Advertisement
by Mahaj » Wed May 23, 2012 11:52 am
Pictria wrote:Against. Resolution is failing!
<Koth> I'm still going by the assumption that Mahaj is Unibot's kid brother or something
Kandarin(Naivetry): You're going to have a great NS career ahead of you if you want it, Mahaj. :)
<@Eluvatar> Why is SkyDip such a purist raiderist
<+frattastan> Because his region was never raided.
<+maxbarry> EarthAway: I guess I might dabble in raiding just to experience it better, but I would not like to raid regions of natives, so I'd probably be more interested in defense and liberations
by Mahaj » Wed May 23, 2012 11:54 am
Delegate Vinage wrote:
Going through the RMB you'll find they've made some homophobic comments in the past - Notably this comment but you'll find other similar ones if you look around the 15 - 20 day mark.
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Mahaj wrote:TBR will move one once its destroyed and refounded, and while you might be okay with region destroying, I'm not, and I will do what it takes to solve it, including helping to write a liberation proposal.
GGR, on the other hand, is woefully incompetent. Furthermore, based on influence levels, GGR's destroying will take far longer than this one will.
Anybody with reasonable priorities would see that trying to fix RORMS first makes more sense.
You're right, I love destroying Fascist regions. However, as far as I am aware, TBR rarely if ever refound - their original intention with RORMS was a tagging raid, as the RMB makes clear. It's only the defenders' complete lack of courage that's allowed them to get a password in place. The GGR, however, intend to refound TUKB. There is no argument for liberating RORMS first.
Also, some RORMS members support stoning gays based upon the Qu'ran. If you want to defend that, that's your choice, but really?
<Koth> I'm still going by the assumption that Mahaj is Unibot's kid brother or something
Kandarin(Naivetry): You're going to have a great NS career ahead of you if you want it, Mahaj. :)
<@Eluvatar> Why is SkyDip such a purist raiderist
<+frattastan> Because his region was never raided.
<+maxbarry> EarthAway: I guess I might dabble in raiding just to experience it better, but I would not like to raid regions of natives, so I'd probably be more interested in defense and liberations
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed May 23, 2012 12:12 pm
by Opaloka » Wed May 23, 2012 12:13 pm
by Cromarty » Wed May 23, 2012 12:17 pm
Please try to be coherent.
Good for TITO.TITO had to defend bazlantis's own backyard democratic socialist alliance
Wanna be a delusional Stalinist? Join the Red Fleet!Wanna be a defender join the red fleet (and do a little raiding too)
Nah, when I defended I preferred to do my fighting in regions, not in the technical forum.or TITO.
Wanna support nazis & anti-semite homophobic medievalists join UDL.
Cerian Quilor wrote:There's a difference between breaking the rules, and being well....Cromarty...
<Koth>all sexual orientations must unite under the relative sexiness of madjack
by Fischistan » Wed May 23, 2012 12:26 pm
Xavier D'Montagne
Fischistani Ambassador to the WA
Unibot II wrote:It's Carta. He CANNOT Fail. Only successes in reverse.
The Matthew Islands wrote:Knowledge is knowing the Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
Anthony Delasanta wrote:its was not genocide it was ethnic cleansing...
Socorra wrote:A religion-free abortion thread is like a meat-free hamburger.
by Crushing Our Enemies » Wed May 23, 2012 12:28 pm
Mahaj wrote:Delegate Vinage wrote:
Going through the RMB you'll find they've made some homophobic comments in the past - Notably this comment but you'll find other similar ones if you look around the 15 - 20 day mark.
And all those are after the raid... meaning that they were goaded into them by flaming raiders.
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed May 23, 2012 12:41 pm
Fischistan wrote:The UDL recently liberated Democratic Socialist Alliance from invaders. And don't even talk about being homophobic, because TITO will defend Muslim regions too. It's only nazis they don't defend (to my knowledge), and we will not defend nazis. So get over it.
by Sedgistan » Wed May 23, 2012 12:41 pm
Opaloka wrote:Cromarty wrote:You stay classy Opaloka!
Working classy! You stay out that UDL not good people not even good defenders. TITO had to defend bazlantis's own backyard democratic socialist alliance just recently. Wanna be a defender join the red fleet (and do a little raiding too) or TITO. Wanna support nazis & anti-semite homophobic medievalists join UDL.
by Sedgistan » Wed May 23, 2012 12:41 pm
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Fischistan wrote:The UDL recently liberated Democratic Socialist Alliance from invaders. And don't even talk about being homophobic, because TITO will defend Muslim regions too. It's only nazis they don't defend (to my knowledge), and we will not defend nazis. So get over it.
What about fascists? Will the UDL and FRA defend fascists?
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed May 23, 2012 12:47 pm
Fischistan wrote:AWARE that these natives have expressed their desire to return to their region and have subsequently gathered in the region of RORMS,
by Campinia » Wed May 23, 2012 12:51 pm
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Very well, back on topic it is.Fischistan wrote:AWARE that these natives have expressed their desire to return to their region and have subsequently gathered in the region of RORMS,
I'd argue that this makes the proposal somewhat less justified - if they are gathered in RORMS as a second home, as opposed to their old home of Region of Reunited Muslim States, then does their homeland actually need liberating, if they've established a new functioning community? I'd argue that it doesn't need liberating, much as they'd like it to be liberated.
by Skizzy Grey » Wed May 23, 2012 12:52 pm
Mahaj wrote:Delegate Vinage wrote:
Going through the RMB you'll find they've made some homophobic comments in the past - Notably this comment but you'll find other similar ones if you look around the 15 - 20 day mark.
And all those are after the raid... meaning that they were goaded into them by flaming raiders.
I feel sick game that the authorities are allowing gays to hide behind the invaders damage to this region. Is an offense to the authorities of the game, it is an offense for a Muslim people who live here and it shows that the invaders of the lovers of gay men is forbidden in the Koran.
by Al Horeya » Wed May 23, 2012 12:54 pm
by Goobergunchia » Wed May 23, 2012 12:55 pm
Al Horeya wrote:If RoRMS is liberated, it sets a precedent-all Invaded regions would have to be liberated. Unless we decide to play favorites, that is, in which case the only regions which we will liberate are the large, important, and/or connected ones.
Since I believe few will agree to that, the question should be rephrased: should Invasions be illegal? I, for one, do not believe they should be.
However, I do believe that adding the password should not be allowed. That is an unfair tactic. Otherwise, though, if the old RORMS nations want their region back, they will have to perform some political maneuvering.
by Campinia » Wed May 23, 2012 12:56 pm
Al Horeya wrote:If RoRMS is liberated, it sets a precedent-all Invaded regions would have to be liberated. Unless we decide to play favorites, that is, in which case the only regions which we will liberate are the large, important, and/or connected ones.
Since I believe few will agree to that, the question should be rephrased: should Invasions be illegal? I, for one, do not believe they should be.
However, I do believe that adding the password should not be allowed. That is an unfair tactic. Otherwise, though, if the old RORMS nations want their region back, they will have to perform some political maneuvering.
by Mallorea and Riva » Wed May 23, 2012 12:57 pm
Al Horeya wrote:If RoRMS is liberated, it sets a precedent-all Invaded regions would have to be liberated. Unless we decide to play favorites, that is, in which case the only regions which we will liberate are the large, important, and/or connected ones.
Since I believe few will agree to that, the question should be rephrased: should Invasions be illegal? I, for one, do not believe they should be.
However, I do believe that adding the password should not be allowed. That is an unfair tactic. Otherwise, though, if the old RORMS nations want their region back, they will have to perform some political maneuvering.
by Fischistan » Wed May 23, 2012 12:57 pm
Al Horeya wrote:If RoRMS is liberated, it sets a precedent-all Invaded regions would have to be liberated.
Xavier D'Montagne
Fischistani Ambassador to the WA
Unibot II wrote:It's Carta. He CANNOT Fail. Only successes in reverse.
The Matthew Islands wrote:Knowledge is knowing the Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
Anthony Delasanta wrote:its was not genocide it was ethnic cleansing...
Socorra wrote:A religion-free abortion thread is like a meat-free hamburger.
by Cerian Quilor » Wed May 23, 2012 1:01 pm
5 hours ago: Fischistan submitted a proposal to the Security Council Liberation Board entitled "Liberate Region of reunited muslim states".
I suppose you are referring to this nation who did not even bother to contact anyone in this region? Another example of complete arrogance and the disregard for Islamic nations in this game. The region that the proposer of that motion is in does not even have an embassy with us. I have sent them a short telegram asking them for an explanation of their actions. I am assuming that it was prompted out of an intrusive sense of altruism, a too-little-too-late attempt by defender aligned parties trying to recover from failure to support us or even offer us an explanation why they could not contact us about their failure to organise themselves, or the nation in question thought that they would attempt to aggrandize themselves while deliberately refusing to consult with any nations in this region.
Liberations motions are not universally regarded as a helpful thing. The proof is clearly visible in the region of Islam where the WASC 'Liberation' motion (which is no "liberation", all it does is remove the right of the elected delegate to password the region) and it prevented Muslim nations from passwording and refounding the region for over two years, the result being that the region was unable to be refounded before the Nazi founder returned to the game. Ask our previous delegate and other nations here, delegates of Islam have been powerless to bring about positive change in the region for years.
You better have a good explanation ready Fischistan as why you thought your ideas on our region were more important than the hundred people here. I bet you're not even a Muslim, just a wannabe who sticks their nose into other region's business.
Absolutely not.
As Director of Contracts, I am invoking Section VII Clause 3 of the Corporate Charter.3. In instances involving the interests of the Firm abroad, the Director of Contracts may order the Delegate to vote a certain way on Security Council Resolutions. The Delegate may appeal this order to the Senior Partners.
It is not in Wolfram and Hart's interests to take part in a this travesty of justice, it is an attempt by the Defenders to once again use the SC to interfere in a personal fight with regions like TBR. Wolfram and Hart should not be a party to this effort to turn the Security Council into a partisan engine.
Moreover, the fact that a much more important resulution to protect The United Kingdom of Britain from destruction by the forces of the Greater German Reich was taken down explicity so this one could go forward is completely inexcusable.
If you wish to appeal this decision to the Senior Partners, you may.
To clarify: By order of the Director of Contracts, under Section VII, Clause 3 of the Corporate Charter, the WA delegate of Wolram and Hart is to vote AGAINST this resolution..
by Goobergunchia » Wed May 23, 2012 1:07 pm
Cerian Quilor wrote:First of all, something from the deposted Delegate of the region, posted on the RMB of the refugee region.5 hours ago: Fischistan submitted a proposal to the Security Council Liberation Board entitled "Liberate Region of reunited muslim states".
I suppose you are referring to this nation who did not even bother to contact anyone in this region? Another example of complete arrogance and the disregard for Islamic nations in this game. The region that the proposer of that motion is in does not even have an embassy with us. I have sent them a short telegram asking them for an explanation of their actions. I am assuming that it was prompted out of an intrusive sense of altruism, a too-little-too-late attempt by defender aligned parties trying to recover from failure to support us or even offer us an explanation why they could not contact us about their failure to organise themselves, or the nation in question thought that they would attempt to aggrandize themselves while deliberately refusing to consult with any nations in this region.
Liberations motions are not universally regarded as a helpful thing. The proof is clearly visible in the region of Islam where the WASC 'Liberation' motion (which is no "liberation", all it does is remove the right of the elected delegate to password the region) and it prevented Muslim nations from passwording and refounding the region for over two years, the result being that the region was unable to be refounded before the Nazi founder returned to the game. Ask our previous delegate and other nations here, delegates of Islam have been powerless to bring about positive change in the region for years.
You better have a good explanation ready Fischistan as why you thought your ideas on our region were more important than the hundred people here. I bet you're not even a Muslim, just a wannabe who sticks their nose into other region's business.
by Fischistan » Wed May 23, 2012 1:09 pm
Cerian Quilor wrote:I suppose you are referring to this nation who did not even bother to contact anyone in this region?
Another example of complete arrogance and the disregard for Islamic nations in this game.
The region that the proposer of that motion is in does not even have an embassy with us.
I have sent them a short telegram asking them for an explanation of their actions.
Xavier D'Montagne
Fischistani Ambassador to the WA
Unibot II wrote:It's Carta. He CANNOT Fail. Only successes in reverse.
The Matthew Islands wrote:Knowledge is knowing the Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
Anthony Delasanta wrote:its was not genocide it was ethnic cleansing...
Socorra wrote:A religion-free abortion thread is like a meat-free hamburger.
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed May 23, 2012 1:11 pm
by Cerian Quilor » Wed May 23, 2012 1:23 pm
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:So, in other words, a Liberation proposal has been put forward on behalf of a group of people who don't want the person who put forward the Liberation proposal to Liberate them. There's a flaw in the logic of the proposal, then, methinks.
by Cowardly Pacifists » Wed May 23, 2012 2:11 pm
Cerian Quilor wrote:*snip*
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement