[SC] In Queue: Repeal "Liberate Republicans"[Archived]

---

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #41: Liberate Republicans shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council,

Aware that Republicans was invaded and passworded by The Greater German Reich on December 20, 2010,

Affirming that the Republicans has since been refounded by The Commonwealth of Jeffersonian Republicans,

Noting that Jeffersonian Republicans has barred executive powers to any would-be delegates,

Confident that SC#41 has served it's purpose and should no longer be in effect,

Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution #41 "Liberate Republicans.

---

This thread is for both discussion and voting.

When voting, please use one of the following options: For | Against | Abstain | Present

"Abstain" means that you wish for the Delegate to not vote on the resolution at all.
"Present" means that you effectively choose not to participate in this vote. "Present" has no effect on how the Delegate votes.

Posts which do not include an explicit and unambiguous vote are not counted in the tally.

The region in question was invaded in 2010 and been refounded and the old liberation resolution STILL HAS NOT BEEN REPEALED?

FOR.

Present

This goes to vote in five hours.

I am refraining from voting for now.

In the SC forum thread, it is mentioned by third parties that the natives want to retain the liberation. If that is indeed true, I would vote against the resolution. However, I cannot seem to find any direct evidence of native support. If someone has any, please post below.

The author, Wolfstar, frequently votes in this forum. I would like to hear what they have to say as well.

Abstain for now.

I am present. If the natives want the liberation in place, let them have it. However, it seems like the liberation has done its job.

When it comes down to it the region is dead and the founder doesn't care about his region. For that reason I am supportive of this repeal.

Especially due to the fact in a nearly 4 year period it has only maintained a WAD for 2 weeks and the founder has CTE a total of 4 times. The WA should not be in the business of being the babysitter of regions with founders that want a region with none of the responsibilities.

For

r3naissanc3r:

This goes to vote in five hours.

I am refraining from voting for now.

In the SC forum thread, it is mentioned by third parties that the natives want to retain the liberation. If that is indeed true, I would vote against the resolution. However, I cannot seem to find any direct evidence of native support. If someone has any, please post below.

The author, Wolfstar, frequently votes in this forum. I would like to hear what they have to say as well.

Click to expand...

It is a dead region, and is nothing more than a puppet dump. The founder himself controls all but two of the nations present, and he can't even be bothered to stay active. The region will be dead and gone within a year anyway, so why keep the liberation on the books. Plus is has an embassy with Right to Life, whose founder is Christian Democrats and it will really cheese him off. If those aren't reasons enough, I don't know what are.

For

Abstain

Against.

Seeing as the region is inactive, and the resolution has served its purpose, Luxah is for, unless there is a direct appeal from the native state to keep it in place, and regardless of civil or religious orientation..

against

Abstain

Topic moved to WA Archives.