NationStates

Condemn Durkadurkiranistan II

A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region.

Category: Condemnation | Nominee: Durkadurkiranistan II | Proposed by: Mallorea and Riva

The Security Council,

Aware that the nation Durkadurkiranistan II has previously been condemned by this Council for actions against The North Pacific,

Notes that the nation has continued to be a threat to the safety and sovereignty of regions,

Lists the following actions that have been a continuation of "Project Purge":

• Couping The South Pacific with Milograd and Mallorea and Riva in April 2013, ejecting well over 500 nations along the way,
• Controlling the Delegacy for a month during the Gatesville/Osiris coup in June/July 2013, ejecting approximately 3000 nations during that time-frame,
• Using a puppet nation, Bokeryville, to infiltrate The North Pacific and the UDL in early 2013, during which time Bokeryville was utilized to attempt to coup The North Pacific and spread negative propaganda against the UDL through a false flag operation,
• Running an unendorsement campaign against the Delegate of The North Pacific at the time McMasterdonia which cost the Delegate nearly 40 endorsements,
• Attempting to endorsement swap and coup Osiris in 2012 with the puppet nation Bachman Turner Overdrive while the Delegate nation Dalimbar was distracted, forcing the Vice Delegate to assume the Delegacy to protect the region,

Agast that over 6,300 nations have been subjected to ejections or bans by Durkadurkiranistan II, in particular new nations which found themselves rudely flung into the Rejected Realms,

Convinced that the nation of Durkadurkiranistan II is perhaps the greatest threat to feeder and sinker governments to ever exist,

Hereby Condemns Durkadurkiranistan II

Very rough draft, open to suggestion for improvement. Durk, more so than any other player, has earned another badge. Feeder/sinker terms are in there as a placeholder for something R4 compliant.

I'm pretty sure Bachman-Turner Overdrive was during the reign of Zaolat. Then again, I wasn't there at the time

Otherwise, I support this.

If we see more coups to the most powerful regions, yeah, I must support this condemn of the nation of Durkdurkiranistan II. I don't want to see 2013's South Pacific Coup again.

Applebania wrote:I'm pretty sure Bachman-Turner Overdrive was during the reign of Zaolat. Then again, I wasn't there at the time

Otherwise, I support this.

After asking around I think it was Dali, then someone else under Zao.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:

Applebania wrote:I'm pretty sure Bachman-Turner Overdrive was during the reign of Zaolat. Then again, I wasn't there at the time

Otherwise, I support this.

After asking around I think it was Dali, then someone else under Zao.

Aye, as I told Mall on IRC the BTO coup attempt happened while Dali was Pharaoh and had fallen inactive. Oliver, his Kai Repat (Vice Delegate), had to assume the Delegacy and then became Acting Pharaoh after Dali ceased to exist. Then in the elections that followed, Earth (Lyanna Stark) was elected Pharaoh.

The coup attempt you may be thinking of, Apple, was Knights of the Round Fable during Zaolat's term, which I don't think Durk was involved in though you never know.

Ynys Prydain wrote:

Mallorea and Riva wrote:After asking around I think it was Dali, then someone else under Zao.

Aye, as I told Mall on IRC the BTO coup attempt happened while Dali was Pharaoh and had fallen inactive. Oliver, his Kai Repat (Vice Delegate), had to assume the Delegacy and then became Acting Pharaoh after Dali ceased to exist. Then in the elections that followed, Earth (Lyanna Stark) was elected Pharaoh.

The coup attempt you may be thinking of, Apple, was Knights of the Round Fable during Zaolat's term, which I don't think Durk was involved in though you never know.

This ^

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Feeder/sinker terms are in there as a placeholder for something R4 compliant.

Is this Mal the player trying to avoid what could potentially be a sticky situation, or is this Mal the mod saying for a fact that the terms "feeder" and "sinker" are R4 violations? I've yet to see a definitive answer on the legality of "feeder"/"sinker".

Wrapper wrote:

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Feeder/sinker terms are in there as a placeholder for something R4 compliant.

Is this Mal the player trying to avoid what could potentially be a sticky situation, or is this Mal the mod saying for a fact that the terms "feeder" and "sinker" are R4 violations? I've yet to see a definitive answer on the legality of "feeder"/"sinker".

viewtopic.php?p=18832921&sid=3459b40811dea31a2477fe7f296a9654#p18832921
It's been answered before.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:

Wrapper wrote:Is this Mal the player trying to avoid what could potentially be a sticky situation, or is this Mal the mod saying for a fact that the terms "feeder" and "sinker" are R4 violations? I've yet to see a definitive answer on the legality of "feeder"/"sinker".

viewtopic.php?p=18832921&sid=3459b40811dea31a2477fe7f296a9654#p18832921
It's been answered before.

And, now I've seen a definitive answer, thanks. I'll be interested to see how you get around that.

As far as this draft, I don't know the parties or circumstances involved, but what you've laid out certainly seems condemn-worthy to me.

There were several other times not mentioned in the original condemn about actions committed in TNP. There was the Bokeryville situation where Durk had two nations in the RA and ran two simultaneous campaigns for Delegate with both accounts.

There was also the telegram campaign against my reign where he told every nation in the region that McMasterdonia was a nation owned by Durkadurkiranistan and I lost nearly 40 endorsements as a result of that campaign.

McMasterdonia wrote:There were several other times not mentioned in the original commend about actions committed in TNP. There was the Bokeryville situation where Durk had two nations in the RA and ran two simulatenous campaigns for Delegate with both accounts.

There was also the telegram campaign against my reign where he told every nation in the region that McMasterdonia was a nation owned by Durkadurkiranistan and I lost nearly 40 endorsements as a result of that campaign.

haha... forgot about those.

Parmesan Crusted Tilapia wrote:

McMasterdonia wrote:There were several other times not mentioned in the original commend about actions committed in TNP. There was the Bokeryville situation where Durk had two nations in the RA and ran two simulatenous campaigns for Delegate with both accounts.

There was also the telegram campaign against my reign where he told every nation in the region that McMasterdonia was a nation owned by Durkadurkiranistan and I lost nearly 40 endorsements as a result of that campaign.

haha... forgot about those.

I'm sure it is easy to forget everything you've done, with your long history of naughty behaviour

Looks like a pretty good draft so far, I would try to add a little more length to it, more events, details / description. I'd add in somewhere his total GCR ejections, which is 6300 according to his sig.

I think we should note that he should be condemned for convincing UDL people he was participating in their missions despite not having a WA nation. Such dastardly deeds deserve to be punished;)

Parmesan Crusted Tilapia wrote:

McMasterdonia wrote:There were several other times not mentioned in the original commend about actions committed in TNP. There was the Bokeryville situation where Durk had two nations in the RA and ran two simulatenous campaigns for Delegate with both accounts.

There was also the telegram campaign against my reign where he told every nation in the region that McMasterdonia was a nation owned by Durkadurkiranistan and I lost nearly 40 endorsements as a result of that campaign.

haha... forgot about those.

Oh Durk you little prankster you

Durk needs to be taught a lesson for his outrageous behaviour over the past few years, and a more expansive condemnation from this Security Council will almost certainly have the desired effect.

Solorni wrote:I think we should note that he should be condemned for convincing UDL people he was participating in their missions despite not having a WA nation. Such dastardly deeds deserve to be punished;)

If duping and trolling the UDL warranted condemnation, a good 2/3 of NationStates should probably have one.

I'm in favor of the condemnation though, I just don't think pulling the wool over the eyes of UDL leadership warrants mention as anything remarkable. It happened all the time, their security was abominable, and if they were at all still relevant it would probably still be happening.

North East Somerset wrote:Durk needs to be taught a lesson for his outrageous behaviour over the past few years, and a more expansive condemnation from this Security Council will almost certainly have the desired effect.

Yeah also it'd be a good idea if mommy Rach spanked me good and hard.

Listing numbers of nations ejected by Durk misses the point of a condemnation. Why is he condemnable for ejecting X number of nations from TSP, TNP, and others? The draft should highlight that he is condemnable because such actions give newly created nations a bad impression of NationStates, reducing their enjoyment of the world and making them more likely to retire from the world. Also, the draft is a bit thin if you're just going to mention the coups and ejections. Perhaps add something about how he turned against the defender cause? Or how the original Durk was deleted for an obscene flag? (You can word it in such a way that it be legal to mention it, for example, noting Durk II to be a successor nation to Durk I, which was destroyed for committing crimes against NS)

I'm not sure we should condemn Durk though. He is hardly one of the most condemnable or most influential invaders on NS. Even though he did coup feeders and ejected nations, he left no lasting impact on how the game is played. Those coups were a hiccup and the feeders recovered quickly. Condemning him ahead of people like EW or Of Crazed would be doing them a disservice. In terms of sheer cunning, I'd rank Westwind and Biyah to be miles ahead. Another point, since Durk loves the limelight, condemning him would just be rewarding him.

If the repeal passes, I think we should just leave it at that.

~GRO~

Anime Daisuki wrote:Listing numbers of nations ejected by Durk misses the point of a condemnation. Why is he condemnable for ejecting X number of nations from TSP, TNP, and others? The draft should highlight that he is condemnable because such actions give newly created nations a bad impression of NationStates, reducing their enjoyment of the world and making them more likely to retire from the world. Also, the draft is a bit thin if you're just going to mention the coups and ejections. Perhaps add something about how he turned against the defender cause?
~GRO~

I'd love more information about his history prior to the purges, I currently lack that. I would also like more feedback on the clause that I inserted regarding new nations being purged, whether it needs expanding.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:

Anime Daisuki wrote:Listing numbers of nations ejected by Durk misses the point of a condemnation. Why is he condemnable for ejecting X number of nations from TSP, TNP, and others? The draft should highlight that he is condemnable because such actions give newly created nations a bad impression of NationStates, reducing their enjoyment of the world and making them more likely to retire from the world. Also, the draft is a bit thin if you're just going to mention the coups and ejections. Perhaps add something about how he turned against the defender cause?
~GRO~

I'd love more information about his history prior to the purges, I currently lack that. I would also like more feedback on the clause that I inserted regarding new nations being purged, whether it needs expanding.

Just keep drafting this as it will eventually be needed.

Chester Pearson wrote:

Mallorea and Riva wrote:I'd love more information about his history prior to the purges, I currently lack that. I would also like more feedback on the clause that I inserted regarding new nations being purged, whether it needs expanding.

Just keep drafting this as it will eventually be needed.

I intend on passing it whether or not the repeal effort is successful.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
Just keep drafting this as it will eventually be needed.

I intend on passing it whether or not the repeal effort is successful.

Even better....

Mallorea and Riva wrote:

Anime Daisuki wrote:Listing numbers of nations ejected by Durk misses the point of a condemnation. Why is he condemnable for ejecting X number of nations from TSP, TNP, and others? The draft should highlight that he is condemnable because such actions give newly created nations a bad impression of NationStates, reducing their enjoyment of the world and making them more likely to retire from the world. Also, the draft is a bit thin if you're just going to mention the coups and ejections. Perhaps add something about how he turned against the defender cause?
~GRO~

I'd love more information about his history prior to the purges, I currently lack that. I would also like more feedback on the clause that I inserted regarding new nations being purged, whether it needs expanding.

Still looking for this ^