NATION

PASSWORD

[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn Stujenske"

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn Stujenske"

Postby Coupy » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:04 pm

Repeal "Condemn Stujenske"

A resolution to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#174 | Proposed by: Coupy

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #174: Condemn Stujenske shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council,

Acknowledging that the original resolution to condemn Stujenske was intended to raise awareness in the World Assembly about the coup d'etat in Lazarus happening at that time;

Noting, however, that the coup executed by the New Pacific Order was short-lived due to the efforts of Kazmr and that the Humane Republic of Lazarus continues to flourish under the leadership of Loftegen;

Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

Affirming that Stujenske's participation in the aforementioned coup of Lazarus, largely orchestrated by Milograd, was very limited and that both Stujenske and Stujenske's actions remain irrelevant to the wider community and unworthy of a condemnation;

Recognizing the probability that Stujenske views the condemnation symbol as a "badge of honor", despite the fact that this nation did absolutely nothing to earn it;

Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution #174: Condemn Stujenske.

Edited to reflect current affairs and submitted.

Image
Condemn Stujenske

A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region.

Category: Condemnation | Nominee: Stujenske | Proposed by: Coupy

Description: The Security Council:

Acknowledging Stujenske as the delegate of the People's Republic of Lazarus;

Noting the progress and prosperity Lazarus has enjoyed under the leadership of Chairman Stujenske, Funkadelia, and Feux;

Shocked, however, that Funkadelia was ejected and banned from Lazarus following public decries of the changing of the flag and the illegal removal of two sections from the region's constitution by Chairman Stujenske two days ago;

Further shocked that the true colors of Chairman Stujenske were revealed when, one day later, the People's Republic of Lazarus was dissolved after the abolishment of the constitution under the flag of the New Pacific Order of The Pacific, itself ruled by a despotic regime. Furthermore, Chairman Stujenske and Feux then proceeded to remove two members of the People's Congress, Gulliver and Toronina, from office following objection;

Horrified that the well-established government of Lazarus was overthrown in such a brutal manner;

Disgusted that the dictatorial government of The Pacific has been supporting the uprising of Chairman Stujenske against the democratically elected leadership of Lazarus;

Observing the efforts of Funkadelia to restore the rightful government of Lazarus following this sudden purge through the Lazarene Underground State, along with prominent dissenting Lazarenes including, but not limited to, Ainin, Gulliver, Horse, Toronina, ChurchOfSatan, and Cameron M. Romefeller;

Urging all members of the World Assembly to recognize the Lazarene Underground State as the rightful government of Lazarus in face of a coup d'etat by Chairman Stujenske, Feux, and the New Pacific Order;

Applauding the actions of influential regions, including, but not limited to, The North Pacific, Wintreath, Renegade Islands Alliance, Spiritus, Taijitu, and Osiris, to sever ties with Lazarus in face of the coup d'etat;

Wishing to bring an end to the tyrannical regime of Chairman Stujenske in Lazarus;

Hereby Condemns Stujenske.
Last edited by Sedgistan on Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:38 pm, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
Ambroscus Koth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1842
Founded: May 06, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Ambroscus Koth » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:18 pm

Go figure, I was mulling over whether or not I should right this one myself. In spirit, full support.
☀ Pharaoh Emeritus of Osiris (x2) ☀
Lieutenant of The Black Hawks | Sovereign General of the DEN
♥ Drunk married to Aurum Rider | Author of SC#172

Miniluv: Stability is Stagnation!

User avatar
Todd McCloud
Senator
 
Posts: 4045
Founded: Oct 11, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Todd McCloud » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:06 pm

Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made when Feux and Stujenske were high, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

The rest of the proposal reads well on a first look, but this clause doesn't jive with me for a couple of reasons. First, making a bad decision while having self-impaired judgment is kind of a poor argument in my opinion. If it were me, I'd just focus on the fact that the world leaders of these two nations didn't appear to really want to coup Lazarus for nefarious reasons, but that it kind of was a rash decision or something like that.
I wrote a book, and another one is on the way!

"Your uniform doesn't seem to fit. You're much too alive in it."

"You must be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi
"The worst prison would be a closed heart." - Pope John Paul II
Vekaiyu's Wiki Page | Ikrisia Levinile's Wiki Page | Vekaiyu & Kelssek co-hosted the XII Summer Olympiad

User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Coupy » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:20 pm

Todd McCloud wrote:
Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made when Feux and Stujenske were high, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

The rest of the proposal reads well on a first look, but this clause doesn't jive with me for a couple of reasons. First, making a bad decision while having self-impaired judgment is kind of a poor argument in my opinion. If it were me, I'd just focus on the fact that the world leaders of these two nations didn't appear to really want to coup Lazarus for nefarious reasons, but that it kind of was a rash decision or something like that.

Point taken, but aren't making bad decisions while having self-impaired judgement the same thing as making a rash decision as such? Or are you saying that the clause should focus more on making the rash decision than what caused them to make that judgement?

User avatar
Wrapper
Senior Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 5907
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Wrapper » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:18 pm

Coupy wrote:
Todd McCloud wrote:The rest of the proposal reads well on a first look, but this clause doesn't jive with me for a couple of reasons. First, making a bad decision while having self-impaired judgment is kind of a poor argument in my opinion. If it were me, I'd just focus on the fact that the world leaders of these two nations didn't appear to really want to coup Lazarus for nefarious reasons, but that it kind of was a rash decision or something like that.

Point taken, but aren't making bad decisions while having self-impaired judgement the same thing as making a rash decision as such? Or are you saying that the clause should focus more on making the rash decision than what caused them to make that judgement?

Perhaps... but then again one could argue that would be a rule violation. The way it's worded, the players were high, not the nations. If you could word it differently....

User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Coupy » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:32 pm

Wrapper wrote:Perhaps... but then again one could argue that would be a rule violation. The way it's worded, the players were high, not the nations. If you could word it differently....

That's also very true.
The following edit has been made:
Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of self-impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

Also spotted an R4(b) rule violation with the use of "he" and "his", and has been edited accordingly.
Last edited by Coupy on Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Wrapper
Senior Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 5907
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Wrapper » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:42 pm

"Self-impaired judgement" makes no grammatical sense. An entity can be self-impaired, or an entity can have impaired judgement. I believe the latter sounds best, in this context.
Last edited by Wrapper on Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Coupy » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:44 pm

Wrapper wrote:"Self-impaired judgement" makes no grammatical sense. An entity can be self-impaired, or an entity can have impaired judgement. I believe the latter sounds best, in this context.

:P

User avatar
New Kambuja
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Jul 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby New Kambuja » Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:55 am

Repeal "Condemn Stujenske"

A resolution to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#174 | Proposed by: Coupy

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #174: Condemn Stujenske shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council,

Acknowledging that the original resolution to condemn Stujenske was intended to raise awareness in the World Assembly about the coup d'etat in Lazarus happening at that time;

Noting, however, that the coup executed by the New Pacific Order was short-lived due to the efforts of Kazmr and that the Humane Republic of Lazarus continues to flourish under the leadership of Funkadelia;

Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

Affirming that Stujenske's participation in the aforementioned coup of Lazarus, largely orchestrated by Milograd, was very limited and that both Stujenske and Stujenske's actions remain irrelevant to the wider community and unworthy of a condemnation;

Recognizing the probability that Stujenske views the condemnation symbol as a "badge of honor", despite the fact that this nation did absolutely nothing to earn it;


Hmm? That's a glaring typo.

User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Coupy » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:12 pm

Edited to reflect current affairs and submitted.

User avatar
Cormac Stark
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Apr 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Cormac Stark » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:44 pm

Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

This doesn't seem accurate, and it seems to both excuse Stujenske to a degree -- as in, he was acting rashly, these things happen -- while also minimizing how serious this was for the community of Lazarus. Impaired judgment or not, it was clear that his coup was a serious coup and that they intended to hold the region. If he just acted rashly and out of anger, he had days to reconsider and end the coup. He didn't.

Coupy wrote:Affirming that Stujenske's participation in the aforementioned coup of Lazarus, largely orchestrated by Milograd, was very limited and that both Stujenske and Stujenske's actions remain irrelevant to the wider community and unworthy of a condemnation;

This doesn't seem to reflect reality, by any account. According to both the public course of events that many people watched unfold, as well as what we've heard about behind the scenes in the NPO/NLO, it seems that it was Stujenske who decided to coup and the NPO then decided to back him. There is little to no evidence that the coup was "largely orchestrated by Milograd." All evidence indicates that it was undertaken by Stujenske and the NPO opted to back him rather than losing their hold over Lazarus.

Coupy wrote:Recognizing the probability that Stujenske views the condemnation symbol as a "badge of honor", despite the fact that this nation did absolutely nothing to earn it;

I mean, he did do something to earn it, and the thing he did was coup Lazarus. I reject the badge of honor argument. Those who do in-character things worthy of condemnation by the Security Council should be condemned by the Security Council. This idea that people might be out-of-character proud for how well they've played an in-character villain, and that would be a bad thing that should affect an in-character condemnation, is utterly bizarre and is reflective of some people's inability to separate OOC from IC in gameplay. Of course people who have chosen to play the villain are going to be OOC proud of how well they've done; that shouldn't affect our IC decisions about condemnations. You don't see this bizarre badge of honor argument for RP condemnations, because it goes without saying that it's natural and fine for an RPer to be OOC proud of how well they've IC portrayed a villain. And so it should be in gameplay, which is a form of roleplay no matter how much Moderation likes to tell us it isn't.

I'm actually not a huge fan of Stujenske's condemnation, but due to the arguments put forward in this repeal, I oppose this repeal.
Last edited by Cormac Stark on Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5601
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:52 pm

Todd McCloud wrote:
Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made when Feux and Stujenske were high, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

The rest of the proposal reads well on a first look, but this clause doesn't jive with me for a couple of reasons. First, making a bad decision while having self-impaired judgment is kind of a poor argument in my opinion. If it were me, I'd just focus on the fact that the world leaders of these two nations didn't appear to really want to coup Lazarus for nefarious reasons, but that it kind of was a rash decision or something like that.


Moreover it'd be a Rule IV violation, big time.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25/05/2008 | Former Delegate of The Rejected Realms | Gameplay Alignment: -18 / -13
Unibotian Factbook // An Analysis of NationStates Generations // The Gameplay Alignment Test // NS Weather // How do I join the UDL? // The Transpacific Trade
Paradise Found // The Unibotian Life Expectancy Index // Proudly Authored 9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Commended by SC#78 // The Polysemes of Nativeness;

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
Benevolent Thomas
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1371
Founded: Jun 10, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Benevolent Thomas » Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:24 pm

I'm in agreement with Cormac here. While failing to successfully turn Lazarus into a colony of the NPO may not be permanently condemn-able, the arguments presented in this draft attempt to rewrite the history of the events its centered around. AGAINST.
The Battle of Fort Triumph

Co-Founder of Fort Triumph
Founder of The Order of the Grey Wardens

Ballotonia wrote:Personally, I think there's something seriously wrong with a game if it willfully allows the destruction of longtime player communities in favor of kids whose sole purpose is to enjoy ruining the game for others.

User avatar
The Silver Sentinel
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1226
Founded: Jul 04, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Silver Sentinel » Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:38 pm

Unibot III wrote:
Todd McCloud wrote:The rest of the proposal reads well on a first look, but this clause doesn't jive with me for a couple of reasons. First, making a bad decision while having self-impaired judgment is kind of a poor argument in my opinion. If it were me, I'd just focus on the fact that the world leaders of these two nations didn't appear to really want to coup Lazarus for nefarious reasons, but that it kind of was a rash decision or something like that.


Moreover it'd be a Rule IV violation, big time.

That it is.

User avatar
We Are Not the NSA
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1540
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Father Knows Best State

Postby We Are Not the NSA » Sat Feb 13, 2016 10:52 am

Coupy wrote:
Repeal "Condemn Stujenske"

A resolution to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#174 | Proposed by: Coupy

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #174: Condemn Stujenske shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council,

Acknowledging that the original resolution to condemn Stujenske was intended to raise awareness in the World Assembly about the coup d'etat in Lazarus happening at that time;

Noting, however, that the coup executed by the New Pacific Order was short-lived due to the efforts of Kazmr and that the Humane Republic of Lazarus continues to flourish under the leadership of Loftegen;

He couped a sinker. I don't care if it lasted a day or a year, that's still impressive and not something easily belittled.
Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

We still incarcerate drunk drivers who run people over. Impaired judgement is the weakest of arguments, especially in a game where you always have time to think about a decision before you commit to it.
Affirming that Stujenske's participation in the aforementioned coup of Lazarus, largely orchestrated by Milograd, was very limited and that both Stujenske and Stujenske's actions remain irrelevant to the wider community and unworthy of a condemnation;

I barely even paid attention to the coup as it happened, and even I called bullshit on this clause when I first read it.
Recognizing the probability that Stujenske views the condemnation symbol as a "badge of honor", despite the fact that this nation did absolutely nothing to earn it;

I've already ranted elsewhere about this argument, so I won't do that again. Also, he clearly did something to deserve it.

Overall, I think I might be willing to repeal this condemnation but definitely not with the revisionist arguments put forward in this draft.
ΩHydra Command Deputy DirectorΩ
Security CouncilNatives Please ReadTWP Raid

Interested in Raiding? Join HYDRA Command Today!

User avatar
Coupy
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Apr 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Coupy » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:34 am

First off, I thank you all for your comments. I was slightly disappointed that not much feedback was given before its initial submission many months ago, which did not reach quorum due to a limited campaign.
Cormac Stark wrote:
Coupy wrote:Further noting that the decision to coup Lazarus was made under a state of impaired judgement, leading many to believe that the following actions were never meant to be serious;

This doesn't seem accurate, and it seems to both excuse Stujenske to a degree -- as in, he was acting rashly, these things happen -- while also minimizing how serious this was for the community of Lazarus. Impaired judgment or not, it was clear that his coup was a serious coup and that they intended to hold the region. If he just acted rashly and out of anger, he had days to reconsider and end the coup. He didn't.

This clause, being factually accurate as it is, holds the implication that the complete colonization of Lazarus was not planned nor executed by the New Pacific Order to be on that very day. It became a serious coup, but the initial decision was made because Stujenske "felt bored with the game." It does not say nor imply a minimization of severity for the Lazarene community; rather, it was an individual's actions that precipitated the coup.
Cormac Stark wrote:
Coupy wrote:Affirming that Stujenske's participation in the aforementioned coup of Lazarus, largely orchestrated by Milograd, was very limited and that both Stujenske and Stujenske's actions remain irrelevant to the wider community and unworthy of a condemnation;

This doesn't seem to reflect reality, by any account. According to both the public course of events that many people watched unfold, as well as what we've heard about behind the scenes in the NPO/NLO, it seems that it was Stujenske who decided to coup and the NPO then decided to back him. There is little to no evidence that the coup was "largely orchestrated by Milograd." All evidence indicates that it was undertaken by Stujenske and the NPO opted to back him rather than losing their hold over Lazarus.

Right, Stujenske and Feux were the ones who decided to coup and the NPO decided to back them against the risk of losing out their influence on Lazarus. However, the events during the actual coup, the things that truly affected the greater community of Lazarus, were largely orchestrated by Milograd. Milograd did the influence calculations, created the ban lists, and planned the slingshots that eventually led to the liberation of Lazarus. It can be said that Stujenske was, metaphorically, merely a puppet of Milograd that did whatever his puppetmaster told him to do.
Cormac Stark wrote:
Coupy wrote:Recognizing the probability that Stujenske views the condemnation symbol as a "badge of honor", despite the fact that this nation did absolutely nothing to earn it;

I mean, he did do something to earn it, and the thing he did was coup Lazarus. I reject the badge of honor argument. Those who do in-character things worthy of condemnation by the Security Council should be condemned by the Security Council. This idea that people might be out-of-character proud for how well they've played an in-character villain, and that would be a bad thing that should affect an in-character condemnation, is utterly bizarre and is reflective of some people's inability to separate OOC from IC in gameplay. Of course people who have chosen to play the villain are going to be OOC proud of how well they've done; that shouldn't affect our IC decisions about condemnations. You don't see this bizarre badge of honor argument for RP condemnations, because it goes without saying that it's natural and fine for an RPer to be OOC proud of how well they've IC portrayed a villain. And so it should be in gameplay, which is a form of roleplay no matter how much Moderation likes to tell us it isn't.

I completely agree with your opposition to the "badge of honor" argument. People who did do IC condemnation-worthy things should be condemned by the Securty Council. However, as I mentioned above, Stujenske had an extremely limited role in the actual coup. Sure, he was the one who made the initial decision and said "screw it, let's coup." We condemned his actions, not his SPDR or his elected delegacy position.
Cormac Stark wrote:I'm actually not a huge fan of Stujenske's condemnation, but due to the arguments put forward in this repeal, I oppose this repeal.

Hope you'll be able to reconsider after this post.
Unibot III wrote:Moreover it'd be a Rule IV violation, big time.

Thank you for your comment, but this issue was resolved over six months ago.
Benevolent Thomas wrote:I'm in agreement with Cormac here. While failing to successfully turn Lazarus into a colony of the NPO may not be permanently condemn-able, the arguments presented in this draft attempt to rewrite the history of the events its centered around. AGAINST.

I don't believe I've made any factual mistakes. With the new explanations in this very post, could you point out any for me? It would be most helpful.
We Are Not the NSA wrote:...
I barely even paid attention to the coup as it happened, and even I called bullshit on this clause when I first read it.
...

You are attempting to affirm your authority on an event, as you say, you barely even paid attention to with unoriginal arguments taken from previous posters. For the sake of responding to everyone, I can tell you that a rebuttal can be found above.

User avatar
We Are Not the NSA
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1540
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Father Knows Best State

Postby We Are Not the NSA » Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:05 pm

Coupy wrote:First off, I thank you all for your comments. I was slightly disappointed that not much feedback was given before its initial submission many months ago, which did not reach quorum due to a limited campaign.

So... You were disappointed that you did not receive feedback in this thread last time... which was months ago... so this time you just submitted it without even looking for feedback before hand... please excuse my lack of sympathy.
We Are Not the NSA wrote:...
I barely even paid attention to the coup as it happened, and even I called bullshit on this clause when I first read it.
...

You are attempting to affirm your authority on an event, as you say, you barely even paid attention to with unoriginal arguments taken from previous posters. For the sake of responding to everyone, I can tell you that a rebuttal can be found above.

First of all, I said I didn't pay attention "as it happened". That doesn't mean I'm not informed on the events that transpired. Furthermore the fact that you're attacking me for something I clearly said simply to emphasize the point I was about to make is a complete waste of your time. If you don't think my opinions are valid, ignore them.

Second, has it ever occurred to you that the repetition of arguments does not make them unoriginal, but simply makes them worth addressing? I didn't read the thread until after I responded to your proposal.
ΩHydra Command Deputy DirectorΩ
Security CouncilNatives Please ReadTWP Raid

Interested in Raiding? Join HYDRA Command Today!

User avatar
Frats and Jocks
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: Dec 23, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Frats and Jocks » Sat Feb 13, 2016 3:25 pm

Support. The 4 remaining active members of the NLO thank you.

Yes, some of us are still around and still proudly flying our flags!

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4306
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby A mean old man » Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:22 pm

c/p "unworthy" cop-out
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Railana » Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:49 am

I'm inclined to support a vote AGAINST this repeal. Stujenske couped Lazarus and tried to make it a colony of the NPO against the will of Lazarene natives. I think that's worthy of a condemnation.

A few points addressing the arguments made in the resolution:
  • The "impaired judgement" excuse is absurd. We don't excuse vehicular homicide when committed by drunk drivers.
  • I don't know too much about who else was involved in the coup, but even if the player behind Stujenske wasn't the mastermind behind it, it still makes sense that the condemnation goes to the nation of Stujenske because it was ultimately that nation that did the couping.
  • I don't really subscribe to the "condemnation as reward" theory; condemnations should be viewed in the IC sense of the World Assembly condemning immoral behaviour, and what Stujenske tried to do was certainly wrong.
Last edited by Railana on Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Bhang Bhang Duc
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1840
Founded: Dec 17, 2003
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Bhang Bhang Duc » Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:22 am

A poorly written repeal that does not deserve support. The "impaired judgement" excuse for the repeal is laughable and is a reason in itself for voting against.
Former Delegate and Guardian of The West Pacific. TWP's Former Minister for World Assembly Affairs

The West Pacific's Official Welshman, Astronomer and Old Fart

Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.

User avatar
Paffnia
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 145
Founded: Nov 03, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Paffnia » Tue Feb 16, 2016 2:27 pm

This is an incredibly odd grounds for repeal. The opinion of the Islands is that the original resolution reflects a merited condemnation for an imperialist-style coup, and nothing in the repeal changes that fact. I have cast the region's vote AGAINST accordingly.
Former Delegate of the 10000 Islands
Knight of TITO
Denes nad Makedonija


WA Ambassador: Joakim Metyhap
Paffniac Factbook
Author, SC #93: Commend The Featured Region Followers
Commended by SC #276: Commend Paffnia

User avatar
Lazarus CoS
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Jan 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Lazarus CoS » Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:21 pm

This probably doesn't need to be said, but there's no excuse for Stujenske's actions. He wanted to coup Lazarus. He fully intended on forcing the natives of Lazarus to submit to the oppressive will of the NPO while he reaped the benefits of his traitorous act. Each of these are statements of fact and were never in dispute by the interregional community. The content of this repeal is indeed vastly lacking. I'm not sure who's behind the nation Coupy (though the name rings a bell) but you'll need to try far harder than you're probably capable of to get the condemnation repealed. The (attempted) forced colonization of a GCR is something not easily forgiven (and never excused for that matter). Frankly I also find it laughable that you fly the flag of The People's Republic of Lazarus while trying to absolve Stujenske of the coup as well.
Last edited by Lazarus CoS on Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ROM
Envoy
 
Posts: 265
Founded: Mar 23, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby ROM » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:38 pm

Against. Stu is without a doubt worthy of a Condemnation - he couped a GCR, and tried to align it with the NPO! That alone should make him Condemn worthy, and I find this proposal to be a waste of the WA's time.
Author of SC Resolution #186 Commend Travelling Region

User avatar
Mount Helena
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Aug 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Mount Helena » Fri Feb 19, 2016 5:13 pm

After reading this many times, I feel I must call into question how that made it to be voted on in the first place. The only defense that is given for Stujenske is the fact that their leadership was impaired, and that they had "very little" involvement. I vote against and support Rom's claim that this has been a complete waste of our time.


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads