[PASSED] Repeal "Condemn DEN"

[Maltropia]

The grammar was criticised during the drafting phase, extensively and repeatedly, by numerous individuals including myself. As far as I know, not one correction was made before it was submitted anyway. A body that produces legally-binding and world-altering legislation is entitled to expect a spell check.

Do I believe that calling people out on this will change anything? No, not really, especially when we're talking about an author who apparently can't tell the difference between 'rouge' and 'rogue'. Poor spellers will always exist. Doesn't mean we can't hope for a better future.

[The Bruce]

You Can Vote Here

Recalling that raider groups have been using the name DEN since ancient times, and that many incarnations of the region have existed,

Recognizing that the current incarnation of DEN was spawned in the wake of the destruction of The Black Riders, but remained a separate entity from The Black Riders, having different leadership, attracting many new raiders who had never been members of the previously mentioned group, and employing different, less mechanical strategies,

Disappointed that SC #187 falls for the common misconception that the two raider groups are one and the same, when they are in fact quite different from one another,

I'm glad that this repeal is very clear about this.

It's important to distinguish between the original DEN, the various schisms afterwards, the acappella group in Balder, or the zombie branding invader group to recently take on that name.

In this regard they haven't distinguished themselves as an entity enough to be condemned, other than for coasting on a name someone else gave meaning to.

It's the equivalent of the 10000 Islands ceasing to exist and a puny defender group founding a region of the same name, to coast on name recognition they had nothing to do with building up for years.

If the zombie brand version of DEN ever becomes something meriting a condemn, beyond tag raiding inactive regions, the fact that they coasted on someone else's name should be prominently included in their condemn.

[Xoriet]

It's important to distinguish between the original DEN, the various schisms afterwards, the acappella group in Balder, or the zombie branding invader group to recently take on that name.

This might be the best description from a non-invader of present DEN I've heard yet.

[We Are Not the NSA]

So, I have refrained from posting in the past few days, mostly because every time someone said something response worthy, someone else had already made the proper response. There weren't many instances where I could have said anything additional that would have changed anyone's minds, but there were a few that I felt weren't appropriate/helpful to my cause. Now that voting is over, here are a few of my responses:

I'm sorry but I think passing this repeal is a huge mistake and causes a huge security crisis..a global one.

Condemnations do not do anything to the targeted region/nation other than slap a tiny little badge next to its name. They do not affect a region's gameplay capabilities in the slightest, meaning that nothing is endangered by the condemnation's removal.

DEN is a horrible region, dedicated to ruining other, smaller, regions and should not have it condemnations repealed. And we are not the NSA, I suggest you take your pucker off DEN's butt.

I address your concerns in two sections of the repeal, one of which is the very first clause. Also, I would respond to that… insult(?), but I just can't get over how weak it is. I mean… "Pucker"? If you have the stones to through a punch, at least be willing to close your fist.

They deserve a condemnation that's done properly, with the correct facts, and no silly grammatical errors.

Of course. DEN is like the ISIS of NationStates.

That is grossly offensive, to the point where I'm not willing to give you a witty response. You think we're like ISIS? Why don't you fly to the Middle East, explain your situation to some Iraqi Shia, and see if they agree that DEN is like ISIS. I'd be interested to hear their response.

So we should train them, and provide them weapons and equipment to raid?

kek

Calling someone out on their grammar in a resolution in my opinion is quite unnecessary and unprofessional, that is something that should be done in private.

So, you're saying that I shouldn't be calling our grammar errors in public? Am I supposed to telegram the original author and tell them about it? Because, that's not going to change the mistakes, and that's not going to discourage future writers from making the same errors. However, there is one specific clause that, while I personally love it, was initially put in as a joke (the book report one). I had assumed someone would tell me to change it before submission, but nobody seemed to care about it.

Using the term NationStates in a resolution as it is in Condemn Den is also quite unnecessary. Terms such as The World, World stage or/and World affairs would be much more appropriate in my view.

I am voting FOR your appeal not because of your appeal but because of the blantant and continual use of the term NationStates in the resolution with which you wish to repeal

The term "NationStates" is very commonly used in the SC, because it is commonly accepted as the name of the Universe (or Multiverse) in which the game takes place. It is the term "on Nationstates" that is annoying, as it is the equivalent of saying "on the Universe".

Repeal "Condemn DEN" was passed 9,591 votes to 4,143.

I guess I'll conclude with a message to the WA as a whole. I'd just like to thank all those who supported this repeal, whether they were vocal or not, as well as all those who offered advice during the drafting period. Additionally, I should thank the three nations who offered to lend me stamps to campaign for this, especially Tim-Opolis, who ended up being the one to run the campaign.

While the results of this vote ended in my favor, I still found them to be a bit disheartening. One of my favorite activities on this site is using the RMB search feature to monitor activity related to my home region, and I used the skills I have picked up from this activity to watch for opinions on this vote that were not voiced here on the forum. There were two major trends amongst those who were openly advocating against the repeal:

1) There was a strange focus on the grammar argument, as if it were the only argument made. This tells me 2 things: People did not pay attention to all of the arguments and were simply nitpicking the weaker ones (ironic since the weakest one was, in fact, nitpicking), and the average player does not give two sh*ts about spelling and grammar, which is really annoying to those of us who care enough to use spellcheck before submitting something.

2) People did not read the resolution. I must have read the phrase "they deserve to be condemned" a hundred times in the past week (as the main point of an rmb post), even though the first clause already states that! If people paid any attention to the actual arguments I voice in this repeal, they would know that the repeal does not state anywhere that DEN does not deserve to be condemned. The argument that DEN deserves a condemnation is a ludicrous argument against this repeal, in which I state:

Remembering that the condemnation of DEN is not a time sensitive issue, and should be done with at least enough care as to not make basic spelling and grammar mistakes, as well as to avoid major factual errors,"

The key words there are "should" and "be". This clause completely guts one of the only two arguments against the repeal, yet people still make it. Why? Because they didn't read that clause, or at the very least didn't listen to what it said.

I know that the second part isn't exactly any sort of revelation, but this is the first time it really mattered to me, and it kind of annoys me now.

Next, I have a request: will people please stop telegramming Nohbdy asking me to author a new condemnation? It's really annoying. Also proves that there are people who didn't read this thread, which is a shame. I am perfectly fine with the author of a repeal being a member of the target region (although I'm not sure why others are), and as long as a self commendation is directed at a deserving target, that is a region, and is well written, I am fine with it (I have never seen an example of this), but I draw the line at self condemnations. That scenario would legitimize the argument that condemnations are "badges of honor" which is an argument that I hate with every fiber of my being. So…

-If you did not know that Nohbdy is a Lieutenant in DEN… I am.
-If you still want me to author a new condemnation… No, stop asking me.

I am still looking forward to assisting who ever decides to write another condemnation, if someone decides tot take that course of action. However, keep in mind that I am completely willing to go for a round 2 if you screw it up again.

Anyways, thanks for the support, the advice, and the badge,

Sincerely,
Lt. We Are Not The NSA

P.S. I appreciate that there were no complaints because of my membership in DEN. There was not a single instance of this, as far as I am aware. I'm glad that I am established well enough in SC politics that no one minded. o7

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

It was a good, very well written repeal, congratulations on getting it passed.