Liberate Free Thought[Archived]

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
Liberate Free Thought

A resolution to strike down Delegate-imposed barriers to free entry in a region


Category: Liberation


Nominee (region): Free Thought


Proposed by: Sedgistan

Description: The Security Council,

DEFINING "griefing" as any act wherein where a group of nations, not native to a region, move to it with the aim of seizing the WA Delegate position; and then, having seized this position, proceed to forcibly remove natives from the region;

BELIEVING that griefing is morally wrong, as it infringes on the right of natives to govern their own region;

AWARE that The Land of Kings and Emperors (The LKE) originally raided Free Thought on the 4th November 2009, leaving after a brief occupation which involved raising their flag over the region;

NOTING that The Land of Kings and Emperors took offence to the natives of Free Thought removing said flag, and referring to it as "that darn flag";

FURTHER NOTING that The LKE invaded Free Thought again on the 22nd December 2009, installed a secret password, and ejected The Tofu Islands, a native of the region;

DENOUNCING The LKE's over-reaction to harmless jibes made by Free Thought's natives about its flag;

OBSERVING that The LKE have changed the World Factbook Entry of Free Thought to read "This once rebellious region has been conquered by The Land of Kings and Emperors (The LKE) and now forms a permanent part of our continually expanding empire";

CONCLUDING that The LKE are griefing Free Thought, especially given their track record, and those of The New Inquisition and Unknown, who have also participated in the raid;

RECOGNISING that the natives of Free Thought, including Polynumina and Luna Amore, desire to have the region restored to their control;

RESOLVING that this can only be done through the intervention of the Security Council;

HEREBY Liberates Free Thought.

Co-authored by Travancore-Cochin.

Votes For: 1,198

Votes Against: 1,718

Voting Ends: in 3 days, 12 hours
Click to expand...
 
I've learned never to totally trust preambles, so does anyone have any actual information about this to impart?

Without it, I usually abstain.
 
I would like to ask members of The North Pacific to vote against this proposal because it is nothing more than a FRA attack on three honourable Nationstates regions, who have done no wrong, apart from beating them in a military engagement (by 32 to 23 endorsements).

The LKE and TNI are both imperialist regions with a long history of imperial conquests and colonialism. I am a senior member of both regions, who both have rich political and military histories, with forums dating back to April 2006 and July 2006 respectively - and over 400,000 posts between them. Unknown is more raider orientated, but is equally a well established and honourable region.

So these are not a couple of "noobish" raider regions that have broken the rules because they don't know or care less. We fully condemn any activities that would cause grief to a region such as forum destruction, and we are full signatories of the relevant convention.

But I must also point out, no rules have even been broken, the whole resolution is loosely based on an outdated concept of griefing that has not been in effect since 2006 when the influence rules were introduced. Furthermore the nation ejected, Tofu Islands, is not thought to be a native but part of the defender force in the region from the previous battle there, hence the ejection.

The concept that Free Thought was a community of any kind as has been bandied about by proponents of the resolution is also ludicrous and untrue, the region has never possessed any kind of forum or active means of discussion anywhere. Indeed there is far more likelihood that this will come about as a result of the region becoming part of the LKE Empire than previously.

More evidence as to what this resolution is really about is found in it's exclusion of Europeia. Europeia were a major contributer to the Free Thought operation, sending almost as many units as TNI, and more than Unknown. The Europeian flag can still be seen flying in Free Thought. An excuse alleging that they have not engaged in what has been redefined as "griefing" has been concocted by the FRA to cover this anomaly. The reality is that Europeia have engaged in many raids and indeed had to eject natives before in operations including Venice to name one example confirmed by their Head of State. Meanwhile the history of the LKE engaging in such griefing is entirely fabricated, there is not one example of it in the regions history.

One can only speculate as to why Europeia were not included. Undoubtably the FRA have a presence in the region and harbour hopes that they will be able to eventually persuade it to join the defenders side. But also as a large region they may have not wanted to take on such a force in a resolution for fear that many regions would not back such negative mentions of a major region in NS. Regardless, it is certainly nothing to do with their griefing record in comparison to the other mentioned regions, or their contribution to the operations.

This resolution is thus not about griefing, punishing regions that have griefed before or restoring control of the region, it is about attacking the more vulnerable imperialist regions in a way that we will find difficult to defend, by attempting to mislead voters into supporting this. Neither the LKE or TNI Foreign Office has managed to send a representative thus far so I am speaking on behalf of those regions.

We must stop this resolution from passing, because it the thin end of the wedge. If this is allowed to pass we will see increasing encroachment on the sovereign rights of regions to wage war upon each other. To some this may not be an immediate part of their gameplay and thus does not matter on the face of it, but to us it is an important aspect of Nationstates, and the game would be much poorer without it. With this in mind, I beg you to vote against this resolution.
 
Would the Land of Kings and Emperors and The New Inquisition be greatly discommoded by the removal of their agent's ability to set a password?

I am also curious, are we still at war with the New Inquisition? I seem to remember their declaration of war during my term as Delegate...
 
Eluvatar:
Would the Land of Kings and Emperors and The New Inquisition be greatly discommoded by the removal of their agent's ability to set a password?

I am also curious, are we still at war with the New Inquisition? I seem to remember their declaration of war during my term as Delegate...
Click to expand...
Presumably the defenders will launch a counter invasion if such an event occurred. This is against the rules of military engagement as they are written down currently, thus they will gain an unfair advantage. We won, we gained enough influence to password, we played by the rules, the matter should be closed. It is only the by the manipulation of the Security Council that they are opening the situation back up again. Is this an acceptable precedent?

TNI is not in a state of war with TNP, that matter has been long concluded. I am sure we would be more than happy to sign a Non-Aggression Pact and Cultural Treaty with you for the future.
 
I strongly urge the WAD for this esteemed region to change his vote from FOR the resolution, to AGAINST it. It is a slap in the face to the raider way of life, and would unequally give greater support to defenders. The simple fact is that the raider-defender dynamic should stick to battles over target regions. Not proposals. By voting AGAINST the resolution, you wouldn't be voting for raiders. On the contrary, you would be voting for the FREEDOM OF CHOICE. I thank you for your time and strongly hope that your WAD shall change their mind.

:hug:
 
All a password put in place by an invader delegate is good for is keeping the region locked down until you've kicked all the natives out. It removes all chance the natives might have at ever getting their region back. Instead they'll have to see their region get slowly strangled and turned into an empty trophy.

Besides any halfdecent invader have a more than fair chance at keeping a region they've raided by repelling liberation attempts by defenders. All it takes is a bit of vigilance and keeping an eye on the region around update. Password protecting is lazy and mostly used by griefers, who do no good for the Nationstates community anyway.

With the removal of the griefing rules and introduction of influence the game tilted in favour of griefers. Liberation resolutions definitely aren't the best solution to counter this, but it's the only one the admins have so far been willing to introduce.

It's not like it's gotten used much anyway. How many succesful ones have we had? Belgium, Feudal Japan, Democratia and Utopia? All of them regions with active natives who supported liberation resolutions as giving them a chance to gain their region back.

Btw. I don't see how you're giving the natives of Free Thought any 'freedom of choice', when you've passworded their region and started to kick them out, D0MINIUS AUR3LIUS. Or does freedom of choice only include raiders?

Also;
The simple fact is that the raider-defender dynamic should stick to battles over target regions.
Click to expand...
Kinda hard when the region is locked down behind a secret password, don't you think?
 
Presumably the defenders will launch a counter invasion if such an event occurred. This is against the rules of military engagement as they are written down currently, thus they will gain an unfair advantage. We won, we gained enough influence to password, we played by the rules, the matter should be closed. It is only the by the manipulation of the Security Council that they are opening the situation back up again. Is this an acceptable precedent?
Click to expand...

I don't believe there is something like the rule of military engagement in existence unless that is something that is only know to the raider community or I missed something during four years of liberation, defence, and invasion? The defender and native, in proposing this resolution, have broken no rules and I see no solid evidence from you that said otherwise. The security council resolution is an accepted game tool, the same way the World Assembly is an accepted tool for raider in raiding. It should not be discarded as "defender tool" when the raider community is doing the same thing with the World Assembly endorsement system.

I said we liberate them and let raider and defender fight.
 
The argument for a fair fight is a compelling one. The only strong argument I can see against this proposal is that it indirectly condemns several regions, which one can argue is inappropriate, at least in a Liberation proposal.

Therefore, I am leaning toward favouring this resolution.

Count me as voting FOR.
 
This is against the rules of military engagement as they are written down currently
Click to expand...

Where? I have never seen them. Have you invented them?

in any case....

Thank you for your input, North EAst Somerset. It has convinced me of my position

I vote FOR the resolution
 
The gameplay rules for NS are here. And I quote "While in power, Delegates can use or abuse their powers as they see fit." This isn't some imaginary invader code or anything like that, it's a simple fact that the ability of delegates to do whatever they want was traded in for the implementation of influence gameplay. To now turn around and say that a military victory is illegitimate and the work of influence in a perfectly legitimate and non-griefing operation can be undone by a WA resolution is just not sensible. Like I said before the nation ejected was not a native, and the LKE has no history of griefing, unlike Europeia which was excluded from the resolution for political reasons.

If this precedent is set it will make empire building virtually impossible and this will be a great loss to the game despite what some may think. I understand that The North Pacific, and flemingovia in particular remembers the past, and sure in the short term it'll be good to have "won" against and got back at the imperialists but in the longer term it will make the game much poorer for us all.
 
Why should we support imperialism?

Plenty of invader organizations have enjoyed the game without emptying regions and seizing permanent control of them. Why is passwording necessary?
 
Yes, that's what our military intelligence thinks. He'd been there for a while yes, but he was still a defender plant posing as a native. The other actual natives including the former delegate weren't ejected.

This is just one of the several examples of sheer fallacies in this resolution that I pointed out in the speech above. You should trust the word of Grosseschnauzer more closely, his skepticism is well-founded.
 
The gameplay rules for NS are here.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to appear stupid, or is it coming naturally to you? In Maxland gameplay rules are set by Max and his team, and change all the time. At the moment "Gameplay Rules" include Liberation motions. Rather than whining, man up and learn to deal with it.

flemingovia in particular remembers the past
Click to expand...

indeed i do. That is why I have little patience with fools. Over the years I have seen too many of them.

Personally, I would see passwords removed completely, but that is unlikely to be implemented. While they do exist, it seems that Max is trying to ensure that they are used for the purposes they were intended for. And that does not include playing schoolyard games of king-of-the-hill.
 
Rather than whining, man up and learn to deal with it.
Click to expand...

lol, we're not the ones trying to use the UN Security Council to turn it around from losing.

And yet again, your argument excels you Flemingovia, oh how I have missed reading your comments in The New Meritocracy.
 
By passing this resolution, the WA would be condemning raiders and praising defenders. The WA (as an organization) should remain as a completely neutral entity, with no allegiance to either side of the raider-defender dynamic.
 
D0MINIUS AUR3LIUS:
By passing this resolution, the WA would be condemning raiders and praising defenders. The WA (as an organization) should remain as a completely neutral entity, with no allegiance to either side of the raider-defender dynamic.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. I think it's still focused on invasion griefing, by the old definition. If secret passwords and the ejection of natives is mainstream raiding behavior these days, then that's a shame.
 
D0MINIUS AUR3LIUS:
By passing this resolution, the WA would be condemning raiders and praising defenders. The WA (as an organization) should remain as a completely neutral entity, with no allegiance to either side of the raider-defender dynamic.
Click to expand...
should they also stay neutral on the socio-economic scale?


:winner:
 
Something's wrong with HEM's masking, so I'm posting this statement for him:
HEM:
Hello fair citizens of the North Pacific,

I come to you on a humble pedestal. Which has possibly been humbled even further by the fact I apparently do not have the ability to post this topic myself, and instead was forced to use a kind and willing messenger to relay my unpopular strings of letters and words.

The message is not unpredictable, nor is it unprecedented. Over the last few hours, we have seen the sands of time tick down, as both sides of the proposed WA Resolution work to ensure it's passage or failure. I stand here as a TNP patriot, proud to have worked to thwart two coup de tats, and proud to have once had the activity to call myself a novice in feeder politics.

Alas, time in my day dwindled to the point where my activity here is virtually non existent, I understand and accept that that attracts a grain of salt to my words, but I implore you to open yourselves up to the conclusion I have come to, and at least consider the set of opinions I will lodge here. Because whether this resolution passes or not, it is vital that we all have a position on what Liberations should be used for, and whether they are fair game, or an unfair fourth strike for defenders.

Firstly, I refuse to argue about game mechanics nonsense. I don't think there are any principles embedded with this game's code to suggest that these resolutions shouldn't be used to do what their name suggests, Liberate regions. But I also feel that in this particular case, we are faced with aggravating factors, that to say the least, aggravate me:

- Let's start by addressing the subvert condemnations of The New Inquisition, The Land of Kings and Emperors, and Unknown. Frankly, I think that region's shouldn't be mentioned unless the resolution involves them. Basically this an up-or-down vote on whether invading a region is wrong. And I don't think that's the WA's prerogative to decide.

- Also, I mentioned the slight against my own region, Europeia. We assisted the forces of LKE in re-attaining the region. Why were we not mentioned? The reason given was that....we...never...invade? Which was pretty much...dumb...As, we do. The real reason is that the FRA is trying to angle for Europeia to look upon the defender side more favorably, which I can say for certain this resolution will not make us do.

- I think it is also key to understand the circumstances surrounding the invasion. This wasn't *one* invasion. This was the LKE coming back after the region basically provoked them to. LKE came before, and they left without damaging the region in the slightest. But then the natives starting spouting off nonsense about how bad LKE's flag was, and said a series of bizarre things that would...raise anyone's eyebrows. So, LKE decides to come back and response to this provocation. Which honestly, most groups on NS would do. I don't like being insulted.

I hope you all consider these three points, and I also hope you all consider the precedent this resolution sets. It basically sets into stone that we can condemn and commend ideologies within the game, and that, I cannot say I approve of.

-HEM
Click to expand...
 
Defenders have larger armies than raiders, defenders need to admit defeat sometimes, without passwords raiders will have a difficult time raiding at all, Ard is writing rules up based on precedent SC resolutions, do you want the right to liberate any and all regions to be on the books? this is a largely defender run region, defenders also use passwords sometimes, it would be a threat to you as much as it is to raiders.

I for one used to argue a pro-neutrality argument, people hated me for it, apparently neutrality is not interesting enough, apparently the WA is supposed to take sides. So much for world unity...
 
THat sounds like "we can only win if the other side are not allowed to play".

My six year old uses that argument sometimes when playing cards with us. "You are not allowed to play that card - it stops me winning."

the game already has on mechanic - founder control - to secure a region. The more I read about it, the less I like passwording. It brings out the worst in people, and makes them lazy.
 
And here I thought defender is ruling NS secretly and that the mod is on their side... don't disappoint me, Ananke!

Edit Note:

The Security Council resolution Liberate Free Thought was passed 2,896 votes to 2,832.

And it is over, very close though.... have fun trying to protect your prize!
 
wait for the counter resolution: "You nasty defenders. Leave Free Thought alone"

leave-britney-alone-02.jpg
 
interesting aside. That means that TNP's vote swung it. If North East Somerset hadn't come in and with his very first posts here tried to badger us, I for one would probably have voted against. I tend to oppose condemn/commend/liberate proposals on principle.

So you could say, Congratulations NE Somerset. You won this one for the 'fendas.
 
flemingovia:
interesting aside. That means that TNP's vote swung it. If North East Somerset hadn't come in and with his very first posts here tried to badger us, I for one would probably have voted against. I tend to oppose condemn/commend/liberate proposals on principle.

So you could say, Congratulations NE Somerset. You won this one for the 'fendas.
Click to expand...
It's interesting how much more satirical and unpleasant you have gotten in the last year Flem. People came here to have an honest debate and open exchange of ideas, and they are met with 5 cent images and portrayed as a political punch line as you laugh and laugh. Frankly, I find such treatment of those willing to have an open debate on your terms to be appalling, and I think the question of why TNP hasn't been as active in the last years has found it's answer. If all visitors are treated like you have treated them, it's clear why people wouldn't want to stay any longer than to buy the next ticket out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top