[PASSED] Commend Northern Borland

[Outer Sparta]

I think restrictions on approval raiding need to be implemented before it becomes a mainstay in the World Assembly.

I disagree. It's a valid way to stop resolutions.

I'm surprised approval raiding didn't stop the terrible liberation proposal of SECFanatics that 95% of the WA voted against when it reached quorom.

[Honeydewistania]

I disagree. It's a valid way to stop resolutions.

I'm surprised approval raiding didn't stop the terrible liberation proposal of SECFanatics that 95% of the WA voted against when it reached quorom.

Liberate SECFanatics didn’t reach quorum, it had an effective counter campaign against. Condemn Ravana on the other hand got too many approvals and no counter campaign was sent. I don’t see why approval raiding is even needed when counter campaigning exists. It doesn’t have to cost any money, it can achieve the same effect, and it doesn’t piss off legions of delegates and WA authors.

[Jakker]

If and when quorum raiding regularly stops proposals from reaching vote, then I would say a conversation would be warranted. Until that point, there is opportunity to think through accessibility as a whole.

It works every time someone does it, and it's happening more and more often with less and less concern over the consequences to the WA game. Any asshole with 10 friends can dequeue a proposal, and we're facing that problem on a regular basis now. You just want to pretend that problem doesn't exist, because you think you're more important than any other WA player.

It depends on what you define as "works" since more often than not, proposals still have made it to vote. And I'm not sure how one would call it happening like 6-7 times this year at most (I don't know the exact number) as a regular basis. Lastly, you vastly overestimate what I consider my importance to be, but I appreciate you thinking so highly of me.

[Outer Sparta]

I'm surprised approval raiding didn't stop the terrible liberation proposal of SECFanatics that 95% of the WA voted against when it reached quorom.

Liberate SECFanatics didn’t reach quorum, it had an effective counter campaign against. Condemn Ravana on the other hand got too many approvals and no counter campaign was sent. I don’t see why approval raiding is even needed when counter campaigning exists. It doesn’t have to cost any money, it can achieve the same effect, and it doesn’t piss off legions of delegates and WA authors.

Oh right it was that Ravana one. I somehow got the two confused since both were terrible drafts that didn't justify any SC action whatsoever.

[Miss Bad Life Choices]

If and when quorum raiding regularly stops proposals from reaching vote, then I would say a conversation would be warranted. Until that point, there is opportunity to think through accessibility as a whole.

It works every time someone does it, and it's happening more and more often with less and less concern over the consequences to the WA game. Any asshole with 10 friends can dequeue a proposal, and we're facing that problem on a regular basis now. You just want to pretend that problem doesn't exist, because you think you're more important than any other WA player.

Hai. Hawk/Asshole with 10 friends who planned and lead the quorum raid here (ignore that I had less then 10 friends with me at update pls).

It's only happened a handful of times this year, and this isn't going to be a regular thing that the Hawks do. I planned this raid in response to THX's telegram as I don't appreciate being told that a legal game action I do is comparable to an illegal game action, and so I thought the best course of action was to ofc respond with doing That Thing. If this became a regular occurrence in World Assembly votes, then it'd be a real problem but as far as I know the only proposals that the hawks have gone after this year were Repeal Liberate Iran, Commend Northern Borland, and then Repeal Commend Evil Wolf, with only Commend Northern Borland being knocked out of queue. If I'm wrong, my bad, but it's still less then a handful of times this year and that's... not a problem.

[Honeydewistania]

You say that if approval raiding becomes regular it becomes a problem then - is that not a large hint that it might be, you know, bad for the WA and everyone involved?

[A Bloodred Moon]

You say that if approval raiding becomes regular it becomes a problem then - is that not a large hint that it might be, you know, bad for the WA and everyone involved?

The SC is a gameplay tool, is it not? Is it therefore not logical that its opponents would use gameplay mechanics to counter it? I am unaware of any campaigns of a large scale to oppose the GA, so I do not entirely understand the objection some seem to bring forward of raiders' actions ruining the "WA game." This is, after all, a political game; isn't it sensible, then, that raiders would act to use the perfectly legal tools available to them to pursue a political agenda?

[Honeydewistania]

You say that if approval raiding becomes regular it becomes a problem then - is that not a large hint that it might be, you know, bad for the WA and everyone involved?

The SC is a gameplay tool, is it not? Is it therefore not logical that its opponents would use gameplay mechanics to counter it? I am unaware of any campaigns of a large scale to oppose the GA, so I do not entirely understand the objection some seem to bring forward of raiders' actions ruining the "WA game." This is, after all, a political game; isn't it sensible, then, that raiders would act to use the perfectly legal tools available to them to pursue a political agenda?

Approval raiding affects all proposals in queue, even with selective targeting. That includes unrelated GA or SC proposals. There are other perfectly available tools, such as counter campaigning, and as Jakker explained earlier it is not rocket science. Why do raiders want to choose the route that pisses everyone off? Why do raiders not want to articulate arguments in words? Why do raiders want to choose the worst way to pursue their agenda, which harms other people that have absolutely zero interest in it? It may be legal but none of this is logical

[Comfed]

The SC is a gameplay tool, is it not? Is it therefore not logical that its opponents would use gameplay mechanics to counter it? I am unaware of any campaigns of a large scale to oppose the GA, so I do not entirely understand the objection some seem to bring forward of raiders' actions ruining the "WA game." This is, after all, a political game; isn't it sensible, then, that raiders would act to use the perfectly legal tools available to them to pursue a political agenda?

Approval raiding affects all proposals in queue, even with selective targeting. That includes unrelated GA or SC proposals. There are other perfectly available tools, such as counter campaigning, and as Jakker explained earlier it is not rocket science. Why do raiders want to choose the route that pisses everyone off? Why do raiders not want to articulate arguments in words? Why do raiders want to choose the worst way to pursue their agenda, which harms other people that have absolutely zero interest in it? It may be legal but none of this is logical

“Tell me, why did you climb Mount Everest?”
“Because it is there.”
Also, TBH did this because they resented THX1138 telling them that a legal in-game action was illegal. Not because they have anything against you or your proposal.

[Honeydewistania]

Yes, and they could had sent a rebuttal telegram or statement to the targeted delegates, not this immature nonsense

[Sedgistan]

Just a general note that discussion on the merits of "approval raiding" should go in this Technical thread, where there are some suggestions of potential changes that could limit it: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=494246

[Honeydewistania]

Just a general note that discussion on the merits of "approval raiding" should go in this Technical thread, where there are some suggestions of potential changes that could limit it: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=494246

My apologies, we were treading away from the SC topic a little

[Honeydewistania]

Now that quorum raiding fiasco is over, I'm bumping this in the hope of getting good feedback.

Edit: stating opposition and reasons why would also be appreciated

[Honeydewistania]

No objections? Speak now or forever hold you peace etc

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Still against - your draft does not convince me that the nominee is Commendable.

[Honeydewistania]

Still against - your draft does not convince me that the nominee is Commendable.

What changes could I enact to make this more palatable for you? Or is the nominee already a near instant against for you?

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

East Borland is one of the most corrupt out there.
It's impressive.

I can't tell if this is legit or satire.

[Socialist States of Ludistan]

I once tried to commend him, I think it was legal, people just didn’t vote for it.

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Still against - your draft does not convince me that the nominee is Commendable.

What changes could I enact to make this more palatable for you? Or is the nominee already a near instant against for you?

The latter I'm afraid.

[Refuge Isle]

It's a joke resolution, and your selling point is obviously that it is a joke.
I don't really see that panning out, but it's well within your right to do so.

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

It's a joke resolution, and your selling point is obviously that it is a joke.
I don't really see that panning out, but it's well within your right to do so.

All the Borlands (especially East and Deep South) are highly secretive

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

I see this has been resubmitted and looks likely to make quorum - only eight approvals required at the time of writing.

I must repeat my lack of support for this proposal and will make a recommendation to my Delegate to vote “Against.”

[Honeydewistania]

I see this has been resubmitted and looks likely to make quorum - only eight approvals required at the time of writing.

I must repeat my lack of support for this proposal and will make a recommendation to my Delegate to vote “Against.”

Awww

Would you be willing to convince yourself to vote for a NS states proposal again? viewtopic.php?f=10&t=481201&p=36831284#p36831284

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

I see this has been resubmitted and looks likely to make quorum - only eight approvals required at the time of writing.

I must repeat my lack of support for this proposal and will make a recommendation to my Delegate to vote “Against.”

Awww

Would you be willing to convince yourself to vote for a NS states proposal again? viewtopic.php?f=10&t=481201&p=36831284#p36831284

Nope, not this time. Remember this from me?

And after the farce of Tinhampton’s efforts I think we could well do without hearing about Northern Borland for quite a while.

For “quite a while” read nevermore as the raven said.

[Westinor]

The North Pacific Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For this proposal, and our delegate will be voting accordingly. Northern Borland has been an excellent issues answerer, and has managed their nations well. For further reasoning on our stance, please see our IFV dispatch: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1502174