Post Archive

pog, congrats--it was a good amendment

mandatory democracy

Breaking news from Sylh Alanor tonight. According to the most recent census, most elves in the country identify their primary culture group to be Refugi. Elvhenan culture, still in second with 22% of the responses, dates back to around 200 BCE. It lasted through the Alanori Golden Age, the rise of the Immortals, and even persisted through the Imperial occupation. To have such a radical shift in cultural identity shows growing support for Sylh Alanor to continue its integration into the wider Refugia alliance.

(Sylh Alanor's culture group on the regional map has changed to Refugi! Hooray for shifting demographics!)

That would be fun, I think it's possible

Hello!

Good, and you?

I just endorsed every WA member in Refugia... :)

Hopefully, I won't.

I also just finished doing that. Please tell me if I missed you. :)

Fixed it.

Refugia rises yet again.

Yeah! Since we started doing the endotarting drives and promoting joining the WA, we went from... I think in the 80s to 28th! Everyone's doing a wonderful job and it makes me super happy.

I agree on most of these points. Certainly an interesting proposal for a relative rookie, but I also think wording in several areas is just too vague to really work for a wa proposal. Definitions are unfortunately very difficult to properly convey in legal terms so they cannot be loopholed or worked around. So as much as I appreciate the resolution, I have to say I am also against

Flohovistan please don't engage with spammers.

Yay!

THAT MEANS IT'S TIME FOR FLOWERS >:D

I appreciate the spontaneous flower explosion

(｡•̀ᴗ-)✿

What do you want thrown at you violets or daffodils?

Violets. Daffodils are centrists! D:<

Good evening, Refugi.

As the Councillor of Foreign Affairs, I've been wanting to make a dispatch outlining some of the basic functions of the office. I was also hoping it could be a nice place to feature both the most recent Foreign Affairs dispatch (which is the news our embassies receive about us through our envoys) and the travel runes we utilise to travel from Refugia to other places. So, with the help of some beautiful graphics provided by Refuge Isle, I was able to complete it! Check it out below and let us know what you think <3

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1458987

-Em

Wow that looks amazing ya’ll!! Great job Em(and Luca for graphics)!!

Hi everyone! I've put together my first monthly update on our embassy in The Leftist Assembly. It has a list of notable events that happened since I became envoy, with links to some cool related stuff as well.

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uwusberg/detail=factbook/id=1459686

Have we talked about this proposal yet? https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=joan_darc_1604956368

I only ask because I believe it’s close to approval

So to me, it seems like it’s not really worth the commendation. They start off simply by saying “They’ve been delegate for a while.” which essentially means nothing to me. You know who else has been delegate for a while? Mikeswill. And he’s never been commended. And then in the third paragraph they quite literally call Philippines “a relatively small and unknown region” which just serves more to reason that contributions to a relatively small and unimportant region, are not necessarily commendable. They also note all the positions they’ve held, but don’t write anything about what they actually did in those positions(this falls under the same category of listing people’s awards but not saying what for). Like cool, you had titles, but why does it matter?

The first thing I see in this that could possibly be commendable is work against invasions, protecting a relatively weak region from several raider incursions. But also, I don’t see why that is any greater than the other gads of folks who have done the same imo.

They also talk about joining the URA, but like... okay? You joined an organization? It doesn’t ever mention them contributing to it, just joining it. And the last two clauses don’t really seem to be commending anything at all, but rather fluff to try and form some kind of story out of a commendation that doesn’t really have one, and doesn’t really try to have one for 3/4 of the proposal.

So for me? Solidly against. I’d love to hear ya’ll’s opinions though :)

Very much agreed. Contributions to one place can still be commendable or condemnable, but the vagueness of any actual contributions, and therefore the lack thereof, is what leads me against this one

Also, here are my thoughts on "Commend Sierra Lyricalia" going up in about five hours (feel free to keep talking about Ariusgrad as you think of things, just quote it around this lol):

(Proposal: https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=cretox_state_1604856186)

(Thread: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=489106)

This seems pretty straightforward and uncontroversial. SL has been involved in several things over time, and the commendation does a good job of laying those out. They've written a GA resolution that's passed, three issues, and spent a lot of time defending their founderless region from raids. They've also spent a lot of time in The Red Fleet, which is an anti-fascist raider group and, if I'm not mistaken, the only raiding org to be commended.

SL is also GenSec, which commendations/condemnations aren't actually allowed to directly mention. So there's an understanding throughout the thread that this is a thing that's a decent amount of work, and work that SL has done well, and the commendation has to dance around actually mentioning that directly. So while it can seem a little light in other respects, it's understandable because of what's not spoken.

Regardless, I think this is fine and I think it's a good idea of something to vote for.

I do very much enjoy this update and I feel like I know more about TLA now.

I apologise those things getting a little disrupted, there was a lot going on at the time.

I'll see if I can find some way to bring some of it back, and also try to make some kind of history and culture dispatch.

I agree with all of these points. The note about GenSec being unmentionable is also spot on, so it's worth remembering that this resolution is a little more about the character of the player than just what's written on the tin of the resolution.

Like I mentioned in the chat, clause 2(a) doesn't really make sense to me as an argument point. SL didn't write that resolution, Sep did and SL isn't credited as being a co-author. In clause 2(b) which is, by it's organisation, presented as functionally the same argument as 2(a). Therefore, I have to conclude that the author views both of those contributions as equal and co-authorships. That's a bit misleading, although Cretox and I disagree on that topic.

That disagreement is not enough for me to pull support for this. I think that SL has contributed a lot to NS, and his work over time in TRF, Anarchy, and issue writing more than satisfies to make a good case about why the player should be commended.

So I'll be voting in favour.

Laisou has chosen a different way to govern Its country. I will randomize what candidates the nation chooses and what candidate wins, I will choose choices to an event based on the current political parties goals. Just for fun! The Far Left Party Won

Sak... why? This is cursed. You subject us to this terror when you could have given us Trans Anarcho-Communist Lesbian Catgirls???

Hey there! You new to NationStates? :) Oh and absolutely nice to meet you too!! ^-^

Ohh!! Welcome to Refugia then!! Feel free to chill here or vibe with us on discord. We love new folks and visitors so I hope you enjoy your time here!!

Thanks for the warm invite! I appreciate it. I joined this discord a week back because I am friends with some members of this community and I decided to move a puppet here because this looks like a very friendly community :)

Yes. Daffodils please. Somehow the primary god figure in my nation is called Violet 🤷🏼‍♀️

I am somewhat new to Nationstates myself, at least new enough to still be getting my bearings on the site, but I can assure you that in my experience at least this is a very friendly group!

Those are some nice namesssss. Seafoam is just such a nice vibe idk man

If it amuses anyone, or even if not, because it amuses me - this should be the 2,500th posts in this RMB, and starts page 100 in the logs \o/

Page 100!!! This is truly magnificent. And now I’m gonna go look at page 1 because I’m interested to see whats there 🤔

I do love the way this rmb has flourished!! It makes Refugia a very warm and welcoming place ^-^

Truly amazing! I'm new in this region (and in the game haha), but we, as a country, are very proud to be part of Refugia!

One of my jobs is to maintain stability and promote wholesome behavior within the region. You guys are doing the job for me. Regardless, the event I had mentioned in my incumbent candidacy announcement will begin on the 1st day after the conclusion of Green Week which ends November 16th.

Speaking of Green Week, how has your nation's eco-friendliness stats been doing since Green Week began?

I didn't measure specifically within the week. But since I came to Refugia (about a month ago), my Eco-friendliness level rose from 1226 to 2743 (about 123.75% increase). I think my growth rate was pretty steady, so divide that by 4.

You can see my graph here:

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=lower_french_gregballs/detail=trend?censusid=7

I would say personally, without knowing the history of any similar resolutions to it being passed, it feels like a solid proposal to me. There doesn’t seem to be any major loopholes from what I can see, any vague wording is not to a degree that it is harmful but rather to a degree of character limits.

The proposals idea as a whole(again, providing I know very little about whether any of this has ever been covered before), seems like a good one. Guaranteeing other nations can’t turn you away at the door if you’re dying or whatever is a solid idea in theory. And the resolution seems well written to me if a little confusing in the middle(took me a couple tries to read through that one 😅).

So to me, the only issue is any other resolutions and uh WA history is not my specialty to be perfectly honest, so I don’t even know if that’s an issue at all(also notably I don’t really have time to read through the forum topic or I’d just do that).

So to me, with current information, for.

Ya know now you say it... you make a solid point xD

Sorry for my delay, I've been very behind on work today, but seeing as how this is going to be up for vote in a little bit, I'll prioritise. Needless to say, I don't like the resolution, so I'm going to poke at it a bit. Here's my chonker thoughts on this topic:

Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy is this here. If this is meant to be freedom to seek medical care III, why is it necessary that we dip into a thing where we're suddenly not doing the thing that the resolution is about? And that's not to say that you can't have a section in the resolution that says "hey, if you have a prisoner, make sure they're securely contained during travel and treatment", but instead, it's this:

If your country baselessly says another country is a terrorist sponsoring regime or what have you, if the nation is otherwise entirely safe, can this political spat harm a citizen seeking foreign medical care? What positive function does this serve?

Another circumstance to where a citizen may be kept in medical limbo through an easily exploitable system. If I keep suing my neighbour in a small claims proceeding, can I prevent them from leaving the country to seek medical care on a heart condition because of my personal vendetta?

Makes strong assumptions that just because a nation is a WA nation, it's not a dictatorial regime. The point of legislating on a topic is not to appeal to the people already doing something, but to force countries to provide care who would otherwise be happy to make up a story about a citizen they don't like. If a country says that it's in the public interest to prevent the care, what stops them from assigning that label to any number of situations? I don't know what benefit this line serves, and I see a number of possible ways it's harmful.

Now up to clause clause 3 and I'm not sure there's anything left that this thing could possibly provide a benefit on, because as we go into clause 4 which prevents retaliation, it prevents retaliation except as permitted to enforce clause 3. What.

So open invitations to exploit clause three which also leads to open invitations to retaliate against citizens for even trying to seek medical care.

How much healthcare can be provided in between the two cases of a nation not wanting to provide healthcare and a nation saying that it would be an undue burden if they did?

Since a nation that's already cool with you seeking medical care in a foreign country doesn't need to be legislated on, I see no reason to pass a resolution that lets the countries that aren't cool with it, keep denying access if the home country doesn't want them to have it.

I have been asking the author for the last 12 hours to withdraw the proposal. Loopholes aside, everything covered here is 1) covered by previous resolutions 2) aren't covered by previous resolutions, but should not apply to medical tourists only, and therefore deserve their own resolution.

Morning friendos.

Today is the last day for the referendum on Excessive Waiting Time Reform. Tomorrow is the last day for the Green Week Competition.

Any final thoughts on Commend Ariusgrad, going up to vote in about three hours?

Read our previous discussion starting here: https://www.nationstates.net/region=refugia/page=display_region_rmb?postid=41517670#p41517670