[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn Punk Reloaded"

[Frisbeeteria]

This has been long needed. Basically, what it comes down to, is that Punk Reloaded was condemned for being a threat because of his war and his "Republic" but we know now both efforts failed. As it turns out, Punk Reloaded is far from a threat, and as a whole is definitely not impressive enough to merit recognition on a game-wide level.

Repeal "Condemn Punk Reloaded"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation
Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#65 | Proposed by: Weed

The Security Council,

Remembering Punk Reloaded was condemned shortly after The West Pacific, under the "leadership" of Punk Reloaded, declared war upon The South Pacific,

Recalling at that time The West Pacific had also implemented other controversial policies such as the NationStates Republic and a new Constitution both mentioned in the resolution,

Regretting the condemnation was passed before the results of these moves could be seen,

Knowing the war on The South Pacific to have turned out to be a pathetic war of words, which consisted of a declaration of war with no action to back up the hostilities until The West Pacific later declared peace to the "war",

Observing in a recent statement Punk Reloaded admitted that the NationStates Republic's original goal, a region giving up some of its "sovereignty" never was accepted, and it therefore failed in its original goal and that the Republic works more like a typical alliance now,"

Noting also that the undemocratic constitution alleged by the original resolution is neither unique or impressive in terms of other regions,

Realizing in retrospect the intentions of Punk Reloaded were certainly bad, but his inefficient and incompetent nature prevented any harm from being done,

Understanding now the conclusion of the original resolution mislabels Punk Reloaded as a "dangerous influence" rather than an inept annoyance, and as an "an enemy of peace and justice" rather than as an enemy of activity and efficiency,

Believing that Punk Reloaded couldn't harm anyone or anything, especially if Punk Reloaded tried,

Hereby repeals SC #65 Condemn Punk Reloaded.

Click here to approve this proposal, delegates!!

Finally, the only further information I need to supply because the information isn't common knowledge of those who were watching this event is the recent comment about the Republic: viewtopic.php?p=10235289#p10235289

WA Ambassador from Weed,

Clinton Tew

[Ossitania]

We're withholding comment until we see how more informed debaters react to this submission, but we will take a position soon.

[Unibot II]

He declared war on the South Pacific using his authority for his own petty and personal end; I understand the West Pacific has been building an army, but at the time, it was incompetent -- that's no reason to suggest that rogue diplomacy which could have caused incredible instability in a tense situation in inter-feeder relations, should not be condemned.

Furthermore, he ignored the regional votes on the SC resolutions related to the South Pacific coup, so he could vote Pro-Dev to satisfy his own pettiness.

OPPOSED!

[The Great Destruction]

Regretting the condemnation was passed before the results of these moves could be seen,

The ends do not justify the means.

Realizing in retrospect the intentions of Punk Reloaded were certainly bad, but his inefficient and incompetent nature prevented any harm from being done,

You dont have to be successful to be evil. Intent and attempt is enough for a condemnation. You admit that he was bad.

Understanding now the conclusion of the original resolution mislabels Punk Reloaded as a "dangerous influence" rather than an inept annoyance, and as an "an enemy of peace and justice" rather than as an enemy of activity and efficiency,

You don't become delegate of the West Pacific by being inept and any nation who could become the leader of such a large region is a potententially dangerous one.

Believing that Punk Reloaded couldn't harm anyone or anything, especially if Punk Reloaded tried,

Just because Punk Reloaded is no longer, or more acuratly not at the moment, a threat to anyone is no reason to un-condmen this nation. One cannot simply undo the actions Punk was responsible for. Punk has not reconciled anything, just simply realized that its foul plans would not succeed.

Opposed

[Belschaft]

I'm going to wait to find out what Punk's opinion is, and then advocate for whatever he doesn't want to happen.

Why? Because of spite. That's why

[Weed]

Ugh Rule IV. Taking out the his and mass tging again.

[Weed]

Just because Punk Reloaded is no longer, or more acuratly not at the moment, a threat to anyone is no reason to un-condmen this nation. One cannot simply undo the actions Punk was responsible for. Punk has not reconciled anything, just simply realized that its foul plans would not succeed.

And to be clear, no he hasn't, he isn't going to. Punk is a different type of player, not one that is respectable or honest. Punk's favourite thing in NationStates is his condemnation, he enjoys being the big bad threat so much, in fact I think he's actually come to believe he actually was some form of impressive evil doer.

I'm just ego checking. Reminding all that things happened differently.

[Punk Reloaded]

I'm going to wait to find out what Punk's opinion is, and then advocate for whatever he doesn't want to happen.

Why? Because of spite. That's why

And indeed friends, this is the difference between myself and the powers that be in The South Pacific, I hold no spite nor ill will to anyone in this.

If you'll allow me to pull back the curtain and not be bombastic, I'd like to say that the condemnation on its own doesn't meet my general criteria for a condemnation. Never did and I'm pretty sure I said as much back then. I didn't declare war against TSP on my own and what AMOM left out of his condemnation was the reasoning for the war declaration.

I won't rehash those same arguments here, but will say that I like the condemnation. One, I like the fact I took a stand, I won't apologize for taking the stand and certainly won't apologize for getting the support of TWP'ers at the time. If the SC feels the need to condemn me for that, that's cool by me. Two, I like a shiny badge, it's cool and chicks dig it!

I have no plans to support or fight efforts to repeal this condemnation. I'm generally curious to see which way the lemmings would vote on a repeal. Would people deem my efforts as unworthy of a condemnation, will they believe that TWP was indeed justified in declaring war? If so, they'll vote for the repeal. If they believe in the merits of the original condemnation, then they will not support the repeal.

Either way, is fine by me...but my preference is to keep my shiny badge.

EDIT: Just actually read through the text of the repeal. Looks like it will get to a vote and we'll get to watch the drama unfold. With respect to the NSR, the alliance is going strong. I invite all who wish to check us out to go here: http://z13.invisionfree.invalid.com/nationstate ... index.php?.

The only item I still take umbridge with and did at the time of the condemnation is that Weed gives me too much credit in what happened in TWP. The region voted for the constitution and also supported the war efforts. Weed mentions how the concept of giving up some sovereignty for the greater good of the republic was not accepted. If my counts are correct more TWP'ers voted for the original constitution than voted to separate TWP and the NSR. Does that make that vote void? Is Enlightened Defenders a rogue delegate who pushed his own constitution through? No, of course not. Instead, the same (or smaller numbers version) TWP that wanted to try out the NSR concept felt that a different approach would be better. But as Belschaft stated, when spite is the source of your inspiration, whatever I support those who hold such feelings towards me will take the opposite position facts be damned.

I'm very curious to see how this plays out in the voting and will be watching. *grabs some popcorn*

[Frisbeeteria]

I'm not as familiar with SC rules as some of the other mods (none of whom are active at the moment), but it seems to me that this proposal is little more than an in-character flame. Given that it will go to vote in 75 minutes, I'd appreciate some feedback from any SC regulars in the house to help me/us decide if this sort of thing is kosher in the SC.

[Bergnovinaia]

I'm not as familiar with SC rules as some of the other mods (none of whom are active at the moment), but it seems to me that this proposal is little more than an in-character flame. Given that it will go to vote in 75 minutes, I'd appreciate some feedback from any SC regulars in the house to help me/us decide if this sort of thing is kosher in the SC.

I'm not a regular... but oddly enough, it appears to me that the majority of the reasons listed don't actually merit a repeal, but mostly state the threats, and then the concluding statement is like... "nation x basically can't do this because they are pathetic." Seems odd to me.

[The Republic of Lanos]

I'm not as familiar with SC rules as some of the other mods (none of whom are active at the moment), but it seems to me that this proposal is little more than an in-character flame. Given that it will go to vote in 75 minutes, I'd appreciate some feedback from any SC regulars in the house to help me/us decide if this sort of thing is kosher in the SC.

We are approaching the major update and it's now on track of hitting the voting floor...

[Frisbeeteria]

I'm not as familiar with SC rules as some of the other mods (none of whom are active at the moment), but it seems to me that this proposal is little more than an in-character flame. Given that it will go to vote in 75 minutes, I'd appreciate some feedback from any SC regulars in the house to help me/us decide if this sort of thing is kosher in the SC.

We are approaching the major update and it's now on track of hitting the voting floor...

I know at least one SC mod reviewed the earlier draft when it was pulled for a Rule 4 violation, so I'm reluctantly leaving it in place. However, I think this sort of passive-aggressive flaming has no place in the permanent annals of the Security Council, and I encourage WA member nations to vote against it.

This is tacky, and the author is experienced enough to know better. I'm disappointed.

[Weed]

First vote for.

[The Republic of Lanos]

We are approaching the major update and it's now on track of hitting the voting floor...

I know at least one SC mod reviewed the earlier draft when it was pulled for a Rule 4 violation, so I'm reluctantly leaving it in place. However, I think this sort of passive-aggressive flaming has no place in the permanent annals of the Security Council, and I encourage WA member nations to vote against it.

This is tacky, and the author is experienced enough to know better. I'm disappointed.

...what would be the significance if this were to pass now that it's too late to pull?

[Gnomewatchers]

First vote against.

[Frisbeeteria]

...what would be the significance if this were to pass now that it's too late to pull?

We'll have established a precedent that an SC proposal that is basically mild flaming made it into the permanent rolls. I know about the division between IC and OOC, but the line was particularly thin on this one. The player behind Weed was basically calling the player behind Punk Reloaded a weak and ineffectual person, and everyone who reads this will know that. I can't speak for anyone else in the game, but the author has, in my mind, forfeited any respect due from his prior contributions with this one.

[Shemiki]

AGAINST this tries to make his actions look less than they really were.

[The Republic of Lanos]

What do you know...it's already failing.

[Tibberiria]

Because someone tried to do something bad and failed doesn't mean they shouldn't be admonished. Against.

[Turtles Everywhere]

I voted against, but I have to admit the last clause made me laugh really hard.

[Punk Reloaded]

We are approaching the major update and it's now on track of hitting the voting floor...

I know at least one SC mod reviewed the earlier draft when it was pulled for a Rule 4 violation, so I'm reluctantly leaving it in place. However, I think this sort of passive-aggressive flaming has no place in the permanent annals of the Security Council, and I encourage WA member nations to vote against it.

This is tacky, and the author is experienced enough to know better. I'm disappointed.

I appreciate this Fisbeeteria. A number of folks from TSP tend not to see beyond their hatred of me to either A accept the positives I have brought to the game or B speak to me in a rational/respectful manner. I plan to continue to treat them as I'd like to be treated and allow them to amuse themselves with things like this. Because I do not agree with them on a number of issues should not give either party license to disrespect one another.

But, I'm just glad to not be the only one to see the flamebait oozing from this proposal.

[Sedgistan]

Okay. I respect the arguments that have been drawn forth but I'm voting FOR because I'm with the NationStates Republic. While it's not fully understood around the NS community, the Republic HAS become a great alliance for regions everywhere. Punk Reloaded does not deserve to be antagonized for creating, what is, although eventually, a good thing.

[Sedgistan]

Debit - this is not a thread for you to advertise in. That part of your post has been removed.

[The Great Destruction]

...what would be the significance if this were to pass now that it's too late to pull?

We'll have established a precedent that an SC proposal that is basically mild flaming made it into the permanent rolls. I know about the division between IC and OOC, but the line was particularly thin on this one. The player behind Weed was basically calling the player behind Punk Reloaded a weak and ineffectual person, and everyone who reads this will know that. I can't speak for anyone else in the game, but the author has, in my mind, forfeited any respect due from his prior contributions with this one.

Yes it is a little flamish. It should have addressed the actions as weak or ineffectual not the nation. As I said earlier those statements are untrue. You don't become the delegate of a large region by being impotent. With that in mind, the fact that Punk made poor descisions with it power, even though Punk may have been thwarted in its attemps, is why it receive an official condemnation. I beleive it should stand.

VOTE NO

[The Federal Republic of Ducharme]

While I do believe that the actions taken by "Punk Reloaded" can be classified as something akin to a nuisance, I also believe that even though the condemnation was worded poorly, it is still a condemnation and it is something that I wish not to be repealed. The longer this subject remains in controversy, the more likely this situation will be repeated by another like minded nation.