[DEFEATED] Repeal Condemn The Black Hawks

[Mahaj WA Seat]

I'm really kind of saddened at the gross misinformation, and that nobody has really commented on this thread.

If this fails, i'm not trying again.

[Sedgistan]

I'm really kind of saddened at the gross misinformation, and that nobody has really commented on this thread.

Mahaj, the lack of comments is probably a result of the lack of content in the proposal. It was pointed out to you that your repeal read as little more than a reverse of the original Condemnation - you added the minimum amount necessary to make it legal, but there's really very little to debate here that the SC didn't already cover when considering the original Condemnation.

When drafting repeals in future, remember that arguing against each individual clause in the resolution you're repealing should only be a start - it'll give you a rather dry proposal, that often runs into the issues you had earlier. It's a good idea to also examine the principles which the original resolution espoused, and argue against them, rather than focusing solely on the clauses.

[Zoblacon]

AWARE that regions with active founders are immune to raids

I wouldn't go as far a saying they are immune. I've seen successful stealth raids that have changed regions for the worse without the founder even realizing it.

[Kulaloe]

THE SECURITY COUNCIL,

ACKNOWLEDGING the existence and intent of the Resolution Condemn The Black Hawks, abbreviated as CTBH in this resolution,

REALIZING that "region" and "nation" were switched in the 'REALIZING' clause of CTBH, making the clause have little meaning,1)

COGNIZANT that The Black Hawks use a style of raiding where regions are not taken and held permanently in most cases, contra to what was stated in CTBH, 2)

EXPOUNDING upon this by describing the raiding style of The Black Hawks to be little more than tagging the World Factbook Entry of invaded regions,

BELIEVING that tags on the World Factbook Entry do not have a cooling effect on free speech and democracy, 3)

FEELING that nations all over the world share their opinions without regard to The Black Hawks, proving that The Black Hawks do not have a cooling effect on free speech and democracy,

AWARE that regions with active founders are immune to raids, 4) allowing nations in those regions to have free speech and participate in democracy no matter how many raids The Black Hawks are a part of, 5)

NOTING that the proposal 'Commend The Black Hawks' failed to even reach quorum in the Security Council,

FEELING that a proposal that did not even come up to vote is not worthy of being a reason for a condemnation, 6)

ALSO KNOWING that 'Commend The Black Hawks' had the help of nations outside The Black Hawks and was not a conspiracy by any means of the word, 7)

RECOGNIZING that the Security Council is one of the two branches of the World Assembly and is here to stay, forever and ever, until the demise of this World Assembly itself,

THEREFORE FINDING that The Black Hawks cannot and in no way endanger the survival of the Security Council,

HEREBY REPEALS "Condemn The Black Hawks" for the above reasons.

1) Word order matters not. Disagree some dialects do.

2) Not taken in MOST cases, but still some are. How many constitutes many is a matter or interpretation.

3) No, but if the tag removes the link to the regional forum there could be problems.

4) Stealth raids.

5) But what if the region wants to be a true republic and go founderless to establish this? Or what about cases like what happened in Xcursion?

6) I agree with this, however there are more reasons than just the fact that they failed to get commended.

7) Or was it? What if they have spies all over the place? Can you say with 100% certainty that it wasn't influenced by Black Hawk spies?

Not true at all! How do you know the SC will last until the WA's demise? There was a time when only the GA existed. Could things not go back to that way if the powers that be decide?

[The Antartic Regions]

The Antartic Regions hereby declares it support to ‘Repeal “Condemn The Black Hawks”’, for TBH is not that big of a threat. Also, as said before, we should condemn them for something actually condemnable. I'd like to add that, also as said before, the condemnation is nothing but a kind of compliment that makes TBH feel proud of themselves.

[Draculanovia]

I as a member and founder of a new region can NOT in good conscience support the repeal of this condemnation as it would run the risk of putting my great region at risk. Further, I propose a condemnation against any nation that supports the repeal of this.

[The Antartic Regions]

I as a member and founder of a new region can NOT in good conscience support the repeal of this condemnation as it would run the risk of putting my great region at risk. Further, I propose a condemnation against any nation that supports the repeal of this.

Yeah, yeah, let's condemn 3127 nations (and counting), GREAT idea, don't you all think so?

[Draculanovia]

Perhaps not the best statement, but you get the point. Everything that passes through here passes for a reason and I feel everyone (like it or not) should be stuck with everything that they have already passed. Repeals of legislation should either not be allowed or not be necessary, however, if you are going to try repealing things, why not just repeal everything and start over from scratch hoping to get a perfect legislative system up and running.

[Kalimat]

The argument in favor of TBH essentially seems to be "we're good at what we do, it's a 'legal' part of the game, and everyone who opposes us is just jealous and bitter."

If you want to leverage the rights of players in your favor, start by respecting other players basic wishes to NOT be raided. Raid those who acknowledge it. Some don't roleplay at all, and we RPers acknowledge that and leave them be. TBH believes that they have a divine right to dictate to other players the features of the game in which they must participate. Once we have given them a taste of their own medicine, using a weakness of the game to inconvenience them, they suddenly lean on the very rights of nations and players that they have so willfully circumvented to gain infamy.

Had you accepted the minor bruise given to you two months ago everyone would have forgotten the condemnation. You're condemned, the repeal will fail, and then what? We'll feel good having called you out with a stupid badge, you'll go on doing what you do with or without the badge, and the game will continue. Alternatively, you can continue tweaking repeals until one passes, forgetting that this is a messy game in which sometimes you lose and instead focusing on what loopholes you can find to justify an activity that obviously a majority of SC members found condemnable.

[New South Arctica]

The argument in favor of TBH essentially seems to be "we're good at what we do, it's a 'legal' part of the game, and everyone who opposes us is just jealous and bitter."

If you want to leverage the rights of players in your favor, start by respecting other players basic wishes to NOT be raided. Raid those who acknowledge it. Some don't roleplay at all, and we RPers acknowledge that and leave them be. TBH believes that they have a divine right to dictate to other players the features of the game in which they must participate. Once we have given them a taste of their own medicine, using a weakness of the game to inconvenience them, they suddenly lean on the very rights of nations and players that they have so willfully circumvented to gain infamy.

Had you accepted the minor bruise given to you two months ago everyone would have forgotten the condemnation. You're condemned, the repeal will fail, and then what? We'll feel good having called you out with a stupid badge, you'll go on doing what you do with or without the badge, and the game will continue. Alternatively, you can continue tweaking repeals until one passes, forgetting that this is a messy game in which sometimes you lose and instead focusing on what loopholes you can find to justify an activity that obviously a majority of SC members found condemnable.

What we do is legal. If you don't wish to be raided get a founder who is active or share the founder account among trusted members of your region...you can't expect that we go around asking founderless regions if they want to be raided or not..thats just ridiculous. We are playing within the rules and its no "divine right" to do so, its plain and simple within the rules of this game.

We don't care about the badge, well it is nice to have, but we will continue to do what we do as long as it stays legal, no matter if we have a badge our not. The condemnation doesn't hurt us at all. This repeal is neither supported by us nor do we want it to pass. The person trying to pass did this because the initial resolution was full of inaccuracies and is portaying us more powerful than we are...we have no problem with that, but if you have really some respect for this institutions you might reconsider some of the elements in that document.

But hey if the majority wants to portray us as the most dangerous players in this game...I am ok with that, its not breaking any rules and its definitely not like "giving us a taste of our own medicine", cause our game is played in a different ballpark. This doesn't mean that I will accept any unproven claims about us and our deeds...like the one in your earlier post in this thread. Which reminds me of one question: where is your proof to our "threat" to you?

[Kalimat]

Founderless? Please direct me to which region Kalimat has been a member of that had no founder or an inactive founder. And yet we've been threatened by The Black Hawks. The notion that you have to be supremely powerful to have a chilling effect on speech is also an interesting interpretation. In my eyes, if a single nation fears to speak up at the Security Council because of a TBH threat, then a vital voice has been silenced and the Council is that much less representative. Of course, TBH and Mahaj only view items as important if hundreds of nations are affected. Threaten a region here or there? No problem. As long as it's not "the norm." Quiet a nation here or there? No problem. As long as it's not "the norm."

If TBH would simply have admitted that yes, on occasion, we have stepped beyond the activities we claim to, this would all be moot. Rather than turn inward and determine who among TBH has been issuing such threats under the TBH banner, you and your allies have turned outward, further convincing players like me that it's worth the time to throw badge up there so future players know what they're dealing with.

[New South Arctica]

Founderless? Please direct me to which region Kalimat has been a member of that had no founder or an inactive founder. And yet we've been threatened by The Black Hawks. The notion that you have to be supremely powerful to have a chilling effect on speech is also an interesting interpretation. In my eyes, if a single nation fears to speak up at the Security Council because of a TBH threat, then a vital voice has been silenced and the Council is that much less representative. Of course, TBH and Mahaj only view items as important if hundreds of nations are affected. Threaten a region here or there? No problem. As long as it's not "the norm." Quiet a nation here or there? No problem. As long as it's not "the norm."

If TBH would simply have admitted that yes, on occasion, we have stepped beyond the activities we claim to, this would all be moot. Rather than turn inward and determine who among TBH has been issuing such threats under the TBH banner, you and your allies have turned outward, further convincing players like me that it's worth the time to throw badge up there so future players know what they're dealing with.

Repeating the same accusations over and over again without proof is very inventive...but hey if this badge is needed for you (and others like you) to feel safe, its ok...in fact I suggest you go throw them around on every single raider in this game and start with me if you want, cause by just posting here I might frighten someone, somewhere in this game and thereby kill the freedom of speech or whatever.

And the "turning inward" advise really made me laugh...you go around claiming stuff and accusing us and we should try to see the truth behind your claims, even if there is no truth behind it. Thats a good starting point for turning our region into a place full of paranoid people (..ahh...maybe thats the plan behind this ) And its like asking a defendant to prove that he is innocent, luckily in any fair and real judicial system things don't work that way, there it is always the prosecutor who has to convince the jury or judge to win his case.

I guess this is one of the reasons why those badges do nothing in game, besides shining brightly next to a regions name....ahh, almost forgot...sorry....and they are giving people like you a feeling of security. I am ok with that, my point is that I only want to be feared for stuff I could really do and destroying the SC is hardly something I or TBH could do, the same goes for silencing people and some of the other stuff claimed in the original condemnation resolution.

You also don't seem to realize why Mahaj is trying to repeal this. Maybe me neither, but here is my theory: Its not because he thinks we shouldn't be condemned, it is because he sees the WA and the SC as something much bigger than our "little" region. And another reason might be, that he is aiming towards resolutions that are a little more related to the in-game reality...short form of this theory: Condemn them for their actions not for stuff they can't do or even won't do. But it seems his quest for higher standards will be as successful as our "attempt" at dominating the whole world ( and this time I mean the REAL world)

[Kalimat]

I've provided this proof before in forums; seek it out. Unlike TBH and Mahaj, I've no interest in beating a dead horse. In all honesty, I prefer to be left alone in my region with a few of our ally regions. It's the forum fanatics that make NationStates an increasingly frustrating game to play, rather than a fun pasttime. We play in our little regions and vote our consciences in the WA and suddenly those with nothing better to do come along and issue threats. So, we stand up and support resolutions that we think will allow us to return to our quiet little game only to have absurd conspiracy theories lobbed our way.

Say what pleases you and enjoy picking on those regions who you deem (because of their founder status) worth raiding. I'm sure NS will be grand old fun once you get all of us ungrateful n00bs out, right?

[Metania]

Heh. I guess I'll have to try my proposal instead.

As my argument is that the reasoning in the original condemnation is hysterical foolishness based around being afraid of nothing at all, and that it was a sham proposal.

You see, to get anywhere in politics like this, one must not sit there and make the calm, boring proposal, but rather repugnant legislation must be forcefully smashed to bits.

People still believe the black Hawks are a threat--means this proposal is doomed. On the other hand, if they are properly portrayed as boring, vanilla, entirely predictable raiders doing a silly game that effects less than 1% of the current population of NS, then you see, the people who oppose can be shown to be living in fear over nothing at all-people afraid of their own shadows.

Not that I'm even against condemning them either--rather if they are to be condemned, it is for NOT being interesting raiders.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Seriously, The Black Hawks? You guys are still hung up on that shit? This is sooooo two months ago...

[Metania]

No need to respond to that--anything two months old loses all importance, apparently, your own post included. The passage of time will apparently deal with it for me.

There is no time limit on dealing with fearmongering jokes of proposals. Lest we forget how many early and bad resolutions of the original UN were removed years after they were made.

[Mahaj]

And we're back! New draft in the OP! Here goes this ride again!

[Sedgistan]

Apparently the WA archivers missed this one. You're going to have to post your new draft in a separate thread.