by Grays Harbor » Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:19 am
by Allrule » Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:42 am
by Travancore-Cochin » Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:09 pm
Grays Harbor wrote:Now that Belgium region has been liberated by several defender organizations, the griefers ejected, and a new password put in place...
I have to wonder if the current resolution passes, will it lift the new password, thereby making it open season for new raider/griefer groups to re-invade?
Grays Harbor wrote:Should those of us who were going to vete "yes" now change our vote to "no" so this does not happen?
Grays Harbor wrote:Or, can we get the resolution declared nul and void, and removed from the vote?
by Vinoslavia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:08 pm
Grays Harbor wrote:Now that Belgium region has been liberated by several defender organizations, the griefers ejected, and a new password put in place...
I have to wonder if the current resolution passes, will it lift the new password, thereby making it open season for new raider/griefer groups to re-invade?
Should those of us who were going to vete "yes" now change our vote to "no" so this does not happen?
Or, can we get the resolution declared nul and void, and removed from the vote?
by Mad Sheep Railgun » Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:13 pm
by Grays Harbor » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:04 pm
Allrule wrote:Wrong forum. Try Security Council.
Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:This belongs in the Security Council.
by Grays Harbor » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:04 pm
Vinoslavia wrote:Grays Harbor wrote:Now that Belgium region has been liberated by several defender organizations, the griefers ejected, and a new password put in place...
I have to wonder if the current resolution passes, will it lift the new password, thereby making it open season for new raider/griefer groups to re-invade?
Should those of us who were going to vete "yes" now change our vote to "no" so this does not happen?
Or, can we get the resolution declared nul and void, and removed from the vote?
No, You should slap yourself in the face for voting yes in the first place and now stick to your initial choice and continue to vote yes, In order to punish the pathetic residents of Belgium who devised this rubbish in the first place.
by The Sedge » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:14 pm
by Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:56 pm
by Mad Sheep Railgun » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:59 pm
Grays Harbor wrote:Allrule wrote:Wrong forum. Try Security Council.Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:This belongs in the Security Council.
excuse me. I should obviously be horsewhipped then.
do you have anything constructive to add besides pointing out the obvious error of my ways?
by Northern Chittowa » Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:24 pm
Vinoslavia wrote:Grays Harbor wrote:Now that Belgium region has been liberated by several defender organizations, the griefers ejected, and a new password put in place...
I have to wonder if the current resolution passes, will it lift the new password, thereby making it open season for new raider/griefer groups to re-invade?
Should those of us who were going to vete "yes" now change our vote to "no" so this does not happen?
Or, can we get the resolution declared nul and void, and removed from the vote?
No, You should slap yourself in the face for voting yes in the first place and now stick to your initial choice and continue to vote yes, In order to punish the pathetic residents of Belgium who devised this rubbish in the first place.
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:18 pm
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:It is best to see how the natives manage and then act according to their wishes. I am holding on at the moment.
by Goobergunchia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:45 pm
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:55 pm
by Goobergunchia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:09 pm
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:18 pm
Goobergunchia wrote:We hardly feel that the potential for two resolutions on a single subject -- one to adopt, the other to repeal -- constitutes special favoritism on the part of the Security Council. Many tedious General Assembly debates have dragged on over the course of two resolutions, with few minds being changed on either side. In this case, we simply wish to respect the sovereignty of Belgium. We would do the same to any other region being considered.
[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia
by Havensky » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:23 pm
by Goobergunchia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:28 pm
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:29 pm
Havensky wrote:Ambassador Kristopher Windcharmer shakes his head, only slightly amused some of the commentary.
"Well, as for me, I would much rather be talking about how to proceed from here now that Belgium is free rather than discussing the situation that existed as of last night.
The skies of Belgium are free and her people are now in the process of normalizing their region. Right now, their delegate has asked for the vote to continue as it was. We will respect their wishes. It's their region - it belongs to them.
I'd much rather have to go through the trouble of a repeal than to go back to the way things were - game over scenarios. While the resolution may not have served it's intended purpose, but the moment it hit quorum it still sent a message loud and clear that one way or another - the world would see a free Belgium."
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:31 pm
Goobergunchia wrote:We think that the observer from Urgench is attributing motives where none exist. While we would also prefer to not spend the time on a repeal vote, we feel that regional sovereignty is paramount.
The Liberal Unitary Republic cannot speak for the region of Belgium and their internal processes.
[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia
by Havensky » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:33 pm
by Goobergunchia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:36 pm
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm
Havensky wrote:From what I have observed, the Resolution to Liberate Belgium had to follow the same rules of Quorum as everyone else. I suspect the repeal will be the same way. So, I disagree that the WA has been giving Belgium impartial treatment. If I remember correctly, France hit quorum first before that region was liberated. (And thus, the resolution withdrawn)
And it's not as if the WA has been ignoring all the other captured regions all together - Liberate Chicago just hit quorum and there are a slew of liberation proposals that are in the pipeline. Belgium was just the first to come to a vote.
by Goobergunchia » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:44 pm
Urgench wrote:This is a totally unecessary waste of time and they should have been able to decide what course of action this set of perfectly predictable events might prompt, and certainly should be able to come to a decision in time to change the vote to whatever suits them.
by Urgench » Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:45 pm
Goobergunchia wrote:We fail to see how the sovereignty of any other region is being impacted by this. While certain hypothetical scenarios have been set forth, we see no point in discussing them until an actual proposal to repeal the liberation of Belgium has been tabled.
[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Retired Officer, Nasicournia
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: A Bloodred Moon, Muffinses
Advertisement