[DEFEATED] Repeal SC#188 "Condemn Vandoosa"

[Tinhampton]

That this thread appears to be devolving into a minor shitfest over who should and should not be counted as a supporter, without any debate over this draft's contents, appears to indicate that I'll probably submit this on Friday major - that's 5am BST on Friday for you Black Hawks.

[RiderSyl]

unless we're going to give Vandy a proper Condemnation after this is repealed, I won't support this
and since Tin has insofar avoided giving a definitive answer on whether Vandy deserves a badge, I'm opposed

it's kinda like the repeal attempts on SC#52, IMO. the subject of the condemn has had such a clear impact on the raiding community, how inaccurate and poorly written the condemn itself is hasn't really mattered to anyone.

also, not sure why you're calling out the Hawks? they're just one of the many, many raiding orgs Vandoosa has graced with his presence

[Jakker]

I am generally always opposed to the notion of repealing an older resolution to rewrite a better one. And it doesn't even seem like a rewrite will happen. Either way, Vandy is a microcosm of the tag raiding during that time and it is easy to forgot just how much raiding they did. Their name was pretty well known and I think if we are to recognize someone from that era, Vandy is a solid person for that.

[SherpDaWerp]

Was or was not Vandoosa a predator user? * If they were, then the condemnation should be repealed without replacement. If not, then it's fine. It's literally that simple. None of this "but muh big impact on raiding" - every other condemned predator user got their condemns repealed on the grounds that people who were complicit in massive breaches of site rules shouldn't be recognised at all.

When did that change? When did it become ok for a predator user to be recognised by the WA just because "they had a big impact"?

If we insist on blocking some players from recognition due to their OOC conduct (Auralia's self commendation, Cormac's borderline harassment) then that standard should be applied equally, and surely a predator user would fall afoul of that standard.

(*spoiler: they were)

[Aurum Raider]

every other condemned predator user got their condemns repealed

The specific repeals you're referring to;
226: viewtopic.php?p=32442448#p32442448
227: viewtopic.php?p=32442448#p32442448
230: viewtopic.php?p=32593654#p32593654

I am on the list of people who got DEAT'd as well, so feel free to take this whatever way you like.

In the case of 227, the subject is DoS, and responsible for variously getting many people DoS, DEAT, and Swept. A repeal of the condemnation is very well deserved.

The subjects of repeal in 226 and 230 were members of TBR (and subsequently DEN's) general staff. They also continued using predator after the author was DoS and were likely aware in one way or another of predator's rulebreaking nature, as well as being responsible for the proliferation of a rulebreaking tool - again, deserved.

Vandoosa was not part of the general staff, and was punished solely because they were high enough in TBR/DEN's command structure to lead raids. The people who were 'complicit,' as you put it, were the people who distributed the tool and knew it was rulebreaking, not Vandoosa.

[WayNeacTia]

That this thread appears to be devolving into a minor shitfest over who should and should not be counted as a supporter, without any debate over this draft's contents, appears to indicate that I'll probably submit this on Friday major - that's 5am BST on Friday for you Black Hawks.

Somehow I am having a hard time believing two whole comments qualifies as a shitfest, but whatever. Debate happened. You were told it is a terrible fucking idea, yet you seem to be determined to press forward at full steam and smash your head off of a brick wall with this. And why exactly are you calling out the Hawks here? Pretty sure most of them are going to vote against it.

Better luck next time I suppose.

[World Assembly Nation 665]

Will only support if you use that lovely cover going around in the NSGP server in some manner.

Edit: Syntax

[SherpDaWerp]

I am on the list of people who got DEAT'd as well, so feel free to take this whatever way you like.

I'll take it as "you know what you're talking about".

226: viewtopic.php?p=32442448#p32442448
227: viewtopic.php?p=32442448#p32442448
230: viewtopic.php?p=32593654#p32593654

I think you meant 227 and 228, rather than 226 and 227, regardless, thanks for linking these.

Obviously I'm in no position to know the specifics of these players' involvements, but it seems off to me that players who were

• members of DEN's general staff
• users of predator
• users of predator who knew it was rulebreaking
• people who were "responsible for the proliferation" of predator

got the same punishment as someone who was just "high enough in DEN's command structure to lead raids" - 3 month WA ban, deletion of main nation.

Why would Vandoosa get the exact same punishment as people with that level of involvement if they weren't even "complicit"...? That seems dodgy to me.

That said; if everything you say is true (and it might be, to your knowledge, but something doesn't add up) then no support for this resolution from me (not that I have any sway over anything). I'll take others' word that Vandoosa has had an impact on R/D, and without predator nullifying those contributions they sound like they should get a condemn.

[Jakker]

That this thread appears to be devolving into a minor shitfest over who should and should not be counted as a supporter, without any debate over this draft's contents, appears to indicate that I'll probably submit this on Friday major - that's 5am BST on Friday for you Black Hawks.

Somehow I am having a hard time believing two whole comments qualifies as a shitfest, but whatever. Debate happened. You were told it is a terrible fucking idea, yet you seem to be determined to press forward at full steam and smash your head off of a brick wall with this. And why exactly are you calling out the Hawks here? Pretty sure most of them are going to vote against it.

Better luck next time I suppose.

I suspect that the reference to TBH is because she assumes that we will work to fight this from getting to vote once it is submitted.

Was or was not Vandoosa a predator user? * If they were, then the condemnation should be repealed without replacement. If not, then it's fine. It's literally that simple. None of this "but muh big impact on raiding" - every other condemned predator user got their condemns repealed on the grounds that people who were complicit in massive breaches of site rules shouldn't be recognised at all.

When did that change? When did it become ok for a predator user to be recognised by the WA just because "they had a big impact"?

If we insist on blocking some players from recognition due to their OOC conduct (Auralia's self commendation, Cormac's borderline harassment) then that standard should be applied equally, and surely a predator user would fall afoul of that standard.

(*spoiler: they were)

This is also a pretty outdated standpoint and it is disappointing to see it come up. It doesn't make sense at all to compare OOC behavior that is done with intent or purpose to using a script in which nearly all of the users had no idea that it was illegal. Yes, it led to other players' condemnations being repealed, but those were the ones who had the most knowledge of it. Vandy is not that. We have seen players recognized by the SC who have used predator since (Koth) and I hope we continue to not let this notion that using predator means they should not be recognized, but the reality is nearly all did so without malicious intent.

[SherpDaWerp]

This is also a pretty outdated standpoint and it is disappointing to see it come up.

My apologies, but as your average uninvolved non-GPer, I still think use of Predator (even without malicious intent) is a c/c-blocking action. If Auralia's self-commend is still a problem 7 years later; then Predator being a problem after 4 years should be wholly unsurprising.

[Vando0sa]

I guess I'll point out that I only used Predator 3 times while being trained on how to use it by Cora. This happened a month or so before we found out it was rulebreaking. As for the rest of my time in DEN before that, All of my time in Cimmeria and The Black Riders era I was Predator free.

I've paid for my Predator using sins though. Mighty wrath of the mods squeaked at me and lead to the fall of old Iwaku. Most of us who received punishment for Predator have been very lawful when it comes to scripts as none of us want to see anything like that happen again. We still like to burn regions and stuff because raiders gotta raid.. we just lawful evil now!

[WayNeacTia]

This is also a pretty outdated standpoint and it is disappointing to see it come up.

My apologies, but as your average uninvolved non-GPer, I still think use of Predator (even without malicious intent) is a c/c-blocking action. If Auralia's self-commend is still a problem 7 years later; then Predator being a problem after 4 years should be wholly unsurprising.

That is not the reason Auralia won't ever receive a commendation and you know that as well as anyone else. Vandy founded a huge region, and then saved it after his main was deleted. That right there is a enough for the condemnation to stand.

[Aurum Raider]

Obviously I'm in no position to know the specifics of these players' involvements, but it seems off to me that players who were

• members of DEN's general staff
• users of predator
• users of predator who knew it was rulebreaking
• people who were "responsible for the proliferation" of predator

got the same punishment as someone who was just "high enough in DEN's command structure to lead raids" - 3 month WA ban, deletion of main nation.

Why would Vandoosa get the exact same punishment as people with that level of involvement if they weren't even "complicit"...? That seems dodgy to me.

The actual circumstances are a little dicey, partly because Moderation never actually explained who got what and why. KKnight and Feuer Ritter were both members of TBR's general staff, who were put in the 'most lenient punishment' tier.

As I understand it, KKnight wasn't particularly active after TBR was deleted. (TBR was deleted for recruitment script abuse) Feuer Ritter was never part of DEN (I may be wrong on this). Because the WA bans happened as a result of Predator's usage in DEN, and neither were active, they didn't receive as harsh a punishment.

Keep in mind, that people who hadn't used predator for 2+ years got the same as people who had been using it up to a month before the punishments came down. I had left TBR months before predator's author was DoS, and never joined DEN (and thus had no access to predator).

Broadly speaking, because anyone who ever used predator was punished, and 3 month WA ban was the most lenient it got, a lot of people were in there solely because the ruling demanded they had to be punished.

That said; if everything you say is true (and it might be, to your knowledge, but something doesn't add up) then no support for this resolution from me (not that I have any sway over anything). I'll take others' word that Vandoosa has had an impact on R/D, and without predator nullifying those contributions they sound like they should get a condemn.

I'll endeavor to dig up TBR and DEN's forum threads to see if I'm mistaken, but the above is as I understand it.

EDIT: Found them (It wasn't worth making another post)
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=351090&p=25680057
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=306698&p=21153251

Feuer Ritter was banned from TBR, which presumably carried into DEN and removed his access to predator.
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=338765&p=24300285

[SherpDaWerp]

I guess I'll point out that I only used Predator 3 times while being trained on how to use it by Cora. This happened a month or so before we found out it was rulebreaking. As for the rest of my time in DEN before that, All of my time in Cimmeria and The Black Riders era I was Predator free.

I've paid for my Predator using sins though. Mighty wrath of the mods squeaked at me and lead to the fall of old Iwaku. Most of us who received punishment for Predator have been very lawful when it comes to scripts as none of us want to see anything like that happen again. We still like to burn regions and stuff because raiders gotta raid.. we just lawful evil now!

Once again, thanks for providing info; it's remarkably difficult to browse through 4-year-old threads about DOS's and such given the amount of content that's not allowed to be discussed.

Complicity is the participation in a completed criminal act of an accomplice, a partner in the crime who aids or encourages (abets) other perpetrators of that crime, and who shared with them an intent to act to complete the crime.

Participation: Yes
Aiding and abetting: No
Shared intent: No

I'm pretty sure a court of law would say "participation meets 1 of the criteria" and call that complicity, but I'm not a court of law and nor have I ever been involved with one, so I'll take that as "not complicit" (albeit someone who did use it a couple times), confirming Aurum Raider's details. I still question why players who (at least anecdotally) had far more involvement received the same punishment. Whim of moderation, I guess, or perhaps they assisted with the investigation to get lesser punishment.

In that case:

no support for this resolution from me

---

That is not the reason Auralia won't ever receive a commendation and you know that as well as anyone else.

OOC mistake == OOC mistake, sure, one of them was more involved & deliberate but that same one was also almost double the amount of time ago. Plus, your presumption of what I "know as well as anyone else" is amusing.

Vandy founded a huge region, and then saved it after his main was deleted. That right there is a enough for the condemnation to stand.

I feel like people have said in the past that there a c/c nominee should have international influence, and not just contribute to one region... (which is something you should know as well as anyone else.) Sure, Vandoosa has had international influence, but "That right there is a enough for the condemnation to stand"? Nope.

---

Also,

big snip

Not exactly ninja'd - I saw your post coming when I did a final "preview" on this post before submitting it. Cheers for the extra explanation.

[RiderSyl]

If we insist on blocking some players from recognition due to their OOC conduct (Auralia's self commendation, Cormac's borderline harassment)

so this is it now, huh? Cormac's OOC bad, a borderline harasser?
guess the victors really do write history.

[SherpDaWerp]

If we insist on blocking some players from recognition due to their OOC conduct (Auralia's self commendation, Cormac's borderline harassment)

so this is it now, huh? Cormac's OOC bad, a borderline harasser?
guess the victors really do write history.

hey I've literally never interacted with him (non-GPer, as I said) but reading his commend and condemn thread he got super salty when it didn't pass. That, more than anything others said, convinced me that he can be a bit of a dick. Maybe in the past he wasn't, but basing my opinion on him quitting the game and flaming other SC authors over a failed C/C doesn't seem like "the victors writing history", it seems like "calling it as it is".

This thread isn't about Cormac anyway. People seem to think that bringing up the people I compared this to (when I was under the impression that Vandy was complicit in wide-scale Predator usage) will somehow defeat my argument; as far as I'm aware Cormac and Auralia were both blocked from c/c's for OOC reasons, and Predator seems like a fairly big OOC reason.

[Honeydewistania]

Sherp I’m going to have to disagree with you here. Yes, Vandoosa used predator and got punished for that. WA ban and the founder of their region got deleted. But they’re not like Halcones. Or Gest. Their condemns got repealed because they cheated and as a result don’t deserve it. However a lot of the content in Vandoosa’s condemn didn’t require the use of predator, like building the region and terrorizing using spam.

[Tinhampton]

Vandoosa indeed never triggered with Cimmeria, with or without Predator, and the draft has been updated to reflect that.

Also, I've just worked out what was meant by "reinstating the organisation of [TBR]" - it was, in fact, Cora's idea to move most of Cimmeria's functions to Black Riders. Myth also busted accordingly in Draft 1c; yeeting date pushed back by 24 hours to Saturday minor.

[Vando0sa]

Vandoosa indeed never triggered with Cimmeria, with or without Predator, and the draft has been updated to reflect that.

Also, I've just worked out what was meant by "reinstating the organisation of [TBR]" - it was, in fact, Cora's idea to move most of Cimmeria's functions to Black Riders. Myth also busted accordingly in Draft 1c; yeeting date pushed back by 24 hours to Saturday minor.

Actually "Black Riders 3.0" was kinda my fault.. I made a joke about while we where raiding that night to tag everything as TBR Ghost Division. Then things got intense.. I just wanted a bit of nostalgia and A new mini TBR happened and Cimmeria merged to it.. then it collapsed like the Soviet Union and caught on Feuer!

[Tinhampton]

Proposal-A-Go-Go, as promised.

[WayNeacTia]

Proposal-A-Go-Go, as promised.

Hopefully this proposal burns like the dumpster fire that it truly is.

[Vando0sa]

I approved! does not matter if it passes or not.. so long as a fire happens!

[Tinhampton]

This proposal was in quorum for about an hour earlier today. It will fall out of queue if it does not receive one more approval in the next 23 hours(!).

[WayNeacTia]

This proposal was in quorum for about an hour earlier today. It will fall out of queue if it does not receive one more approval in the next 23 hours(!).

You know, when something JUST makes quorum, it is usually a sign that bad things are to come. Given the fact the only major delegate to approve it was McM should be telling.

[Yokiria]

Until Tinhampton actually answers whether or not this is a repeal-and-replace, I'm going to be operating under the assumption that they don't plan to replace it, which means I am against this.

Also, I see this repeal cites SC#161 as justification. Arguing precedence may be how nations say "hello" in the General Assembly, but in the Security Council, it's not as important.

If we are going to bother with precedence though (and this has been submitted, so it seems we are), instead of looking at one proposal, let's look at several. The failed proposals to repeal SC#52 by multiple authors and the previous failed proposal to repeal SC#188 by Wallenburg show that the quality and accuracy of a C&C does not override its targets' worthiness. And the worthiness of this target, Vandoosa, has been confirmed by Kuriko, who is the Registrar-General of 10KI, the home of TITO. I think an evaluation from the Registrar-General carries more than enough weight to prove Vandoosa should keep their Condemn and that SC#188 should stay.