[SC - WITHDRAWN] Condemn Libertanny

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hulldom

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Boston Castle
Discord
seathestarlesssky
sc.jpg

Condemn Libertanny
Category: Condemnation | Target: Libertanny
Proposed by: Vikanias | Onsite Topic​

This proposal suggests the condemnation of Libertanny.

Noting that Libertanny’s excuse for war against europeia was because of an insult, that was of an opinion and had pretty much no international relevance.

Recognizing that the insult was at Libertanny’s relevance as the current WA delegate of The East Pacific.

Citing that the Declaration of war is for Libertanny’s reputation, not for the defence of The East Pacific or to save a region that is being raided by Europeia.

Citing that Europeia as been a Region in full support of Human liberties and the banning of far right extremist groups which knocks out the reason for “freeing the nations in Europeia”

Hoping that the WA shall Recognize Libertanny’s declaration of war fraudulent and make Libertanny pay for all damages done to Europeian nations if war escalates further before a agreement is reached.

Noting that some Europeian and The East Pacific nations don’t want war at all.

This Proposal Hereby condemns Libertanny
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
[TR][TD] For [/TD][TD] Against [/TD][TD] Abstain [/TD][TD] Present [/TD][/TR][TR][TD]2[/TD][TD]9[/TD][TD]1[/TD][TD]0[/TD][/TR]
 
Last edited:
Against

I remember a time when we didn't need to entertain proposals covering an insignificant portion of a nominee's history and accomplishments because some random nation felt disproportionately affected.

Yesterdaaayyy seems so far awaayyyy
 
Last edited:
Praetor:
Against.

I will note that the nominee campaigned for this resolution to go to vote. Something worth remembering in the case there is a more serious and well-written proposal on this nominee in the future.
Click to expand...
I don't believe we should necessarily penalize them if a better proposal comes to vote in the future. Should we take it into consideration on their own work? Yes, but otherwise it's spiteful towards a hard-working author who does not deserve to be viewed negatively for the nominee's actions.

Anyways, this entire "legislation", if one can call it that, is just slop. Vehemently against.
 
Boston Castle:
I don't believe we should necessarily penalize them if a better proposal comes to vote in the future. Should we take it into consideration on their own work? Yes, but otherwise it's spiteful towards a hard-working author who does not deserve to be viewed negatively for the nominee's actions.

Anyways, this entire "legislation", if one can call it that, is just slop. Vehemently against.
Click to expand...
I'm not referring to penalizing the author. Self-commendations/condemnations are extremely frowned upon. I think some of that should be extended to campaigning for your own condemnation.
 
Boston Castle:
I don't believe we should necessarily penalize them if a better proposal comes to vote in the future. Should we take it into consideration on their own work? Yes, but otherwise it's spiteful towards a hard-working author who does not deserve to be viewed negatively for the nominee's actions.

Anyways, this entire "legislation", if one can call it that, is just slop. Vehemently against.
Click to expand...

I mean, he notes in the campaign that there is more to add. That kind of speaks for itself
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top