[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn The Pacific"

[South Sacred Sauce]

South Sacred Sauce agrees with john_turner words, voting against this resolution.

[Solorni]

How is it strange, he is critiquing the NPO for its governance yet his region is governed in a way that most would find repulsive.

In what way is it governed repulsively? Form vs. content, Rachel. I'm criticizing TP for its form of government, and you're criticizing RTL for its ideological content. Hence, Guy calls your attack an ad hominem. He's right. The two things are separate matters.

Region	Form of Government	Content of Government
The Pacific	One-party system, dictatorship	Francoism (minus the name now)
Right to Life	Multi-party system, representative democracy	Advocacy for prenatal rights

In particular, I referenced to Cormac my preference for on-site elections, which are practiced in a region that I founded.

This assumes a difference between form and content in NS. In reality they are both aspects of content and culture. It is telling that you put Francoism into your category of content despite Francoism essentially determining the form of TP. Thus, to me at least the determined culture and governance are intertwined and equal. Both are determined by either the community or by individuals in a more authoritarian fashion. In the case of your region, you determined the content in a fashion perhaps even more authoritarian than TP. So its obvious that they can be compared in this manner.

I thus don't believe it's a personal attack to rightly point out the hypocrisy of your statements when you have based your region on an ideology seen as repulsive in real life let alone just an in game one. Also , I have not given my own view on it.

[Lazarus CoS]

I think we're losing sight of what's important here. How The Pacific governs itself doesn't matter. What matters is that the reason The Pacific was condemned is not something to be dismissed because Pierconium said "Oops, my bad bro." a few months later. I might be paraphrasing, but it was Pierconium himself during the invasion with which The Pacific was condemned for that said "In a decade's time we'll all be wondering what Lazarus was like before it was part of the order." Is the repeal really deserved because he apologized after they failed? I don't believe it is. Nor do I have reason to believe there was any sincerity in the apology that the author is trying to use to justify this repeal and every reason to believe it was insincere.

[Christian Democrats]

In what way is it governed repulsively? Form vs. content, Rachel. I'm criticizing TP for its form of government, and you're criticizing RTL for its ideological content. Hence, Guy calls your attack an ad hominem. He's right. The two things are separate matters.

Region	Form of Government	Content of Government
The Pacific	One-party system, dictatorship	Francoism (minus the name now)
Right to Life	Multi-party system, representative democracy	Advocacy for prenatal rights

In particular, I referenced to Cormac my preference for on-site elections, which are practiced in a region that I founded.

This assumes a difference between form and content in NS. In reality they are both aspects of content and culture.

Form and content are clearly different things. Canada and Lesotho have the same form of government; but I doubt you would say that, in essence, they are identical countries.

It is telling that you put Francoism into your category of content despite Francoism essentially determining the form of TP. Thus, to me at least the determined culture and governance are intertwined and equal. Both are determined by either the community or by individuals in a more authoritarian fashion. In the case of your region, you determined the content in a fashion perhaps even more authoritarian than TP. So its obvious that they can be compared in this manner.

Authoritarian? I'm sure you'd find that RTL offers its residents more freedom than the vast majority of regions.

I thus don't believe it's a personal attack to rightly point out the hypocrisy of your statements when you have based your region on an ideology seen as repulsive in real life let alone just an in game one. Also , I have not given my own view on it.

It's hypocritical to distinguish between a region's structure and its ideology, really?

Also, advocacy for the most fundamental human right is hardly "repulsive" except to a barbaric culture.

[DrWinner]

Very well, I'll be sure to contact the author for permission, then. Thank you for the warning.

No worries. Reading back I realise I sounded a bit more scary than intended, I needed to get my cooking going. But yeah, ask permission before using (parts of) someone else's proposal, or you could get dinged for plagiarism. 'sides, you might want to give drafting your very own proposal a go?

I've thought about it, but I've yet to find any issue I feel like I could get it passed successfully on. And besides, it's more fun trying to be a social justice warrior.

[The Bruce]

This would have stood a good chance of passing if the author wasn't Cormac, because NPO were evidently making progress, so this is a bit of a setback.

So soon after the Osiris coup, blatant overreach, but not at all surprising. This is someone who has almost single-handedly turned the Gameplay world on it's head, no one cares about R/D anymore - it's just a question of where you stand on Cormac.

What else can you say really, the actual substance of the resolution is pretty much irrelevant in the present context, so it would be more sensible to discuss that at a future date under milder conditions.

It is a bit of a problem. It's sort of like a kid who likes to commit random acts of arson in the neighbourhood calling out another kid for throwing rocks through windows. You can agree that it's wrong for that kid to be breaking windows, but you just feel wrong about the fact that it's the arsonist kid being the one to present the argument. Maybe they could have also brought it up without still having a can of gas in their hand too...

[Deliana]

How is it strange, he is critiquing the NPO for its governance yet his region is governed in a way that most would find repulsive.

In what way is it governed repulsively? Form vs. content, Rachel. I'm criticizing TP for its form of government, and you're criticizing RTL for its ideological content. Hence, Guy calls your attack an ad hominem. He's right. The two things are separate matters.

Region	Form of Government	Content of Government
The Pacific	One-party system, dictatorship	Francoism (minus the name now)
Right to Life	Multi-party system, representative democracy	Advocacy for prenatal rights

In particular, I referenced to Cormac my preference for on-site elections, which are practiced in a region that I founded.

I really think that your 'Right to Life' should be changed to 'One-party system, dictatorship of the lifers' and 'Life-ism'. There are debates and discussions within the Pacific about how it ought be run. Similarly, there are debates and discussions within RtL about how it ought be run. But if I were to walk in there railing about how it needs to change itself to be pro-choice — slam.

[California Prime]

Let's lay this out on the line. The Pacific has done everything required to earn a repeal of this condemnation, but the anti-New Pacific Order crowd will do everything they can to keep this condemnation active simply because they don't approve of the form of Regional Government that we the citizens of The Pacific have agreed to. Apparently they think that they should be in position to try to bully us into adopting a regional government more to their outsider liking. These partisan hacks wage a war against our region's right to govern ourselves as we see fit and yet they have the stones to think that they are the ones shining a beacon on freedom and liberty. Typical.

[Consular]

Let's not make this out like it's entirely about Cormac. I know me being against it has nothing to do with him being the author really, and I imagine there are plenty of others who feel the same.

[Guy]

-snip-

Is this still about the Security Council Resolution or about how we do things in the Pacific?
This shouldn't be of any concern here and I find it disturbing and disgraceful on how some of you are acting to our Emperor. As Pacifican, I feel insulted to some extend.
Leave alone all the Dictator references and whatnot..

All these claims completely unjustified and are - if I can state it right now - made by people which aren't Pacificans at all. Amusing isn't it?
Where is there even the respect for the souvereignity of the Pacific? Do we even have a word to say, when it comes on how we want our regional government to be? - Or do we have to bend to those ridiculous epistemes that are literally imposed at us in here, by some people?

Our Emperor, was right: He would win an open election within the Pacific twice a day! It is the way we want to be governed. We value, against all odds our Meritocracy that prevailed longer than any other government in this game until today. I doubt that most of you would understand what the Meritocracy is about.
It's definitely not democratic and thus no hilarious popularity contest. But I tell you what it is: It is performance-oriented. And thus it is anything but stagnant and oppressive: It is rewarding. It values contributions to the community. It values loyalty. It values duty. Those are mertis that seem to be a foreign concept to a wide amount of players here, but these are merits we value.

Pierconiums endorsements are not given to him, just because. It is a sign. A sign that the nations of the Pacific stand behind their rightful Delegate and behind the New Pacific Order, that made our region prosperous for ages.

I am neither impressed by your pointless argumentation, nor intimidated. After all, I am just disappointed on how my region is displayed here.
This being said, I will, with foremost reason and goodwill ignore people like you in the future and anyone else that ridicules the Pacific, our community, our way of governance or our Souvereign.

Hail Pacifica. o/

Ah yes Pergamon, the Lazarus couper who also signed with "Hail Pacifica".

[The Church of Satan]

Let's lay this out on the line. The Pacific has done everything required to earn a repeal of this condemnation, but the anti-New Pacific Order crowd will do everything they can to keep this condemnation active simply because they don't approve of the form of Regional Government that we the citizens of The Pacific have agreed to. Apparently they think that they should be in position to try to bully us into adopting a regional government more to their outsider liking. These partisan hacks wage a war against our region's right to govern ourselves as we see fit and yet they have the stones to think that they are the ones shining a beacon on freedom and liberty. Typical.

It's easy to dismiss all the naysayers as bullies, but those that disapprove with the NPO's form of governance don't represent all of the opposition. It doesn't change the fact that the NPO did invade a GCR in the hopes of conquering it and even your emperor hoped it would succeed. Not to mention, despite apologizing for it, the NPO rewarded both Stujenske and Pergamon for their part in it. You're going to have to actually try to put some effort into your posts if you want anyone to take you seriously.

[Pierconium]

Let's lay this out on the line. The Pacific has done everything required to earn a repeal of this condemnation, but the anti-New Pacific Order crowd will do everything they can to keep this condemnation active simply because they don't approve of the form of Regional Government that we the citizens of The Pacific have agreed to. Apparently they think that they should be in position to try to bully us into adopting a regional government more to their outsider liking. These partisan hacks wage a war against our region's right to govern ourselves as we see fit and yet they have the stones to think that they are the ones shining a beacon on freedom and liberty. Typical.

It's easy to dismiss all the naysayers as bullies, but those that disapprove with the NPO's form of governance don't represent all of the opposition. It doesn't change the fact that the NPO did invade a GCR in the hopes of conquering it and even your emperor hoped it would succeed. Not to mention, despite apologizing for it, the NPO rewarded both Stujenske and Pergamon for their part in it. You're going to have to actually try to put some effort into your posts if you want anyone to take you seriously.

First, Pergamon was a loyal citizen of Lazarus who was in government there prior to the NLO. He simply agreed with the rights of the sitting Delegate to change the form of government, something the Pacific also agrees with. He also served within the Pacific in various 'non-authority' positions before being very recently invited to join the Senate. His position now has absolutely nothing to do with Lazarus and everything to do with his service to the Pacific.

Second, how did the Pacific 'reward' Stujenske? He is not part of the Pacific.

[Pergamon]

It's easy to dismiss all the naysayers as bullies, but those that disapprove with the NPO's form of governance don't represent all of the opposition. It doesn't change the fact that the NPO did invade a GCR in the hopes of conquering it and even your emperor hoped it would succeed. Not to mention, despite apologizing for it, the NPO rewarded both Stujenske and Pergamon for their part in it. You're going to have to actually try to put some effort into your posts if you want anyone to take you seriously.

You're going to have to actually try to put some effort into your region and courts if you want anyone to take you seriously. I mean, how long is your processing of the "GoF" going on now? : One year and one month?

Plus, tell me how I have been rewarded for what happened in Lazarus? Just hilarious. I've actually had to start from scratch again. I lost big in april one year ago. For me, it was complete ground zero, why?: Because unlike you I didn't decide to betray my Delegate.
I am accountable to none - and especially not to the likes of you.

Ah yes Pergamon, the Lazarus couper who also signed with "Hail Pacifica".

Actually, I didn't coup Lazarus in particular. I were simply serious about my position as Vice Delegate and assisted the sitting Delegate with the best of my abilities.

[Alvecia]

A a somewhile citizen of The Pacific, I feel I should weigh in here on the notion of us not having a choice regarding our governance.
Quite frankly, that's bullshit.
True the average citizen does not have much of a say in who becomes part of the ruling party, but we still have a choice. NS is full to overflowing with regions that are ruled democratically and will quite happily take in any newcomers. We in the Pacific have already made a choice. We chose to stay and we chose the governance that we have now.
To suggest that the ability to elect should be forced upon us is to suggest that it should be forced upon all, lest you find yourself tripping over your own double standard.

If you believe that is the case then I suggest you write up a proposal that would see democracy mandatory in all NS regions. See how far that gets.

[Ghenslund]

As a new member of The Pacific I feel motivated to give the security council my point of view.

It looks like this repeal is going to fail, and I find that sad. I've been playing NS for 7 years now and about a month ago decided to park my nation in its original feeder region and give it a try for the first time. The first thing I saw was the condemn badge, and it sent me to do some research. I get what happened with the failed invasion, and I understand the original condemnation.

But now, a year later, it seems that the Security Council is intent on continuing to condemn a handful of NPO leaders, regardless of the fact that not all remain, and by your admission, the current leadership had apologized for.

This condemnation isn't being applied to those nations in the Pacific that the Security Council found guilty last year- it is being applied to every new nation founded in The Pacific. If a nation decides to stay in the Pacific and support its meritocratic government, you may disagree, but that is not an act worthy of condemnation.

Blocking this repeal is not a vote on what happened last year. This is a referendum on the NPO, and the international community's personal dislike of its non-democratic form. The continued condemnation of new regional residents like myself is purely petty. I am disappointed.

[Cobeidha]

Bismillah Al Rahman Al Rahim

I would like to give my view on the Pacific. I have been a member of the Pacific for over a year now. I was a newbie with every sense of the word. I had absolutely no knowledge in what to do and felt alone. But then I joined the off-site forums, and met a number of great and awesome people, some left, some stayed and even made new friends over the course of my time in the Pacific. I then began to contribute more into the NPO and was dedicated in helping the region in everyway I can. Our system is not a dictatorship, we are a Meritocracy, as in if we contributed to the NPO and helped it, then you get rewarded. This is, in my opinion, a great teamwork exercise and can form new friendships with the many people who do the same. You keep criticising the NPO and falsly claiming that its citizens do not want them? Here I am, a citizen of the NPO, and I am saying that the NPO is a fair system where everybody gets rewarded if they contribute to the region. While it is sad that the repeal of the condemnation isn't going to pass, It won't deter me anytime soon. If at all I, along with other Pacificans, will wear the badge as a sign of honour and a sign of freedom of choice. We honestly don't care what the rest of the NS community says about us, it's all petty lies anyways.

Sadakallahu Al Adhim

Salam

[Sandaoguo]

This would have stood a good chance of passing if the author wasn't Cormac, because NPO were evidently making progress, so this is a bit of a setback.

Would it? I don't think TSP cast its votes against because Cormac wrote it.

[Pierconium]

This would have stood a good chance of passing if the author wasn't Cormac, because NPO were evidently making progress, so this is a bit of a setback.

Would it? I don't think TSP cast its votes against because Cormac wrote it.

I'm not sure of your point. The vote is losing by a 2:1 margin at present and TSP only accounts for a small percentage of that difference.

Also, TSP voted fairly late (considering the apparent pattern of certain large votes to stack the early tally) and did not really have that much influence on the current totals.

We in the Pacific have no ill-will toward TSP and acknowledge their right to vote as Lazarus tells them to, but I do not believe TSP was a deciding factor in this instance and would likely (unless the vote is given in coordination earlier with some of the other anti-NPO regions) not be a factor in future votes. Although, again, we would welcome TSP's support.

[Sandaoguo]

Would it? I don't think TSP cast its votes against because Cormac wrote it.

I'm not sure of your point. The vote is losing by a 2:1 margin at present and TSP only accounts for a small percentage of that difference.

Also, TSP voted fairly late (considering the apparent pattern of certain large votes to stack the early tally) and did not really have that much influence on the current totals.

We in the Pacific have no ill-will toward TSP and acknowledge their right to vote as Lazarus tells them to, but I do not believe TSP was a deciding factor in this instance and would likely (unless the vote is given in coordination earlier with some of the other anti-NPO regions) not be a factor in future votes. Although, again, we would welcome TSP's support.

TSP is #7 in the number of votes our delegate has. So, no, it's not irrelevant.

That's not even what my post what about, anyways. There's no evidence that 3,500+ players were persuaded to vote against repealing the condemnation because Cormac's name is attached to it. It's far more likely they just don't think The Pacific deserves to have its condemnation repealed.

[Pierconium]

I'm not sure of your point. The vote is losing by a 2:1 margin at present and TSP only accounts for a small percentage of that difference.

Also, TSP voted fairly late (considering the apparent pattern of certain large votes to stack the early tally) and did not really have that much influence on the current totals.

We in the Pacific have no ill-will toward TSP and acknowledge their right to vote as Lazarus tells them to, but I do not believe TSP was a deciding factor in this instance and would likely (unless the vote is given in coordination earlier with some of the other anti-NPO regions) not be a factor in future votes. Although, again, we would welcome TSP's support.

TSP is #7 in the number of votes our delegate has. So, no, it's not irrelevant.

That's not even what my post what about, anyways. There's no evidence that 3,500+ players were persuaded to vote against repealing the condemnation because Cormac's name is attached to it. It's far more likely they just don't think The Pacific deserves to have its condemnation repealed.

I contend that TSP was completely irrelevant to the outcome of this vote and that the majority of those voting in the negative have done so because of the initial vote stacking, as is often the case for these sorts of things. I highly doubt that the vast majority of those voting have any actual concern about the initial Condemnation or the merits of this repeal.

But, sure, tell yourself that.

[Crazy girl]

There's no evidence that 3,500+ players were persuaded to vote against repealing the condemnation because Cormac's name is attached to it. It's far more likely they just don't think The Pacific deserves to have its condemnation repealed.

Actually, it is far more likely they think "this option has the most votes, so that should be the right one"

The WA has a sort of lemming effect, so if one or more larger regions toss in their votes early, a lot of voters will follow their example, often even without reading the proposal or at least not doing any research into it.

[Aaaah Snaaaake]

Despite personal and political arguments rampant in this debate, which the leaders of Aaaah Snaaaake find repugnant in an international convention, the research done by our Foreign Department confirms that The Pacific has indeed made reparations and strides toward improving the situation in which it was condemned for and finds an entire year perfectly reasonable. Our region's lead delegate, Lord Ravenclaw, not responding to the charges laid against him disturb us, however The North Pacific regional democratic laws allow us to vote however we like. While we do not agree with how The Pacific governs, their own nations do. We do not even agree with how some of our own member nations govern and thus reserve the right allowed by North Pacific law to not endorse them. However, we do respect a nation and region's right to sovereignty and will never participate in outside political debates irrelevant to the matter at hand. Which these arguments about their sovereign rights certainly are. Therefore Aaaah Snaaaake and its people have cast their vote FOR.

Ambassador Wallace Badgerton IV
Prime Badger of Foreign Department
Head of International Aid Committee

[Glen-Rhodes]

Y'all, I practically invented criticizing the lemming effect. You can't check me on that.

It's just not credible to think that Cormac being the author is why this repeal is failing. The NPO isn't popular. That's why it's failing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sciongrad]

Y'all, I practically invented criticizing the lemming effect. You can't check me on that.

It's just not credible to think that Cormac being the author is why this repeal is failing. The NPO isn't popular. That's why it's failing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have no strong feelings on this repeal, but this is pretty accurate. The target resolution passed by one of the largest margins ever. I doubt the author is the reason this is failing.

[Pierconium]

Y'all, I practically invented criticizing the lemming effect. You can't check me on that.

It's just not credible to think that Cormac being the author is why this repeal is failing. The NPO isn't popular. That's why it's failing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is credible when almost 1000 of the votes cast within the first 5 minutes were explicitly cast in the negative because of the author.

I don't agree with the logic behind the decision but that is the stated reason.

It is not credible to think that in this one instance the lemming effect was not a factor.