We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Protection of Sekowan states
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Føderale League (NUC-DMF)
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 2695
Description[?]:
| Talks have resulted in the creation of this bill: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php As Defense minister I shall enforce this bill upon it's passing if Sekowo falls out of legitimate Sekowan control, however, we seek approval from the rest of the legislature in the protection of Sekowan assets, even if we do not effect Sekowo proper (and therefore are not declaring war or suchlike, only protecting assets placed under our protection) |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:51:44, January 09, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | Bad link. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=235488 |
| Date | 13:00:22, January 09, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | The Paradigm fully supports this course of action. Unless the Sekowans would be willing to renegotiate the terms of the bill. We probably should have instead leased the territory from Sekowo for an undefined period of time; with only Kazulia having the right to end the lease and having the payments being made to the colony organization the Sekowans set up. |
| Date | 13:59:12, January 09, 2009 CET | From | Kommunistiska Partiet | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | We are against. |
| Date | 14:19:44, January 09, 2009 CET | From | Mitten Partiet | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | Our party support this bill |
| Date | 14:28:52, January 09, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | Why against KP? You are against helping our neighbors/fulfilling our treaty obligations? |
| Date | 14:33:58, January 09, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | Do you even know what is going on KP? Sekowo has had a recent influx of parties wishing to destroy Sekowo. It is our duty as a Dovani nation and member of the Dovani Treaty Defence Organization to assist our allies in Sekowo in their attempts to protect their territory from the greedy, imperialistic hands of the non-Dovani nations. |
| Date | 14:55:01, January 09, 2009 CET | From | Kommunistiska Partiet | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | They do not intend to destroy Sekowo but to put an end to some absurd megalomaniac developments there. |
| Date | 15:00:38, January 09, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | We are treaty bound to oppose any transfer of Dovani territory to non-Dovanians. That is what the "illegitimate" parties of Sekowo intend to do and they hope to ruin Sekowo in the process. You said: "It will not support any willingly loss of sovereignty by Sekowan parties in order to keep power in their hands" That is precisely what you are supporting by opposing this bill. The willing transfer of Sekowan territory to non-Dovanian states; who, unlike us, have no intention of ever returning the territory to them. OOC: OOC and IC are different things. They haven't stated what their IC reasons are (or I haven't seen it at least). I don't think they have any. We can't take their OOC statements complaining about the Uberwankishness of the Sekowan military as an IC justification for the transfer of territory and attempts to destroy Sekowan society and its economy, in game. |
| Date | 19:51:48, January 09, 2009 CET | From | United Føderale League (NUC-DMF) | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | KP: Do you actually see what's going on? The Sekowans got taught a while ago that they're not almighty, and their ideas are a little silly. But the Deltarians want to trash Sekowo, give away their land, military, economy, everything. Sekowo is the most powerful nation in Dovani, like it or not. And Dovani is about to become a battlefield between states from other continents just because the Deltarians though they were a little up their own asses. |
| Date | 23:15:24, January 09, 2009 CET | From | Kommunistiska Partiet | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | H+P, dear comrades, the Communists certainly have never supported the ratification of such a treaty. We do not feel morally obliged to respect it. UFL, the Communists support the destruction of the Sekowan bourgeois elite. |
| Date | 23:57:23, January 09, 2009 CET | From | Guds og Konges Kjemprene | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | The Communists apparently think that a totalitarian state, ruled by nothing but corporations, is the right thing for the people of Sekowo. A party that calls itself communist really should know better. We will vote to help our Sekowan friends against their new, dangerous parties. |
| Date | 00:16:14, January 10, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | We're not comrades. So, you'd prefer to help the "bourgeois elite" of the non-Dovanian nations that wish to exploit the people of Sekowo and take control of the fruits of Sekowan labor? |
| Date | 12:15:09, January 10, 2009 CET | From | United Føderale League (NUC-DMF) | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | I'm sorry, the Sekowan elite is not being destroyed, they will remain as they always have. Instead, we will have them PLUS huge numbers from other nations coming into the state. |
| Date | 16:26:31, January 11, 2009 CET | From | Anti-Faggotry League | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | OOC ; Just an FYI, if the Sekowan parties actually wise up enough to make a bill transferring legislative jurisdiction of the states to Kazulia, we'll almost certainly start targetting your colonies as well. Nothing personal or anything, but look at it from our point of view ; If you help Sekowo protect her colonies, nobody in my coalition is going to be satisfied with the outcome, and we'll have to come here to get the colonies back. If you try to play keepaway with us, you'll slip up eventually when we mass-activate in the nation holding the colonies when there's less than eight months to election-time ; and one slip-up is all it will take. And after all that trouble I doubt I could convince anyone in my coalition that we're not entitled to Kazulia's colonies ; even if I wanted to. I'm not the leader of the coalition, all I can do is try to guide it, but the more trouble Sekowo and Kazulia cause for us, the more punitive any outcome will be, and there's nothing I can do to stop that, short of betraying my own coalition. Which I won't do. Sorry guys, I don't want to sound threatening or extortative or anything like that, I just thought you deserved a fair warning of the likely consequences to your actions. If you help protect Sekowo's colonies, you'll be putting your own at risk, and I can't do a thing to change that. |
| Date | 16:28:14, January 11, 2009 CET | From | United Føderale League (NUC-DMF) | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | This has been pushed to vote to see the common opinion. We will stress this is to save Sekowo from complete meltdown (no help to anybody) and will NOT included interference in Sekowo Proper. It is also to prevent other continental forces from gaining a foothold in central Dovani from which to assault our colonies and distabalise all of Dovani. |
| Date | 23:07:45, January 11, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | OOC: Why keep resorting to OOC nation invasions instead of IC RP wars? "but the more trouble Sekowo and Kazulia cause for us" It's called playing the game. The point of Particracy isn't to do whatever the Deltarians want done. |
| Date | 23:27:01, January 11, 2009 CET | From | Grammar Nazi Party | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | *its (in bill description) The Kazulian parties seem to have problems in their legislative with the use of apostrophes too. Seems like this plague is spreading from Sekowo. It needs to be stopped. |
| Date | 23:31:53, January 11, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | OOC: You can't be serious. So, actually RPing is something you guys are opposed to? You prefer to just run around taking over nations so they can't RP something that might not go along with your plans? |
| Date | 05:47:32, January 12, 2009 CET | From | Laid Madame Coalition | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | We are not Deltarians. Stop referring to us like that. Would it make any difference if I opposed to the idea of transferring the colonies to the Deltarian government? I would have, only if I cared. I might as well RP, but Sekowo is boring. After we came, every distanced themselves and things are quite lonely. We had the whining, the Khaler crying and the like, and then things became stagnant. You're talking about RP, what RP? |
| Date | 06:01:50, January 12, 2009 CET | From | Anti-Faggotry League | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | I'm not threatening you ; I'm saying what will happen. The coalition has snowballed out of control, it's taken on a mind of it's own. I'm not the leader anymore, I'm just along for the ride. And there's nothing I can do to stop it. |
| Date | 17:47:33, January 12, 2009 CET | From | United Føderale League (NUC-DMF) | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | Then back out. The situation in Sekowo has become rediculous, and yes, we will defend Sekowo's colonies, and to be honest, **** whoever wants to ruin the game for us trying to protect another Dovani nation IC. I don't give a damn for your OOC grudges and petty issues, the aircraft carrier fleet is gone, the arrogance of the Sekowan parties is smashed. We want to preserve a little bit of Sekowo to last until after. The coalition can be as arrogant and hard headed as it likes, we're not backing down. |
| Date | 20:54:41, January 12, 2009 CET | From | H+ Paradigm | To | Debating the Protection of Sekowan states |
| Message | I second that. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 416 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 60 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "If man asks for many laws, it is only because he is sure that his neighbor needs them; privately he is an unphilosophical anarchist, and thinks laws in his own case superfluous." - Will Durant |