NationStates

Varanius wrote:

Apatosaurus wrote:I would prefer not to be compared to as a weapon/snipe, thanks (as much as I disagree with your point that Aiv is ignoring criticism )

Uhhh, I don’t care.

You cared enough to make that remark.

Honeydewistania wrote:

Varanius wrote: Uhhh, I don’t care.

You cared enough to make that remark.

The lengths I’m willing to go to rid of boredom in the middle of class astound even me on occasion.

I would appreciate it if you could at least keep your badgering on topic.

Aivintis wrote:I would appreciate it if you could at least keep your badgering on topic.

I agree, it would be quite nice for Honey to stay on topic next time.

Submitted : )

Aivintis wrote:Submitted : )

If this gets to vote, I stand by my claims that the nominee isn't commendable and that your proposal doesn't fully make a good case of why.

The United Regions Alliance recommends voting against this resolution. https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1609211

An “Against” recommendation was made to TWP’s Delegate.

Libertanny has done a great deal not only for TEP, but for the allies and embassies of TEP by reaching out to them while exiting a busy internal time. I greatly credit him for why the Alstroemerian Commonwealths finds value in interregional friends by being the first to uplift our regions into something larger than themselves.

I do not yet hold the seat of TEP WA Delegate, but am happy to see Delegate Atlae's vote FOR Libertanny per my order.

URA World Assembly Affairs wrote:The United Regions Alliance recommends voting against this resolution. https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1609211

I’d like to start off by saying I understand a lot of the points presented. The reason I’m not addressing those is that they don’t need to be addressed. That would just be a waste of words. I am only addressing the falsehoods and misinterpretations of my proposal that contributed to the vote against - not any valid points on its writing, or on the fact that becoming a GCR delegate makes the standard far higher than for a non-GCR-delegate, or that sort of thing. One big thing I can’t speak on is Anteria. I was pretty sure those logs were full pages, but I also see the error in TEP’s ways in that matter - especially since it was explained recently (I only just learned about it today) that those messages were left there as evidence. But I wisely stayed completely out of all that to the best of my ability, which means I can’t speak on that matter.

The first point I’d like to address is FA. I can’t speak for where the framework came from, but it’s not complicated. MoFA is big boss, Senior Diplomats are seconds, Inner Circle consists of MoFA, SDs, and Advisors. Diplomats are assigned to regions. SDs watch over five or so regions as “deputy”. Junior Diplomats are new applicants who learn from other diplomats in assignments without being the full diplomat there. I explained it there in three sentences.

As for zero real engagement, we tried. But for regions whose diplomacy with us was inactive, as you call it, 9 times out of 10 they didn’t have an ambassador in our FA server, or there just wasn’t anything to report. There’s nothing we could do about that that we didn’t try. The 1 out of 10 case was that of a bad ambassador, who we were sometimes too late on firing. That’s a problem on me as MoFA and not on Serge for the creation of the structure or on Serge as delegate, and so has nothing to do with him. Delegates don’t micromanage ambassador appointments. That’s what I was supposed to do.

“This is a very selective retelling of the Consortium”

It’s most certainly not. None of what I said there is related to the Consortium, except in that both regions mentioned were in it. I’m referring to the Poem of the Greats, the Treaty of Santiago de Chile, and the appointment of ambassadors such as Eastern Alksearia to Thaecia and, I admit, me to FNR, whose success lies in integration within the community, something that has brought both regions far closer to TEP. To the point where some pretend Thaecia is our vassal. But this isn’t just about Thaecia and FNR. They’re just the best examples. This is about XKI (Treaty of the Waxing Moon), TSP (Galapagos Accords), LKE (TEP’s first non aggression pact), and similar feats. Not everything with FNR and Thaecia is about the Consortium.

“This was therefore unrelated to any counter-coup efforts”

This is based on the false assumption that the coup only happened in October 2019. Since his first election Fedele was undermining the region, destroying the Executive, and pushing an agenda in the Magisterium. The SMC was created months before the coup IIRC. I joined counter-coup efforts weeks before the coup.

Also, the rigging elections thing is over exaggerated, and if it was even a quarter as terrible as you suggest, EPPS or Conclave wouldn’t have let it go. Serge wasn’t Delegate or Vice Delegate or MoFA back then, and so they had no reason to give him leniency. Not to mention he contacted one person and failed.

“Based on what those involved with the planning of the first Paradoxical event have told me, it succeeded largely in spite of Libertanny, rather than because of them.”

That’s an outright lie. Serge was the only one consistently putting his blood, sweat, and tears into Parodoxical. Without him, there would be no RP - he made the map and updated it for 80% of the event. He was more active than any one of us, and the event would have failed if he hadn’t been there. Not to mention he is the only one who pushed for Paradoxical 2. Who pushed for Paradoxical 3. Who organized Paradoxicals 2, 3, and 4. Paradoxical would be a failed event without him.

Greater Cesnica wrote:

(Image)

---

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote AGAINST the Security Council Resolution, "Commend Libertanny".
Its reasoning may be found here.

---

“ and the author ignored the feedback they were given regarding the Resolution”

Here’s what actually happened. Varanius responded with an initial message, 80% of which was just saying Serge is not commendable, Bran did everything better, that sort of thing. 50% of it was anything that could be addressed. So I addressed it. I cleared up misconceptions, I explained my reasoning, and I challenged claims such as “Paradoxical is just a generic event and TWP does them better”. Varanius ignored everything he could not reply to with his signature “snark”. I asked for him to respond or acknowledge the parts of my response that he left out, and he ignored that too. So I ignored him. And then he cries that I ignore criticism and suddenly everyone is saying that I ignore criticism. I address this. Explain the situation. And somehow you still see me as ignoring criticism.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1609210

Again, a lot of this is valid and so won’t be addressed, but I will address what’s wrong with it.

First of all, the independence of WAA wasn’t a cosmetic change. MoWAA was under the direct jurisdiction of the MoRA, who often wasn’t aquatinted with WA affairs, and the independence of WAA removed that. This allowed it greater autonomy than say Culture.

“ The proposal also fails to account for their failures as delegate” because failures aren’t commendable. I addressed this earlier in the thread as well.

As for my acknowledging that Serge was only part of a whole, yes, but a car can’t run without an engine AND a steering wheel, and the SMC couldn’t be as effective without Serge. As for the symbolic resolution being the “main” thing, that’s not true. SMC was the main thing. The symbolic proposal was only there to present a pattern of such efforts.

Aivintis wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:

(Image)

---

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote AGAINST the Security Council Resolution, "Commend Libertanny".
Its reasoning may be found here.

---

“ and the author ignored the feedback they were given regarding the Resolution”

Here’s what actually happened. Varanius responded with an initial message, 80% of which was just saying Serge is not commendable, Bran did everything better, that sort of thing. 50% of it was anything that could be addressed. So I addressed it. I cleared up misconceptions, I explained my reasoning, and I challenged claims such as “Paradoxical is just a generic event and TWP does them better”. Varanius ignored everything he could not reply to with his signature “snark”. I asked for him to respond or acknowledge the parts of my response that he left out, and he ignored that too. So I ignored him. And then he cries that I ignore criticism and suddenly everyone is saying that I ignore criticism. I address this. Explain the situation. And somehow you still see me as ignoring criticism.

So you didn't address any of those initial criticisms and decided to press on even though many people (not just Vara) have pointed out that Libertanny isn't commendable for their regular GCR delegate actions.

Outer Sparta wrote:

Aivintis wrote:“ and the author ignored the feedback they were given regarding the Resolution”

Here’s what actually happened. Varanius responded with an initial message, 80% of which was just saying Serge is not commendable, Bran did everything better, that sort of thing. 50% of it was anything that could be addressed. So I addressed it. I cleared up misconceptions, I explained my reasoning, and I challenged claims such as “Paradoxical is just a generic event and TWP does them better”. Varanius ignored everything he could not reply to with his signature “snark”. I asked for him to respond or acknowledge the parts of my response that he left out, and he ignored that too. So I ignored him. And then he cries that I ignore criticism and suddenly everyone is saying that I ignore criticism. I address this. Explain the situation. And somehow you still see me as ignoring criticism.

So you didn't address any of those initial criticisms and decided to press on even though many people (not just Vara) have pointed out that Libertanny isn't commendable for their regular GCR delegate actions.

I did address the initial criticisms, and I said that in my response to Europeia’s dispatch.

As for the “GCR delegate” argument, I addressed that too, mainly by addressing that I can’t address something so vague and fundamentally opposed to the very concept of a commendation. That I can’t address a call to delete the whole thing.

“ The practice of including the legislature in treaty negotiations I don't recall improving the efficiency much, and I don't believe it was continued after his Delegacy.” — Gorundu, TRR recommendation

It did, because instead of having weeks of debating semantics in the Magi, we only had a few days of discussing the overall concept. And it continues to be used to this day - and was used for the Aurora Covenant and Alpaca Treaty following Serge’s delegacy.

You know, you can actually make all of these posts into one.

Aivintis wrote:As for the “GCR delegate” argument, I addressed that too, mainly by addressing that I can’t address something so vague and fundamentally opposed to the very concept of a commendation.

"I addressed it by addressing that I can't address it" is a sequence of words that my eyeballs really hate you for typing.

Also.. you could address it. I've seen the GCR delegate argument successfully combated in the SC before. Honestly, Aivintis, it may be better for you to just take a day away from the thread and gather yourself. Letting Vara get under your skin, only focusing on the criticisms, the rapid-fire posting, the fact the proposal is failing - if you aren't stressed the hell out, then you're not far from reaching that point.

RiderSyl wrote:

Aivintis wrote:As for the “GCR delegate” argument, I addressed that too, mainly by addressing that I can’t address something so vague and fundamentally opposed to the very concept of a commendation.

"I addressed it by addressing that I can't address it" is a sequence of words that my eyeballs really hate you for typing.

Also.. you could address it. I've seen the GCR delegate argument successfully combated in the SC before. Honestly, Aivintis, it may be better for you to just take a day away from the thread and gather yourself. Letting Vara get under your skin, only focusing on the criticisms, the rapid-fire posting, the fact the proposal is failing - if you aren't stressed the hell out, then you're not far from reaching that point.

I address your comment about my address by addressing that I do not wish to address the matter in which you have addressed and wish for me to address.

Also, I address your following address by agreeing wholeheartedly with your correct address, and I address that I am indeed stressed the hell out.

To be Honest, I dont think [AT VOTE] Commend Libertanny will pass tbh.

Polomon Islands wrote:To be Honest, I dont think [AT VOTE] Commend Libertanny will pass tbh.

Interesting take

Concrete Slab wrote:

Polomon Islands wrote:To be Honest, I dont think [AT VOTE] Commend Libertanny will pass tbh.

Interesting take

I'm being serious. No one is liking the General Assembly and the Security Council proposals for some reason.
I mean voters can say why they vote against or with it.

Polomon Islands wrote:

Concrete Slab wrote:Interesting take

I'm being serious. No one is liking the General Assembly and the Security Council proposals for some reason.
I mean voters can say why they vote against or with it.

In other breaking news, rain is wet. Back to you Tom........

Now here is a question for you Dungtoper, do you know WHY people are voting against? The reasons were laid out in this very thread multiple times.