[DEFEATED] Repeal: Commend Imperium Anglorum

[Armaros]

Also against due to author, but that wouldn't make a difference.

This is not a good outlook.

How so?

[United Massachusetts]

This is not a good outlook.

How so?

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

[Armaros]

How so?

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

Actions have consequences. And this guy certainly didn't change.

[Kuriko]

How so?

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

Pppphhhhtttttttt.... Jocospor? Change? HAHAHAHAHA. He changes the least. Just look at all his forum posts and the fact his region is still trying to commend itself. No, Jocospor and through extension CCD won't change.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Proofreading isn't the same as checking legality. I defer to someone with more experience writing SC stuff.

As for the rest... as I said, you personally might not like IA, however there's no denying their many, many contributions to the game via the WA and their home region. They're practically part of the WA furnature at this point. No one aside from the orcs are gonna support this.

Throw yourself down on a sofa enough times and eventually you'll break it.

This is my new life motto. That is a great metaphor (or whatever figure of speech it is really... analogy maybe?)

Along with "try to make the world a better place".

Also, sorry Joscopur, but against.

[United Massachusetts]

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

Pppphhhhtttttttt.... Jocospor? Change? HAHAHAHAHA. He changes the least. Just look at all his forum posts and the fact his region is still trying to commend itself. No, Jocospor and through extension CCD won't change.

This is the type of attitude that gets people nowhere. I've actually talked with him in private on the matter. Give him a chance here. He's trying to balance the IC difficulties of running a region like CCD with a desire to also branch out.

[The Tri State Area and Maine]

How so?

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

It's just politics. Considering that this website is a political simulator, politics shouldn't be surprising. Why should I let someone who I politically dislike author a SC resolution?

If he writes a GA resolution, on the other hand, I'll be willing to judge that on it's merits.

[Jocospor]

If the author writes a good resolution (like his present GA draft), we should get behind it. This blacklisting of authors is at best immature. People can change.

Pppphhhhtttttttt.... Jocospor? Change? HAHAHAHAHA. He changes the least. Just look at all his forum posts and the fact his region is still trying to commend itself. No, Jocospor and through extension CCD won't change.

Oh my friend, such an exuberant outburst - have you considered the theatre?

Our thanks to you, UM, but truly you are wasting your time.

[United Massachusetts]

Pppphhhhtttttttt.... Jocospor? Change? HAHAHAHAHA. He changes the least. Just look at all his forum posts and the fact his region is still trying to commend itself. No, Jocospor and through extension CCD won't change.

Oh my friend, such an exuberant outburst - have you considered the theatre?

Our thanks to you, UM, but truly you are wasting your time.

Who am I kidding? Most of my time is wasted anyways.

[Aclion]

I don't trust anything CoCD does anymore. Against, due to there probably being some hidden agenda here.

Literally no hidden agenda. It's a pop at someone they don't like and the hopes of getting a badge. Less 4d chess and much more 2D tic tac toe.

That's just regular tic tac toe.

[Caracasus]

Literally no hidden agenda. It's a pop at someone they don't like and the hopes of getting a badge. Less 4d chess and much more 2D tic tac toe.

That's just regular tic tac toe.

Lol yeah I know.

[Jocospor]

Calling into question, in fact, the very sincerity of I.A.’s World Assembly operations which, though lauded by SCR#233, have of late caused mass controversy and disharmony among this World Assembly, particularly GAR#433 “Preventing the Execution of Innocents”

This right here. Never mind the rest of this proposal.

Repeal PtEoI, with its deliberately confusing and misleading language, and a more recent GA proposal written entirely in financial jargon, are specifically designed to further some sort of hidden agenda. Such deceptive and underhanded tactics should not be tolerated, let alone commended. If IA has made NS a better place for everyone over many years, then some of his recent proposals appear to buck the trend. If IA cannot bring himself to draft proposals using plain, easy-to-understand English 100% of the time, instead opting to disrespect the vast majority of NS players by labeling them as "anti-intellectual" simply for not having a Ph.D. in economics, then he cannot be trusted. This is no way to engender good will.

This is a valid point in our opinion. The actions of I.A. could certainly be seen as pandering to a specific calibre of voters.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This proposal was submitted three hours ago. A campaign telegram was sent around the same time.

There are a few factual inaccuracies that I wanted to address. Most of the other things are opinions or interpretations, which (while I would dispute them heavily) seem less important. They are dealt with in the second section. Since there will probably be made the argument that a person should never post in a thread having anything to do with honours related to them in the SC, cf. page 4 of the target resolution's discussion.

Alarmed that SCR#233 would falsely present the import of legislation that I.A. repealed to mislead this World Assembly:
GAR#329 did not “[permit] national sub-groups to disregard and neglect nationwide laws.”
GAR#350 did not “[stop] the World Assembly from passing any laws.”
GAR#396 did not “[slow] down the Internet.”

All the resolutions cited in fact did do those things. RIP in fact prohibited member nations from enforcing laws against indigenous peoples except for things found illegal by the World Assembly. I'm not sure what exactly Joco is talking about in NSC because he snipped off 100 pc of the context, but NSC prohibited the enactment of blocking legislation which would have protected nuclear supply chains from WA interference. And OIO in fact did require the elimination of QoS packet pritorisation.

Reminding this Security Council that the lauded Communiqué detailed in SCR#233 is fundamentally of a misleading nature, that being that telegram recipients’ identities are hidden from one another, and has been used by I.A. maliciously;

I prevaricated on whether or not I should respond to this proposal at all. But this part here is what tipped the balance. There are probably multiple interpretations here, because it's written shoddily, but the one that I see most easily is that Joco is claiming that Communiqué (1) discloses information about who uses it or (2) I have been using it in some "malicious" manner, which in the context of computer technology is generally considered to be malware. If you want to accuse me of such acts, which are illegal (data-handling regulations and unauthorised computer access laws), please do so in a court in real life.

Exposing the author of SCR#233 to be, during their time and at the time of this resolution's writing, a crony of I.A., with the latter assisting very much in the running of the author’s region, the now-terminated The Honorary Allied Nation States.

This is false. I have and have had no relationship with anything having to do with the administration of that region, let alone "assisting very much".

---

At a more broad level, I think there's also a confusion in this repeal about what arguments even are in the Security Council (and to a similar extent, the General Assembly). Resolutions with large preambles (e.g. repeals, commends, condemns, etc.) and a singular act have clauses. Those clauses are not inherent claims to being independent arguments for affirm.

It is usually not the case that a single impact has so much weight that it can yield passage in of itself (there are, of course, cases where this is true: Gruen's Repeal "Sexual Privacy Act", everything related to Predator, the recent Self-defence resolution, etc.) This repeal seems to assume that it is a flaw in the target that any one clause does not independently provide overwhelming reasons for passage. Or, it's just badly argued, because most of the arguments are defensive ones which mitigate, but do not eliminate, positive impact weighing.

Calling into question, in fact, the very sincerity of I.A.’s World Assembly operations which, though lauded by SCR#233, have of late caused mass controversy and disharmony among this World Assembly, particularly GAR#433 “Preventing the Execution of Innocents”;

If you care about unity and harmony, this is profoundly hypocritical. But because you don't, I guess this disharmony is really just caused by your being on the losing side of the vote. But the other question is what the game is about; the GA game is fundamentally about enacting a certain set of desired policies into law. SC's C&C are fundamentally about recognising quality at playing specific specialised portions of the game.

Contesting that I.A.’s “helpful and constructive feedback” as suggested by SCR#233 is reserved for a select few; namely, those who serve a political interest.

The original clause in the target resolution probably refers to forum activity, which still happens. If you think that support in of itself is motivated by the desire to see or not see a policy implemented, you've found yourself the entirety of the General Assembly game: passing policies.

Disgusted that SCR#233 would consider the acts outlined in its sixth clause as worthy of commendation, for such acts are only the duties of any invested World Assembly Delegate,

Well, to go back via oblique reference, I think it strange to expect that any "invested World Assembly Delegate" would go out of their way to spend their own money or hours of their time on campaigns for other peoples' proposals. I guess that's why you used an oblique reference rather than just saying it outright, because campaign support and associated financial/server time costs are not generally expected of delegates.

In the case of Europe’s Government Act 2017 (then appropriately addressed as The Basic Law by SCR#233), noting that such deceptively cements I.A.’s hold over Europe, contrary to the region’s democratic values.

Where? We should expect more of such a claim than just its statement. Also, inb4 reasonable security measures are twisted into being the tools of draconian oppression which a person looking at Europe's Happenings would end up finding out are rarely used.

[Jocospor]

Well, look, we'll let all that stand for what it is. It's a lavish, passionately incensed response that tells everyone all they need to know, really.

Actually, we'll quickly rebut one point:

Exposing the author of SCR#233 to be, during their time and at the time of this resolution's writing, a crony of I.A., with the latter assisting very much in the running of the author’s region, the now-terminated The Honorary Allied Nation States.

This is false. I have and have had no relationship with anything having to do with the administration of that region, let alone "assisting very much".

We draw attention to the following factbook. Scroll towards the bottom: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=914902

"I have...had no relationship...with the administration of that region." How quaint.

[Ex Patrian SSR]

Pppphhhhtttttttt.... Jocospor? Change? HAHAHAHAHA. He changes the least. Just look at all his forum posts and the fact his region is still trying to commend itself. No, Jocospor and through extension CCD won't change.

This is the type of attitude that gets people nowhere. I've actually talked with him in private on the matter. Give him a chance here. He's trying to balance the IC difficulties of running a region like CCD with a desire to also branch out.

Can I just chime in to say thank you for saying this. I'm utterly sick of GP's attitude of discarding people who's ideologies they don't quite like, or who's IC actions have been less than what they consider acceptable as nobodies and outcasts. The attitude on this game is just incredible. (No offence Kuriko.)

[Imperium Anglorum]

Well, look, we'll let all that stand for what it is. It's a lavish, passionately incensed response that tells everyone all they need to know, really.

Actually, we'll quickly rebut one point:

This is false. I have and have had no relationship with anything having to do with the administration of that region, let alone "assisting very much".

We draw attention to the following factbook. Scroll towards the bottom: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=914902

"I have...had no relationship...with the administration of that region." How quaint.

Wow, I draft laws. One would expect that anyone familiar with what I've done in NationStates would be unfazed with such an astonishing statement. Running a region is very different from creating a structure. I can write laws about how to run a region, set up some structure, etc etc. But that doesn't mean anything unless those laws are enforced by the people who in fact run the region.

You've proven too much, since under this logic, dead people who wrote decades-old constitutions and never held any posts are actively involved in the running of modern governments. Because these laws are based in similar ones in Europe, which I explained to the people of that region, the dead men who set up the Dutch Republic are actively involved in the running of modern day Canada.

[Caracasus]

So we're left here with a decision between believing IA or believing the CCD.

Hmmm. Well that's sure a tough one there. You know what, I think I am going with the player who has actively been working for years within the WA and helping newcomers and not the folks who think chucking a few quid into TG campaigns for their godawful resolutions is making a contribution.

Especially given this rather interesting dissection of exactly how the OP has lied throughout this repeal attempt.

[Jocospor]

Well, look, we'll let all that stand for what it is. It's a lavish, passionately incensed response that tells everyone all they need to know, really.

Actually, we'll quickly rebut one point:



We draw attention to the following factbook. Scroll towards the bottom: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=914902

"I have...had no relationship...with the administration of that region." How quaint.

Wow, I draft laws. One would expect that anyone familiar with what I've done in NationStates would be unfazed with such an astonishing statement. Running a region is very different from creating a structure. I can write laws about how to run a region, set up some structure, etc etc. But that doesn't mean anything unless those laws are enforced by the people who in fact run the region.

You've proven too much, since under this logic, dead people who wrote decades-old constitutions and never held any posts are actively involved in the running of modern governments. Because these laws are based in similar ones in Europe, which I explained to the people of that region, the dead men who set up the Dutch Republic are actively involved in the running of modern day Canada.

Cute save, not convinced. Though good to see your healthy opinion of yourself shining through, as always.

[Jocospor]

So we're left here with a decision between believing IA or believing the CCD.

Hmmm. Well that's sure a tough one there. You know what, I think I am going with the player who has actively been working for years within the WA and helping newcomers and not the folks who think chucking a few quid into TG campaigns for their godawful resolutions is making a contribution.

Especially given this rather interesting dissection of exactly how the OP has lied throughout this repeal attempt.

Oh Caracasus, go have a glass and calm your nerves. Cabinet's on the left, bottom shelf.

[Democratic Empire of Romania]

No / Nyet / Nu / Tu n'as pas raison.

[Honeydewistania]

Jocospor, change it from [DRAFT] to [SUBMITTED], since you submitted it.

[Jocospor]

Jocospor, change it from [DRAFT] to [SUBMITTED], since you submitted it.

Oh yep - thank you!

[Caracasus]

So we're left here with a decision between believing IA or believing the CCD.

Hmmm. Well that's sure a tough one there. You know what, I think I am going with the player who has actively been working for years within the WA and helping newcomers and not the folks who think chucking a few quid into TG campaigns for their godawful resolutions is making a contribution.

Especially given this rather interesting dissection of exactly how the OP has lied throughout this repeal attempt.

Oh Caracasus, go have a glass and calm your nerves. Cabinet's on the left, bottom shelf.

I'll take your faint jab at me as you not actually having a concrete rebuttal for any of the points raised regarding this then?

[Zelronia]

Approved

[Jocospor]

Oh Caracasus, go have a glass and calm your nerves. Cabinet's on the left, bottom shelf.

I'll take your faint jab at me as you not actually having a concrete rebuttal for any of the points raised regarding this then?

If a respected man kills another, and the only witness was a common scoundrel, did the respected man still kill?

It's not a question of reputation. We've presented the facts. Now you must objectively weigh them.