NationStates

The World Assembly,
Believing that the so-called "Coalition Against the Ideology of Nazism" (CAIN) doesn't speak for all regions and nations;
Aware that CAIN has taken it upon themselves to eradicate all regions they wish to label as "Nazi regions" or "Nazi collaborators";
Concerned that CAIN has labeled KAISERREICH as a Nazi region based solely on remarks jokingly made by their founder and emperor, which they rescinded and have since shown remorse for, and the imagery used by one nation in their dispatches, ignoring that it predates the ideology of Nazism;
Disturbed that CAIN labels all regions with embassies to so-called "Nazi regions" as "Nazi collaborators", thereby smearing the reputations of more than 100 innocent regions, including those led by Jews and those of Jewish descent;
Denouncing such reckless behavior as counterproductive to the anti-Nazi cause;
Hereby Condemns The CAIN.

CAIN are communists we should burn them JK but seriously they're a pain in the butt

I like it but referring to that specific region is a bit of an issue - CAIN the region is not much of an issue. It would be better to perhaps condemn Brunhizzle, since he seems to be leading the whole shebang.

Cobranicium wrote:I like it but referring to that specific region is a bit of an issue - CAIN the region is not much of an issue. It would be better to perhaps condemn Brunhizzle, since he seems to be leading the whole shebang.

I considered doing that, but I'm not sure if he's actually the leader or just the one they decided to become the OP. Either way, I think that may be a better option. I'll ask about it before submitting the proposal to the Security Council, but I'll change it for now.

I think this is good, but it has no chance of passing. CAIN signatories make up 34% of the entire NS population. To put this into perspective, this is double the size of the entire country of San Marino. The delegates of these regions would torpedo this resolution before it even got off the ground.

Canton Empire wrote:I think this is good, but it has no chance of passing. CAIN signatories make up 34% of the entire NS population. To put this into perspective, this is double the size of the entire country of San Marino. The delegates of these regions would torpedo this resolution before it even got off the ground.

I don't expect it to be an easy path to victory, but it's worth a shot. Even if it is defeated, it'll at least spread awareness.

Neo Danzig wrote:

Canton Empire wrote:I think this is good, but it has no chance of passing. CAIN signatories make up 34% of the entire NS population. To put this into perspective, this is double the size of the entire country of San Marino. The delegates of these regions would torpedo this resolution before it even got off the ground.

I don't expect it to be an easy path to victory, but it's worth a shot. Even if it is defeated, it'll at least spread awareness.

It's an impossible path to victory. I highly doubt this will make quorum. I suggest you generate awareness via R/D or a dispatch. Maybe even an interregional alliance.

File a GHR and ask for your resolution to be pulled. You have a R4 violation in it

Canton Empire wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:I don't expect it to be an easy path to victory, but it's worth a shot. Even if it is defeated, it'll at least spread awareness.

It's an impossible path to victory. I highly doubt this will make quorum. I suggest you generate awareness via R/D or a dispatch. Maybe even an interregional alliance.

You may be right, but there's no reason not to try.

Canton Empire wrote:File a GHR and ask for your resolution to be pulled. You have a R4 violation in it

How so?

Neo Danzig wrote:

Canton Empire wrote:File a GHR and ask for your resolution to be pulled. You have a R4 violation in it

How so?

Probably this:

based solely on remarks jokingly made by their founder, which he deleted and has since shown remorse for

Cobranicium wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:How so?

Probably this:

based solely on remarks jokingly made by their founder, which he deleted and has since shown remorse for

Meh, it could be argued that it's not a violation, as I never specifically mentioned him deleting post. It could be taken as any form of digital communication. Additionally, I think this part of Rule 4 allows it:
Any term included within NationStates the game - eg. passwords, World Factbook Entries, founders, eject, 'black helicopters transporting nations between regions' - legal

It was that sentence indeed that made me delete your proposal, but not in the way you think.

Nope. I have worked with Brun in various areas and am fully against this.

Cobranicium wrote:I like it but referring to that specific region is a bit of an issue - CAIN the region is not much of an issue. It would be better to perhaps condemn Brunhizzle, since he seems to be leading the whole shebang.

Brun is female.

Kaboomlandia wrote:

Cobranicium wrote:I like it but referring to that specific region is a bit of an issue - CAIN the region is not much of an issue. It would be better to perhaps condemn Brunhizzle, since he seems to be leading the whole shebang.

Brun is female.

But that doesn't really matter, since that's still an R4b violation.

Neo Danzig wrote:

Cobranicium wrote:Probably this:

Meh, it could be argued that it's not a violation, as I never specifically mentioned him deleting post. It could be taken as any form of digital communication. Additionally, I think this part of Rule 4 allows it:
Any term included within NationStates the game - eg. passwords, World Factbook Entries, founders, eject, 'black helicopters transporting nations between regions' - legal

You can't use s/he to describe nations in the World Assembly.

[quote=neo_danzig;22842837]Obviously no one here likes CAIN, and for good reason. As such, I've taken it upon myself to write a condemnation. Feel free to criticize and give suggestions.
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... 4&t=397311[/quote]

It is not enough. You must correct your proposal and to include more informations about CAIN.
You need solid argues if you want to do it better.

Your resolution is against a nation. I see that. It is better to condemn or to commend a region in the World Assembly. One like them for this treaty you are against is at this link https://www.nationstates.net/region=the_cain .
But you forgot to mention exactly who is "CAIN" and who formed it. You could also mention the regions which are involved in that coalition group if it is necessary. The rest of the NS world (over 20000 regions and more nations) don't know their posts on the forum, so you could add few link to forum also.

My regional Vice-Delegate sent you some vital information. The first initiative of CAIN (coalition) was to isolate Nazis and their Collaborators. Their mistake was to go too far that CAIN can accuse many other regions for just the fact that they hold embassies and also to go more forward that also the next their own embassies could be accused for being as collaborators even if they are not involved in this ideology.

And, for it, you need at least 107 or 108 approvals from regional WA Delegates to go to be voted.

If you want me to help you, then I need at least 2 endorsements to be eligible as WA Delegate in my region, to approve (and to propose resolutions in the future) at votes. But those who endorse me have to reside in my region, not for a short time, but for a long time. You can get 1 approval from me, for this resolution, but only if I would have at least 2 endorsements.

At the same time you should know that everyone can have so many ""puppet"" nations he/she wish to do, but only one of its nations can join the World Assembly. And you can change the settings of each nation as you wish to do.

The rest is up to you.

Sorry (for the situation)
and thanks (for understanding and friendship).

@DACOROMANIA ,

Leader & High Chancellor of my Confederacy region.

First of all, linking to the forum in a proposal is not allowed.

Second of all, your poor attempt to recruitment WA members to your region is better suited in a different place. Do not use someone else's thread for this purpose again.

Crazy girl wrote:It was that sentence indeed that made me delete your proposal, but not in the way you think.

Canton Empire wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:Meh, it could be argued that it's not a violation, as I never specifically mentioned him deleting post. It could be taken as any form of digital communication. Additionally, I think this part of Rule 4 allows it:
Any term included within NationStates the game - eg. passwords, World Factbook Entries, founders, eject, 'black helicopters transporting nations between regions' - legal

You can't use s/he to describe nations in the World Assembly.

Oh, okay, that's reasonable. Thank you for explaining.

Alright, I've edited the draft. First of all, I changed the subject of the condemnation to what appears to be CAIN's HQ, thereby condemning the organization as a whole, instead of just a single nation. Additionally, I fixed the rule violation. If anyone has any further feedback, I'd love to hear it. This time, I'm going to wait a couple days before submitting the proposal, just so I can be sure everything is alright.

Given the membership of CAIN, this will be stomped into the ground within minutes of going to vote. Have fun.

Tim-Opolis wrote:Given the membership of CAIN, this will be stomped into the ground within minutes of going to vote. Have fun.

I do believe that this is called "Tyranny by the Majority." CAIN is really going way too far, and should be at the very least be more specific in their qualification of "Nazi" regions. Since the interregional organization is mainly made up of Communists, raiders, and some defenders, your group might be better off renaming itself CAIF (Coalition Against the Ideology of Fascism) or CAGN (Coalition Against German Nationalism) than CAIN.

Neo Danzig wrote:I considered doing that, but I'm not sure if he's actually the leader or just the one they decided to become the OP. Either way, I think that may be a better option. I'll ask about it before submitting the proposal to the Security Council, but I'll change it for now.

There is no "leader" of CAIN, I'm its organizer and creator. I organize the Coalition, facilitate votes, and help it in its operation but I do not lead it. I don't even have a vote in its decision making process nor can I make any decisions about its operation.

Since the interregional organization is mainly made up of Communists, raiders, and some defenders,

Well, we're not though. We've got a couple of Communists, a lot of moderate Independents, some Imperialists, raiders, and defenders.

your group might be better off renaming itself CAIF (Coalition Against the Ideology of Fascism) or CAGN (Coalition Against German Nationalism) than CAIN.

The Coalition itself has only opposed those who have demonstrable links to Nazism. Also, fun fact, I'm a German that has pride in her country. This certainly isn't about that.

TL;DR

CAIN has no leader. I'm CAIN's creator and organizer. Most of us aren't Communists. Your name changes have been noted and ignored.

Tim-Opolis wrote:Given the membership of CAIN, this will be stomped into the ground within minutes of going to vote. Have fun.

You could be right, but I don't see any reason not to try.

You're trying to launch a space shuttle from your home's backyard, sir. But have fun.