Page 3 of 3

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:41 am
by Honeydewistania
Err... I hope I’m not going insane but it appears that my ruling request thread has disappeared. Does that mean a ruling has been reached? Or is there some ambiguity over wording that still needs discussions? If it’s the latter, I could just see what I can do to prevent wasting moderator’s time. Thanks!

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:22 am
by Bhang Bhang Duc
Honeydewistania wrote:Err... I hope I’m not going insane but it appears that my ruling request thread has disappeared. Does that mean a ruling has been reached? Or is there some ambiguity over wording that still needs discussions? If it’s the latter, I could just see what I can do to prevent wasting moderator’s time. Thanks!

The one in Moderation? It's still there on Page 2.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:46 am
by Honeydewistania
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Honeydewistania wrote:Err... I hope I’m not going insane but it appears that my ruling request thread has disappeared. Does that mean a ruling has been reached? Or is there some ambiguity over wording that still needs discussions? If it’s the latter, I could just see what I can do to prevent wasting moderator’s time. Thanks!

The one in Moderation? It's still there on Page 2.

I guess I was going crazy then. I swear it didn’t appear when I searched for it :blink:

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:56 am
by Sedgistan
Ruling: the various cards references in the proposal are legal. Specifically, that's "Card Defending", "Card Defenders Alliance", "Card News", and "Card Olympics".

The NationStates world has features to it that are distinct to the real world; one of these is that nations can collect and trade "cards". It makes sense that nations within this world would come up with terms unique to the NS world to describe the actions and behaviour of nations with regards to these cards. One of these actions is nations attempting to crash the value of cards (via "pull events") for their own nefarious purposes, and another is nations defending the value of these cards to protect their investments.

This is the same reasoning that saw terms like "feeder" legalised many years ago. As mentioned elsewhere we are looking to loosen up interpretations of the SC rules to give more freedom to authors, and to WA nations to decide on their own standards of what is appropriate in SC proposal text.

This ruling supercedes Ransium's 2019 ruling here. I will update the Compandium too, which previously described references to cards as "conditionally okay" to now be "generally okay".

That's not to say that authors should stop using the language "international artwork" - that is a "more IC" term, as used by the world census rank, and is well-established within the resolution base. But the term "cards" can be used instead when preferred.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:30 pm
by Honeydewistania
I prefer artwork anyway, it’s better IC. But thanks!

PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:15 pm
by Warzone Codger
I only wished there is a clause condemning Noah for only wanting to be 2nd best - what a terrible mentality!

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 4:20 am
by Chan Island
This condemnation ignores of course the conspiracy behind Noah's First Country. The erasure of the first country cannot continue! Just for Noah's First Citizens!!!

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 4:26 am
by Honeydewistania
Chan Island wrote:This condemnation ignores of course the conspiracy behind Noah's First Country. The erasure of the first country cannot continue! Just for Noah's First Citizens!!!

Actually, the abuse by NSC against Noahania (aka Noahs First Country) has been listed in the proposal

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:21 am
by Outer Sparta
Honeydewistania wrote:
Chan Island wrote:This condemnation ignores of course the conspiracy behind Noah's First Country. The erasure of the first country cannot continue! Just for Noah's First Citizens!!!

Actually, the abuse by NSC against Noahania (aka Noahs First Country) has been listed in the proposal

Where's Noah's Third Country? :p

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:23 am
by Honeydewistania
Outer Sparta wrote:
Honeydewistania wrote:Actually, the abuse by NSC against Noahania (aka Noahs First Country) has been listed in the proposal

Where's Noah's Third Country? :p

Me. /s

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 12:53 pm
by Great Clotet
The Kingdom of Great Clotet is appalled by this abhorrent behaviour from Noah's Second Country a.k.a. NSC. Whilst we are strongly in favour of civil rights and forgiveness, it seems the best course of action here is to condemn NSC and send a message to other nations who may wish to take part in similar behaviour.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2020 12:16 pm
by Newenken
OOC: Could please someone clarify me if the facts attributed to NSC in relation with the card exchange market are prohibited by any particular game rule or GAR?

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2020 12:45 pm
by Bhang Bhang Duc
Newenken wrote:OOC: Could please someone clarify me if the facts attributed to NSC in relation with the card exchange market are prohibited by any particular game rule or GAR?

No game rules are being broken. If they were then they couldn’t be referenced directly by the Condemnation - “Rule 2(c) Don't use proposals to raise issues that should be dealt with elsewhere, such as rules violations and technical suggestions.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2020 3:18 pm
by Newenken
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Newenken wrote:OOC: Could please someone clarify me if the facts attributed to NSC in relation with the card exchange market are prohibited by any particular game rule or GAR?

No game rules are being broken. If they were then they couldn’t be referenced directly by the Condemnation - “Rule 2(c) Don't use proposals to raise issues that should be dealt with elsewhere, such as rules violations and technical suggestions.


OOC: Thanks a lot!

IC: “Although the conduct attributed to NCS in relation to the card market does not imply a violation of international law - for which it could be argued that "it is within the possibilities granted by the rules of the free market" - we will support the proposed condemnation. This, since although the matter is not regulated, we believe that commercial and contractual relationships must be carried out with a minimum of ethics and in good faith“.

Guybrush Threepwood.
Ambassador to the General Assembly and the Security Council.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2020 4:43 pm
by Yokiria
This is an extremely unique Condemn. I love it. Support.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2020 6:56 am
by Drasnia
Condemn Noahs Second Country was passed 9,347 votes to 5,120.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2020 6:58 am
by Honeydewistania
Drasnia wrote:
Condemn Noahs Second Country was passed 9,347 votes to 5,120.

Poggers