[PASSED] Repeal Commend Solorni | SC#252

[Kostrorleauny]

Good call, I woudn’t bother with a condemnation proposal.

But yes, I agree with most everyone else here. The actions undertaken by Solorni out-of-character that we now have been made aware of far outshadow her achievements in-character that she was commended for. With this knowledge in hand, we cannot allow her to remain commended as that would set bad precedent.

What exactly happened? What did she do OOC?

EDIT: Posted this on a puppet on accident.

We will not be discussing that here, out of regard for etiquette and also so as to not disclose the specifics of the situation publicly. However, suffice to say that their quote-unquote “out-of-character actions”, as mentioned, are being used to refer to recent revelations of blantant misconduct and manipulative behaviour on the part of Solorni.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Support.
I don't know the spacifics, but I have enormous respect for the thoroughness and impartiality of the Europeia admin team, and have read their comments on the matter.

[Yokiria]

This has now been submitted.

[Jocospor]

What exactly happened? What did she do OOC?

EDIT: Posted this on a puppet on accident.

We will not be discussing that here, out of regard for etiquette and also so as to not disclose the specifics of the situation publicly. However, suffice to say that their quote-unquote “out-of-character actions”, as mentioned, are being used to refer to recent revelations of blantant misconduct and manipulative behaviour on the part of Solorni.

OOC: If someone could privately contact me (Discord is good) about what actually went on, I'd be grateful.

Having signed off on this now, I'm going to withdraw my support. My concern is that these are OOC issues. If Solorni has done something wrong (and I have a fair idea of what considering the resolution implies it) then an in-game repeal of her commendation is not the most appropriate action that can be taken.

It's for this reason I have a hard time believing these people actually did what they're accused of. Put simply, if Yuno (for example) did what she is said to have done, then why isn't she in IRL jail?

[Kuriko]

We will not be discussing that here, out of regard for etiquette and also so as to not disclose the specifics of the situation publicly. However, suffice to say that their quote-unquote “out-of-character actions”, as mentioned, are being used to refer to recent revelations of blantant misconduct and manipulative behaviour on the part of Solorni.

OOC: If someone could privately contact me (Discord is good) about what actually went on, I'd be grateful.

Having signed off on this now, I'm going to withdraw my support. My concern is that these are OOC issues. If Solorni has done something wrong (and I have a fair idea of what considering the resolution implies it) then an in-game repeal of her commendation is not the most appropriate action that can be taken.

It's for this reason I have a hard time believing these people actually did what they're accused of. Put simply, if Yuno (for example) did what she is said to have done, then why isn't she in IRL jail?

OOC: The difference here is that she admitted to it publicly on the Balder and Europeia off-site forums. Due to what she's done she's been permanently banned from both regions, and I believe NS moderation is looking into it right now.

[Jocospor]

OOC: If someone could privately contact me (Discord is good) about what actually went on, I'd be grateful.

Having signed off on this now, I'm going to withdraw my support. My concern is that these are OOC issues. If Solorni has done something wrong (and I have a fair idea of what considering the resolution implies it) then an in-game repeal of her commendation is not the most appropriate action that can be taken.

It's for this reason I have a hard time believing these people actually did what they're accused of. Put simply, if Yuno (for example) did what she is said to have done, then why isn't she in IRL jail?

OOC: The difference here is that she admitted to it publicly on the Balder and Europeia off-site forums. Due to what she's done she's been permanently banned from both regions, and I believe NS moderation is looking into it right now.

OOC: If higher-tier actions are being taken then that's certainly for the better.

The only other problem I have with this commendation is it reads a little too OOC, commenting on things the player has done more than the nation. I'm not sure. I'll likely abstain if this goes to vote.

[Yokiria]

The only other problem I have with this is it reads a little too OOC

The original commendation read somewhat OOC as well. By addressing the points in the original commendation, I was unavoidably going to strike the same tone. Due to the nature of what Solorni did to earn a repeal, it was even more difficult to avoid coming across somewhat OOC. This was a very difficult proposal to write from an in-character standpoint, and a technical standpoint, but I did the very best that I could.

[Jocospor]

The only other problem I have with this is it reads a little too OOC

The original commendation read somewhat OOC as well. By addressing the points in the original commendation, I was unavoidably going to strike the same tone. Due to the nature of what Solorni did to earn a repeal, it was even more difficult to avoid coming across somewhat OOC. This was a very difficult proposal to write from an in-character standpoint, and a technical standpoint, but I did the very best that I could.

OOC: I understand and agree with you, and wish you well with the vote. For now, I'll be abstaining, though we'll see what new conversation comes up during the vote.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

OOC:

So this is at vote, and seems to relate to some sort of politics that has gone on in Balder, and that there's some sort of deep corruption at play.

But basically those in the know about the details are refusing to give us the details.

Can you at least clarify what is meant by "exploitation of at risk nations"? Are we talking about nations that are vulnerable adults in real life, or something like that?

Because right now, those of us who don't know what's going on have absolutely no reason to vote for this motion. As far as I'm concerned, if the player did something in real life that makes them a horrible human being, then the mods can use their powers to take them out of the game, and strip them of all titles and so on.

However, if all this is IC stuff, then there's basically not enough detail or evidence to support the removal of a commendation.

[Frattastan IV]

But basically those in the know about the details are refusing to give us the details.

Aside from Rule 4 (which prescribes that SC proposals be 'in-character'), details cannot be given because they might be defamatory.

[Lord Dominator]

OOC:

So this is at vote, and seems to relate to some sort of politics that has gone on in Balder, and that there's some sort of deep corruption at play.

But basically those in the know about the details are refusing to give us the details.

Can you at least clarify what is meant by "exploitation of at risk nations"? Are we talking about nations that are vulnerable adults in real life, or something like that?

Because right now, those of us who don't know what's going on have absolutely no reason to vote for this motion. As far as I'm concerned, if the player did something in real life that makes them a horrible human being, then the mods can use their powers to take them out of the game, and strip them of all titles and so on.

However, if all this is IC stuff, then there's basically not enough detail or evidence to support the removal of a commendation.

If you can find me on Discord (Lord Dominator#2860) I can get you the two relevant bits of evidence we have.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

OOC:

Okay, thanks to those of you who have privately contacted me and explained the context.

I'd say that while I don't condone the OOC actions of Solorni, I feel like the use of the in-game mechanism of the World Assembly wasn't a wise move.

What you've effectively done is outed that a scandal to the whole of Nationstates, when actually this would have been best dealt with by moderators. Even if you rightly avoided mentioning the specifics in the thread, the mere fact that you signposted a scandal exists will make curious individuals like myself inclined to discover the underlying story.

As an Issues Editor, I don't like to see OOC and IC getting mixed up. You're essentially using an in-game in-character mechanism to publicise the OOC failings of an individual. This all smacks of trial-by-media, and of "internet justice", and I'm deeply saddened to see Nationstates used in this way. I think the WA should have been kept out of this, and am surprised that this one made it through to be voted on.

Rule 4 might have been met by the letter, but not in spirit. This was clearly an OOC problem being aired in an IC context.

My personal feeling is that this vote should be deleted from the game and from the records, but of course I leave that up to the moderators.

As for anyone else who has read the vote at hand and is curious about the sordid details, I'd advise don't try to find out. But nobody's going to listen to that of course. Loads of folk like me are now going to know about something they had no need to know about. Ah well.

[Wrapper]

This is now at vote.

My personal feeling is that this vote should be deleted from the game and from the records, but of course I leave that up to the moderators.

We have no grounds to do so. The repeal is entirely in-character and doesn’t violate any of the proposal rules.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

*bows*

I'm thinking this an IC mechanism being used to publicise an OOC scandal, so I'd have argued it's against the spirit of Rule 4, but this is in your remit as moderators to decide, of course, and I don't know enough about the WA / SC to know if the "spirit of the law" has any importance to rules decision-making.

Cheers for considering it, anyhow.

Will mark down an intention to abstain here, and leave this thread and this sorry business behind. Really wish I'd never looked in Pandora's box now!

[South World]

I cannot in good conscious vote for this resolution. I have no idea what has gone on and thus will not vote to remove a commendation.

[Kaboomlandia]

*bows*

I'm thinking this an IC mechanism being used to publicise an OOC scandal, so I'd have argued it's against the spirit of Rule 4, but this is in your remit as moderators to decide, of course, and I don't know enough about the WA / SC to know if the "spirit of the law" has any importance to rules decision-making.

Cheers for considering it, anyhow.

Will mark down an intention to abstain here, and leave this thread and this sorry business behind. Really wish I'd never looked in Pandora's box now!

Badges have been repealed in the past that have at least in part been due to OOC stuff (can’t name names due to defamation rules, but I have been involved with at least one said resolution) so this isn’t a new argument.

[Cormactopia Prime]

It's amazing to see people complaining about repealing a Commendation based on OOC misconduct, as though that has never happened before.

And yet...

Anyone who is voting against Repeal "Commend Solorni" on that basis, but who voted for Repeal "Commend Unibot II," is a hypocrite of the worst kind.

[Ragnaria]

Eh, the Original Commendation isn't terribly good anyways, might as well use the horrible behaviors and what not to clean out old trash.

Voted for.

[AaronScythe]

The nation of AaronScythe as a whole believes that members of Osiris have no place in shaming members of Balder.
A region deserves their own input with the Security Council as to the veracity of a claimed crime.
And the right to punish one of their own by their own choice.

OOC: (Trying to be vague) Even having viewed HEM's post -albeit with no access to the "confession" linked, the use of "overwhelmingly likely" still tells me that it's lacking evidence.
The only thing I can gather that is confirmed, is her recent awareness, although nothing noted of historic due to the aformentioned "overwhelmingly likely". A proper confession would not leave a "likely".
Being realistic, this is the internet and if no solid evidence exists, then it's probably based off nothing but accusation.
And we're better than the witch trials, now aren't we?

[Jocospor]

OOC:

Okay, thanks to those of you who have privately contacted me and explained the context.

I'd say that while I don't condone the OOC actions of Solorni, I feel like the use of the in-game mechanism of the World Assembly wasn't a wise move.

What you've effectively done is outed that a scandal to the whole of Nationstates, when actually this would have been best dealt with by moderators. Even if you rightly avoided mentioning the specifics in the thread, the mere fact that you signposted a scandal exists will make curious individuals like myself inclined to discover the underlying story.

As an Issues Editor, I don't like to see OOC and IC getting mixed up. You're essentially using an in-game in-character mechanism to publicise the OOC failings of an individual. This all smacks of trial-by-media, and of "internet justice", and I'm deeply saddened to see Nationstates used in this way. I think the WA should have been kept out of this, and am surprised that this one made it through to be voted on.

Rule 4 might have been met by the letter, but not in spirit. This was clearly an OOC problem being aired in an IC context.

My personal feeling is that this vote should be deleted from the game and from the records, but of course I leave that up to the moderators.

As for anyone else who has read the vote at hand and is curious about the sordid details, I'd advise don't try to find out. But nobody's going to listen to that of course. Loads of folk like me are now going to know about something they had no need to know about. Ah well.

OOC: These concerns were mine as well.

[Lord Dominator]

She most certainly confessed in a clear manner, DM if you need a proper link.

Sorta-edit: That goes for anyone, I don't have anyone blocked to my knowledge

[Mr Bubbly]

Oh wow, gee whiz yet another commendation being repealed because someone wasn't as awesome as they really seemed to be. We've done this how many times now? My memory says three (Unibot, Krull and AMOM). Perhaps maybe people should take this as a sign that commendations need to be very heavily considered, instead of being passed willy-nilly from now on (Paff comes to mind)? Passing a commendation just because someone has been around for a long time always seems to come back around and bite people in the ass doesn't it?

It's amazing to see people complaining about repealing a Commendation based on OOC misconduct, as though that has never happened before.

And yet...

Anyone who is voting against Repeal "Commend Solorni" on that basis, but who voted for Repeal "Commend Unibot II," is a hypocrite of the worst kind.

At this point, anyone taking anything you have to say seriously really should have their heads examined, and probably stop playing the game. I seem to recall you arguing profusely about Balder's inclusion in the repeal of Krull's badge. But here we are. Then you help author a scathing condemnation of the NPO, only to try and repeal it when you and Tim needed to bring some credibility to your pathetic coup of Osiris. What the hell is your endgame here? Why are you so concerned? You have more skeletons in the closet than anybody else.

[Wrapper]

Anyone who is voting against Repeal "Commend Solorni" on that basis, but who voted for Repeal "Commend Unibot II," is a hypocrite of the worst kind.

At this point, anyone taking anything you have to say seriously really should have their heads examined

You're both tap-dancing on the fine line between heated debate and personal attacks. Time to take a step back.

[The Tri State Area and Maine]

As an Issues Editor, I don't like to see OOC and IC getting mixed up.

I should point out that this happens all the time, and the most important resolutions passed in the SC this year were for OOC reasons (see: every offensive liberation on Fascist regions.)

[Fascist Greater Frankia]

Support #SolorniDidNothingWrong HAIL FRANKIA !