(Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

(Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:08 am

The International Court of the World Alliance

The United States of Scouting,
The United Kingdoms of Apepistan


Plaintiffs,
COMPLAINT FOR DERELICTION OF DUTY
vs.

The Empire of Articmainia,
The Federation of Serenarea,
The United Socialists States of Zanland,
The People's Republic of North Korreaa,
The Commonwealth of The Republic of Chivalry,


Defendants

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|




Dated this 8th day of January, 2015


Plaintiffs complain against Defendants and allege:

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION


  1. Primary Plaintiff, United States of Scouting, resides as a member of the World Alliance Security Council.
  2. Co-Plaintiff, The United Kingdoms of Apepistan, resides in the region of Arcadia, which is represented by the WASC Council Member, New Rhodinia.
  3. Defendants reside as members of the World Alliance Security Council.
  4. Defendants are seen to be in dereliction of duty during the timeframe of December 8th, 2014 - January 8th, 2015.
  5. Dereliction of Duty is defined as: "the shameful failure to fulfill one's obligations."
  6. Defendants listed have failed to carry out their duties that they've been appointed to carry out by Abstention or Abstention by default, or otherwise on proposed legislation or resolutions, in which we the plaintiffs consider Dereliction of Duty.
  7. Defendants failed to act on proposed legislation in the amount that follows between the dates above: Chivalry (5), Serenarea (5), Zanland (6), DPRK (6), Articmainia (7)


The Harms of Failing to Vote, Dereliction of Duty

Failing to vote and to carry out duties as a WASC member has its costs. There is a requirement of 10 votes for a law or resolution to pass currently, out of 14 members. This means no more than 4 abstentions and nay vote can occur or the law/resolution isn't passed. With the amount of abstentions going around the entire WASC, it is extremely difficult to get something to pass. Granted of course, an abstention could have very well been a nay vote, but if it were a yea vote, some things that failed to pass may have passed with the abstentions votes.

On multiple of these proposed legislation, the combined defendants could have potentially made a difference in the passage.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

We bring forth a Conflict of Interest against The Empire of Great Eurussia, whom is the President of the WASC. Due to the fact that the President appointed the members of the Security Council, we believe it is in everyone's best interest that the President is not involved in these proceedings. As The Grand Empire of Xolox is the Vice-President, we recommend that the Chain of Command is followed and have the Vice-President serve as the Judiciary Authority on this matter.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST II

We feel that as the primary plaintiff in this matter that we should NOT be allowed to vote on any end results.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST III



We feel that the defendants in this matter should NOT be allowed to vote as they're directly involved in the lawsuit, and thus is a conflict of interest.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST IV

We feel that the President of the WASC should NOT be allowed to vote as the President has made the appointment of all WASC members, thus creating a conflict of interest.

Conclusion

We the plaintiffs see it only fit that each defendant be removed from his/her seat on the WASC and an adequate replacement be chosen, if there is no such replacement deemed worthy by the President of the WASC, we ask that the seat(s) remain empty until such time arises. To ensure proper representation in this matter, the co-plaintiff, The United Kingdoms of Apepistan represents the nations within the World Alliance to ensure that a 3rd party is involved to bring fairness to the matter and justice by the people.


Signed,


President of the United States of Scouting


Last edited by Great Eurussia on Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:30 pm; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : Formatting error)
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:13 am

**NOTICE** AS OF THIS NOTIFICATION, THE PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Apepistan on Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:34 am

The United Kingdoms of Apepistan sign the lawsuit and join the complaint.
avatar
Apepistan
Regional Power

Posts : 439
Join date : 2014-09-27
Location : Budapest, Hungary

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  New Rhodinia on Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:52 am

While the defendant nations actually do vote on enough resolutions to avoid the Accountability Act's punishments, that's all it is. These nations do not vote as critically or as urgently as much as a resolution requires that they do. In our opinion, we should not let minimum WASC effort exist in the World Alliance anymore; as stated above, we cannot get most resolutions through to a solid and just end due to missing or otherwise empty votes.

New Rhodinia is in favor.
avatar
New Rhodinia
Emerging Regional Power

Posts : 324
Join date : 2014-09-22

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Serenarea on Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:59 am

Although I may agree on the removal North Koreaa, I must defend my nation from these charges. This may not apply to the other defendant nations, but ever since the Tenth Security Council was convened, Serenarea has voted and voiced our opinion on many important issues. Along with that, the reason for my 5 missed resolutions is that I have been busy in the last couple of months but I haven't been absent for more than 2 or 3 days. I have voted on all the pending proposals that are still in vote by the time I get online and the ones I don't vote on may be a issue with my nations neutrality or its something my nation might not care for.


Last edited by Serenarea on Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Serenarea
Powerbroker

Posts : 179
Join date : 2014-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  chivalry on Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:08 am

Okay, I am at a lost, I vote every time I get a notice in my box, if i don't get a notice, how am i suppose to vote on something, if i am not notified about something, I have a pretty voting record.
avatar
chivalry
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts : 64
Join date : 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=the_republic_of_chivalry

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Zanland on Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:50 am

The reason I haven't voted on the six cases was due to the lack of relevance to my nation. The cases have nothing to do with Zanland or her people. Normally when I don't vote it defaults to abstention, I didn't vote in the cases. From now on, I will officially state my choice to abstain if i so choose.
avatar
Zanland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts : 85
Join date : 2014-09-05
Location : United States

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Apepistan on Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:50 pm

Zanland wrote:The reason I haven't voted on the six cases was due to the lack of relevance to my nation. The cases have nothing to do with Zanland or her people. Normally when I don't vote it defaults to abstention, I didn't vote in the cases. From now on, I will officially state my choice to abstain if i so choose.

The WA Security Council act clearly states that the Security Council members are responsible for the peace, security and stability of the entire region of the World Alliance. Everything happening in the WA is relevant if you're a member of the SC.

"Section 1 - Preamble

The World Alliance Security Council shall be the supreme and supranational governing institution of the World Alliance and all its nation states without prejudice to their inherent rights as sovereign countries such as the right to exist, the right to sovereignty, the right to independence, the right to due process, the right to association, the right to self defense, and the right to self determination. The WASC shall have the primary aim of ensuring, promoting, and developing the peace, security, and stability of the World Alliance and among its nation states."
avatar
Apepistan
Regional Power

Posts : 439
Join date : 2014-09-27
Location : Budapest, Hungary

Back to top Go down

NOTICE

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:39 pm

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
The International Court of the World Alliance

The United States of Scouting,
The United Kingdoms of Apepistan


Plaintiffs,
COMPLAINT FOR DERELICTION OF DUTY
vs.

The Empire of Articmainia,
The Federation of Serenarea,
The United Socialists States of Zanland,
The People's Republic of North Korreaa,
The Commonwealth of The Republic of Chivalry,


Defendants

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|




Dated this 8th day of January, 2015


Plaintiffs complain against Defendants and allege:

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION


  1. Primary Plaintiff, United States of Scouting, resides as a member of the World Alliance Security Council.
  2. Co-Plaintiff, The United Kingdoms of Apepistan, resides in the region of Arcadia, which is represented by the WASC Council Member, New Rhodinia.
  3. Defendants reside as members of the World Alliance Security Council.
  4. Defendants are seen to be in dereliction of duty during the timeframe of December 8th, 2014 - January 8th, 2015.
  5. Dereliction of Duty is defined as: "the shameful failure to fulfill one's obligations."
  6. Defendants listed have failed to carry out their duties that they've been appointed to carry out by Abstention or Abstention by default, or otherwise on proposed legislation or resolutions, in which we the plaintiffs consider Dereliction of Duty.
  7. Defendants failed to act on proposed legislation in the amount that follows between the dates above: Chivalry (5), Serenarea (5), Zanland (6), DPRK (6), Articmainia (7)


The Harms of Failing to Vote, Dereliction of Duty

Failing to vote and to carry out duties as a WASC member has its costs. There is a requirement of 10 votes for a law or resolution to pass currently, out of 14 members. This means no more than 4 abstentions and nay vote can occur or the law/resolution isn't passed. With the amount of abstentions going around the entire WASC, it is extremely difficult to get something to pass. Granted of course, an abstention could have very well been a nay vote, but if it were a yea vote, some things that failed to pass may have passed with the abstentions votes.

On multiple of these proposed legislation, the combined defendants could have potentially made a difference in the passage.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

We bring forth a Conflict of Interest against The Empire of Great Eurussia, whom is the President of the WASC. Due to the fact that the President appointed the members of the Security Council, we believe it is in everyone's best interest that the President is not involved in these proceedings. As The Grand Empire of Xolox is the Vice-President, we recommend that the Chain of Command is followed and have the Vice-President serve as the Judiciary Authority on this matter.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST II

We feel that as the primary plaintiff in this matter that we should NOT be allowed to vote on any end results.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST III



We feel that the defendants in this matter should NOT be allowed to vote as they're directly involved in the lawsuit, and thus is a conflict of interest.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST IV

We feel that the President of the WASC should NOT be allowed to vote as the President has made the appointment of all WASC members, thus creating a conflict of interest.

Conclusion

We the plaintiffs see it only fit that each defendant be removed from his/her seat on the WASC and an adequate replacement be chosen, if there is no such replacement deemed worthy by the President of the WASC, we ask that the seat(s) remain empty until such time arises. To ensure proper representation in this matter, the co-plaintiff, The United Kingdoms of Apepistan represents the nations within the World Alliance to ensure that a 3rd party is involved to bring fairness to the matter and justice by the people.


Signed,


President of the United States of Scouting


The SC hereby accepts this complaint under its judicial authority and thus the Parties that are slated to be involve are Scouting & Apepistan against Articmainia, Serenarea, Zanland, North Korreaa, and Chivalry. AND having Scouting, Apepistan, Serenarea, Zanland, and Chivalry recognizing the complaints against them, the SC hereby issues its two (2) day notice to Articmainia and North Korreaa to make their position before the SC makes the next step and elevate the complaint into an international case. So ordered.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  DPRNK on Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:36 am

Scouting should simply direct his target to DPRK. After failing to remove DPRK in Security Council, he tries again here in a court and has accessories to hide his imperialistic intentions. Supreme Leader will repeat it satement that there is no law to remove DPRK and other from Security Council just because Scouting want it.
avatar
DPRNK
Regional Power

Posts : 419
Join date : 2014-09-17

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:37 pm

The United States of Scouting Officially requests this case to be escalated, as it is apprx. 16 hours AFTER the timeframe for statements to be made. Furthermore, as DPRK's statement was lodged after the timeframe, we motion to dismiss their statement from the proceedings.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

NOTICE

Post  Great Eurussia on Tue Jan 13, 2015 10:06 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:The United States of Scouting Officially requests this case to be escalated, as it is apprx. 16 hours AFTER the timeframe for statements to be made. Furthermore, as DPRK's statement was lodged after the timeframe, we motion to dismiss their statement from the proceedings.

Motion granted.


And citing the failure of North Korrea and Articmainia to respond to our notifications on time about the filed complaint of Scouting and Apepistan, they are considered to have refused international arbitration. The complaining nations may refer to the WA Security Council Act or other international laws if they wish to pursue, if any. (Please use another separate thread.)

On the other hand, citing the recognition of Serenarea, Zanland, and Chivalry to the complaint, the concern may now move forward and is now elevated into an official international case. And due to conflict of interest, Eurussia as the President of the Security Council, hereby resigns from the case as its presiding judge, and hereby transfers the responsibility to Xolox, the Vice President, to preside over the case: Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry. So ordered.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

NOTICE

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Wed Jan 14, 2015 6:44 am

Following the failure of North Korreaa and Articmainia to accept International Arbitration, I've officially filed a Compulsory Arbitration request. I recommend that these proceedings are held until a vote is taken on the compulsory request. It is Scouting's recommendation that should the compulsary request be granted, that the cases be merged as they originally stood.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Xolox on Wed Jan 14, 2015 6:56 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote: I recommend that these proceedings are held until a vote is taken on the compulsory request.

You request is sensible, and I will halt the proceedings until then.
avatar
Xolox
Regional Power

Posts : 470
Join date : 2014-09-04
Age : 19
Location : Florida

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=xolox

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Sun Jan 18, 2015 7:46 am

I am asking that the proceedings continue, as it's likely North Korreaa will be removed anyway, Articmainia has been removed, and it's unlikely that the amount of votes required will be reached.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Xolox on Wed Jan 21, 2015 8:12 am

As per Scouting's request, the case will be reopened and all involved parties with have 5(five) days to argue their sides.
avatar
Xolox
Regional Power

Posts : 470
Join date : 2014-09-04
Age : 19
Location : Florida

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=xolox

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Fri Jan 23, 2015 8:37 am

The quotes from the defendants statements below show the incompetence and clear misunderstanding of their duties within the WASC. These quotes alone nearly make the Plaintiffs' case.

Serenarea wrote: I have voted on all the pending proposals that are still in vote by the time I get online and the ones I don't vote on may be a issue with my nations neutrality or its something my nation might not care for.

While we are glad that you vote on proposals that are still in vote "by the time you get online", you represent your CONTINENT, not your COUNTRY. Granted it may be difficult to reach your constituents in time, you are still obligated to represent their opinions, or what you believe they would want.

Notice the phrase, "representing each of the continents of the WA"

"There shall also be thirteen (13) member states representing each of the continents of the WA also appointed by the President provided that they are not puppet states, on the WA Map, and active in both roleplaying matters and out-of-character matters which can also be removed by the WASC, for any grounds, at anytime and at will."


chivalry wrote:Okay, I am at a lost, I vote every time I get a notice in my box, if i don't get a notice, how am i suppose to vote on something, if i am not notified about something, I have a pretty voting record.

Part of your duty as a WASC member is to be active in Role-Play, which also consists of checking the forums to do your duty and vote. Do you really expect someone to send you a telegram every time it's time for you to do your job? Grow up.

"active in both roleplaying matters and out-of-character matters"


Zanland wrote:The reason I haven't voted on the six cases was due to the lack of relevance to my nation. The cases have nothing to do with Zanland or her people. Normally when I don't vote it defaults to abstention, I didn't vote in the cases. From now on, I will officially state my choice to abstain if i so choose.

My Co-Plaintiff already covered your statement pretty well. Once again, lack of relevance to your nation may be the case, but you don't represent just your nation, you represent your continent!
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Serenarea on Sun Jan 25, 2015 2:03 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:The quotes from the defendants statements below show the incompetence and clear misunderstanding of their duties within the WASC. These quotes alone nearly make the Plaintiffs' case.

While we are glad that you vote on proposals that are still in vote "by the time you get online", you represent your CONTINENT, not your COUNTRY. Granted it may be difficult to reach your constituents in time, you are still obligated to represent their opinions, or what you believe they would want.

Notice the phrase, "representing each of the continents of the WA"

"There shall also be thirteen (13) member states representing each of the continents of the WA also appointed by the President provided that they are not puppet states, on the WA Map, and active in both roleplaying matters and out-of-character matters which can also be removed by the WASC, for any grounds, at anytime and at will."

Incompetence and clear misunderstanding of their duties within the WASC? We completely understand our duties in the WASC and accusing us of incompetence is just outrageous. We HAVE and WILL complete our duties as a member of the SC as we HAVE represented the CONTINENT of Mnemosyne. We DO vote and take in account the thoughts of our CONTINENT shown by our existing treaties with the nations on my continent. You may also want to NOTE that our nation also has VIEWS that AFFECTS how we vote on matters. We have a strong voting record in our long service in the WASC and we will not stand still against such ignorant attacks.
avatar
Serenarea
Powerbroker

Posts : 179
Join date : 2014-09-03

Back to top Go down

NOTICE

Post  Great Eurussia on Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:55 pm

With the absence of presiding judge, the Security Council is working out on the possible presiding judge of this case since the Presidency has refused to handle the case due to conflict of interest. 

However, due to the previous order of the presiding judge of five (5) days notice now overdue, an official verdict from the next presiding officer is expected.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Kingdom of Ireland on Sat Jan 31, 2015 11:14 pm

Russia will also be residing over this case per request of Eurussia. Saying no more exchange has happened we see this case a complete. I will review the entire case and release a verdict within the newt 12-24 hours,
avatar
Kingdom of Ireland
Emerging Regional Power

Posts : 387
Join date : 2014-09-06
Age : 16
Location : Georgia,USA

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Kingdom of Ireland on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:11 am

Citing the failure of this resolution http://worldalliance.postalboard.com/t700-dismissed-remove-serenarea-new-korea-chivalry-zanland-china-china. I see no more need for this case. So this case is hereby dismissed. This verdict can be contested at anytime.

I now ask that members of the SC vote on the verdict of this case. If it gets enough votes in favor it will be the official verdict.
avatar
Kingdom of Ireland
Emerging Regional Power

Posts : 387
Join date : 2014-09-06
Age : 16
Location : Georgia,USA

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:15 am

Empire of Russia wrote:Citing the failure of this resolution http://worldalliance.postalboard.com/t700-dismissed-remove-serenarea-new-korea-chivalry-zanland-china-china. I see no more need for this case. So this case is hereby dismissed. This verdict can be contested at anytime.

I now ask that members of the SC vote on the verdict of this case. If it gets enough votes in favor it will be the official verdict.

Scouting contests this verdict. How is the dismissal of another resolution relevant to this? The matters at hand in this case still stand.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Kingdom of Ireland on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:43 am

Objection noted.

Correct. The matters in this case are very important. And if a nation fails to execute their duties then i suggest proposing to remove them. I'd also suggest continuously sending telegrams notifying them of the proposal. Posting on the RMB about the proposal. Much of which is already done. The Security Council can not outright force a nation to vote. And no where in the Constitution does it say we can remove them without question. Perhaps there should be a law giving requirements for activity, and the proper punishment for not meeting these requirements. But as it stands at this moment there is not much more the court can do except threaten or ask for someones resignation. Both of which would have little effect. I recognize it makes sense that members should have to meet a requirement. But the court does not run on what makes sense we run on what is the law. To directly answer your question that bill is relevant because it pertains to the people of this case. There isn't a stronger law that can guide the court in these matters. But we can warn these members. If they aren't more active the security Council can remove them. And I see it as a legal obligation that they must remove them if they are not active.
avatar
Kingdom of Ireland
Emerging Regional Power

Posts : 387
Join date : 2014-09-06
Age : 16
Location : Georgia,USA

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  UnitedStatesOfScouting on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:47 am

Empire of Russia wrote:Objection noted.

Correct. The matters in this case are very important. And if a nation fails to execute their duties then i suggest proposing to remove them. I'd also suggest continuously sending telegrams notifying them of the proposal. Posting on the RMB about the proposal. Much of which is already done. The Security Council can not outright force a nation to vote. And no where in the Constitution does it say we can remove them without question. Perhaps there should be a law giving requirements for activity, and the proper punishment for not meeting these requirements. But as it stands at this moment there is not much more the court can do except threaten or ask for someones resignation. Both of which would have little effect. I recognize it makes sense that members should have to meet a requirement. But the court does not run on what makes sense we run on what is the law. To directly answer your question that bill is relevant because it pertains to the people of this case. There isn't a stronger law that can guide the court in these matters. But we can warn these members. If they aren't more active the security Council can remove them. And I see it as a legal obligation that they must remove them if they are not active.

As judge you can set those requirements, they're clearly in dereliction of duty.
avatar
UnitedStatesOfScouting
Emerging Power

Posts : 970
Join date : 2014-11-03

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=scouting

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Kingdom of Ireland on Sun Feb 01, 2015 6:06 am

Noted. I will review the case and laws of our region then release another verdict by 10 PM EST
avatar
Kingdom of Ireland
Emerging Regional Power

Posts : 387
Join date : 2014-09-06
Age : 16
Location : Georgia,USA

Back to top Go down

Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum