[PASSED] Liberate Christmas

by **Delegate Vinage** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:44 am

I, Lothar Prolark, World Assembly Delegate and Vice President of Europeia will be voting NAY on this proposal after a 2/12 internal vote decided said action. The resolution is inaccurate to what has transpired and, well, this and the messages sent along to Delegates smack of point-scoring rather than an actual concern for the region. Perhaps the author is upset they won't get an invite to Christmas for the festivities? Anyway, yes, we will be voting Nay.

by **Tibberiria** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:27 am

The region was inactive prior to this, correct? If so, then what's the big deal?

Voted No.

by **Zintai** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:45 am

It's completely possible to establish a community in a founderless region. And if any of the natives wanted the protection of a founder, they could have refounded it at any time.

I may not be the most experienced member of the World Assembly, but I do know what it's called when a group moves into a region in force, takes the delegate seat, password protects it, and ejects all the natives. And it isn't called "protection."

by **Damanucus** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:53 am

Hmmm, research seems to establish a question towards the region itself. For those in curiosity, the question is not, "does this region even require a liberation?" but more "what would be the result in either direction of the liberation?"

The answer to that question comes straight from the Factbook: it is the central region for Christmas-related activities. And this is an honourable position to hold, hopefully one that may earn the region a commendation. However, the only way this can be achieved is if the region is held independent of all others. Maybe even establish it as a puppet region. The invasion by Asgard doesn't seem to fit with this ideal of an independent Christmas region, and should this liberation fail that will forever be the case.

What if the liberation succeeds, and the region expires on its own? It's not a nice thought to have, and certainly not one which we intend to strive for, but sadly, if it comes to that, then we cannot say we didn't try. That we didn't try to save a region from possible bias and external pressures in regards to the arrangement of certain festivities. That we didn't try to help re-establish a neutral regional body for the arrangement of such activities. That we didn't try—as ironic and cliche as this'll sound—to save Christmas.

My vote sits for this liberation.

Stephanie Orman
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

by **Yes Im Biop** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:55 am

Opposed. Do you have areal reason for wanting them adulterated?

by **Of the Free Socialist Territories** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:18 am

Mahaj, evidently not appreciating the potential LOL value of a script that TGs all Delegates, including Delegates who are leading invasions, wrote:Hey there!
I submitted a proposal called Liberate Christmas, and I need your support! 1) Christmas is in danger of being stolen and kept as a trophy, and the native community, the people who like you worked hard to build their region, 2) are getting their hard work destroyed by petty bullies. NationStates as a whole needs to step up and protect its members, 3) and you play a vital role in this.
4) Please, don't let Christmas get stolen, Approve Liberate Christmas!
Thanks,
Mahaj

1) Here's the WFE of Christmas:
"Founded over two years ago by Santas helper, Christmas was annexed as a colony of Asgard on 19 July 2012. It is now the cultural hub of NationStates for Christmas and other festivities related to winter holidays.

This region is in the process of being refounded. Asgard encourages and hopes for an active and thriving native population and we invite all natives to return to Christmas after the refounding process is complete."

That's not the wanton destruction of a regional community, that's the refounding of a region to protect it from further raiding after which point the natives will be allowed to return.

2) Which is more petty, invading a region with the intent to refound and revitalise a community and allow natives back post-refound, or attempting to pass an SC resolution to gain another pretty badge and some point-scoring over other SC proposal authors? I reckon the latter personally.

3) My WA puppet is currently in the process of very energetically destroying another community, it's not in my interests to vote for this.

4) For the reasons above:

No.

Mahaj, did you consult any of the natives on this?

Sedgistan wrote:That said, I'd probably support this, simply because re-founding will deny us the chance to see which raiders are dedicated/obsessed enough to take part in the annual Christmas Eve raid.

We can see from this that if Mahaj's "Liberation" passes then Christmas will merely continue being raided for sport. A defender aiding raiding. Oh, the irony.

by **Cromarty** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:22 am

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:1) Here's the WFE of Christmas:
"Founded over two years ago by Santas helper, Christmas was annexed as a colony of Asgard on 19 July 2012. It is now the cultural hub of NationStates for Christmas and other festivities related to winter holidays.

This region is in the process of being refounded. Asgard encourages and hopes for an active and thriving native population and we invite all natives to return to Christmas after the refounding process is complete."

That's not the wanton destruction of a regional community, that's the refounding of a region to protect it from further raiding after which point the natives will be allowed to return.

And we're to take what Asgard says at face value becuase...?

2) Which is more petty, invading a region with the intent to refound and revitalise a community and allow natives back post-refound, or attempting to pass an SC resolution to gain another pretty badge and some point-scoring over other SC proposal authors? I reckon the latter personally.

1. Prove the bold is the case.
2. Prove the underlined is the case.

by **Skyrim Diplomacy** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:43 am

As previously mentioned, I will be voting AGAINST this proposal in my power as WA Delegate of Skyrim. The lack of native activity in the region in question gives our delegation no reason to remove the password at this time. Furthermore, we see this Liberation proposal as a last-ditch effort by the UDL to "save" another region they could not protect in the first place.

by **Kandorith** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:01 am

We also vote no for this proposal, as it seems utterly unnecessary.

For reasons throughout fully listed above.

by **Mahaj** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:10 am

Kandorith wrote:We also vote no for this proposal, as it seems utterly unnecessary.

For reasons throughout fully listed above.

All the reasons listed by Asgard are silly.

by **Jamie Anumia** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:15 am

Mahaj wrote:
Kandorith wrote:We also vote no for this proposal, as it seems utterly unnecessary.

For reasons throughout fully listed above.

All the reasons listed by Asgard are silly.

The ambassador from Jamie Anumia feels that as the author of the proposal, you would be expected to say that. Yet you have yet to back up your arguments that these reasons are 'silly'.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

by **Mahaj** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:27 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:
Mahaj wrote:All the reasons listed by Asgard are silly.

The ambassador from Jamie Anumia feels that as the author of the proposal, you would be expected to say that. Yet you have yet to back up your arguments that these reasons are 'silly'.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

They've been proven to be lies.

Repeated lies.

by **Jamie Anumia** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:28 am

Mahaj wrote:
Jamie Anumia wrote:The ambassador from Jamie Anumia feels that as the author of the proposal, you would be expected to say that. Yet you have yet to back up your arguments that these reasons are 'silly'.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

They've been proven to be lies.

Repeated lies.

I still fail to see any evidence.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

by **The Great Destruction** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:35 am

I cannot vote for any single liberation when no nation from the said region will speak up either for or against. Therfore I will vote no until this happens.

by **Mahaj** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:42 am

The Great Destruction wrote:I cannot vote for any single liberation when no nation from the said region will speak up either for or against. Therfore I will vote no until this happens.

I would hope the default would be a 'yes' vote...

its better to help somebody than to not help them.

by **The Brotherhood of Portugal** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:43 am

When will nations stop using the security council for their own political means? The Brotherhood votes NO.

by **Cromarty** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:44 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:
Mahaj wrote:They've been proven to be lies.

Repeated lies.

I still fail to see any evidence.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

From their TG:

Defenders have now taken to the WA Security Council asking it to liberate a native population that has not been active in some time, if ever. The last post on the Regional Message Board prior to our invasion was over five months ago. In addition, the Capitalis de Societate of the United Defenders League, Unibot, has stated that at least one native refused UDL assistance in liberating the region.

This was a lie.

Asgard's intentions for Christmas are no secret. We intend to make Christmas a cultural hub of NationStates, the home to Christmas and other winter celebrations sponsored by Asgard and our friends and allies abroad. In addition, as a show of good faith, we will guarantee the right of native return to Christmas. By annexing Christmas, Asgard can protect this region from further invasion as well. In annexing Christmas, our goal is not to collect a simple trophy, but to expand our regional influence in such a way that will benefit the natives of Christmas, the citizens of Asgard, and many people in the NationStates world.

They intend to make Christmas a 'cultural hub of NationStates', but have no plan on how to do so. They admitted this here.

In that same post they ask us to trust that their intentions are 'noble'. To do so would be equivalent to trusting that a home invader will repair the door he kicked in when invaded your home.

It is up to us all to not allow the defenders to use the Security Council to maintain the status quo. Asgard is dedicated to using our time and influence to build up an inactive region and give it a place in the NS community.

But only once a year. :roll:

Inactive regions do not need to become useless and die, and Christmas is a prime example of that, so please, give Asgard the chance to develop this region into what it should be rather than bowing to the wants of the defenders and sentencing Christmas to a slow death.

Ironically Asgard's refounded region would suffer from chronic inactivity for 11 months of the year.

by **Cromarty** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:44 am

The Brotherhood of Portugal wrote:When will nations stop using the security council for their own political means? The Brotherhood votes NO.

So what would you use the Security Council for exactly? :eyebrow:

by **Lyanna Stark** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:58 am

I, Lyanna Stark, as Pharaoh and Delegate of Osiris, will be voting for this resolution due to a 4-1 internal vote. Asgard has failed to convince us that they are noble in their approach or have any plans for after refound on making this an actual 'cultural hub'.

As Asgard seems to be attempting this without any set plan, without any experience or reasons to be trusted, and without any care for the natives that reside there, this Delegate votes AYE to liberate. They've already lied to us in this thread, why trust them; why let them steal Christmas?

by **Jamie Anumia** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:03 am

I'm not convinced by any of the points presented in this thread. I still view this as just another use of the SC as a defender tool.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

by **Cromarty** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:04 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:I'm not convinced by any of the points presented in this thread. I still view this as just another use of the SC as a defender tool.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

Feel like explaining why you aren't convinced, Ambassador?

by **Jamie Anumia** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:07 am

Cromarty wrote:
Jamie Anumia wrote:I'm not convinced by any of the points presented in this thread. I still view this as just another use of the SC as a defender tool.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

Feel like explaining why you aren't convinced, Ambassador?

I think most of my reasoning rests on the argument of this proposal being little more than a defender tool. However, I do have other reasons, there has not been 1 native that has posted in this thread arguing for the liberation, which leads me to think this proposal does not even have native support.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

by **Mahaj** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:10 am

Jamie Anumia wrote:
Cromarty wrote:Feel like explaining why you aren't convinced, Ambassador?

I think most of my reasoning rests on the argument of this proposal being little more than a defender tool. However, I do have other reasons, there has not been 1 native that has posted in this thread arguing for the liberation, which leads me to think this proposal does not even have native support.
- WA Ambassador - Treacle Smith -

The raid didn't have native support either.

I'm not sure why you think its okay to destroy regions.

by **Dagguerro** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:11 am

Voting in favour of this liberate. I believe the eloquent summary from the ambassador for Damanucus reflects our own reasoning.

- Lord Swift

by **Hells Fury** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:14 am

As Secretary of Defense for Gargantuan and spokesperson for District 10 Villagers we state our eternal OPPOSITION to this proposal. After failing to see any further evidence from natives of Christmas to justify this proposal, D10 has stated that he sees no reason to "liberate a region that is, finally, beginning to do something positive". He also states that is a shame that "the author fails to see the positives of annexing this region into Asgard. Christmas was failing and the author intends to destroy everything they have in their favor. Asgard has plans to make Christmas successful. Let's not take their freedom to choose away."

[PASSED] Liberate Christmas

Who is online