PASSED: Liberate belgium

[Yelda]

We see no reason to blame the distinguished former ambassador from Knootoss for the events of October 2003.

Well, Koopman did have a reputation for setting things on fire....

[Goobergunchia]

We see no reason to blame the distinguished former ambassador from Knootoss for the events of October 2003.

Well, Koopman did have a reputation for setting things on fire....

We cannot deny that.

Lord Evif, etc., etc.

[Northern Chittowa]

I have to say i find it slightly amusing that the likes of Urgench are complaining about this liberation proposal and the apparent cavalier attitude of the natives of Belgium. The natives of Belgium for one had no idea this liberation was going to take place and as such to say they should have accounted for that in any future plans that they might have had is the same as saying that we in real life should account for any surprise that will happen next week, next year or even in the next decade. Indeed most the defenders, bar those in the upper echelons of power, even knew what was going to happen till an hour beforehand. It is that surprise which eventually helped to free the region from invader control.

This resolution was drafted, put up for consideration and is now at vote for the sole reason that Mencer, Macedon and the like had effectively put the noose around the regions neck and had their hand on the lever ready to wring it by the neck until its death. Because defenders actually got in there before this liberation was able to pass should not mean that this fact is ignored.

Not one member of Belgium, the defender community or anyone else for that matter apart from a few select individuals seem to think that Belgium are wasting the SC’s time, or indeed was only created to cater to the needs of Belgium. This resolution is going to pass, we all know it and as such the PW will fall and invaders will be able to try again to take it if they so wish, however i see no reason why the natives of any region let alone Belgium should have the option to repel the resolution at a future date when the need for it has surpassed. Surely that was always going to be the case even when the resolution passed and the region was liberated?

Also the nation of Vinoslavia, a little bit of looking around and it seems that you yourself come from an imperialist region who have ties to mencer and as such it is of no surprise you are upset at this proposal. Thats fair enough, and i have no problems with that, but i must say i find it interesting that you call the region pathetic just for managing to return itself to native control...

Have you actually read what I've written or are you just jumping on some kind of bandwagon ? Let me make this clear, again, I have no problem with the resolution at vote, if Belgium want to continue to be liberated by the WA fine if they don't also fine.

We are told that the player community which Belgium belongs to has miraculous powers to control the vote on these kinds of resolutions, therefore it seems reasonable to assume that if Belgium made up its mind what it wanted reasonably quickly it could campaign to have the vote be changed to whatever outcome suits them best.

Instead of that representatives from Belgium have said they can't organise themselves properly to make any decisions at all and without a by-your-leave think it's perfectly OK to say they wont bother their arses trying to get a decision made and they'll just take their sweet time and then waste the SC's time with a repeal we could have avoided if they feel like introducing one at some point in the future.

Frankly a region which has been moaning and complaining about being dominated and ethnically cleansed or whatever by Macedon for ages and on who's behalf a campaign for SC liberation has been in the pipeline for a long time might have discussed what they might do if defenders decided to liberate them while a Liberation resolution was at vote, and certainly might be able to offer some kind of opinion on how it thought delegates and members should vote under such circumstances.

But perhaps such forethought is too much to ask, if I were in their shoes it's something I would have thought of.

Oh give it a rest will you. Of course i have read what you have posted before and no, im not just jumping on the ‘bandwagon’ as you say...Dear me.

Lets give you another view on this then shall we. You are treating Belgium as a region which has a working and active government, one that wasn’t in a state of half activity when it was invaded. It unfortunate case is that it was. As a result, for it to plan so perfectly like you seem to wish it had would have been very hard and next to impossible. You are complaining and moaning at those from that region for not taking into account every little detail possible and that is just ridiculous.

Not one member have said they wont bother trying to make a decision on a repel etc, they have just said they want some time and pretty much everyone here agrees apart from yourself. I see you didn’t like one example giving against you so how bout this one. For them to make plans for a liberation attempt before the liberation proposal had gone through is like me making huge consistencies for losing my job next week when im working at Britain’s biggest supermarket and i know that it will not go bust any time soon. That im sure you agree sounds pretty impossible as it seemed was a liberation attempt before the proposal had gone through.

Martyrdoom, thats fair enough then i can see where your coming from, however under native control a PW would not have fully restricted free entry. Indeed for now its a security measure to prevent further invasions for instance, as will no doubt surely come due to the high profile nature of the region now. In the future it would only be introduced once/if they decided to refound the region. The implementation of the PW in these two instances are not the same as the implementation under Macedon rule, which would have killed the region effectively ending free entry forever. Also if you forget about the definition of defending, i think you forget that the Liberation proposal format was created due to the invader/defender side of the game. To remove that equation and it doesn’t really make much sense to have these type of proposals at all

[Ardchoille]

*reminds the usual suspects that this is an international body in which a certain level of diplomatic behaviour is expected*

*adds some new names to list of "usual suspects"*

[Northern Chittowa]

*reminds the usual suspects that this is an international body in which a certain level of diplomatic behaviour is expected*

*adds some new names to list of "usual suspects"*

If thats to me, which if im honest would be called for, my apologies

[Vinoslavia]

Everything written here by Urgench has been true and full of fair points. I have nothing but critisism for Belgium and suggest that you prepare for when the password gets removed. Macedon won't be happy.

However although Urgench talks of the ignorance of the Beligian natives I believe that this is part of much wider ignorance embedded in the wider community of the game at the moment. This is even further highlighted by the fact that in spite of recent events most have continued to vote blindly in favour of the resolution at vote. I myself and the region of Great Britain have changed our votes from against to in favour in the light of recent events. My present to you Gooberblahh or whatever you are called.

[Naivetry]

As promised, the official statement has been posted for your consideration, here: viewtopic.php?p=314282#p314282

[Ellezelles]

i think i can speak for the belgians.

As some have said before, we're not the organised bunch that some expect us to be. We actually are pretty shattered, but we mostly stand for the same principles.

In the light of recent events, most (i haven't heard any substantial objections yet ) of us think that it is the best to get on with this resolution. With doing so we can stay a founderless region, a thing we've been very proud of and we feel is a part of our region. On the other hand we don't want to lock up our region.

If the resolution is passed (i'd be surprised if it wouldn't) i think, and most belgians agree on me with that, that we're in the best possible situation.

We realise that in this way we won't be safe for invaders, but we will always be able to defend ourselves. An invader force won't be able to put a password on the region anyway.

As to the accusations that Urgench has made towards us, i don't have a clue what he's trying to prove here. Are we bad people that are here to ruin other people's fun playing this game?? I don't think so. Are we too influential??? I don't think so either.

We weren't the ones pushing for this resolution to exist, of cours we were glad to be the reason it has come to exist, but it has only come to existance because people were fed up with the fact that invaders/griefers could just destroy communities.

So please, cut the crap, i can understand you don't like the liberation resolution type, but there are other topics if you don't agree with it.

[Naivetry]

The presumption that it was "incredibly unlikely" has been proven spectacularly false by reality no ? Had anyone in Belgium been in any way realistic they too might have been able to predict and plan for this outcome. Instead they expect the SC to wait on them and deal with their total lack of common sense.

Your argument is patently flawed, good ambassador, unless you are arguing that all historical events have had an equal probability of occurring simply because, post facto, they occurred.

The fact that someone has won the lottery does not mean that they were not "incredibly unlikely" to win it when they bought the ticket.

And in this case, the natives of Belgium were unaware that a ticket had even been purchased.

The resolution has my continued support going forward, as it is the expressed wishes of those residents of Belgium who have spoken up here that the proposal to Liberate Belgium be passed.

[Urgench]

The presumption that it was "incredibly unlikely" has been proven spectacularly false by reality no ? Had anyone in Belgium been in any way realistic they too might have been able to predict and plan for this outcome. Instead they expect the SC to wait on them and deal with their total lack of common sense.

Your argument is patently flawed, good ambassador, unless you are arguing that all historical events have had an equal probability of occurring simply because, post facto, they occurred.

The fact that someone has won the lottery does not mean that they were not "incredibly unlikely" to win it when they bought the ticket.

And in this case, the natives of Belgium were unaware that a ticket had even been purchased.

The resolution has my continued support going forward, as it is the expressed wishes of those residents of Belgium who have spoken up here that the proposal to Liberate Belgium be passed.

Regardless of how likely or indeed unlikely it might be, I have on numerous occassions made intricate and fascinating plans for what I would do in the eventuality that I ever won the Lottery. I don't even buy tickets.

The fact that Belgium has now made up its mind rather closes the matter for me, so long as a repeal of this Liberation does not come before this organisation for vote that is.

[Urgench]

So please, cut the crap, i can understand you don't like the liberation resolution type, but there are other topics if you don't agree with it.

How do you come by that understanding and why is it relevant?

[Mad Sheep Railgun]

Wait, wasn't France refounded by defenders while a "Liberate France" resolution was racing to quorum? Not exactly the same circumstances, admittedly, but this makes twice now in recent history that defenders have been able to do their jobs without WA assistance. Which brings forth the question: is this Liberation category really even necessary?

[The Sedge]

The only reason that defenders re-founded France is that the invader occupiers attempted to re-found it as a response to the 'Liberate France' proposal.

[Mad Sheep Railgun]

The only reason that defenders re-founded France is that the invader occupiers attempted to re-found it as a response to the 'Liberate France' proposal.

OK, then from your point of view it is necessary because it has tipped the balance of power in favor of defender forces?

[Cocodian]

OK, then from your point of view it is necessary because it has tipped the balance of power in favor of defender forces?

It is need because it provides a catalyst for action whatever the outcome and therefore breaks the stalemate, which password protected regions, which have been invaded become.

In this case it caused the raiders to release the password to the region to more of their allies in order to reinforce it from the expected defender attack once the proposal had passed, which (I am guessing) is one of the reasons the password was recovered.

Therefore whether it passed of not, the resolution completed its purpose

[Mad Sheep Railgun]

Therefore whether it passed of not, the resolution completed its purpose

Can you see any circumstances in which raiders would make use of this new category, or is it intended only for defender use?

[Martyrdoom]

The only reason that defenders re-founded France is that the invader occupiers attempted to re-found it as a response to the 'Liberate France' proposal.

OK, then from your point of view it is necessary because it has tipped the balance of power in favor of defender forces?

Indeed, I'd argue it's more than tipped the balance. It's completely shattered it. As I've relayed in other threads, just look at the Belgium debacle in terms of actions/facts. Essentially we have this following scenario that completely undermines or contradicts the very philosophy on which liberation's own plausibility relies:

Forget who's who for the moment as the defintion of invading is taking the delegacy: Belgium has been invaded once again; the delegate replaced; a password installed; the new Belgium delegate has been banjecting at will (what can still technically be called) 'natives' and anyone else who is'nt on 'the list' as posted on the WFE and regional RMB.

That's exactly the same MO as that they've wanted to undo with Mencer, Macedon et al. How can we allow this state of affairs?!

Like I said, the whole thing stinks to high heaven!

Seriously, if we don't get rid of liberations, what about a "liberate the Security Council" proposal?!!

[Cocodian]

This resolution seems to be more suited for defenders, seeing as they are more likely to gain the necessary votes to pass the resolution.

I can see raiders using the resolution, but only if they work together in big enough numbers to compensate from the loss of the element of surprise, which the resolution causes.

[Travancore-Cochin]

Wait, wasn't France refounded by defenders while a "Liberate France" resolution was racing to quorum? Not exactly the same circumstances, admittedly, but this makes twice now in recent history that defenders have been able to do their jobs without WA assistance. Which brings forth the question: is this Liberation category really even necessary?

Yes, it is relevant.

Defenders were able to refound France only because of all the attention it got while it was targeted for liberation. Macedon, in a desperate attempt to derail the resolution, tried to refound the region - that's when defenders snatched it.

Likewise, defenders liberated Belgium before the resolution came to pass to have the effect of surprise. At least, that's what the official statement says.

[Urgench]

Well that "official statement" is appalling. The idea that the SC's processes should be abused and circumvented as a subterfuge to achieve the aims of specific player groups with axes to grind against other groups is just the sort of obnoxious partiality and sneaky corruption that this resolution should not be used for.

[The Sedge]

Why do you think we knew we could liberate Belgium before the resolution came to a vote? And even if we did, we could hardly have asked for the resolution to be taken down because we were planning to liberate the region.

[Urgench]

Why do you think we knew we could liberate Belgium before the resolution came to a vote? And even if we did, we could hardly have asked for the resolution to be taken down because we were planning to liberate the region.

It should be illegal for defenders to Liberate a region while a Liberation resolution is being voted on, the region should be treated almost as though it were under WA administration , the SC should not exist to make the work of Defenders easier, work which ends up making any WA intervention irrelevant or at worst an active hindrance. If a region is to be legally liberated by the WA then Defenders should do the WA the respect of postponing their own attempts, or alternatively contact the authors of a Liberation before it reaches quorum in order that they can request its removal from the proposals list.

Either defenders are organised enough to Liberate regions themselves or they are not, the WA should not be used to tip the balance of power in favour of defenders.

[West-Flanders]

Why do you think we knew we could liberate Belgium before the resolution came to a vote? And even if we did, we could hardly have asked for the resolution to be taken down because we were planning to liberate the region.

It should be illegal for defenders to Liberate a region while a Liberation resolution is being voted on, the region should be treated almost as though it were under WA administration , the SC should not exist to make the work of Defenders easier, work which ends up making any WA intervention irrelevant or at worst an active hindrance. If a region is to be legally liberated by the WA then Defenders should do the WA the respect of postponing their own attempts, or alternatively contact the authors of a Liberation before it reaches quorum in order that they can request its removal from the proposals list.

Either defenders are organised enough to Liberate regions themselves or they are not, the WA should not be used to tip the balance of power in favour of defenders.

If a region is to be legally liberated by the WA, in other words a liberation-resolution is approved, the region won't be actually liberated yet. The occupiers will still be there, it'll just mean the password is gone, just that.

The end justifies the means I guess. Wether the liberation-proposal was not yet approved or not, it doesn't really matter, the goal has been reached, Belgium is free again.

[The Sedge]

You do realise that the whole point of a liberation resolution is to then get the region liberated by defenders? Why should it matter if the resolution enables it to be done while its still being voted upon - the same outcome has been achieved, just earlier, which benefits the natives. Also, I thought the mods were quite clear that its not the WA that liberates the region afterwards - there can be no WA army - its defenders who have to actually restore the delegacy to the natives. And if we were to ask for the resolution to be taken down, it would make our job harder, as there would be no pressure on the invader delegate to spread the pw around to acquire reinforcements, it would give a clear warning to the invaders that we're about to liberate (meaning the delegate would be online), and should we fail, the password would be changed, and we'd have to start all over again with getting a proposal through the WA.

[Travancore-Cochin]

It should be illegal for defenders to Liberate a region while a Liberation resolution is being voted on, the region should be treated almost as though it were under WA administration , the SC should not exist to make the work of Defenders easier, work which ends up making any WA intervention irrelevant or at worst an active hindrance. If a region is to be legally liberated by the WA then Defenders should do the WA the respect of postponing their own attempts, or alternatively contact the authors of a Liberation before it reaches quorum in order that they can request its removal from the proposals list.

Just because the resolution name/type is "Liberation" doesn't mean that, upon being passed, it automatically ejects all griefers and puts natives in control.

The description of the type simply reads, "A resolution to strike down Delegate-imposed barriers to free entry in a region" and that's exactly what it does. The game doesn't differentiate between natives or defenders or invaders.