DEFEATED: Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE" : THE QUADRILOGY!!!

[Ardchoille]

Not really. "Nazi" isn't a race of people is it. He is however a laughable hypocrite.

I've quoted Vinoslavia, not because it's a particularly noteworthy insult, but because it's the most recent OOC insult. There are too many of them in this thread.

While the WA has a robust tradition of exaggerated insult, inventive name-calling and frequent extreme physical outrage ambassador to ambassador (IC), that doesn't extend to player-to-player exchanges (OOC). For players, it's the same as General: attack the argument, not the player.

I'd prefer not to start chucking warnings around, since warnings and such are depressingly OOC. Just try to remember that in this forum you're a diplomat representing your nation.

[Qumkent]

OOC Are we ?

[Topid]

I'd prefer not to start chucking warnings around, since warnings and such are depressingly OOC. Just try to remember that in this forum you're a diplomat representing your nation.

Eww!!! The SC has always been 90% OOC, and is pretty much an OOC forum.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Honoured ambassadors, the repeal attempt has been defeated again, 3,527 votes to 2,249.

I can observe that it appears that either there is a case against the region that forgot to be mentioned in the original, or that some may still believe that it is an ideology of hate. I don't know... I know ideologies can't be banned in resolutions, but honestly the Nazism debate is now at a deadlock or something.

Yours etc,

[TannerFrankLand]

Honoured ambassadors, the repeal attempt has been defeated again, 3,527 votes to 2,249.

I can observe that it appears that either there is a case against the region that forgot to be mentioned in the original, or that some may still believe that it is an ideology of hate. I don't know... I know ideologies can't be banned in resolutions, but honestly the Nazism debate is now at a deadlock or something.

3,527 votes to 2,249? Not much of a deadlock sounds like case closed to me. Or at least for several months.

I'm sad we lost, but we did, repeatedly. Let's not beat a dead horse. I know there are going to be another thousand of these repeals proposed within a couple weeks, but delegates should not approve them. The more times this repeal goes to vote, the less likely I think it will be that it ever passes.

[Inflatable Gandalfs]

I agree with the troll. Give this thing a rest already. When he wants to start another argument about his resolution, I'm sure he'll let us know.

But that's just the "diplomat" in me speaking.

[Daynor]

I agree with the troll.

And the kettle calls the pot black.

This entire thing has been inflamed by the old UN/Old WA/New GA elitists as a way to discredit the SC as nothing but trolling and name calling, and retake their precious bureaucracy.

You have no idea what his motives were.

[Qumkent]

I agree with the troll.

And the kettle calls the pot black.

This entire thing has been inflamed by the old UN/Old WA/New GA elitists as a way to discredit the SC as nothing but trolling and name calling, and retake their precious bureaucracy.

You have no idea what his motives were.

OOC Eh ? What's that ? Unibot is the author of this controversy, after all Unibot is the one who's dragged this mess up repeatedly, not "the old UN/Old WA/New GA elitists"

[Inflatable Gandalfs]

I actually don't think the SC would be such a bad thing, had it not been hijacked by the Gameplay Elite for its own ends. I've even proposed one or two C&Cs myself -- but there's not much hope for this institution as long as it remains dominated by one clique of players rehashing the same shit over and over again. Of course, I've said this countless times before, but no one wants to listen to little ol' me. Yet another symptom of the GP elite's mindless self-indulgence and groupthink.

[TannerFrankLand]

I agree with the troll. Give this thing a rest already. When he wants to start another argument about his resolution, I'm sure he'll let us know.

But that's just the "diplomat" in me speaking.

One, I wished you let off, if you actually read the draft thread of the original Nazi Europe resolution, it's very clear that I believed I was doing what was right, (I was wrong) but the point is, my motivation wasn't vengeance. I started two regions, and built two communities AT THE SAME TIME I was campaigning for this resolution... Do you really think I was also playing as a main nation as well? I didn't have time! I just don't see how I could have been motivated by revenge when clearly I had only been playing the game for a couple weeks.

Two, everyone (active members of the WA, on the forum) wants this resolution gone. I only asked a question, and apologized. I told everyone in the thread you are using to blame me for starting this repeal, that a repeal was useless, and would fail. I don't understand how that was encouraging Stash to write this!! I don't understand how this is my fault. Please please please explain.

Three, given that everyone wants this gone, and given that I have said nothing over the last few weeks that indicated anything other than it is smart to wait several months, how would YOU like me to behave? Really, whatever it is, I'll consider it. I can't just ignore this. It follows me, you know this. But how would you like me to handle the issue of the condemnation?

[Krioval]

And the kettle calls the pot black.

This entire thing has been inflamed by the old UN/Old WA/New GA elitists as a way to discredit the SC as nothing but trolling and name calling, and retake their precious bureaucracy.

You have no idea what his motives were.

Semi-IC (contains a bit of OOC thought, but presented IC):

I wasn't going to, but I can't let it go. Oh, well. We "elitists" (I do hope I qualify) are interested in solid proposal authorship, not self-congratulatory dreck. C/C proposals fall squarely into that category unless they are dealing with exceptional behaviors. So far, that's not been the case. Remember that my opposition to this repeal effort was that the claims in the repeal were sufficiently odious to overcome what would have been modest support; Condemn NAZI EUROPE is a terrible proposal. At the same time, you're right in that I don't want the WA to be focused on the comings and goings of two or three regions at the expense of the rest of the NSWA. The near-constant activity on pushing this repeal effort has left me wondering if it is the goal of the SC's proponents to drive the organization into irrelevance. I mean, there was talk of a repeal/replace effort for Commend 10000 Islands because of a single spelling error; there have been four repeal attempts on Condemn NAZI EUROPE (two of which have come to vote and failed); there is a serious effort to commend the founder of 10000 Islands because, I suppose, commending the region is just not enough; there were attempts to commend moderators for doing their jobs, forcing a new rule against such commendations to be enacted; and the current SC forum reads like a bunch of barbarians trying to outshout one another at a tribal moot. Good think Kriovallers are well practiced at both theatrics and barbarism.

The existence of C/C proposals is a debacle that has been blunted by the very "elitists" you deplore - several commendations reached quorum that would have congratulated people on things such as being Catholic. Only a vigorous campaign against such proposals caused their loss of support, as it had to be explained that religiosity was hardly worthy of commendation given the complex makeup of NS. C/Cs represent the basest motives combined with the crassest politics for the stupidest of results, and it is also for that reason that SC#3 needs to be kept around for a while. TannerFrankLand's motives are irrelevant here, though I suspect (probably along with all those other "elitists") that by constantly popping up to say how horribly, horribly wrong he was, he is drawing a lot of unwarranted attention to himself, and that behavior bring into question his supposedly altruistic intentions. Further, I think that he and the rest of the SC apologists (I hesitate to consider them to be "elite" until proven otherwise) need to take their lumps, let this thing sit for a while, and not play right into the hands of the NAZI EUROPE propaganda machine.

Now for the bureaucracy issue. By virtue of working on WA (once-UN) proposals for the better part of four and a half years, I have an idea as to what constitutes a decently written proposal, what constitutes crap, and what constitutes a work in progress regardless of how Krioval might vote on the finished product. GA proposals, unlike C/Cs, actually do something, and therefore have to have their wording carefully calibrated, or they will be lightning rods for repeals later on. And frankly, with the quality of the work that is coming out of the SC, I hardly have to lift a finger to solidify the GA's hold on the bureaucracy. But please continue to ignore the fundamental fact that the WA is a political organization, that motives and writing quality matter, and that C/Cs are fundamentally flawed.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Great Chiefdom of Krioval

[Krioval]

One, I wished you let off, if you actually read the draft thread of the original Nazi Europe resolution, it's very clear that I believed I was doing what was right, (I was wrong) but the point is, my motivation wasn't vengeance. I started two regions, and built two communities AT THE SAME TIME I was campaigning for this resolution... Do you really think I was also playing as a main nation as well? I didn't have time! I just don't see how I could have been motivated by revenge when clearly I had only been playing the game for a couple weeks.

See, here's where you fail utterly. You were grabbing for attention any way you could get it; building "two communities at the same time" while "campaigning for this resolution". Oh, who has the time for careful contemplation when there's so much work to do. Misplaced martyrdom will get you nowhere with Krioval, IC or OOC.

Two, everyone (active members of the WA, on the forum) wants this resolution gone. I only asked a question, and apologized. I told everyone in the thread you are using to blame me for starting this repeal, that a repeal was useless, and would fail. I don't understand how that was encouraging Stash to write this!! I don't understand how this is my fault. Please please please explain.

With the right repeal, maybe. But SK/Unibot and you are actively ruining any chance at that happening by dragging in a ridiculous amount of self-focusing drama and emotionalism. Also, it is obvious that not "everyone", even with your constraint, want this resolution gone. This is why one is cautious in proposing new legislation before the WA. The law of unintended consequences always passes, and the goal should be to minimize its impact. Maybe you were naive, or maybe you just didn't care, but you made a mess of things because it suited you to do so at the time. Now it doesn't anymore - deal.

Three, given that everyone wants this gone, and given that I have said nothing over the last few weeks that indicated anything other than it is smart to wait several months, how would YOU like me to behave? Really, whatever it is, I'll consider it. I can't just ignore this. It follows me, you know this. But how would you like me to handle the issue of the condemnation?

Honestly, the best chance for a repeal would be for you and Unibot/SK to not touch this thing for a good six months. Then, in April, somebody completely disinterested can submit a repeal, keep the cheap emotionalism to a minimum, and maybe shepherd it through the vote. I say "maybe" because it's going to be an uphill battle to repeal a condemnation of Nazis even if the damned thing is perfectly written. So, yes, if it's about more than you and your feelings, you'll ignore this, keep quiet, and chime in only when asked, and then, only to the degree that you are asked. Now, whether you can do that is really up to you.

[Daynor]

Semi-IC (contains a bit of OOC thought, but presented IC):

sniped to save space

Totally-OOC (The only right way):
Yeah, you are right that not all of the SC proposals are the fault of GAers, but, you of all people should know that new/inactive players will submit some really stupid things. Let's not pretend that stupid proposals are limited to the SC (Which I don't think is what you mean). Commending mods and commending catholics are just some of the normal stupid behavior that is bound to come out of any player-submission body.

But, I still think that (and you are a GAer in my book, but one innocent of the following by what I've seen) certain people who swore to boycott and never have anything to do with the SC suddenly found a reason to take part in these huge debates in the SC. And I think that reason is less than ethical.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Dear Honoured Ambassadors,

The government of The Grand Puerto Rican Palti of Buffett and Colbert wishes to express its sincere disappointment in the failure of passage of the repeal of Condemn Nazi Europe. We hope that a new repeal can be drafted and put into law in a timely manner.

Sincerely,

Stephen Jims
WA Ambassador

[Krioval]

Totally-OOC (The only right way):
Yeah, you are right that not all of the SC proposals are the fault of GAers, but, you of all people should know that new/inactive players will submit some really stupid things. Let's not pretend that stupid proposals are limited to the SC (Which I don't think is what you mean). Commending mods and commending catholics are just some of the normal stupid behavior that is bound to come out of any player-submission body.

But, I still think that (and you are a GAer in my book, but one innocent of the following by what I've seen) certain people who swore to boycott and never have anything to do with the SC suddenly found a reason to take part in these huge debates in the SC. And I think that reason is less than ethical.

OOC (as you wish):

I take pains to be extremely tolerant of new posters in the GA, unless my blood is boiling from other things, in which case I avoid new posters until I reach equilibrium. The problem with C/Cs in particular is that it is easy to get a fluff proposal to quorum with a slick political campaign, and bypass the draft stage (and the forums) entirely. I really have no problems with the Liberation category, though I wonder how useful it is. Such is life, I feel the same way about the Gun Control category in the GA.

I admit my anti-SC bias, though it is hardly total, and I wouldn't agree to boycott something that I might want to influence, should it gain in strength. I wouldn't mind seeing an effective SC, but I think that the C/C category lends itself to self-parody. It turns the SC into a pageant, wherein the right answer to every question becomes "world peace". That's part of why I argue on the "Remove Liberate" thread that invaders need to brush up on basic politics.

As for previously boycotting WA members increasing participation in SC affairs, a good deal of that is GA/SC crossover - Unibot/SK has a negative reputation with Krioval and I try to RP my nation whenever possible, even in SC matters (hence the semi-IC post). Krioval is hardly alone in this, and FrankTannerLand has done an excellent job of shooting himself in the foot, politically speaking, drawing further criticism. Maybe some of those nations (since I don't know which ones you mean, I can't say for sure) have adopted a gatesvillian approach to the SC - join it to bring it down. Whether this is ethical is up for debate - I prefer the direct approach despite being of a political bent but some are less direct.

[Krioval]

Dear Honoured Ambassadors,

The government of The Grand Puerto Rican Palti of Buffett and Colbert wishes to express its sincere disappointment in the failure of passage of the repeal of Condemn Nazi Europe. We hope that a new repeal can be drafted and put into law in a timely manner.

Sincerely,

Stephen Jims
WA Ambassador

Yes. In April.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Great Chiefdom of Krioval

[Qumkent]

Totally-OOC (The only right way):
Yeah, you are right that not all of the SC proposals are the fault of GAers, but, you of all people should know that new/inactive players will submit some really stupid things. Let's not pretend that stupid proposals are limited to the SC (Which I don't think is what you mean). Commending mods and commending catholics are just some of the normal stupid behavior that is bound to come out of any player-submission body.

But, I still think that (and you are a GAer in my book, but one innocent of the following by what I've seen) certain people who swore to boycott and never have anything to do with the SC suddenly found a reason to take part in these huge debates in the SC. And I think that reason is less than ethical.

OOC I'm not sure who your refering to in this post when you talk of "certain people who swore to boycott and never have anything to do with the SC", but I do think you need a reality check.

Condemn NAZI EUROPE is in fact the perfect example of exactly what the SC is designed to do. We are expected to accept that it is manifestly a good thing that C&Cs allow the entire WA player membership the opportunity to decide who it likes and who it does not like. We are expected to believe that simple majorities of a largely apathetic or only casually interested membership are an excellent way to establish what is approved and what is not approved behaviour for WA member players.

The sum of these beliefs is Condemn NAZI EUROPE. If you ask a mob to decide moral or ethical dilemma then you will get the mob's decision on such dilemma. I personally think that Condemn NAZI EUROPE should now stay on the books partly because it would be annoying beyond words to have to be subjected to this nonesense again, but partly because I think it is exactly what the SC and C&Cs were created to do. Why is anyone surprised by this outcome ? If you ask a mob do they like Nazis in most cases they will say "NO!".

I suppose the worst thing about this is that in fact this condemnation isn't in character and couldn't ever be. So we have asked WA Players not characters to condemn another group of players for actually doing nothing of any consequence. But since that is exactly what the SC and the C&C process demands I am at a loss to understand why anyone thinks this is anomolous or repealable.

If you didn't want players mindlessly condemning other players and creating unpleasant badges of ostracism to demonise other players ( or glamourise them depending on your perspective ) then you shouldn't have been so delighted with this whole theatre of stupidty.

[Helertia]

*headesk*
It's back in proposals for the third time, near enough identical wording and getting approved by people. I swear they're trying to kill us through sheer fatigue....

[The Aryan Third Reich]

Why are people againist this it makes no sense

Why people keep proposing repeals makes no sense.

Cause it's wrong

No,Because As soon as they see the Word "Nazi" the vote against it,I bet half the nations didn't even read the resolution.

Agreed!!! Stupid Pricks.

[Katganistan]

Why are people againist this it makes no sense

Why people keep proposing repeals makes no sense.

Cause it's wrong

No,Because As soon as they see the Word "Nazi" the vote against it,I bet half the nations didn't even read the resolution.

Agreed!!! Stupid Pricks.

Remember: no trolling/flamebaiting.

[Ardchoille]

I'd prefer not to start chucking warnings around, since warnings and such are depressingly OOC. Just try to remember that in this forum you're a diplomat representing your nation.

Eww!!! The SC has always been 90% OOC, and is pretty much an OOC forum.

True, at least from my point of view, though I'm told that, for some gameplayers, simply posting on a forum is posting IC. I'm not going to even try to arbitrate that.

My point is simply this: if I or other mods think you're posting as a player, and what you're saying is an insult addressed to another player, rather than to their argument, or their nation's activities, you're open to whatever penalties are appropriate.

On the question of warnings, etc, the rules say, and the assumption I am working on is, that this forum and the GA are world bodies where a certain level of diplomatic conduct is expected and enforced. If "diplomatic" smacks too much of eww, RP, to you, just consider that players are expected to be on their best behaviour because this is a formal setting. It's the difference between a UN debate and a pub shouting-match.

When players are on their best behaviour, a murmured, "I say, old boy, that just isn't done!" should be all that's needed to get them back on track. Imposing OOC in-game warnings and bans is more like calling in the security guards, with a bit of the old GBH thrown in. This disrupts the proceedings. So, when modding the WA forums, we try the softly-softly approach first. It's worked for some years in the GA, and I see no reason to expect SC players to be less couth.

As to "unethical behaviour" -- if you think it's unethical, Condemn it! Admins have repeatedly said C&Cs allow the WA nations to take a moral stance. There are only two points you'll have to watch: first, be very careful how you condemn, because, given the personal nature of SC proposals, there's a risk of rule-breaking by flaming. "Commend Kandarin" controversially established that you can praise the player behind the nation, but long-standing NS rules have established that you can't flame them. You have to walk the fine line between criticising an action and insulting the actor. "Gameplay" IC -- to the extent of referring to the nation, not the person -- would probably be your best bet.

Second, "unethical" to one politician is "realistic politics" to another. Again, the admins have repeatedly said that the SC is a chance to play politics (just as Gatesville did in the NS UN). You are allowed to use your influence, monster your subordinates, trade favours, quibble, equivocate, filibuster (until mods catch you) and anything else that comes to mind. It's up to the proposer to persuade others that a given behaviour is "unethical".

You can even whinge about the SC, provided that it relates to the proposal before the Council. You, collectively, set the tone. It can be Chicago under the Boss, the British House of Commons at the height of the WWII blitz or the Government of All the Talents: your choice.

[Gobbannium]

Two, everyone (active members of the WA, on the forum) wants this resolution gone.

OOC: I don't.

The SC needs this resolution on the books as a Terrible Example of What Not To Do (and yes, SP, those are portentous capital letters).

The GA has a body of rules that impose a fair degree of quality control. It's not a guarantee of course, but the truly dismal rather than merely debatable (i.e. things I may disagree with ) are usually also illegal.

The SC doesn't have those rules, and the rules that might conceivably have applied have been deliberately suspended. Roleplay is not enforced, not even by peer pressure. The line between player and nation is blurred to the point of non-existence. Real life can intrude. We can condemn ideologies. And of course, fact-checking is optional.

"Condemn Nazi Europe" is the result of the SC not imposing rules on itself. While we haven't learned from it -- and the debate shows pretty clearly that a number of the movers and shakers here have learned not a damn thing -- we should keep it in place as a warning.

[Vinoslavia]

Why are people againist this it makes no sense

Why people keep proposing repeals makes no sense.

Cause it's wrong

No,Because As soon as they see the Word "Nazi" the vote against it,I bet half the nations didn't even read the resolution.

Agreed!!! Stupid Pricks.

Oi Ardchoille cat guy, Why am I always warned on these forums when people post things like this guy just wrote. Just an observation. At least I make some attempt at raising good points. My History lesson was largely ignored though, I feel like Tony Robinson.

[Vinoslavia]

Why are people againist this it makes no sense

Why people keep proposing repeals makes no sense.

Cause it's wrong

No,Because As soon as they see the Word "Nazi" the vote against it,I bet half the nations didn't even read the resolution.

Agreed!!! Stupid Pricks.

Remember: no trolling/flamebaiting.

Actually Ardchoille I Think I missed this from your Senior.

I just feel as if people aren't even reading the original resolution when they vote against the repeal. It is so flawed and poorly written that I am amazed that it even made it past moderation. Vote to repeal it even in order to make way for better written new condemnation legislation against Nazi Europe. If that is the way that the Assembly feels about the region. Wisdom of crowds I guess, However as it stands the resolution is a slur upon the reputation of the WA itself.

[Flibbleites]

Why are people againist this it makes no sense

Why people keep proposing repeals makes no sense.

Cause it's wrong

No,Because As soon as they see the Word "Nazi" the vote against it,I bet half the nations didn't even read the resolution.

Agreed!!! Stupid Pricks.

Remember: no trolling/flamebaiting.

Actually Ardchoille I Think I missed this from your Senior.

I just feel as if people aren't even reading the original resolution when they vote against the repeal. It is so flawed and poorly written that I am amazed that it even made it past moderation.

It wasn't deleted by the mods because being poorly written is not a deletable offense.