| Commend 10000 Islands | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 8 2009, 01:44 PM (881 Views) | |
| Trav-Coch | Dec 12 2009, 03:50 PM Post #11 |
|
I don't know from where you keep coming with this "time-honoured tradition of neutrality" or "neutrality law" or any such nonsense. Facts are:
|
![]() |
|
| Oh My Days | Dec 12 2009, 09:17 PM Post #12 |
|
I'm acknowledging that there is no "time-honoured tradition" of neutrality in the SC, it's not a law but the WA should be neutral because it is meant to serve the interests of the whole world IMO. I'm not saying that the SC always has been, but it should be neutral. |
![]() |
|
| A mean old man | Dec 14 2009, 09:55 PM Post #13 |
|
Crazed Curmudgeon
|
Believe me, I've already tried this. |
![]() |
|
| Kalibarr | Dec 15 2009, 04:45 AM Post #14 |
|
I'v tried as well. no one listens, the only support I got was from raiders, who'd rather there is no security council. I have a few come to me saying they'd support a proposal that supports neutrality, even one who said he'd help me force a resolution through, but that was back when I was more neutral and I provided them with quotable material for neutrality, as at the time I was the only neutral who voiced their opinion for neutrality. for they moment I'm sticking with the "SC sucks" crowd, and am going to spend most of my time recruiting, as no one else seems to want to do it. |
![]() |
|
| Trav-Coch | Dec 16 2009, 04:11 PM Post #15 |
|
I'm not saying that it shouldn't be neutral, either. |
![]() |
|
| Oh My Days | Dec 16 2009, 07:08 PM Post #16 |
|
If you think it should be neutral, then why commend them for defending rather than excellence if their field? A Mean Old Man and Kalibarr have pointed out that it can be difficult, but surely fendas would still support a proposal like that, and some raiders would be happy for it to pass too. The vast majority of players who don't get involved in the gameplay side would surely be much happier with something like that, they could appreciate a proposal to reward excellence without taking sides. |
![]() |
|
| Trav-Coch | Dec 17 2009, 09:26 PM Post #17 |
|
1. I'm not commending anyone; the SC does that. When this proposal comes to vote, the SC, as a collective, will decide whether it wants to take a side or stay neutral. 2. In case you haven't bothered to read through the draft, this proposal is not commending the 10000 Islands simply for defending. Their gameplay achievements have been stated in the proposal as well. 3. Just because I'm not saying that the SC shouldn't be neutral, it does not necessarily mean that I don't want defenders to be commended or griefers to be condemned. What I'm opposed to are resolutions that simply say, "These people are defenders, so let's commend them" or "These people are griefers, so let's condemn them" without providing sufficient context as to why they merit a commendation/condemnation. Edited by Trav-Coch, Dec 17 2009, 09:29 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Firstaria | Dec 19 2009, 01:30 PM Post #18 |
|
Ok, the proposal is on, and i started with the TG. Can someone help me??? |
![]() |
|
| [unibot] | Dec 19 2009, 09:03 PM Post #19 |
|
Yellow Matter Custard
|
I'll endorse it. But at the moment I don't have time to help campaigning, sorry, and my delegate contact list is now in my dossier which is very inconvenient for transferring 400 names to a list format to give to you. |
![]() |
|
| Firstaria | Dec 20 2009, 10:13 AM Post #20 |
|
well, i don't need a delegate list, the regional delegate list on NS + the "do not" list on this forum is already OK. I need someone who can start TG others. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Drafting Floor of the Security Council · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:21 AM Jul 11
|






8:21 AM Jul 11