NationStates

This is something I really could support. COE deserves this.

Kuriko wrote:Weird, raiders supporting commending raiders for raiding. Who could have seen that coming? You're right Pepper, this isn't the real world. But that also doesn't mean we should commend those that get a kick out of destroying regional communities for the fun of it.

Are you against citing raiding as reason for commendation, or flat-out commending raiders?

Bormiar wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Weird, raiders supporting commending raiders for raiding. Who could have seen that coming? You're right Pepper, this isn't the real world. But that also doesn't mean we should commend those that get a kick out of destroying regional communities for the fun of it.

Are you against citing raiding as reason for commendation, or flat-out commending raiders?

Citing raiding, I thought that was obvious but maybe not.

Kuriko wrote:

Bormiar wrote:Are you against citing raiding as reason for commendation, or flat-out commending raiders?

Citing raiding, I thought that was obvious but maybe not.

Sorry, I misread the “...commend those that get a kick out of...” bit.

Bormiar wrote:Praetor, do you expect us to condemn every wrongdoing? Based on the proposal, it seems clear that COE’s region-building contributions are clearly commendable. Should the author choose to fully recognize their affect on NS, what’s wrong with that? Of anything, it certainly doesn’t contradict the “purpose” of a condemnation.

I've made no statements as to expectations as to what should be commended or condemned. I am genuinely curious, if someone is able to be commended for being the bad guy IC, then what purpose do condemnations serve?

(this question is for Jakker too)

Praeceps wrote:

Bormiar wrote:Praetor, do you expect us to condemn every wrongdoing? Based on the proposal, it seems clear that COE’s region-building contributions are clearly commendable. Should the author choose to fully recognize their affect on NS, what’s wrong with that? Of anything, it certainly doesn’t contradict the “purpose” of a condemnation.

I've made no statements as to expectations as to what should be commended or condemned. I am genuinely curious, if someone is able to be commended for being the bad guy IC, then what purpose do condemnations serve?

(this question is for Jakker too)

Perhaps it means that the IC “bad guys” (from your perspective) have been gaining popularity and people have started to support their cause.

The other explanation is that people don’t do much IC narrative in the SC anymore (which is a shame, because it would make things immeasurably more interesting), but that is obviously the boring and thus wrong explanation.

A Bloodred Moon wrote:

Praeceps wrote:I've made no statements as to expectations as to what should be commended or condemned. I am genuinely curious, if someone is able to be commended for being the bad guy IC, then what purpose do condemnations serve?

(this question is for Jakker too)

Perhaps it means that the IC “bad guys” (from your perspective) have been gaining popularity and people have started to support their cause.

The other explanation is that people don’t do much IC narrative in the SC anymore (which is a shame, because it would make things immeasurably more interesting), but that is obviously the boring and thus wrong explanation.

That's not quite answering my question. If raiding is worthy of commendation and not condemnation, then what are we going to condemn for?

You’re positing that raiding is the same thing as being the bad guy, and it’s not because not all examples of being the bad guy are raiding, and not all examples of raiding are evil (e.g. raiding the Black Riders).

For that reason, I could only assume that:
1) the controversial nature of raiding would require an abundance of information not directly related to raiding. Rarely would a commendation contain mention of raiding. In this proposal, COE’s work in TNP is the main argument.
2) Condemnations would still cover other things (e.g. coups, roleplay)
3) Commendations would never directly state region destruction as basis for the commendation. In the case of this proposal, COE is said to have helped in the aftermath of predator, and it lists positions he had held. That’s not commending raiding.

The scales seem to tip in favor of commendation for COE, so commendation it should be. I highly doubt this will be the case for most raiders, so I’m really not worried.

Praeceps wrote:

A Bloodred Moon wrote:Perhaps it means that the IC “bad guys” (from your perspective) have been gaining popularity and people have started to support their cause.

The other explanation is that people don’t do much IC narrative in the SC anymore (which is a shame, because it would make things immeasurably more interesting), but that is obviously the boring and thus wrong explanation.

That's not quite answering my question. If raiding is worthy of commendation and not condemnation, then what are we going to condemn for?

This is getting a bit off track of the thread. I will note that I am not posting a commendation proposal of COE focused on his raiding. I do not go into detail about his raiding history. This proposal argues that COE should be commended for the leadership, organizational structures, and foundational efforts they have put into multiple regions including their musical contributions. Both of these have not only positively impacted the regions that they have been in, but also has had positive contributions to parts of the greater NationStates world as well. For that, I do believe COE is worthy of a commendation.

The clause that mentions his time in the Speakers office and as the executive editor is a little clunky. The Speaker’s office is not involved with the production of the regional newspaper. So perhaps they could be a separate sentence. Followed up by COE’s service in the executive government as Minister of Communications etc etc.

Seeing as most of the proposal is about his work in TNP, perhaps the target of the commendation should be General COE instead of Crushing Our Enemies?

Jakker City wrote:

Praeceps wrote:That's not quite answering my question. If raiding is worthy of commendation and not condemnation, then what are we going to condemn for?

This is getting a bit off track of the thread. I will note that I am not posting a commendation proposal of COE focused on his raiding. I do not go into detail about his raiding history. This proposal argues that COE should be commended for the leadership, organizational structures, and foundational efforts they have put into multiple regions including their musical contributions. Both of these have not only positively impacted the regions that they have been in, but also has had positive contributions to parts of the greater NationStates world as well. For that, I do believe COE is worthy of a commendation.

Can you frame it as condemnable and then go into the commendable portions then?

Kuriko wrote:

Jakker City wrote:
This is getting a bit off track of the thread. I will note that I am not posting a commendation proposal of COE focused on his raiding. I do not go into detail about his raiding history. This proposal argues that COE should be commended for the leadership, organizational structures, and foundational efforts they have put into multiple regions including their musical contributions. Both of these have not only positively impacted the regions that they have been in, but also has had positive contributions to parts of the greater NationStates world as well. For that, I do believe COE is worthy of a commendation.

Can you frame it as condemnable and then go into the commendable portions then?

Everything I listed about COE's time in TBH, I listed because I believe them to be commendable. All of them articulate themes of leadership, regional organization, and initiative that continue throughout the proposal.

East Meranopirus wrote:Seeing as most of the proposal is about his work in TNP, perhaps the target of the commendation should be General COE instead of Crushing Our Enemies?

In speaking with the nominee and given that this is their oldest nation, it makes sense to go with Crushing Our Enemies. Their TNP nation is even based on that original nation.

McMasterdonia wrote:The clause that mentions his time in the Speakers office and as the executive editor is a little clunky. The Speaker’s office is not involved with the production of the regional newspaper. So perhaps they could be a separate sentence. Followed up by COE’s service in the executive government as Minister of Communications etc etc.

Thanks for your feedback. I will look it over and adjust accordingly.

Jakker City wrote:

Kuriko wrote:Can you frame it as condemnable and then go into the commendable portions then?

Everything I listed about COE's time in TBH, I listed because I believe them to be commendable. All of them articulate themes of leadership, regional organization, and initiative that continue throughout the proposal.

East Meranopirus wrote:Seeing as most of the proposal is about his work in TNP, perhaps the target of the commendation should be General COE instead of Crushing Our Enemies?

In speaking with the nominee and given that this is their oldest nation, it makes sense to go with Crushing Our Enemies. Their TNP nation is even based on that original nation.

McMasterdonia wrote:The clause that mentions his time in the Speakers office and as the executive editor is a little clunky. The Speaker’s office is not involved with the production of the regional newspaper. So perhaps they could be a separate sentence. Followed up by COE’s service in the executive government as Minister of Communications etc etc.

Thanks for your feedback. I will look it over and adjust accordingly.

Then you're definitely saying that work in a raider organization is commendable, which is starting the slippery slope of calling raiding commendable. Which it isn't.

Maybe just a "Acknowledging raiding is a destructive act that does not deserve a commendation, however,"
before the TBH accomplishments section

Bormiar wrote:You’re positing that raiding is the same thing as being the bad guy, and it’s not because not all examples of being the bad guy are raiding, and not all examples of raiding are evil (e.g. raiding the Black Riders).

For that reason, I could only assume that:
1) the controversial nature of raiding would require an abundance of information not directly related to raiding. Rarely would a commendation contain mention of raiding. In this proposal, COE’s work in TNP is the main argument.
2) Condemnations would still cover other things (e.g. coups, roleplay)
3) Commendations would never directly state region destruction as basis for the commendation. In the case of this proposal, COE is said to have helped in the aftermath of predator, and it lists positions he had held. That’s not commending raiding.

The scales seem to tip in favor of commendation for COE, so commendation it should be. I highly doubt this will be the case for most raiders, so I’m really not worried.

It is pretty clear that the raiding in discussion here is not about raiding TBR or the like.

Regardless of the proportion of content which includes commendations for work relating to raiding vs. commending for TNP work, the fact of the matter remains that this proposal wants to commend COE for supporting raiding activities. I don't disagree that COE should be getting commended, I agree he is worthy of recognition by the SC. However, if he is to be commended, I don't believe this material should be included.

Jakker City wrote:

Praeceps wrote:That's not quite answering my question. If raiding is worthy of commendation and not condemnation, then what are we going to condemn for?

This is getting a bit off track of the thread. I will note that I am not posting a commendation proposal of COE focused on his raiding. I do not go into detail about his raiding history. This proposal argues that COE should be commended for the leadership, organizational structures, and foundational efforts they have put into multiple regions including their musical contributions. Both of these have not only positively impacted the regions that they have been in, but also has had positive contributions to parts of the greater NationStates world as well. For that, I do believe COE is worthy of a commendation.

While the proposal does not focus on raiding it does include his involvement in raider organizations and cites his contributions to those organizations as being worthy of commendation. I find it difficult to believe that raiding is condemnable yet supporting the organization and developing the organization which does condemnable action is commendable?

I would prefer that if this material is included in the resolution it is phrased that COE is commendable despite his involvement in raider organizations, eg. Despite...

---

Now, as for feedback on the rest of the proposal...

Jakker City wrote:Complementing that Crushing Our Enemies played a vital role in the foreign policy practices and regional responses of The Black Hawks' Council including the aftermath of the military weapon, Predator, being found to be against international law,

I'm a bit confused here, I don't quite understand how the reaction to a single incident is worthy of recognition. Am I missing some history here?

Noting Crushing Our Enemies’ induction into the Raiding Hall of Fame, a body of nations who have positively contributed to the advancement of raiding,

While I don't have an issue with recognizing someone for getting recognition (provided there is sufficient other content in the resolution), I have noted that in previous drafts of resolutions objections are raised to the inclusion.

Of course if you do keep it in there is that issue of commending someone for raiding...

Highlighting that the nominee’s musical productions have been submitted in several global song contests and they have won on three separate occasions,

Nothing the same as above (although this is not about raiding so no issue with it if it is included).

I plan to submit this in the next few days, so feel free to share any last bits of feedback.

Jakker City wrote:I plan to submit this in the next few days, so feel free to share any last bits of feedback.

My feedback remains the same. You can write the raider stuff as condemnable and then phase into the commendable parts, but I doubt you'll take this advice at all since you've been mainly ignoring me and others who have said this.

Kuriko wrote:

Jakker City wrote:I plan to submit this in the next few days, so feel free to share any last bits of feedback.

My feedback remains the same. You can write the raider stuff as condemnable and then phase into the commendable parts, but I doubt you'll take this advice at all since you've been mainly ignoring me and others who have said this.

I believe that I responded to your previous posts as well as others. I did not directly respond to a couple of the most recent posts, but I think I address those points earlier as well. I have taken all feedback into account, so I don't see that as ignoring. Simply because I disagree does not mean that I have not heard what has been said.

Full support.

The Stalker wrote:Full support.

So, you're willing to fully support the passage of a commendation proposal that lists the nominee as a member of the Raiding Hall of Fame and lists their contributions to one of the most powerful raider organizations in NationStates? Knowing full well that if ever given the chance, the nominee and the organization they've helped would gladly invade your region and grief it without a second thought like they've done to countless others? It's great to see the Security Council fall so far as to no longer stand up for what it once did, and its members fall so far that they're glad to support another proposal commending someone for actions done as a raider knowing full well the nominee wouldnt hesitate to destroy any region they want.

Edit: Yes, I know this may come off as rude and sorry for that. But that's basically how I'm starting to feel, that the SC participants no longer care about the natives and their rights and that continuing to commend raiders for raiding instead of condemning them for it is continuing to erode the stance the SC has taken since its inception.

Jakker City wrote:I plan to submit this in the next few days, so feel free to share any last bits of feedback.

Is there any point in doing so if you won't reply to it?

Kuriko wrote:

The Stalker wrote:Full support.

So, you're willing to fully support the passage of a commendation proposal that lists the nominee as a member of the Raiding Hall of Fame and lists their contributions to one of the most powerful raider organizations in NationStates? Knowing full well that if ever given the chance, the nominee and the organization they've helped would gladly invade your region and grief it without a second thought like they've done to countless others? It's great to see the Security Council fall so far as to no longer stand up for what it once did, and its members fall so far that they're glad to support another proposal commending someone for actions done as a raider knowing full well the nominee wouldnt hesitate to destroy any region they want.

Edit: Yes, I know this may come off as rude and sorry for that. But that's basically how I'm starting to feel, that the SC participants no longer care about the natives and their rights and that continuing to commend raiders for raiding instead of condemning them for it is continuing to erode the stance the SC has taken since its inception.

An accomplished player is an accomplished player. Perhaps a Condemning is more appropriate, but I don't think it necessarily needs to be one or the other.

Furthermore nobody’s raiding Hell while I’m King.

Kuriko wrote:Edit: Yes, I know this may come off as rude and sorry for that. But that's basically how I'm starting to feel, that the SC participants no longer care about the natives and their rights and that continuing to commend raiders for raiding instead of condemning them for it is continuing to erode the stance the SC has taken since its inception.

I fear that does not work when you’re speaking to a native that has seen their regions get raided often enough. To claim the native delegate of a founderless region* does not care for native founderless regions is silly.

*not like we’re ever getting that password so it might as well be foundered, but still.

You’re being disingenuous, Kuriko. You should already be well-aware of Hell’s history with raids and nearly being destroyed- more than what you’ve experienced, so frankly that’s rude to the stalker. Who are you to tell him how he feels about it?

He’s not ignoring feedback, Praetor, as evident by this thread. He’s just wise enough not to debate on something the parties will never agree on.