PASSED: Liberate the Security Council !!

[Philimbesi]

I'm pleased to announce that after applying my CouldGiveACraplessWhatOtherNationsDo^TM Security Council scoring rubric. It has been decided to vote for this measure.

Scoring is as follows.

-10 Points for "No mention of penguins."
+25 Points for "There is nothing I like better in the queue"
+25 Points for "Was created to make a point"
-25 Points for "No one got the point"
+10 Points for "No mention of Nazi's
+10 Points for "No mention of regions that remind me of salad dressing"
- 10 Points For "No mention of Nazi Zombies"

The overall score is 25 points and as it is above 0, we vote for.

[The Rich Port]

So... let me guess this straight: this measure liberates the committee in charge of liberating? Dear Lord Almighty, is the situation so dire that we must require such an absurd measure? What bias will this remove, the bias of proposing new legislation, of trying to have it passed? What is happening that this measure requires implementation? I mean, jeez, I've only missed two legislative forum debates; what did I miss? I rescind my vote on such a silly measure. On second thought, I shall vote against it, so that the World Assembly can continue it's ACTUAL business of bettering the world.

[The Rich Port]

So... let me guess this straight: this measure liberates the committee in charge of liberating? Dear Lord Almighty, is the situation so dire that we must require such an absurd measure? What bias will this remove, the bias of proposing new legislation, of trying to have it passed? What is happening that this measure requires implementation? I mean, jeez, I've only missed two legislative forum debates; what did I miss? I rescind my vote on such a silly measure. On second thought, I shall vote against it, so that the World Assembly can continue it's ACTUAL business of bettering the world.

[Philimbesi]

-25 Points for "No one got the point"

[The Palentine]

Since I really couldn't give a rat's arse if this passes or not, I've decided to have a contest to decide which side gets my vote. The rules are very simple, and since I'm dealing with y'all here in the Security Council, I'll remember to talk slow. The side which peeves me off the least gets my vote. So have at it with your twisted or obtuse logic, name calling, trolling, flaming, slap fights, and other seemingly regular methods of persuasion. I'll be here sipping my Wild Turkey^(TM), smoking a Fine Yeldan Cigar^(TM), the size of a small kosher salami, and visiting the Thessadorian Ambassador's website with my laptop, while you debate. So carry on.<begins to hum the notre Dame Fight song while smiling most unwholesomely to the Security Council regulars.>
Excelsior,
Sen. Horatio Sulla

[Koumpounophobia]

Richard Makner shrugged a little.
"I got the point. Not sure why people think it's so weird. The Security Council feels that the General Assembly is shitting on the small guys. So, to follow the kid metaphor, this is a little boy asking his brother to stop crapping on the kid. Easy enough, right?
"I approve."

[Minyos]

FOR.

But y'know what I'd reeeeally like to see, really?

That the SC evolve beyond craptastic C&Cs and (I can't totally fault Liberations, they have teeth), well, I'd LOVE for the SC to become a house of review, the NS Senate over time.

Yeah.

Actually, what I'd REALLY love is if SC resolutions pass in the GA, and vice-versa. Pass TWICE. Make it HARD to get ANYTHING passed - so what escapes quorum, then voting in both "houses" might actually reflect something genuine and lasting.

Or not.

But it'd be F U N to watch the desperation and frustration to get that res, PASSED.

In fact I'd go as far as to say that all movement STOP upon the review voting until a minimum quorum of votes is reached, to stop people from going "Oh, this is just some stupid GA/SC thing (choose your flava, playa), haven't I voted on this already...stuff that". Nah, it can all stop until it's dealt with, then any new res in either queue gets bumped up.

I'm liking it.

A LOT. Niiice and complimercated and frustrating and annoying, and everyone can BITCH and piss and moan and whine and the game actually has longevity and evolving interest...

C'mon...who hasn't seen the potential for the SC to become a House of review over time?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Gods, no. One of the main reasons for the separation was because the two branches hate being inundated by the others' business. And I hardly think that even the most ardent SCer would favor turning the house that brought us resolutions on WFE colors and Nazis into a revered "house of review."

[Sedgistan]

I think we could have a lot of fun vetoing GA resolutions...

[Plutoni]

Sen. Sulla,

I don't want to peeve anybody off, and therefore, I may not be taking a very active role in the debate. However, I'd like you to know that I wholechippedly support this resolution, and if my non-peeving impresses you, I encourage you to do the same.

--PDA418, Plutonian Attaché for Security Council matters

[Doitzel]

And apparently some people don't even check the post just above theirs when they post.
Again, for those who don't understand:

In basic technical terms, it would prevent delegates of The Security Council from imposing a password on that region.

However, in reality, the resolution is there to guage support for this suggestion.

I read your post. I know what this is about. I still think it's stupid and annoying to use a technicality to dodge around the game rules so that you can bring up a debate that has no place in the WA (or any in-game areas). Frankly if you can't get your point across or gather enough support for a game mechanic change without cute little stunts like this either A) it's not enough of an issue for people to give a rat's ass or B) people don't support it.

[Sedgistan]

I accept that this resolution is rather different to any we've previously had, but I think its actually quite a good way of seeing the level of support for the idea. Yes, there is the possibility of people misunderstanding it, but there's not really another way of finding out the level of support for splitting the GA & SC.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

I think we could have a lot of fun vetoing GA resolutions...

Yes, and imagine the fun GAers would have had not vetoing Condemn Nazi Europe or Repeal Commend 10000 Islands!

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

And apparently some people don't even check the post just above theirs when they post.
Again, for those who don't understand:

In basic technical terms, it would prevent delegates of The Security Council from imposing a password on that region.

However, in reality, the resolution is there to guage support for this suggestion.

..you can bring up a debate that has no place in the WA (or any in-game areas)...

Excuse me.. but I thought this was the Security Council... as in, the institution thats being liberated from the General Assembly (and vice versa), did I miss something ? Or do I have the wrong Security Council !?

[Koumpounophobia]

And apparently some people don't even check the post just above theirs when they post.
Again, for those who don't understand:

In basic technical terms, it would prevent delegates of The Security Council from imposing a password on that region.

However, in reality, the resolution is there to guage support for this suggestion.

..you can bring up a debate that has no place in the WA (or any in-game areas)...

Excuse me.. but I thought this was the Security Council... as in, the institution thats being liberated from the General Assembly (and vice versa), did I miss something ? Or do I have the wrong Security Council !?

"You may have missed something- I know I did," remarked Makner slowly.

[Philimbesi]

::Cough:: Check the link to the region on the resolution ::cough::

[Doitzel]

And apparently some people don't even check the post just above theirs when they post.
Again, for those who don't understand:

In basic technical terms, it would prevent delegates of The Security Council from imposing a password on that region.

However, in reality, the resolution is there to guage support for this suggestion.

..you can bring up a debate that has no place in the WA (or any in-game areas)...

Excuse me.. but I thought this was the Security Council... as in, the institution thats being liberated from the General Assembly (and vice versa), did I miss something ? Or do I have the wrong Security Council !?

Yeah, the Delegate is really going to draft a proposal to liberate a region from himself when the region cannot be liberated because the measures being petitioned against are not in place. Just because other people want to roleplay an idiot doesn't mean I have to. This is a breach of roleplay barriers -- there are separate methods and areas for discussing game mechanics for a reason.

And no, as I said, this is not an accurate way to gauge support: people not only don't understand this, but the WA has a tendency to vote for anything (good example recently: we passed Protection of Monuments and then repealed it a few days later just because both proposals were loaded with buzzwords).

Also so we're clear, since the quoted poster did not recognise this, I am speaking OOC; I refer to my nation in the third person when roleplaying, myself in the first when not. That should be obvious given the nature of what I'm talking about, but hey...

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

And apparently some people don't even check the post just above theirs when they post.
Again, for those who don't understand:

In basic technical terms, it would prevent delegates of The Security Council from imposing a password on that region.

However, in reality, the resolution is there to guage support for this suggestion.

..you can bring up a debate that has no place in the WA (or any in-game areas)...

Excuse me.. but I thought this was the Security Council... as in, the institution thats being liberated from the General Assembly (and vice versa), did I miss something ? Or do I have the wrong Security Council !?

Yeah, the Delegate is really going to draft a proposal to liberate a region from himself when the region cannot be liberated because the measures being petitioned against are not in place. Just because other people want to roleplay an idiot doesn't mean I have to. This is a breach of roleplay barriers -- there are separate methods and areas for discussing game mechanics for a reason.

And no, as I said, this is not an accurate way to gauge support: people not only don't understand this, but the WA has a tendency to vote for anything (good example recently: we passed Protection of Monuments and then repealed it a few days later just because both proposals were loaded with buzzwords).

Also so we're clear, since the quoted poster did not recognise this, I am speaking OOC; I refer to my nation in the third person when roleplaying, myself in the first when not. That should be obvious given the nature of what I'm talking about, but hey...

Unibot says "you do know this idea has already been agreed upon by the admins, right? A gauge really isn't needed, the idea that this proposal should be used as a gauge just started as joke. Though it still remains a joke or as you called it ' a cute little stunt', the proposal is meant to be a way to transition the WA into a era of divided proposal floors, others have even heralded it as a founding document for the WASC ... which is anything but humbling, but my goal with it was just to help smooth the transition of the WA using a proposal while getting a few laughs out of it (and passing the first joke proposal in the WA? Yes/No?), as years from now when newbies join the game and try to make sense of this mess of events they might not have these threads to look from as 'primary sources of history', if you will, but the WA resolutions will always exist".

[Kandarin]

There's an argument to be made here that the resolution isn't a very good gauge of player opinion of the aforementioned thread if most people can't agree on what it's about. However, that will have to wait for more people to come in and say that they don't know what it's about in order to be credible - as it stands, most commenters seem to know the suggestion implicit in the resolution and the ratio of those perplexed hasn't exceeded that which can be expected from any resolution in either chamber.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

A WA resolution that is illegal due to fiddling with game mechanics is more or less demanding the administrators fiddle with game mechanics. If only for the irony, I'm voting yes.

[Sedgistan]

Its not illegal, otherwise Ardchoille wouldn't have encouraged it.

[Todd McCloud]

Its not illegal, otherwise Ardchoille wouldn't have encouraged it.

Very true. Though this liberation is more about a way the game works, The Security Council itself *is* technically a region. BUT, this does show the support of two separate bodies in the WA

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

A WA resolution that is illegal due to fiddling with game mechanics is more or less demanding the administrators fiddle with game mechanics. If only for the irony, I'm voting yes.

Trust me.. with my track record of deleted proposals, if this was illegal, I would have been told with an abrupt telegram message from NationStates Moderators to tell me the bad news and offer the ol' complimentary copy and pasted list of delegates who supported it.

And if this was illegal, it would be hilarious considering the much lighter offences my previously deleted proposals committed (Consortiums are for member nations -- but you can't say that, and you can't apologize in proposals... yada yada yada)

[Koumpounophobia]

A WA resolution that is illegal due to fiddling with game mechanics is more or less demanding the administrators fiddle with game mechanics. If only for the irony, I'm voting yes.

Trust me.. with my track record of deleted proposals, if this was illegal, I would have been told with an abrupt telegram message from NationStates Moderators to tell me the bad news and offer the ol' complimentary copy and pasted list of delegates who supported it.

And if this was illegal, it would be hilarious considering the much lighter offences my previously deleted proposals committed (Consortiums are for member nations -- but you can't say that, and you can't apologize in proposals... yada yada yada)

Very true. Personally, I think that if a large-enough group asks for it, then it should be given. We've worked out our own form of war and trading and political discussion. we on our own cannot split the SC and GA as needed. Circumstances require a cleaner cut between the two. And thus my support.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

Very true. Personally, I think that if a large-enough group asks for it, then it should be given

Utilitarianism eh? Carry on... I just wanted to use the word in a conversation.