[DEFEATED] Condemn Lord Dominator

[Reploid Productions]

You all have 12 hours to resign from the world assembly.

Excuse me? I don't see "Game Moderator" by your name. You have no authority to be making such threats, and you've been told before that mods-as-weapons is not acceptable.

Similarly, the above threat reads as a form of moderator impersonation, which is against the site rules. Besides which, your post has absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic, so it's spam as well.

*** Hehateu, WARNED for moderator impersonation and spamming. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Wrapper]

The tit-for-tat rule says (emphasis added):

Proposals which are solely 'tit-for-tat' proposals (ie Condemns Nation X for Condemning Nation Y) will be deleted. However, if they have other substance to them besides the 'tit-for-tat' argument, they are unlikely to be deleted

Therefore, had this proposal focused solely on SC#263, the liberation of the author's region, it would certainly have been illegal. Yet, this proposal also addresses (1) how influential LD was during the debate of SC#245, which has nothing to do with the author of this proposal; (2) how LD may have a hidden agenda, because of (3) LD's status as a raider; and that (4) LD has somehow sullied the reputation of the SC (which, by the way, I find hilarious and ridiculous; alas, I digress). There's more than enough substantive here that goes beyond just SC#263. Therefore, I concur with Fris, this is absolutely legal.

[Weed]

mfw i just realized LD didn't write SC245

Okay, fair enough.

[Kuriko]

When everyone forgets who started the offensive liberation trend

[Lord Dominator]

When everyone forgets who started the offensive liberation trend

I remember!

[Frisbeeteria]

I wonder if Fris could flesh out his ruling about why this has substance, and what it means to not have substance beyond the tit for tat argument?

The mods have done heavy-handed moderation on the proposal queue in the past, and there are players who didn't like it. We've done light moderation recently, and there are players who didn't like it. There's no possible way to please everyone, so my personal philosophy is to have as light a touch as possible. In this case, I made the ruling based on one or two sentences that met the 'substance' test in the most liberal interpretation possible. The rest is up to you guys.

The tit-for-tat argument is a precedent, not part of the actual ruleset. The official SC ruleset is pretty cut and dried. Given that it's not a Bright Line violation, I prefer to leave it to the approvers and voters to decide.

[Jar Wattinree]

When everyone forgets who started the offensive liberation trend

It was you, yes?

[Cedoria]

You like... realise that's totally irrelevant, right? Delegate votes exist. Delegate votes matter more.

I fear, dear sir, you just inadvertently proved one of our many points.

A point which would be credible if you actually had any objection to that, but you don't. Your only criticism of this system is that you can't manipulate it to your own advantage by buying votes with (someone's) credit card. That doesn't make it an unfair system, it makes you bad at working with it.

Also, don't come off all pro-democracy on us now. Nobody in this Assembly believes you give the slightest crap about individual nations having a greater say in WA votes. You're as transparent as you are wrong.

[Cedoria]

Yes, and that's why the World Assembly is flawed.

As luck would have it, Jocospor posted a great factbook on this very recently: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1101057

Which is quite litterally an unendorsement campaign against legitimately elected delegates. Can you all paint a bigger target on your back than you already have?

And all those people who claim CCD didn't deserve a Liberation tag when it's leaders just openly called for the destruction of every currently existing regional government...

[Prydania]

I said it back in the “Liberate CCD” thread.

You could remove every reference to fascism and still justify the offensive Liberation. The CCD consistently acts like a gaggle of obnoxious teenagers, pestering the rest of the WA at every opertunity. Be it attempts at self-Commendation, trying to tear down the GA, spamming people with TGs constantly, calling for the destruction of every government that votes against their proposals, and just generally being belligerent with everything they do.

And like a gaggle of obnoxious teenagers? They don’t understand that their freedom to do these things has consequences.

One of these consequences was being slapped with an offensive Liberation. Another is not having the pull necessary to get a proposal passed. It’s hard to have pull when you’ve alienated nearly everyone else.

[Imperium of Josh]

I said it back in the “Liberate CCD” thread.

You could remove every reference to fascism and still justify the offensive Liberation. The CCD consistently acts like a gaggle of obnoxious teenagers, pestering the rest of the WA at every opertunity. Be it attempts at self-Commendation, trying to tear down the GA, spamming people with TGs constantly, calling for the destruction of every government that votes against their proposals, and just generally being belligerent with everything they do.

And like a gaggle of obnoxious teenagers? They don’t understand that their freedom to do these things has consequences.

One of these consequences was being slapped with an offensive Liberayion. Another is not having the pull necessary to get a proposal passed. It’s hard to have pull when you’ve alienated nearly everyone else.

So much this...

[Hehateu]

You all have 12 hours to resign from the world assembly.

Excuse me? I don't see "Game Moderator" by your name. You have no authority to be making such threats, and you've been told before that mods-as-weapons is not acceptable.

Similarly, the above threat reads as a form of moderator impersonation, which is against the site rules. Besides which, your post has absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic, so it's spam as well.

*** Hehateu, WARNED for moderator impersonation and spamming. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

I never said I was a moderator. I said log out. And I'm max landis's one black friend. So please don't be racist and attack a rare black player. Max asked me to play to bring diversity.

[Frisbeeteria]

I never said I was a moderator. I said log out.

We can read, you know. You said "resign". Mods can tell cheaters and multis to resign. Regular players cannot. The warning was accurate.

And I'm max landis's one black friend. So please don't be racist and attack a rare black player. Max asked me to play to bring diversity.

Seriously? You're playing the race card? And you don't even know that the site owner is Max Barry, not John Landis' little brother Max? Thanks for the cheap laugh.

[Jocospor]

I never said I was a moderator. I said log out.

We can read, you know. You said "resign". Mods can tell cheaters and multis to resign. Regular players cannot. The warning was accurate.

OOC: Just so I know, for role play purposes (!), can you demand a player to resign from the WA within IC parameters? Was Hehateu's issue because they didn't specify IC, or is it just a phrase genuinely frowned upon?

[USS Monitor]

We can read, you know. You said "resign". Mods can tell cheaters and multis to resign. Regular players cannot. The warning was accurate.

OOC: Just so I know, for role play purposes (!), can you demand a player to resign from the WA within IC parameters? Was Hehateu's issue because they didn't specify IC, or is it just a phrase genuinely frowned upon?

There was no context. If there was context that put it IC, that would be different.

[Ninland Penninsula]

This has become a war, hasn’t it? Condem them, liberate this, Commend ally, condem enemy. Honestly, I personally don’t think that the SC should be used in this way, yes, it is used for gameplay, but not this way. If you play in the gameplay, do that, but seriously, all that ends up, is that the people who are part of the majority of NS will be commended, and those who aren’t, are condemned, simple? Otherwise this will never end.

Agreed, And also after this can you two little whippashnappas quiet down like, a lot?
As a WA member, I have to say, hearing this war is getting really annoying,
and so when there's something else, even when it's dumb, It's a huge relief.
So please shut up and stop warring.

[AntiTrumpGroup]

I am for condemning Lord Dominator.

[YoriZ]

My feelings tell me to vote against condemnation.
I've learned not to condemn, no matter what a person does.

[Kuriko]

My feelings tells me to vote against condemnation.
I've learned not to condemn, no matter what a person does.

What about RP condemnations tho? Those are okay in my opinion.

[YoriZ]

My feelings tells me to vote against condemnation.
I've learned not to condemn, no matter what a person does.

What about RP condemnations tho? Those are okay in my opinion.

Does that require the Security Council?

[Lord Dominator]

What about RP condemnations tho? Those are okay in my opinion.

Does that require the Security Council?

If it goes through the SC, yes

[Lord Dominator]

"Condemn Lord Dominator" was defeated 8,750 votes to 7,987.

Cool, we done here then?

[The Winter Sun]

No.

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Yes

[Laurarcor]

I hope so