[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn Vandoosa"

[Goddess Relief Office]

Alarmed at the assertions that Vandoosa participated in raiding Alternate World History and is its current delegate to the World Assembly, both of which are incorrect,

I believe the right way of writing this should be:

"Alarmed at its assertion the assertions that Vandoosa had participated in raiding Alternate World History and was at one point is its delegate to the World Assembly, both of which are incorrect,"

Dismissing the claim that the Glorious Nations of Iwaku have fallen apart due to Vandoosa's actions. On the contrary, the region has not fallen at all, and is actually quite healthy;

I believe the right way of writing this should be:

"Dismissing the claim that the Glorious Nations of Iwaku has have fallen apart due to Vandoosa's actions. On the contrary, the region has not fallen at all, and is actually quite healthy;"

Also, there's inconsistent use of punctuation marks:

• The proposal's third clause ends with a comma (,)
• Fifth clause ends with a period (.)
• All other clauses -- you've used a semi-colon (;)

Might want to consider fixing the above because--- repeals live on forever.

~GRO~

[Wallenburg]

Alarmed at the assertions that Vandoosa participated in raiding Alternate World History and is its current delegate to the World Assembly, both of which are incorrect,

I believe the right way of writing this should be:

"Alarmed at its assertion the assertions that Vandoosa had participated in raiding Alternate World History and was at one point is its delegate to the World Assembly, both of which are incorrect,"

The target's claims work in either tense depending on your interpretation.

Dismissing the claim that the Glorious Nations of Iwaku have fallen apart due to Vandoosa's actions. On the contrary, the region has not fallen at all, and is actually quite healthy;

I believe the right way of writing this should be:

"Dismissing the claim that the Glorious Nations of Iwaku has have fallen apart due to Vandoosa's actions. On the contrary, the region has not fallen at all, and is actually quite healthy;"

If I were referencing "Glorious Nations of Iwaku", you would be right, but I am referencing "the Glorious Nations of Iwaku". "Nations" is plural, and my wording approaches the region not as a single entity, but as several nations.

Also, there's inconsistent use of punctuation marks:

• The proposal's third clause ends with a comma (,)
• Fifth clause ends with a period (.)
• All other clauses -- you've used a semi-colon (;)

Might want to consider fixing the above because--- repeals live on forever.

~GRO~

Damn. They should all be semicolons. Well, too late for that now!

[The Silver Sentinel]

Damn. They should all be semicolons. Well, too late for that now!

How is it too late? There is still 18 hours before this goes to vote. You can have it pulled and fix them.

[Wallenburg]

Damn. They should all be semicolons. Well, too late for that now!

How is it too late? There is still 18 hours before this goes to vote. You can have it pulled and fix them.

I don't think two characters are worth pulling it, considering how difficult it was to get to quorum. I'll give it some more thought, though.

[Normlpeople]

How is it too late? There is still 18 hours before this goes to vote. You can have it pulled and fix them.

I don't think two characters are worth pulling it, considering how difficult it was to get to quorum. I'll give it some more thought, though.

If there is actual support for your bill, then a return to quorum shouldn't be an issue. Don't end up being known as a lazy author. As GRO said, repeals are forever.

[Wallenburg]

A GHR has been filed.

[Luna Amore]

This proposal has been pulled from the queue at the author's request.

[Wallenburg]

Do we have any more suggestions, or will I have to once again submit this, push it to queue, and pull it less than an hour before it goes to vote to make the smallest tweaks imaginable?

[Dark Commander]

Do we have any more suggestions, or will I have to once again submit this, push it to queue, and pull it less than an hour before it goes to vote to make the smallest tweaks imaginable?

I'm not sure why, but I don't like the usage of "healthy" in the fourth clause; perhaps replace it with "prosperous?"

[Wallenburg]

Do we have any more suggestions, or will I have to once again submit this, push it to queue, and pull it less than an hour before it goes to vote to make the smallest tweaks imaginable?

I'm not sure why, but I don't like the usage of "healthy" in the fourth clause; perhaps replace it with "prosperous?"

Meh, that's debatable. Maybe "successful" or "thriving" or something along those lines?

[Dark Commander]

I'm not sure why, but I don't like the usage of "healthy" in the fourth clause; perhaps replace it with "prosperous?"

Meh, that's debatable. Maybe "successful" or "thriving" or something along those lines?

Yes, along those lines.

[Wallenburg]

Meh, that's debatable. Maybe "successful" or "thriving" or something along those lines?

Yes, along those lines.

Edited. Danke.

[Dark Commander]

Yes, along those lines.

Edited. Danke.

No problemo.

[YoriZ]

I would vote in favor of this repeal.

The original resolution states:
"... Appalled that since becoming a raider Vandoosa has forcefully wrenched delegacy from the rightful rulers ..."

Following the game rules, the rightful ruler of a region is de delegate.

[Vancouvia]

At vote now

[ChingisOtchigin]

Following the game rules, the rightful ruler of a region is de delegate.

Then please make sure to listen to the delegate in your region.

Or is he not the rightful ruler? Then I'm guessing you're not following game rules.

[YoriZ]

Following the game rules, the rightful ruler of a region is de delegate.

Then please make sure to listen to the delegate in your region.

Or is he not the rightful ruler? Then I'm guessing you're not following game rules.

Not listening to the rightfull ruler of a region is not against the rules.

[RiderSyl]

I don't know if anyone remembers, but one of Vandoosa's puppet nations nearly got condemned before Vandoosa himself. I don't know what bizarre world the SC had stepped into around the time this passed, but I'm glad we're out of it now.

EDIT: Nevermind, just took a peek at the vote. Seems we're not out of it.

[Wallenburg]

I don't know if anyone remembers, but one of Vandoosa's puppet nations nearly got condemned before Vandoosa himself. I don't know what bizarre world the SC had stepped into around the time this passed, but I'm glad we're out of it now.

EDIT: Nevermind, just took a peek at the vote. Seems we're not out of it.

This resolution is being voted against in the same proportion as the current GA bill is being voted for. I think that says something about the current voting pool.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This resolution is being voted against in the same proportion as the current GA bill is being voted for. I think that says something about the current voting pool.

I think those are different pools which are coincidentally voting or not voting on the subject. For example, there are 200 votes always missing from SC resolutions (i.e. my votes, since Europe does not believe SC resolutions are anywhere near neutral).

[ChingisOtchigin]

Not listening to the rightfull ruler of a region is not against the rules.

Gah! Right you are. Didn't think of that

[Dragon rider 663]

Repeal "Condemn Vandoosa"

---

Category: Repeal || Resolution: SC#188 || Proposed by: Wallenburg

---

Applauding international efforts to combat raiding;

Recognizing that condemnations do little to discourage raiding, and often serve as badges of honor to prominent raiders;

Alarmed at the assertions that Vandoosa participated in raiding Alternate World History and is its current delegate to the World Assembly, both of which are incorrect;

Dismissing the claim that the Glorious Nations of Iwaku have fallen apart due to Vandoosa's actions, considering that the region has not fallen at all, and is actually quite successful;

Questioning Vandoosa's true impact on the international community, and recognizing the lack of evidence for many of the claims in the condemnation of Vandoosa;

Noting the dissonance of condemning Vandoosa for supposedly injuring the Glorious Nations of Iwaku, yet explicitly stating the further injury of this region's activity as one of the condemnation's main goals;

Believing that nations should not be condemned on false pretenses;

Observing no benefit to any nation but Vandoosa itself in the continued existence of SC#188;

The World Assembly hereby repeals SC#188, "Condemn Vandoosa".

EDIT 1: Split fourth clause into two sentences. Replaced commas with semicolons.
EDIT 2: Swapped ALL CAPS for sexy italics.
EDIT 3: Added the sixth clause.
EDIT 4: Added the fifth clause.
EDIT 5: Moved things around for clarity. Added the seventh clause.
EDIT 6: Repaired end punctuation and reworked the fourth clause, turning it back into one sentence.
EDIT 7: Tweaked the fifth clause by adding "recognizing" to it for clarity.
EDIT 8: Replaced "healthy" with "successful" in the fourth clause.

I hate the people who think that condemnations will do any thing we do not care
Clause three also seems to run on try breaking it into two smaller sentences

[Wallenburg]

I hate the people who think that condemnations will do any thing we do not care

Are you speaking to me, or such people?

Clause three also seems to run on try breaking it into two smaller sentences

It's kind of late to make changes, even if they were necessary.

[Tir-Na-Nog-Ta]

Dang. Better luck next time Wallenburg. A well written repeal for a poorly written condemnation. All the best to you, mon ami o/

[RiderSyl]

Dang. Better luck next time Wallenburg. A well written repeal for a poorly written condemnation. All the best to you, mon ami o/

Well said.