NATION

PASSWORD

[AT VOTE] Gay Panic Defense Ban

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

[AT VOTE] Gay Panic Defense Ban

Postby Crowheim » Mon Feb 01, 2021 12:16 pm

This is a relative shot in the dark of a proposal but it’s been swirling around my head for some time, so I figured I should draft something out and see the feedback and thoughts on it.

For clarification I’m the same person as Penguin Palace and Titanne.

Image

Gay Panic Defense Ban

Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Mild


Commending previous efforts passed in these hallowed halls which advanced the civil rights of those who do not identify as heterosexual or cisgender,

Recognizing that there is still much work to be done in the securing of equality and justice for members of the LGBTQ+ community, as the previously passed resolutions could only cover so much ground,

Noting one of the most egregious offenses against these rights which is still in existence: the Gay Panic Defense, often used by aggressors of assault and murder to justify their actions due to their perception of one's sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity, an argument which would have the finder of fact in the relevant courtroom believe that one's sex, sexual orientation or gender identity makes it acceptable to commit a violent crime against them,

Realizing that this justification rarely if ever is actually accurate to the circumstances of an assault or murder, and that when it is, the argument is rooted in bigotry, homophobia and transphobia which should not be logic accepted or utilized by a jury or judge in any court of law,

This legislature enacts the following:

The perception, whether true or not, of a person's sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity may not be used as a defence to a criminal offence, excuse or justification of criminal conduct, or evidence for mitigating a criminal offence's severity in sentencing.

The use of force against another individual is not justified by the mere discovery, knowledge, or disclosure of that individual's sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

Co-authored with Imperium Anglorum.
Last edited by Sedgistan on Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:21 am, edited 28 times in total.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Hulldom
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 45
Founded: Nov 16, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Hulldom » Mon Feb 01, 2021 1:58 pm

Crowheim wrote:

The Gay Panic Defense Ban

Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant


The General Assembly,

Commending previous efforts passed in these hallowed halls which advanced the civil rights of those who do not identify as heterosexual or cisgender,

Recognizing that there is still much work to be done in the securing of equality and justice for members of the LGBTQ+ community (those who are not cisgender or heterosexual),

Noting one of the most egregious offenses against these rights which is still in existence; the Gay Panic Defense, often used by aggressors of assault and murder to justify their actions under the logic that they thought the transgender or gay victim was attempting to become involved romantically or sexually with the aggressor,

Realizing that this justification rarely if ever is actually accurate to the circumstances of an assault or murder, and that when it is, it is built on arguments that bigotry, homophobia and transphobia, which should not be acceptable or present in any court of law,

...hereby mandates,

I) That the so-called Gay Panic Defense be disallowed in the court of law in all member states of the World Assembly,

II) That a commission selected by this body will be established to provide compensation to the families of previous victims of this legal strategy, as well as the victim his or herself, if applicable.

"The Hulldomian delegation is very much in favor of this resolution as we very much appreciate the sentiments behind this resolution. However, we have a list of edits we would make on this resolution. They would appear more in boldface, or more appreciably black than grey, but our legation assistant spent the money we should've used to buy ink for the printer on lobster."

1. Adding the bit after the "LGBTQ+ community" in the Recognizing clause is superfluous.

2. A colon after "in existence" in the Noting clause would be better.

3. In the realizing clause, it would be better for the latter part of the clause to read "arguments rooted in bigotry, homophobia, and transphobia", you can also eliminate the comma after that.

4. Don't need the ellipses before hereby. Just have it be "Hereby mandates:"

5. (More of a dealer's choice play here) Add a verb after "Gay Panic Defense" in point I, potentially shall.

6. Using no pronouns would be preferable to "his or herself", it would also be more inclusive towards those who use they/them pronouns or other pronouns.
Card fiend. WA-current alt of Boston Castle.
WA Ambassador: Emile Rosenkranz.

Views not those of Thaecia and her government. Though that should've been obvious.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21011
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Feb 01, 2021 2:39 pm

1) "Gay Panic Defense" most certainly requires a definition.
2) Is this proposal meant to suggest that current WA law does not already prevent this through its anti-discrimination law?
THERE IS NO WAR IN BA SING SE
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Viceroy for The East Pacific

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:12 pm

Hulldom wrote:
Crowheim wrote:

The Gay Panic Defense Ban

Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant


The General Assembly,

Commending previous efforts passed in these hallowed halls which advanced the civil rights of those who do not identify as heterosexual or cisgender,

Recognizing that there is still much work to be done in the securing of equality and justice for members of the LGBTQ+ community (those who are not cisgender or heterosexual),

Noting one of the most egregious offenses against these rights which is still in existence; the Gay Panic Defense, often used by aggressors of assault and murder to justify their actions under the logic that they thought the transgender or gay victim was attempting to become involved romantically or sexually with the aggressor,

Realizing that this justification rarely if ever is actually accurate to the circumstances of an assault or murder, and that when it is, it is built on arguments that bigotry, homophobia and transphobia, which should not be acceptable or present in any court of law,

...hereby mandates,

I) That the so-called Gay Panic Defense be disallowed in the court of law in all member states of the World Assembly,

II) That a commission selected by this body will be established to provide compensation to the families of previous victims of this legal strategy, as well as the victim his or herself, if applicable.

"The Hulldomian delegation is very much in favor of this resolution as we very much appreciate the sentiments behind this resolution. However, we have a list of edits we would make on this resolution. They would appear more in boldface, or more appreciably black than grey, but our legation assistant spent the money we should've used to buy ink for the printer on lobster."

1. Adding the bit after the "LGBTQ+ community" in the Recognizing clause is superfluous.

2. A colon after "in existence" in the Noting clause would be better.

3. In the realizing clause, it would be better for the latter part of the clause to read "arguments rooted in bigotry, homophobia, and transphobia", you can also eliminate the comma after that.

4. Don't need the ellipses before hereby. Just have it be "Hereby mandates:"

5. (More of a dealer's choice play here) Add a verb after "Gay Panic Defense" in point I, potentially shall.

6. Using no pronouns would be preferable to "his or herself", it would also be more inclusive towards those who use they/them pronouns or other pronouns.

Addressed all of these points.
Wallenburg wrote:1) "Gay Panic Defense" most certainly requires a definition.
2) Is this proposal meant to suggest that current WA law does not already prevent this through its anti-discrimination law?

1) Noted.
2) I think current WA law is a bit vague and while it takes great strides in broadly limiting discrimination and these sorts of practices, I think in this particular area it is a bit lacking, so it can never hurt to set it in stone.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Ionida
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 54
Founded: Jan 27, 2021
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ionida » Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:55 pm

Although, Ambassador, the Commonwealth is in favour of this resolution, it doesn't agree that there should be a dedicated comission. This would be needless bureaucracy; existing charitable initiatives or organisations could deal with this, or cash payment could be ordered by a judge in court as a result of a trial for hate speech/anti-LGBTQ+ offences to be paid to the victim (or family) by the offender or government.
- Governmental Delegation for WA Human Rights Board
Last edited by Ionida on Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'From devout service arises freedom'

Member of LITA

Ionida's views are not necessarily representative of RL views.
1NSD = 1.16IDD

User avatar
Purple Hyacinth
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 14
Founded: May 17, 2020
Democratic Socialists

Postby Purple Hyacinth » Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:04 pm

I support the idea, although my inexperience in WA means that I can't really evaluate the quality of the proposal :P

Quick suggestion: you may want to include, by name, the "Trans Panic Defense" as well.

User avatar
Ardiveds
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 423
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:47 pm

Ionida wrote:Although, Ambassador, the Commonwealth is in favour of this resolution, it doesn't agree that there should be a dedicated comission. This would be needless bureaucracy; existing charitable initiatives or organisations could deal with this, or cash payment could be ordered by a judge in court as a result of a trial for hate speech/anti-LGBTQ+ offences to be paid to the victim (or family) by the offender or government.
- Governmental Delegation for WA Human Rights Board

"We share this opinion as well and would like to question the necessity of compensating the family of the victim, atleast in cases where the victim himself/herself is still alive and legally competent. What if the immediate family of the victim themselves are disapproving of the victim's sexual identity?"
If the ambassador acts like an ambassador, it's probably Delegate Arthur.
If he acts like an edgy teen, it's probably definitely Delegate Jim.... it's always Jim

User avatar
Old Hope
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1009
Founded: Sep 21, 2014
Tyranny by Majority

Postby Old Hope » Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:33 am

Crowheim wrote:This is a relative shot in the dark of a proposal but it’s been swirling around my head for some time, so I figured I should draft something out and see the feedback and thoughts on it.

For clarification I’m the same person as Penguin Palace and Titanne.


The Gay Panic Defense Ban

Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant


The General Assembly,

Commending previous efforts passed in these hallowed halls which advanced the civil rights of those who do not identify as heterosexual or cisgender,

Recognizing that there is still much work to be done in the securing of equality and justice for members of the LGBTQ+ community, as the previous resolutions could only cover so much ground,

Noting one of the most egregious offenses against these rights which is still in existence: the Gay Panic Defense, often used by aggressors of assault and murder to justify their actions under the logic that they thought the transgender or gay victim was attempting to become involved romantically or sexually with the aggressor,

Defining Gay Panic Defense as a legal strategy in which a defendant claims they acted in a state of temporary insanity, diminished capacity, or self-defence, committing assault or murder, because of unwanted same-sex sexual advances.

Realizing that this justification rarely if ever is actually accurate to the circumstances of an assault or murder, and that when it is, the argument is rooted in bigotry, homophobia and transphobia which should not be acceptable or present in any court of law,

hereby mandates:

I) That the so-called Gay Panic Defense shall be disallowed in the court of law in all member states of the World Assembly,

II) That a commission selected by this body will be established to provide compensation to the families of previous victims of this legal strategy, as well as the victim themselves, if applicable.

This needs some polishing. "Sexual advances" is a very broad term. A bit too broad because it also includes physical actions also considered to be sexual assault.

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:23 am

Ardiveds wrote:
Ionida wrote:Although, Ambassador, the Commonwealth is in favour of this resolution, it doesn't agree that there should be a dedicated comission. This would be needless bureaucracy; existing charitable initiatives or organisations could deal with this, or cash payment could be ordered by a judge in court as a result of a trial for hate speech/anti-LGBTQ+ offences to be paid to the victim (or family) by the offender or government.
- Governmental Delegation for WA Human Rights Board

"We share this opinion as well and would like to question the necessity of compensating the family of the victim, atleast in cases where the victim himself/herself is still alive and legally competent. What if the immediate family of the victim themselves are disapproving of the victim's sexual identity?"

"We have adjusted the proposed mandate so that renumeration is only provided in cases where the victim cannot receive it, and left wording deliberately vague so that the commission may decide whether such compensation is necessary at all, for cases like the one you referenced."
Old Hope wrote:
Crowheim wrote:This is a relative shot in the dark of a proposal but it’s been swirling around my head for some time, so I figured I should draft something out and see the feedback and thoughts on it.

For clarification I’m the same person as Penguin Palace and Titanne.


The Gay Panic Defense Ban

Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Significant


The General Assembly,

Commending previous efforts passed in these hallowed halls which advanced the civil rights of those who do not identify as heterosexual or cisgender,

Recognizing that there is still much work to be done in the securing of equality and justice for members of the LGBTQ+ community, as the previous resolutions could only cover so much ground,

Noting one of the most egregious offenses against these rights which is still in existence: the Gay Panic Defense, often used by aggressors of assault and murder to justify their actions under the logic that they thought the transgender or gay victim was attempting to become involved romantically or sexually with the aggressor,

Defining Gay Panic Defense as a legal strategy in which a defendant claims they acted in a state of temporary insanity, diminished capacity, or self-defence, committing assault or murder, because of unwanted same-sex sexual advances.

Realizing that this justification rarely if ever is actually accurate to the circumstances of an assault or murder, and that when it is, the argument is rooted in bigotry, homophobia and transphobia which should not be acceptable or present in any court of law,

hereby mandates:

I) That the so-called Gay Panic Defense shall be disallowed in the court of law in all member states of the World Assembly,

II) That a commission selected by this body will be established to provide compensation to the families of previous victims of this legal strategy, as well as the victim themselves, if applicable.

This needs some polishing. "Sexual advances" is a very broad term. A bit too broad because it also includes physical actions also considered to be sexual assault.

Edited.
Purple Hyacinth wrote:I support the idea, although my inexperience in WA means that I can't really evaluate the quality of the proposal :P

Quick suggestion: you may want to include, by name, the "Trans Panic Defense" as well.

Added into the mandate section.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Tinhampton
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7755
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Tinhampton » Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:30 am

Crowheim wrote:a commission selected by this body

Are you absolutely sure that this doesn't violate the rule against proposals defining how committee members are chosen? :P

Wallenburg wrote:1) "Gay Panic Defense" most certainly requires a definition.

This, except replace "Gay" with "Trans" this time
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 319,372): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540
Other achievements: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; -45 Darkspawn Kill Points; current WA Delegate of Auctor; "Tinhampton? the man's literally god"
Who am I, really? 45yo Tory woman; Cambridge graduate; possibly very controversial; currently simping for Marie Newman

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21011
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:47 pm

Tinhampton wrote:
Crowheim wrote:a commission selected by this body

Are you absolutely sure that this doesn't violate the rule against proposals defining how committee members are chosen? :P

Wallenburg wrote:1) "Gay Panic Defense" most certainly requires a definition.

This, except replace "Gay" with "Trans" this time

By the nature of definitions, they could make it cover both. I'm not sure why the mandates were separated to distinguish the two but no attempt was made to actually define the new term.
Last edited by Wallenburg on Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
THERE IS NO WAR IN BA SING SE
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Viceroy for The East Pacific

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15384
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:56 am

OOC: Covered by CoCR already.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Coronavirus related. This too. And this. These are all jokes. This isn't. This is, again, but it's also the last one.
Apologies for absences, RL has been hectic, nothing to do with COVID-19, I'm just busy with other things than NS.

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:31 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Tinhampton wrote:Are you absolutely sure that this doesn't violate the rule against proposals defining how committee members are chosen? :P


This, except replace "Gay" with "Trans" this time

By the nature of definitions, they could make it cover both. I'm not sure why the mandates were separated to distinguish the two but no attempt was made to actually define the new term.

Noted, I'll mush the two together both in definitions and mandate.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6464
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:34 pm

I would capitalize the 'H' in "hereby". Besides that, full support.
Alan Moore wrote:People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
Authorship Dispatch
SapplyValues
WA Discord Server
WA Ambassador: Slick McCooley

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:55 pm

Greater Cesnica wrote:I would capitalize the 'H' in "hereby". Besides that, full support.

Edited, and thank you!
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Tinhampton
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7755
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Tinhampton » Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:28 am

Gay Panic Defense Ban or The Gay Panic Defense Ban? Be consistent :P
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 319,372): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540
Other achievements: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; -45 Darkspawn Kill Points; current WA Delegate of Auctor; "Tinhampton? the man's literally god"
Who am I, really? 45yo Tory woman; Cambridge graduate; possibly very controversial; currently simping for Marie Newman

User avatar
Goobergunchia
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 1720
Founded: Antiquity
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Goobergunchia » Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:56 am

In the definition clause we wish to note that it's spelled "perceived", not "percieved".

We are also unsure if the "despite this often not being the case," language is not superfluous.

Madeleine Kofelgas
Deputy Ambassador to the World Assembly
Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia

User avatar
Barfleur
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 410
Founded: Mar 04, 2019
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Barfleur » Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:48 pm

"Ambassador, my delegation offers its support to this proposal. We think such action is long overdue. As a matter of personal styling, I would recommend that you define 'gay panic defense' and 'trans panic defense' individually, and that you move the definitions after the operative clause ('hereby mandates:'). I also recommend defining 'sexual assault,' since, under your proposed legislation, it would be a valid defense in a murder trial. Such an important distinction, in my mind, merits a clear definition."
Barfleur: Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno
Citizen of The East Pacific
“Sweatpants are a sign of defeat. You lost control of your life so you bought some sweatpants.”
― Karl Lagerfeld
Ambassador: Roger MacGeorge
Military Attaché: Colonel Lyndon Q. Ralston
Co-author, GA#534.
The Barfleurian World Assembly Mission can be found at Room 1903, Floor 19, WAHQ.

User avatar
Romextly
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8827
Founded: Nov 10, 2018
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Romextly » Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:52 pm

Aight I'ma continue to list this as another laws I'll ignore

News:Iron Pact beginning to move forward | Aquila and the RPS gain more traction in election | John Cena visited a tequila bar

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:28 pm

Tinhampton wrote:Gay Panic Defense Ban or The Gay Panic Defense Ban? Be consistent :P

Noted, will fix.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Crowheim
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:37 pm

Barfleur wrote:"Ambassador, my delegation offers its support to this proposal. We think such action is long overdue. As a matter of personal styling, I would recommend that you define 'gay panic defense' and 'trans panic defense' individually, and that you move the definitions after the operative clause ('hereby mandates:'). I also recommend defining 'sexual assault,' since, under your proposed legislation, it would be a valid defense in a murder trial. Such an important distinction, in my mind, merits a clear definition."
Goobergunchia wrote:In the definition clause we wish to note that it's spelled "perceived", not "percieved".

We are also unsure if the "despite this often not being the case," language is not superfluous.

Madeleine Kofelgas
Deputy Ambassador to the World Assembly
Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia

Noted and fixed, to both of you.
Writer and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5717
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Capitalizt

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Sun Feb 07, 2021 4:36 pm

Do you actually think by making it easier to convict criminal suspects, you are increasing civil liberties?
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Tinfect
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5165
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Tinfect » Sun Feb 07, 2021 5:14 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Do you actually think by making it easier to convict criminal suspects, you are increasing civil liberties?


OOC:
I think it works; it means that gay and trans people can't be murdered without the appropriate legal consequences. This argument only really works if you think it is a civil liberty to randomly murder people.
Last edited by Tinfect on Sun Feb 07, 2021 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Raslin Seretis, Imperial Diplomatic Envoy, Male
Tolarn Feren, Civil Oversight Representative, Male
Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight Representative, Female


Bisexual, Transgender (She/Her), Native-American, and Actual CommunistTM.

Imperium Central News Network: Preliminary trials of Military Doctrinal Reform prototypes to begin; IRPC 5-115, 5-298, 5-076 public details, Project Lead interviews released | Aeravahn occupation expands to 17% of the Exterior Territories, Internal Security orders full-stop to Civilian expeditions to Exterior | TCO - Vigilant Star declared missing following exit of Iraet orbital region | Indomitable Bastard #283
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Ardiveds
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 423
Founded: Feb 28, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ardiveds » Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:01 pm

Tinfect wrote:
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Do you actually think by making it easier to convict criminal suspects, you are increasing civil liberties?


OOC:
I think it works; it means that gay and trans people can't be murdered without the appropriate legal consequences. This argument only really works if you think it is a civil liberty to randomly murder people.

OOC: It could be argued that the option to use gay panic defence is a civil liberty, just one that's discriminatory and ethically questionable. On the other hand, this doesn't really make it illegal to kill gay or trans people, that was already illegal under CoCR.
Last edited by Ardiveds on Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If the ambassador acts like an ambassador, it's probably Delegate Arthur.
If he acts like an edgy teen, it's probably definitely Delegate Jim.... it's always Jim

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5717
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Capitalizt

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Mon Feb 08, 2021 4:05 am

It was merely a game-stats query -- nothing else.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anomalokaris

Advertisement

Remove ads