wrote:

Jakker wrote:<snip>

I think the general idea behind it is no safe haven, no platform for these people, and by working with them -- not only the so-called "blacklisted" folks, but also fascists -- Shadow has very much become one of these people by association, and of her own free will. Children of the Grave is a safe haven for her.

I don't really love this either, but either we're serious about depriving these people of safe havens and platforms when we can, or we aren't. I don't think Shadow should get a pass just because she hasn't done reprehensible things. She's enabling people who have done those things to continue pestering us through gameplay mechanics, by using her sleepers to engage in R/D and bother those of us who want absolutely nothing to do with them. Maybe she's not a bad person herself, I really have no idea, but she is enabling people who have done terrible things to continue antagonizing the gameplay community, including many of the people they have previously victimized, and that's on her. I don't feel bad for her one bit, because she could make different choices.

Nicely argued Cormac. I have sympathy for Jakker’s point of view, but overall I’m leaning towards this line of reasoning.

Go liberate something else.

Twins of Hearts wrote:Public statements are meaningless, as we all know. Its what you did in private, lenlyvit...

Using la navasse as your personal in game guinea pig after the dank meme region failure is a well known fact. A move worthy of whitelist intervention, I dare say!

Kind of curious as to what you have been smoking? You may want to cut back a tad. Kuri opposes offensive liberations for the same reason I do. They devalue the function of them. There are always exceptions to the rule and this seems like a good exception. Ride with the fash? Share their fate.

Jakker wrote:Just seems like all a refound would do (even if the founder was a raider) would be for the region to lose its original founder.

Worth noting that Shadow has ejected everyone from the region and is presumably going to attempt a refound herself, so this is happening either way now, the liberation proposal just gives a controlled timescale for others to catch her in the act of doing so and beating her to it

Numero Capitan wrote:

Jakker wrote:Just seems like all a refound would do (even if the founder was a raider) would be for the region to lose its original founder.

Worth noting that Shadow has ejected everyone from the region and is presumably going to attempt a refound herself, so this is happening either way now, the liberation proposal just gives a controlled timescale for others to catch her in the act of doing so and beating her to it

Well as far as I can see, this is happening because of this proposal And I can understand Cormac's point about pushing the message of depriving those of safe havens. I'm just unsure if it will actually have the desired effect, yet will have other consequences like removing the original founder.

Jakker wrote:Well as far as I can see, this is happening because of this proposal And I can understand Cormac's point about pushing the message of depriving those of safe havens. I'm just unsure if it will actually have the desired effect, yet will have other consequences like removing the original founder.

I was content for this to sit here in draft as a threat against Shadow if she worked with the same group again. She could have acknowledged that the operation was starting to draw undesirable fascist involvement. Or less than that she could have made a case that she was working with old friends in a limited way that was unlikely to result in opportunities for them to make the same mistakes that have made them undesirable anywhere else. Instead she booted every other native nation from CotG and doubled down on her mistakes by raiding with them all again. Instead of acknowledging the concerns of nations from relatively neutral regions like TNP and Osiris she is apparently seeking to undermine and ignore them by undertaking a forced refound of her own in CotG.

Aggressive acts should have consequences, we have already turned condemnations into dark mode commendations, so the Security Council needs to choose whether to have a bite or not.

So since she's ejected everyone from the region, it seems like a liberation wouldn't pass in time to stop that refound?

Gorundu wrote:So since she's ejected everyone from the region, it seems like a liberation wouldn't pass in time to stop that refound?

She’ll only attempt a refound if the threat of liberation is there, so this needs to progress either way otherwise it leaves Shadow to steal the region from Oz in her own time.

Author, you planning to push this to vote? I’m a bit keen to myself if you’re not, but don’t want to make a competing proposal if you’re still working it. The sooner this could pass, should the community decide to support it, the better.

Offensive Liberations have been a widely accepted tactic for years now, do we really need to go through the whole song and dance of people pretending to have moral/ethical concerns again.

Support, except for the annoying timing >_>

This seams like a attention seeking-idea.

As long as more regions can be created, there is a safe haven for everyone. Which means this proposal is totally pointless.

I'm just really damn disappointed in Shadow. She's going to destroy her reputation as a raider if she keeps raiding with the Fossils.

What luck I have! I was going to submit it today, then it got refounded just last update. Don't know who it was though...

Anyway, consider this draft abandoned.

I know who it was and this didn't go well for Shadow.

No doubt your proposal contributed to the end result, even if it wasn't in the way you intended!

Better than having your proposal go to vote, be about to pass, and then the region gets refounded and there is 24 hours to get the vote to swing against.

Mission accomplished at least (most likely)

Praeceps wrote:Better than having your proposal go to vote, be about to pass, and then the region gets refounded and there is 24 hours to get the vote to swing against.

That’s true.