NationStates Jolt Archive

This has been submitted; please endorse (or even help telegram!); we must combat this heinous water bourne plague!

Human Rights; strong

REALISING the risk Arctocephalinae pose to the free flow of regulated organic biomass through the obstruction of regulated organic biomass distribution systems.

FURTHER REALISING that the abundance of Arctocephalinae is a contributor to the increase in volume of saline dihydrous oxide expanses.

NOTING WITH REGRET the relative abundance of Arctocephalinae on dihydrous oxide rich ecosystems.

MANDATES the neutralisation of Arctocephalinae in all United Nations member states.

URGES nations to neutralise Arctocephalinae through the use of large potentially disruptive re-entry systems to assist in the energetic disassembly of Arctocephalinae, if they have such technology.

MANDATES nations without potentially disruptive re-entry systems, or which are unwilling to use them, to introduce a programme to of insertion of manual terrain alteration equipment into the sphenoid of all Arctocephalinae.

Saline Dihyrous Oxide? WTH is that?

Darkumbria can neither approve or disapprove this proposal without further research into the problem.


First I must investigate the disappearance od my dictionary to figure out what the heck that is. ;)

See the "Neutralise Pinnipeds" thread. Let me know when you've read it so I can delete this post; you'll understand why!

I'm against this proposal

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3AArctocephalinae&meta=

Have a nice day

I hate having to contact my scientists via HPG, they are so, well, scientific. I can't be for the proposal, sorry. The erradication of any species is deplorable, as much so as the permanent saving of any species. Fur seals are the lifeblood of some countries and the permanent irradication of said species is never a good thing.

You must be shrooming.

It is more an experiment to see whether a large telegram campaign combined with a decent sounding title will both reach quorum and pass, no matter how ridiculous the idea.

Hack, I have a question: If we are willing to repeal this after it passes by pointing out the obvious, can we perform this experiment? If not, then oh well.

It ought to be "eradicate", shouldn't it? Irradicate means "to root deeply" according to dictionary.com.

DLE: Part of the experiment is to see whether the same people who voted for the resolution (if it reaches quorum) will vote for a repeal.

Myopia: Bugger...

I'm all for the experiment, if you want to do it. I would like to see that its repealed afterwards. :)

The problem is that I'm going on holiday on Sunday; but hopefully someone else will work out what this proposal will do.

Of course, it might not reach quorum...

It's been deleted. Bastard mods...

It's been deleted. Bastard mods...
Love you too.

There's enough bad Proposals by people who don't know better, we don't need to be trying to pass Proposals just to then try and Repeal them. Besides, if you want to do this "experiment", it's already going on with National Systems of Tax.

The results? We're stuck with another pointless Proposal.

This has been submitted; please endorse (or even help telegram!); we must combat this heinous water bourne plague!

Human Rights; strong

No, we will not "neutralize" subfamily "Arctocephalinae" (more commonly known as the "Sea Lion"....

Love you too.

There's enough bad Proposals by people who don't know better, we don't need to be trying to pass Proposals just to then try and Repeal them. Besides, if you want to do this "experiment", it's already going on with National Systems of Tax.

The results? We're stuck with another pointless Proposal.
You mean to tell me that Powerhungry Chipmunks did that proposal as an "experiment"? I can understand why he TGed me to "help in the repeal" if that's the case.

You mean to tell me that Powerhungry Chipmunks did that proposal as an "experiment"? I can understand why he TGed me to "help in the repeal" if that's the case.
That's my guess. He submitted it without mentioning it on the forum, and right after it passed, he submitted a Repeal.

That's my guess. He submitted it without mentioning it on the forum, and right after it passed, he submitted a Repeal.
Don't you think that's..I don't know, a tad illegal? I mean, if he submitted the proposal solely to prove a point, but never said a damn word about it, then he's kind of contradicting himself. Plus, it was a move made in bad faith, basicially aiming to discredit the UN.

He tried to get me to swear to secrecy about this campaign, but the more I look at it, the more I smell a rat (or chipmunk, as the case may be.).