[PASSED] Repeal "Commend Hobbesistan"

[Benevolent Thomas]

One day of drinking and I miss all of this? I'd really like to see Hobbes' Commendation get repealed and I may try writing one myself just so that the GCR/SC drama bullshit doesn't get in the way (I have no enemies, right?). I have nothing against the kid, I just don't believe he deserved his commendation then and he certainly no longer deserves it now. Go back and read the commendation. Which clauses still hold up to this day? When I read it all I can think of is "Ozymandias" by Percy Bysshe Shelley:

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
'My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

The SC is supposed to recognize people who do great things, not an assortment of meh+ activities over a short span of time. Does Hobbes compare to Todd McCloud, no. Is Hobbes as awesome as Evil Wolf is infamous, no. Lets repeal this sub-par resolution and remove an ugly stain from the integrity of the SC.

[Demongate]

I have a question, Tom.
If this is a "stain", wouldn't the bad press caused by repealing it be the equivalent of pouring something with the same color as the original fabric and calling it fixed?
My analogies and such are weird, but they work.

Of course, you could be going by the "Since you can't please everyone, you might as well please yourself" way of thinking.
It can get hard to tell.

[Benevolent Thomas]

I have a question, Tom.
If this is a "stain", wouldn't the bad press caused by repealing it be the equivalent of pouring something with the same color as the original fabric and calling it fixed?
My analogies and such are weird, but they work.

Of course, you could be going by the "Since you can't please everyone, you might as well please yourself" way of thinking.
It can get hard to tell.

I don't think its bad press to repeal a resolution. Its a far worse crime to depreciate the value of a commendation (and condemnations) by allowing this one to stand. Righting a wrong is far more noble than to sweep a wrong underneath the rug because we don't want to collectively look stupid.

[Shizensky]

10000 Islands had their original commendation repealed on the grounds that it was poorly written. They were commended later with a stronger commendation.

There is precedent that shows that the removal of a commendation in itself is not a stain on the target, but even a possibility for a stronger celebration of accomplishments.

[RiderSyl]

There is precedent that shows that the removal of a commendation in itself is not a stain on the target, but even a possibility for a stronger celebration of accomplishments.

There are repeals based on the original being weak/poorly written and deserving a better commendation.

There are also repeals based on the author not liking the commended, as the author makes up the reasons for a legitimate repeal as they go along.

This is the latter.

[Shizensky]

There are repeals based on the original being weak/poorly written and deserving a better commendation.

There are also repeals based on the author not liking the commended, as the author makes up the reasons for a legitimate repeal as they go along.

This is the latter.

I'm not familiar enough with the Hobbes/Lazarus situation to comment on any of that. All I hoped to do was provide some personal insight regarding the other discussion previous to my post.

Even when XKI was having their commendation repealed, anybody who knew any of the players saw that it was quite obvious that it had almost nothing to do with the strength of the commendation. The "weak commendation" argument was just the straw man being used at the time to accomplish a goal.

That's not to say whether the argument stands this time or not. I'm just relating to what I know from many moons ago.

[Eluvatar]

Approx was originally based on my perl script for approxing update times. Every update script has followed the same logic - assigning an update time rate and multiplying it in series of each region, population by population. FriarTuck's big innovation was the ability to automatically calibrate itself for the most recent update speed rate. Hobbes's script was just copying the same method as FriarTuck's.

EDIT: To clairfy I'm fine with Elu getting credit for it all. FT was the script that mass produced the technology and made it accessible and easy. It was the Windows of Update Analysis. All I did was figure out how you could use the logic of daily dumps to create an estimate and made a pretty shoddy perl script that's been replicated since in some fashion. But Hobbes tagging onto that glory is a bit silly.

The odd thing is that neither you, I, nor hobbes actually named our program 'approx' as such. Yours was called uniboot, the 'after' module in FriarTuck contains the 'approx_upd' function which is invoked through the 'approx' command, and Hobbes' program is called SerinApprox and contains an 'approx' command of its own.

As a side note, I believe it was Ballotonia's suggestion to automatically update the formula based on the most recent update length, and the underlying mathematical function used by FriarTuck is slightly different from uniboot's.

FriarTuck actually also has some alternatives to 'approx' designed to let the user fiddle with the formula, which haven't been used... in over 2 and a half years.

[Demongate]

I don't think its bad press to repeal a resolution. Its a far worse crime to depreciate the value of a commendation (and condemnations) by allowing this one to stand. Righting a wrong is far more noble than to sweep a wrong underneath the rug because we don't want to collectively look stupid.

I agree with everything you just said except the context of the last sentence.
Your last sentence only applies if everyone thinks "Commend Hobbesistan" is a bad thing, which is (quite blatantly) untrue. Some people think that this resolution is bad in some fashion and that it'd be best to repeal it, while others see absolutely nothing wrong with this.
Now, since I hardly know anyone in this situation (I have seen Hobbesistan around, though), I'm trying my hardest to stay neutral.
However, I do not see much of a reason for this to be repealed. The points it made were very good and seem to be appropriate for commendation.
There has also been substantial proof that the majority of the reason for "Repeal "Commend Hobbesistan" is a personal grudge or something to that effect, which is petty.

[Hobbesistan]

Shocked that The Grand Poobah of NationStates of Hobbesistan was given credit for developing the "approx" script, when the script was actually developed by the nation of The Royal Confederacy of Eluvatar at a far earlier time;

Havn't we proved this clause isnt true? We all developed different versions, and my code is entirely different to Uniboot and FriarTuck, and, infact, uses different mechanics - to be honest I am rather offended that its going to be a official SC language that (If this passes) I just stole Elu's script.

I won't campaign against it(although i won't resist a chance to break out the don't tase me bro flag - lol) or care that much if it passes; It's a game either way, but I do care when my labor is depreciated to 'stole it from someone else'.

[Funkadelia]

-snip-

You have my permission to take this identical proposal and make edits to it as you see fit, on the condition that you name me and feux as co-authors, and as long as you wait until this thing expires.

I want to see if the author actually matters (which it probably will).

There is precedent that shows that the removal of a commendation in itself is not a stain on the target, but even a possibility for a stronger celebration of accomplishments.

There are repeals based on the original being weak/poorly written and deserving a better commendation.

There are also repeals based on the author not liking the commended, as the author makes up the reasons for a legitimate repeal as they go along.

This is the latter.

You basically have no idea what you're talking about. If you don't know what you're talking about, and you're just lapping up the gossip from elsewhere in NS, then you have no place commenting at all. Stop lying.

[Hobbesistan]

I would also like to clarify I have nothing against Funk personally and I'm usually talking with him daily on IRC - I do not believe there is a grudgematch in play here.

[RiderSyl]

You basically have no idea what you're talking about.

What a grand retort.

If you don't know what you're talking about, and you're just lapping up the gossip from elsewhere in NS, then you have no place commenting at all.

I agree. Thankfully none of that applies to me, especially the 'lapping up gossip from elsewhere in NS'. I couldn't give less fucks about NS gossip.

It seems that I struck a nerve when I called this repeal nothing more than a targeting of the commended player rather than a targeting of the commendation itself, with reasons for it being a legitimate repeal made up on the go.

Stop lying.

I never started.

[Anime Daisuki]

-snip-

You have my permission to take this identical proposal and make edits to it as you see fit, on the condition that you name me and feux as co-authors, and as long as you wait until this thing expires.

I want to see if the author actually matters (which it probably will).

Being idealistic is good but sometimes we need to face reality. Why is Hobbes commended when under "normal" circumstances he wouldn't have been? The reason is there was big money at play in the original's passage. After the first attempt failed in February, the proponents tried again in one of the largest campaigns I've ever seen carried out on NS. A stamp campaign got the proposal to quorum; which was quite normal. What was abnormal was when the proposal hit the floor and looked as though it's heading to defeat like the first attempt, with NAY votes higher for 2 days, the proponents (not just the author but other nations) began stamp campaigns targeting not just Delegates but all WA nations. The spending spree paid off and got Hobbes a badge.

Also, the fact that Hobbes hosted GRC off-site forums and act as their Admin buys him influence over those GRCs, and influence translates to votes for him.

This is one instance where NS politics mirror RL politics (especially US politics) where big money wins big elections. Unless you guys can throw more money on the repeal, you won't defeat this.

/cynic

[Fezkovia]

Hobbes hosted GRC off-site forums and act as their Admin buys him influence over those GRCs, and influence translates to votes for him.

I wonder why. It's not vote buying, it's providing forums for regions, which is a commendable action.

EDIT: Hah, wrong puppet.

[McMasterdonia]

You have my permission to take this identical proposal and make edits to it as you see fit, on the condition that you name me and feux as co-authors, and as long as you wait until this thing expires.

I want to see if the author actually matters (which it probably will).

Being idealistic is good but sometimes we need to face reality. Why is Hobbes commended when under "normal" circumstances he wouldn't have been? The reason is there was big money at play in the original's passage. After the first attempt failed in February, the proponents tried again in one of the largest campaigns I've ever seen carried out on NS. A stamp campaign got the proposal to quorum; which was quite normal. What was abnormal was when the proposal hit the floor and looked as though it's heading to defeat like the first attempt, with NAY votes higher for 2 days, the proponents (not just the author but other nations) began stamp campaigns targeting not just Delegates but all WA nations. The spending spree paid off and got Hobbes a badge.

Also, the fact that Hobbes hosted GRC off-site forums and act as their Admin buys him influence over those GRCs, and influence translates to votes for him.

This is one instance where NS politics mirror RL politics (especially US politics) where big money wins big elections. Unless you guys can throw more money on the repeal, you won't defeat this.

/cynic

If I recall correctly, those campaigns were also conducted by anonymous nations. This has always been very strange to me, perhaps it is just paranoia. I do not believe that Abacathea would campaign for a proposal of his using an anonymous nation, it just isn't his style. I agree though - the campaign was very extensive, which leads me to wonder who wanted this proposal to pass the most

The resolution itself contains many weak clauses, even if you exclude the approx script. I think it is safe to say that this weak commendation could be repealed and a new one written up for it.

I'm sorry Abacathea, I understand that you feel very passionately about this, but - this resolution should be repealed. Intentionally or not, I feel that this resolution was misleading and contained several things that had no greater impact on the world (as highlighted by Funkadelia).

[Hobbesistan]

If memory serves, the TG campaign was Leningrad(my memory is pretty shotty though as i spent most of that week in a hospital).

[Shadoke]

I think that Hobbes earned his commendation. This repeal just strikes me as a strike against Hobbes

[Blood Wine]

10000 Islands had their original commendation repealed on the grounds that it was poorly written. They were commended later with a stronger commendation.

There is precedent that shows that the removal of a commendation in itself is not a stain on the target, but even a possibility for a stronger celebration of accomplishments.

And yet,the XKI commendation is still lacking - can't touch it though sadly,trying to repeal-replace it would be wasted effort (just look at the TBR condemns,god that was a disaster)

[Warzone Codger]

Skimmed this thread very quickly.

1. The argument is that things Hobbes was commended for had no lasting impact. Is this true?
2. The counter-argument seemed to be Funk is doing this personal vendetta.

Why does Funk motivation's matter? The statements in Hobbes' commend are either true or not. I haven't seen an argument yet they have a lasting impact (or explains why it doesn't matter whether it had an lasting impact) , so I have no idea how there are people saying he deserves it.

[A Weathered Stone]

I have a question, Tom.
If this is a "stain", wouldn't the bad press caused by repealing it be the equivalent of pouring something with the same color as the original fabric and calling it fixed?
My analogies and such are weird, but they work.

Of course, you could be going by the "Since you can't please everyone, you might as well please yourself" way of thinking.
It can get hard to tell.

I don't think its bad press to repeal a resolution. Its a far worse crime to depreciate the value of a commendation (and condemnations) by allowing this one to stand. Righting a wrong is far more noble than to sweep a wrong underneath the rug because we don't want to collectively look stupid.

Gotta agree with Thomas here. The original resolution was very weak and frankly not deserved. I hope to see great things out of the boy though so one day he can earn that commendation.

[Blood Wine]

Skimmed this thread very quickly.

1. The argument is that things Hobbes was commended for had no lasting impact. Is this true?
2. The counter-argument seemed to be Funk is doing this personal vendetta.

Why does Funk motivation's matter? The statements in Hobbes' commend are either true or not. I haven't seen an argument yet they have a lasting impact (or explains why it doesn't matter whether it had an lasting impact) , so I have no idea how there are people saying he deserves it.

The commendation is not bad,but also not that good either - several people have claimed it would promote authorship by encouraging a new commendation to be passed,but factually the personal vendetta is a negative forcing on this,essentially promoting self-interest rather then proper authorship

The repeal and replace of condemn TBR was an excellent example to promote proper drafting and authorship,yet that proposal faced much opposition - this proposal will likely pass on "ZOMG RAIDER ENABLER" and Funks large influence on regional politics (leming effect)

It disgusts me that Funk abuses his influence to pass a resolution to support his childish vendetta's

[Funkadelia]

Skimmed this thread very quickly.

1. The argument is that things Hobbes was commended for had no lasting impact. Is this true?
2. The counter-argument seemed to be Funk is doing this personal vendetta.

Why does Funk motivation's matter? The statements in Hobbes' commend are either true or not. I haven't seen an argument yet they have a lasting impact (or explains why it doesn't matter whether it had an lasting impact) , so I have no idea how there are people saying he deserves it.

The commendation is not bad,but also not that good either - several people have claimed it would promote authorship by encouraging a new commendation to be passed,but factually the personal vendetta is a negative forcing on this,essentially promoting self-interest rather then proper authorship

The repeal and replace of condemn TBR was an excellent example to promote proper drafting and authorship,yet that proposal faced much opposition - this proposal will likely pass on "ZOMG RAIDER ENABLER" and Funks large influence on regional politics (leming effect)

It disgusts me that Funk abuses his influence to pass a resolution to support his childish vendetta's

Have you even read the thread?

I would also like to clarify I have nothing against Funk personally and I'm usually talking with him daily on IRC - I do not believe there is a grudgematch in play here.

Jesus, I'm starting to think you guys don't even think at all. It disgusts me that you continue to use that old, worn out, and abused line, especially considering the laziness of the accusation.

[Blood Wine]

The commendation is not bad,but also not that good either - several people have claimed it would promote authorship by encouraging a new commendation to be passed,but factually the personal vendetta is a negative forcing on this,essentially promoting self-interest rather then proper authorship

The repeal and replace of condemn TBR was an excellent example to promote proper drafting and authorship,yet that proposal faced much opposition - this proposal will likely pass on "ZOMG RAIDER ENABLER" and Funks large influence on regional politics (leming effect)

It disgusts me that Funk abuses his influence to pass a resolution to support his childish vendetta's

Have you even read the thread?

I would also like to clarify I have nothing against Funk personally and I'm usually talking with him daily on IRC - I do not believe there is a grudgematch in play here.

Jesus, I'm starting to think you guys don't even think at all. It disgusts me that you continue to use that old, worn out, and abused line, especially considering the laziness of the accusation.

While I admit I didn't spot that post hobbes made (it's not exactly the most noticeable) - I remain at my point though - you're still abusing your power and diminish proper authorship

[Funkadelia]

Your point is negligible because you assert it as fact without proof or even basic reasoning. At this point I'm starting to think that is typical for you.

[Abacathea]

Just seeing as it was raised while AD was participating I. The conversationI should clarify for the record. I was AWOL for the bulk of the original being at vote. Any puppets I have are widely recognized as mine and anyone who recalls my repeal of the hogwarts lib knows I don't like hiding behind a false identity when campaigning. The Hobbes campaigns had nowt to do with me beyond the initial quorum stages.

Tl;dr; the campaigns weren't me.