[DEFEATED] Repeal SC#33 Condemn Durkadurkiranistan II

[Mousebumples]

The Security Council,

Recognizing at the time of condemnation Durkadurkiranistan II was an impeding force on the democratic stability of the North Pacific,

Acknowledging that Durkadurkiranistan II did eventually step down as delegate,

Pointing out that one coup, no matter how long it progressed is hardly worth the attention of the Security Council,

Disappointed that a proper condemnation of Durkadurkiranistan II did not include their coups of Osiris, Lazarus, or The South Pacific,

Whilst realizing Durkadurkiranistan II is a threat the international stability,

Also realizing this Security Council resolution #33 did little to nothing to actually censure Durkadurkiranistan II for their actions,

Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,

Hoping the Security Council passes a far more comprehensive condemnation of this heinous nation,

Hereby repeals SC Resolution 33: Condemn Durkadurkiranistan II.

[The Stalker]

"Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

What this? If anyone deserves a condmening badge it's Durk. He's ejected well over 1000 nations in his multiple purges.

If the point is to pass a new resolution better outlining his actions, maybe I could get behind that, but if your just looking to take his badge away, i'm really against.

[Chester Pearson]

"Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

He's ejected well over 1000 nations in his multiple purges.

In subsequent purges, not the one listed in this resolution.

If the point is to pass a new resolution better outlining his actions, maybe I could get behind that, but if your just looking to take his badge away, i'm really against.

That would be the point, yes....

[The Stalker]

"Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

He's ejected well over 1000 nations in his multiple purges.

In subsequent purges, not the one listed in this resolution.

If the point is to pass a new resolution better outlining his actions, maybe I could get behind that, but if your just looking to take his badge away, i'm really against.

That would be the point, yes....

Well if that is the point, I don't think you should have included the line saying "Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

[Chester Pearson]

In subsequent purges, not the one listed in this resolution.



That would be the point, yes....

Well if that is the point, I don't think you should have included the line saying "Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

Because he did nothing to earn this particular condemnation....

[Socialist Assembly Marxists]

Well if that is the point, I don't think you should have included the line saying "Seeking to remove this badge of honor from a nation that did little to nothing to actually achieve it,"

Because he did nothing to earn this particular condemnation....

Abstain.

[Dalimbar]

As a note, The North Pacific and North Pacific are two completely different regions. The link (currently directing to North Pacific) should be changed to The North Pacific.

[New Brussels]

Chester, are you drafting or have drafted a new condemnation proposal for Durk?

[The Stalker]

Because he did nothing to earn this particular condemnation....

Eh, that's debatable. He got The North Pacific down to something like 500 nations, it was one of the most memorable coups of it's time. That alone was enough for people to wanna condemn him, which is why it passed in the first place.

Chester, are you drafting or have drafted a new condemnation proposal for Durk?

Well, if this passes, I probably would have interest in drafting a new one. Since I authored the original one... Though I expect Chester has one already.

Personally I don't really see a good reason to repeal it and then write up another one, then holding two votes on the subject when it's not very relevant to modern gameplay, seems like digging up the past. But admittedly the resolution is a bit dated and Durk has done a lot more than what it mentions.

[Durkadurkiranistan II]

Eh, that's debatable. He got The North Pacific down to something like 500 nations, it was one of the most memorable coups of it's time. That alone was enough for people to wanna condemn him, which is why it passed in the first place.

All the way down to 407 nations. Also I put a bunch of curse words into the regional flag and got deleted.

[McMasterdonia]

Did Durk have any involvement in the North Pacific? As far as I know he couped The North Pacific.

Edit: Dalimbar beat me to it

[Chester Pearson]

Because he did nothing to earn this particular condemnation....

Well, if this passes, I probably would have interest in drafting a new one. Since I authored the original one... Though I expect Chester has one already.

Shall we work together then?

[Sichuan Pepper]

Chester your draft differs from what you have submitted. As people have already posted the linked region to the submitted repeal is incorrect.

[The Stalker]

Well, if this passes, I probably would have interest in drafting a new one. Since I authored the original one... Though I expect Chester has one already.

Shall we work together then?

Sure, i'd be open to working together.

[Jakker]

I just find the practice of repealing old proposals because they were not written well to get a new one passed silly. Different standards have developed over the years and there are reasons why the proposal was passed in the first place. This just greatly diminishes the historical value and simply seems to be a means of getting more passed proposals under your belt.

[Wrapper]

Voted against. Pretty sloppy job there, Chet ("North Pacific"). That's unlike you.

[Sedgistan]

Thread stickied, and updated the OP to match the text of the submitted proposal.

[Chester Pearson]

Voted against. Pretty sloppy job there, Chet ("North Pacific"). That's unlike you.

Meh.... If it fails I will touch it up and reque it.

[Redsward]

Voted against. Pretty sloppy job there, Chet ("North Pacific"). That's unlike you.

Meh.... If it fails I will touch it up and reque it.

Well, if everyone dislikes the proposal each time you draft or submit, why should you bother trying? I tried to condemn Lenin three times already, each one was poorly written, I had practically no supporters, and Rifty got all the attention in my last draft. Then I abandoned the thing entirely.

[Chester Pearson]

I tried to condemn Lenin three times already, each one was poorly written, I had practically no supporters, and Rifty got all the attention in my last draft.

The fact that I actually have some credibility around here, as well as the information/experience to actually back up my arguments would be the difference between you and me....

(I also know how to run a campaign)

Thread stickied, and updated the OP to match the text of the submitted proposal.

Great.... Next time you edit one of my posts could you at least edit it correctly?

You forgot the "the" in front of North Pacific. The fact that it isn't in the region link doesn't mean it still isn't in the proposal....

[Sedgistan]

My mistake - apologies.