«12. . .122123124125126127128. . .229230»
There are exactly three nations ever to be on my grudge list. One of them I will not discuss because it was a personal issue, another I think is a little much for the RMB. So I'll stick with the first one.
A few years ago I was helping a friend start a region as Minister of Foreign Affairs, and also was an advisor of its fledgling military. At the time another player had a fledgling defender region that didn't really know what it was doing, but somehow it wound up striking up a diplomatic connection with our region. That is, until that player realized that I was notorious raider Overthinkers. (In retrospect, i think that's the most important anyone outside my regions has ever thought I am.) He exploded in my friend's DMs, trying to get me and another advisor kicked out of the region because we were such bad people. Obviously this fell on deaf ears but we maintained a little mostly-IC rivalry for a while. I refounded his region eventually, though anymore I don't even remember the name.
ooof
why so?
...
Who's going to tell him?
Question of the Day!
What is your favorite feature that NationStates currently has?
Factbooks
Making unique history
So many to choose from, but banning has to be one of them.
New Sukberia and Holocovoy
Good morning Niamark! Happy Coupsday!
Today I am couping people who don't communicate promptly. I realize this often includes myself.
Oi Barbaroi and Holocovoy
Then I am couping you.
Hmm, Hard To Pick, But I'd Say The Customizable Fields For Pre-Titles, Religion, Capital City, Etc.
WA: Freedom of Association
My thoughts:
1) This proposal is poorly written and lacking in details.
2) I don't see it having much to do with freedom of assembly, or it's so closely related to assembly that this proposal doesn't matter. What applies to freedom of assembly should apply to "association".
3) The second article says criminal penalties MAY be attached to joining hateful and violent associations, not criminal penalties WILL BE attached to said malicious associations. So, there is no guarantee that joining a harmful association will amount to criminal penalties. It also allows such malicious associations, as listed in the proposal, to legally exist and to accept memberships legally. In short, the second article says things and has key words, but it legally and effectively does nothing. Traitorous, violent, discriminatory, and ill-intended associations can exist legally and fully, without threat of repercussions, under this proposal.
My recommendation is to vote "AGAINST" this proposal. What do you all think?
Question of the Day!
What is your least favorite musical piece? This could be an album, a song, an artist, or a genre.
Anything by Luke Bryan.
This used to be my go-to answer and still is true for the most part, but I was recently introduced to Hopsin, whom I found weirdly relatable.
100 gecs
That really hardcore punk music. It's just yelling into a mic while people with a negative amount of musical skill play random instruments in the background.
I'm pretty sure you mean ska.
D e a t h. G r i p s
WA: Long-Term Storage of Produced Waste
My thoughts on this proposal:
It's not detailed enough. There are instances in which the proposal lists out mandates or what should be done, but it neglects by who. Though well-intentioned, this proposal likely provides for too many loopholes to be effective.
I recommend voting "AGAINST" this proposal. What do you all think?
«12. . .122123124125126127128. . .229230»
Advertisement
