[PASSED] Commend Eluvatar

[Feux]

McM needs to submit this so I can vote for it already.

[McMasterdonia]

McM needs to submit this so I can vote for it already.

Yay

I am still working on the second draft. It shouldn't be too far away.

[McMasterdonia]

New Draft. Comments, questions etc are welcomed.

The Security Council,

Believing that a history of cumulatively positive behaviour across regional borders responded to positively by those across the ideological spectrum is admirable and worthy of recognition;

Noting that Eluvatar is a founding member of the United Defenders League one of the most known and active defender organizations, subsequently serving as both Chief of Intelligence and Lieutenant, playing a pivotal role in gathering intel, providing tactical resources and regularly filling the organization's need for a triggerman, allowing for exact military precision in liberations;

Further Noting that Eluvatar is the creator of FriarTuck, a tool that has been used by many defender organizations to assist in perfecting and simplifying liberations, and as a result has assisted in the aiding, revitalizing and protection of nations and regions alike through this work;

Astounded by Eluvatar’s efforts to secure the regional community of Taijitu which Eluvatar worked tirelessly to protect, ultimately assisting in refounding the region with the support of the native community which allowed Taijitu to continue to exist in peace;

Amazed that Eluvatar has successfully juggled conflicting regional and organizational demands, loyalties and laws to almost unparalleled extents and has served successfully as a respected civil servant in the executive, the legislature and the judiciary of the The North Pacific, Balder, Osiris, The South Pacific and Taijitu;

Acknowledging Eluvatar’s work against tyrants and rogue Delegates in The North Pacific such as Lewis and Clark and Shoeless Joe winning the praise and admiration of the regional community. Furthermore their tireless work against the Empire in the East Pacific, which resulted in the nation being awarded honourary citizenship in said region;

Further acknowledging Eluvatar’s role in the liberation of the South Pacific, including their membership on the Allied Command Council as the head of military strategy and tactics. Eluvatar’s dedication to the cause greatly contributed to the liberation of the South Pacific from the oppressive regime of Milograd, a regime that led to the arbitrary removal of thousands of nations from the region;

Appreciating Eluvatar’s efforts in improving the security of The North Pacific, Osiris and the South Pacific with the development of state of the art technologies such as Toaster, that have been of great assistance in maintaining the security and high endorsement levels of the aforementioned regions;

Thankful for Eluvatar’s work as Delegate of The North Pacific, pursuing difficult legal and constitutional changes in order to improve regional prosperity and efficiency while remaining a respected and fair authority in the regional government.

Understanding that while Eluvatar has not personally authored resolutions of note; Eluvatar’s strong focus on regional engagement in matters before the World Assembly, has greatly contributed to the high number of World Assembly nations within The North Pacific today;

Disappointed that Eluvatar’s constant strives towards international and national diplomacy and their willingness to be a mentor to nations young and old alike, essentially setting a bar for nations to climb towards has failed to be commended so far by the World Assembly;

Hereby Commends Eluvatar.

Co-Authored by KiwiTaicho

[Unibot III]

Believing that a history of cumulatively positive behaviour across regional borders responded to positively by those across the ideological spectrum is admirable and worthy of recognition;

This implies cumulative positive behavior across regional borders not responded to positively by those across ALL of the ideological spectrum isn't necessarily admirable or worthy of recognition. Seems like a neutralist's idea. This rephrasing however is accurate without the neutralism...

Believing that a history of cumulatively positive behaviour across regional borders is admirable and worthy of recognition;

It's also a shorter rephrasing - which is good because you're going to run into problems with the killjoy word count. I'm not sure if such a clause is however necessary. If I were you I would use this as the penultimate clause (and get rid of the "Disappointed" clause) - and if you're over the word count cut this clause first.

Further Noting that Eluvatar is the creator of FriarTuck, a tool that has been used by many defender organizations to assist in perfecting and simplifying liberations, and as a result has assisted in the aiding, revitalizing and protection of nations and regions alike through this work’ [need a semi-colon]

Astounded by Eluvatar’s efforts to protect the regional community of Taijitu which Eluvatar worked tirelessly to protect [awkward phrasing - you say he's worked to protect it twice], ultimately assisting in refounding the region with the support of the native community which allowed Taijitu to continue to exist in peace;

Amazed that Eluvatar has successfully juggled conflicting regional and organizational demands, loyalties and laws to almost unparalleled extents and has served successfully as a respected civil servant in the executive, the legislature and the judiciary of the The North Pacific, Balder, Osiris, The South Pacific and Taijitu. [you should end this clause with semi-colon instead of a period]

Acknowledging Eluvatar’s work against tyrants and rogue Delegates in The North Pacific such as Lewis and Clark and Shoeless Joe winning the praise and admiration of the regional community. [this second sentence is awkwardly tacking on a new premise] Furthermore their tireless work against the Empire in the East Pacific, which resulted in the nation being awarded honourary citizenship in said region;

Further acknowledging Eluvatar’s role in the liberation of the South Pacific, including their membership on the Allied Command Council as the head of military strategy and tactics. Eluvatar’s dedication to the cause greatly contributed to the liberation of the South Pacific from the oppressive regime of Milograd, a regime that led to the arbitrary removal of thousands of nations from the region;

Here's alternative wording for the Acknowledgement clauses:

Acknowledging Eluvatar's work against tyrants and rogue Delegates,

• In The North Pacific, Eluvatar fought against The Crimson Order and Shoeless Joe -- winning the praise and admiration of the regional community;
• In The East Pacific, Eluvatar tirelessly worked to undermine The Empire in The East Pacific, which resulted in the nation being awarded a rare honourary citizenship in said region;
• Eluvatar also played a leading role in the liberation of The South Pacific against the SPSR, with membership on the Allied Command Council as the head of military strategy and tactics;

I think "awarded a honorary citizenship in said regions" may sneak by Rule IV because it could be interpreted as meaning a honorary citizenship for one individual. I also can't help but notice the SPPR is the only invasion you felt it necessary to say purged -- when Lewis and Clark, Shoeless Joe and especially The Empire did a lot of crap. Makes me feel the mention was more political framing - I got the sense that Eluvatar wouldn't want his resolution to be a political affair. Also, you mentioned The Empire as The Empire, but The Crimson Order as Lewis and Clark and SPPR as Milograd - there are usually more people to blame than just the individual leader and in Eluvatar's case its quite symbolic he fought against The Crimson Order since many of them are/were his friends and its much more emotionally and morally testing to work against your friends doing something you think is wrong. I've changed the phrasing to be consistent in regards to groups or leaders. I don't think Shoeless Joe had a name for his TNP, but he had the support of people like HEM.

Understanding that while Eluvatar has not personally authored resolutions of note; Eluvatar’s strong focus on regional engagement in matters before the World Assembly, [comma splice] has greatly contributed to the high number of World Assembly nations within The North Pacific today;

Disappointed that Eluvatar’s constant strives towards international and national diplomacy and their willingness to be a mentor to nations young and old alike, essentially setting a bar for nations to climb towards has failed to be commended so far by the World Assembly; [probably an unnecessary clause - I'd get rid of it, you're going to getting close to the word count][/quote]

[Milograd]

If I recall correctly, wasn't Shoeless Joe pretty fair about surrendering the delegacy if the opposition had popular support? I don't think it'd be fair to label him as a "tyrant" were that the case, especially since this commendation would probably be on the books for a long while.

[McMasterdonia]

Unibot it wasn't political framing. We are simply describing how the SPSR was and thought it deserved it's own clause. Eluvatar has said that he worked the hardest against the SPSR, the Crimson Order and the Empire and that is why they were included. There simply isn't the space to go through each one in detail, and as the SPSR was the most recent example and the one we have the most knowledge of we went with it.

Shoeless Joe did not ban any nation during his take over. We wouldn't have the space to expand upon every act committed by the Empire either.

[Unibot III]

We wouldn't have the space to expand upon every act committed by the Empire either.

But you did have space for SPSR, which is why I found it suspicious that you described SPSR and named Milograd, while didn't described The Empire and didn't name Neenee. Surely the older events need more description than the newer ones, which people are presumably more familiar with?

[McMasterdonia]

We wouldn't have the space to expand upon every act committed by the Empire either.

But you did have space for SPSR, which is why I found it suspicious that you described SPSR and named Milograd, while didn't described The Empire and didn't name Neenee. Surely the older events need more description than the newer ones, which people are presumably more familiar with?

'

You are suspicious about everything

I think the older events have been done to death, almost. Furthermore, Eluvatar's role in the SPSR liberation is much more clear cut than his role in the Empire situation.

[Unibot III]

You are suspicious about everything

Yes. *nods*

[Milograd]

If he wants to shine a light on my name in particular, I don't object and I do not assume his inclusion of my name to be a politically charged against myself or the PRL. McM and I have always maintained a good relationship, and he has continued to be one of the people in GP who has helped support my attempts to move past my past mistakes. He was one of the first, in fact.

It is better that nations are reminded that their actions have consequences, and I am probably one of the better examples of that in Gameplay; I did something that I'm not proud of, have tried to redeem myself, but even that doesn't change the fact that it carries with you, negatively effects the target of your attacks, and that you shouldn't do it in the first place. Commending players for contributing significantly against coups, and condemning players who perpetrate them, even if the condemnation is as little as a mention in a resolution not about the perpetrator, teaches a lesson that all players and delegates ought to learn and take to heart. Of course, there is no harm done in not including my name in this, but I'll leave the choice up to McM's judgement.

[Kiwitaicho]

Thanks for all your constructive feedback, Unibot. I'm happy with this draft and I'm glad we've all worked to make it better.

That said, lets not descend into nitpicking. Lesser commends have passed and I think we're at a point where this adequately describes Eluvatar's integrity and accomplishments.

[The Foxfyre Islands]

An aid walks up and delivers a message

Message reads:

The Foxfyre Islands is in full support of this resolution. Well written and a worthy candidate.

Kind Regards:
Ambassador Ceresden Gander
WA Delegate for the International Western Union
WA Ambassador for the The Foxfyre Islands

[North East Somerset]

Further acknowledging Eluvatar’s role in the liberation of the South Pacific, including their membership on the Allied Command Council as the head of military strategy and tactics. Eluvatar’s dedication to the cause greatly contributed to the liberation of the South Pacific from the oppressive regime of Milograd, a regime that led to the arbitrary removal of thousands of nations from the region;

I do seem to recall Eluvatar mistiming 3 completely impotent liberation attempts in a row which affected morale badly. It was in fact the influence draining strategy which the mission switched to that led to victory, something I advocated from the start.

Nonetheless, Eluvatars creative work in the UDL as one of their few competent and perceptive members was/is certainly significant in raising the bar of that organisation's capabilities.

Furthermore, though it is interestingly not mentioned in the final draft, despite I daresay it being a significant reason for the author submitting this Resolution to begin with - Eluvatar's loyalty to TNP in the face of typical UDL corruption - during March 2013, is worthy of applause.

[Sedgistan]

The proposal has been removed for violating Rule 4 - specifically:

Noting that Eluvatar is a founding member of the United Defenders League one of the most known and active defender organizations serving subsequently serving as both Chief of Intelligence and lieutenant, playing a pivotal role in gathering intel and providing tactical resources while also regularly filling the organizations’ need for a triggerman, allowing for exact military precision in liberations;

On a non-mod point, this may want looking at:

Noting that Eluvatar is a founding member of the United Defenders League one of the most known and active defender organizations serving subsequently serving as both Chief of Intelligence and lieutenant, playing a pivotal role in gathering intel and providing tactical resources while also regularly filling the organizations’ need for a triggerman, allowing for exact military precision in liberations;

For the record, the approvals at the time of removal were:

79 (McMasterdonia, Archangelskl Oblast, Bodobol, Lykens, Abdolfist Reich, Milograd, Awas, Communist Eraser, Yxilland, Urcea, King Rankmore, Moronist Decisions, Mamluk, Kingsley Bedford, Conwy-shire, Brusy, Frattastan II, Randomnitia, Istiglal, Bachtendekuppen, The Ranponian, Felandos, Fengari, United Federation of Wilfistan, Usual People In Life, New Vivungi, The Evil Despot of the Chaise Longue, Galacteo, The Assassins, Athyma, Astro-Tech corporation, Laysley, Po-os, Vandelstein, Verisburg, Mousebumples, Hellany, MirrorGate, Bunnvonberg, Penhuela, The Sova Empire, Nerotysia, Maoist People, Gradyana, Peldar, Albarusija, Raurosia, Nayrin, Greater Fascism, Malcolm X, Hombertoland, ShadowDragons, Gebeta, Wolkan, The Foxfyre Islands, Cliffston, Christian Isles, Ghant, Neo Industrium, Siokania, Tranquilta, Fenshamsland, Muzztopia, Le Cruise, Intergalactic Federation of Systems, Neptania, Conlandiville, Afrikaneer, Escade, Tresatopia, Knoll, Webus, Drandasian, Tayberia, Zero-0ne, The United Workers Federation, Segennea, Lewayiin, Bad-Assistan)

[Unibot III]

Sedgistan, is it violating R4.b or R4.c? I offered that wording because of a clear ambiguity,

The clause says, Eluvatar serving as Chief and Lt., while also regularly filling the organizations’ need for a triggerman.

This could be taken two different ways,

Eluvatar is a person filling the organizations need for triggerman.

Or,

Eluvatar regularly filled the organizations need for a triggerman, by offering someone from its nation to fill that capacity.

It does not need to be construed as simply the first interpretation - the latter interpretation is perfectly valid. It's using the same ambiguity trick that we use every time we say "Unibot served as Chief" or "Sedgistan served as Chancellor". "Todd McCloud filled the region's need for a delegate", for example should be perfectly valid.

----------

If you're suggesting this a R4 violation not because of R4.b, but because of R4.c -- I must protest. The word, "triggerman" surely has a sensible meaning without it narrowly having to do with game triggers. There are gunmen who pull triggers, there are bomb experts who trig bombs. Why wouldn't a "defender" organization have someone experienced in artillery or weapons? I don't see why this should be a R4.c violation anymore than "forum" (which is also used in a equivocal sense), but different than "Poster" (which couldn't be used sensibly in the context of Poster's Award without following foul of R4.c). I think many organizations need triggermen - every mafia in existence, for example.

I was under the impression given the different workarounds already established for R4.c, that if an equivocation can be done that makes some sense (and the mods have been charitable in the past - suggesting forums can have colours and stuff like that) that the equivocation is a valid workaround. It makes sense that many organizations would need a triggerman - any hired goon is a triggerman.

If you're suggesting the problem is not that triggermen isn't equivocal ,but that triggerman isn't equivocal (because most organizations need more than one triggerman) - it should be noted that it was ambiguous over whether UDL was filling a specific post of one triggerman or just filling a "need" for a triggerman. For example, Johnny fills Blue Team's need for a forward striker, does not necessarily suggest he is the only forward striker - he's simply just filling the need for one more forward striker. If we were to change the wording to, Johnny fills Blue's Team need for a goalie, we only know that there's only one goalie because we know in sports with goalies there is one per team. In the triggerman case, the game meaning of "triggerman" is a goalie position (one person fills it), but in the gunman meaning, its a striker position, there are multiple people who are usually gunmen - evaluating whether an equivocation is valid and sensible should not use the game meaning of "triggerman" in its reading of the interpretation. Otherwise, the test is flawed.

Definition of TRIGGERMAN

: a gunman who shoots the victim (as in a gangland murder)

[Elke and Elba]

<snip>

I must agree Sedgistan makes some sense. Even without bringing in the problem about "triggermen", I must protest to say that saying Eluvatar is Chief of this and that definitely seems to connote that Eluvatar is a person instead of a nation - notwithstanding the fact the whole paragraph is phrased in such a manner to connote what was mentioned earlier.

You don't really say a nation is a chief of something - instead the more appropriate wording would be like Eluvatar as a nation played a pivotal role blah blah.

[McMasterdonia]

"Triggerman" is the issue, not that I mentioned that the nation was Chief of Intelligence.

Thanks for the input Sedgistan. I'll think on it and resubmit once the appropriate change is made.

[Elke and Elba]

<snip>

I must agree Sedgistan makes some sense. Even without bringing in the problem about "triggermen", I must protest to say that saying Eluvatar is Chief of this and that definitely seems to connote that Eluvatar is a person instead of a nation - notwithstanding the fact the whole paragraph is phrased in such a manner to connote what was mentioned earlier.

You don't really say a nation is a chief of something - instead the more appropriate wording would be like Eluvatar as a nation played a pivotal role blah blah.

Do people actually understand what I was trying to say at all? Or do they not read?

[McMasterdonia]

I must agree Sedgistan makes some sense. Even without bringing in the problem about "triggermen", I must protest to say that saying Eluvatar is Chief of this and that definitely seems to connote that Eluvatar is a person instead of a nation - notwithstanding the fact the whole paragraph is phrased in such a manner to connote what was mentioned earlier.

You don't really say a nation is a chief of something - instead the more appropriate wording would be like Eluvatar as a nation played a pivotal role blah blah.

Do people actually understand what I was trying to say at all? Or do they not read?

I understand. I just don't agree that it is an issue.

[Elke and Elba]

Do people actually understand what I was trying to say at all? Or do they not read?

I understand. I just don't agree that it is an issue.

That's great then. I won't contest your differing viewpoints since it's a non-issue a la Sedgistan's way of viewing the text (hopefully). Eluvatar deserves the commendation, too.

[Cormac A Stark]

Here's a suggested revision. Red is text to be removed, blue is text to be added, purple is where I have fixed minor capitalization and punctuation.

Noting that Eluvatar is a founding member of the United Defenders League, one of the most known and active defender organizations, serving subsequently serving as both Chief of Intelligence and Lieutenant, playing a pivotal role in gathering intel, and providing tactical resources while also and regularly filling the organization's need for a triggerman, allowing for exact military precision in liberations;

That still conveys what you were trying to convey, I think, without use of the word "triggerman." Gameplayers, at least, will know what you mean by "exact military precision in liberations."

You may want to check the entire draft for minor issues such as punctuation; I've noticed an apostrophe and a few periods at the end of some clauses and semicolons at the end of others. You also didn't bold "Acknowledged" in the sixth clause and in the fourth clause you use the word "protect" twice in the same sentence and may want to use a synonym instead. That's just some stylistic nitpicking that I thought you may want to fix before submitting.

[Getti]

I understand. I just don't agree that it is an issue.

That's great then. I won't contest your differing viewpoints since it's a non-issue a la Sedgistan's way of viewing the text (hopefully). Eluvatar deserves the commendation, too.

You can have your nations more centralized around the idea that they are a person rather than an actual nation or entity, and nations that do this have been commended and condemned before. This is due to the fact that a good amount of R/D nations do not RP about their nation, so they have no need to reinforce or embrace the nation aspect with their user.
I do it. Most raiders do it and some defenders do to.

[McMasterdonia]

Here's a suggested revision. Red is text to be removed, blue is text to be added, purple is where I have fixed minor capitalization and punctuation.

Noting that Eluvatar is a founding member of the United Defenders League, one of the most known and active defender organizations, serving subsequently serving as both Chief of Intelligence and Lieutenant, playing a pivotal role in gathering intel, and providing tactical resources while also and regularly filling the organization's need for a triggerman, allowing for exact military precision in liberations;

That still conveys what you were trying to convey, I think, without use of the word "triggerman." Gameplayers, at least, will know what you mean by "exact military precision in liberations."

You may want to check the entire draft for minor issues such as punctuation; I've noticed an apostrophe and a few periods at the end of some clauses and semicolons at the end of others. You also didn't bold "Acknowledged" in the sixth clause and in the fourth clause you use the word "protect" twice in the same sentence and may want to use a synonym instead. That's just some stylistic nitpicking that I thought you may want to fix before submitting.

I fixed those punctuation issues before submitting.... Once I remembered to use the preview button Thanks for the suggestion.

Edit: Also I had forgotten to update the OP. I have gone with your suggestion regarding the triggerman issue.

[Mousebumples]

I think Cormac's suggestion is a good alternative.

One general grammatical comment: I think your argument/phrasing might be stronger if it were in present tense, versus the ING form. (i.e. Believes, Notes, Acknowledges, Understands, Emphasizes, Realizes, Respects, Admires, Details ... and whatever else Thesaurus.com suggests if there's a certain verb you want to find new a synonym of)

Not essential, by any means, but I think it might give your wording a bit more punch. I can try to do more details suggestions sometime tomorrow, probably ... if you'd like.

[Unibot III]

I think Cormac's suggestion is a good alternative.

One general grammatical comment: I think your argument/phrasing might be stronger if it were in present tense, versus the ING form. (i.e. Believes, Notes, Acknowledges, Understands, Emphasizes, Realizes, Respects, Admires, Details ... and whatever else Thesaurus.com suggests if there's a certain verb you want to find new a synonym of)

Not essential, by any means, but I think it might give your wording a bit more punch. I can try to do more details suggestions sometime tomorrow, probably ... if you'd like.

This would be an unusual way to format a resolution, given the present tense is reserved for operative clauses. There is only one operative clause in a Security Council resolution: the "commends" line, which is already using the present tense.