Join the new world

To all GLD members,

I am truly shocked by the latest published article going straight against LSD. I hope I can comment on that being from neither GLD nor LSD, and thus a bit "neutral".

There's a tone in it that is just... not GLD. I have always admired the GLD, as it was one of the most constructive parties. I especially recall it being that way under the leadership of Pander Sols and Steingrimur Illugi. GLD, may I ask: what happened?

It's really great that you want to work more closely together with I&W. But why flame the LSD for that? Why not strengten bonds with I&W, and also keep LSD as friends?! Where are the times that YOU, dear GLD, wrote this - and I quote - in your articles about working together:

"In this game, the magic word is cooperation, and that is exactly what we are good at. GLD has been in several governments, both with LSD and BP (a bit to the left) and I&W and LP (a bit to the right) and in both occassions we have received positive feedback from our coalition-partners. We’re not restricting our members to think along the lines of some political doctrine: all the sides have something good to offer, and we intend to bring those things together."

Please come back, dear GLD! I miss you!

Kind regards,
A concerned fellow politician.


[ UPDATE ]
PS: there's nothing wrong with working closer together with I&W! I did it a lot in the past (f.e., I served as MoF in a government of I&W/GLD/LP when I was still Belgian Party). I just hope that we won't get any LSD vs. GLD situation, like we had a BP vs. GVD situation before. The atmosphere in Congress doesn't get better because of that.

[ UPDATE 2 ]
I just have to include a link to an article Steingrimur published after this, that is closely related to it. To me, it explained a lot, and puts some good nuances in the situation as I experienced and described it above.




**************************************** **************************************** ******************






Dear Konrad,

I'd like to react on a few point made in the latest article, announcing to support Garmr. Don't get me wrong: it's your good right to support him! He is indeed experienced, and as I'm 2 months "eRep"-older, I've had the honour of getting into UNL politics more or less at the same time, working together with him in the government multiple times. If that would have been the reasoning to support him, fine by me.

However, you start raising a lot of arguments then that feel a bit unfounded, or even as a personal attack. So I hope you'll allow me to react on them.

1) &quot😢...) using the England land swap as a political weapon against our president and the GLD government. Even Boklevski now pointing his finger at this issue as a "transparency" issue."

Didn't know we had a GLD government? 😉

Seriously, as stated in my article, this was not against Myers11, but just an example of what could have been done better. All I know is that I woke up having fights all over UK regions owned by my country, without knowing what was going on. But my call for transparency didn't start because of that. Look up some of my papers: 9 months ago, I ran for Congress. Point of attention: Transparency. Or look who introduced the first Financial Reports to give transparency as MoF around September. If people know what's going on, the game will be more fun for everybody. At least that's what I think. That's why I would like transparency.

Additional note: Garmr also has transparency in his program. (And it's a good point, so I support him in that! 😉 ). Therefore, I don't understand why you would use this as an argument not to support me?

2) "Less is more and we believe in that, "

My proposed government consists of 15 people. The current government, formed under GLD's Myers11, counted 17 people.

Just naming the facts...

Oh, and Konrad, PLEASE read Garmr's programme, and I quote: "This is why I have taken it serious to create a large government." (Note: I admire his motives for it (summer holidays!), so I'm not saying I'm against. But if you say you don't like my "large" government, how can you say you like his?!)

3) "Garmr have a solid team that is chosen from the best and not hiring random people for votes etc."

Could you please refer me to the article? I don't find any proposed team? Thanks for your help!

(If you can't post the link, then get a good argument, and don't call a proposed government with experienced guys who helped out UNL as far as this game goes back - like AndreasIsaksson, ArtemIvanov, Tim Veltkamp and Deviltje - "hiring random people for votes", while you support a "solid team" that doesn't yet exist!)

4) &quot😢...) with an impeachment without talks or even letting people know that he is unhappy etc. GLD at this time cannot support an IP candidate for we think their behavior is erratic."

Markus Bell has stated that he acted on his own, and that he regrets the turmoil that this has caused. This is no reason to blame IP. The only thing that you could blame IP, is that we didn't force him to resign. WHY didn't we do that? Because it's just a game.

I know you are upset because the previous CP was a GLD member, but if you first blame me for bringing up the transparency issue "again", and then start about this, you're really missing the point... your own point, in fact.

I only remember the past to learn from it. You only seem to remember it to take revenge.

Thanks for your time, just wanted to react on this. Hope these CP elections won't turn out in your personal crusade against me, and that we can stay constructive towards each other.

Kind regards,
Boklevski