[PASSED] Commend The Cat-Tribe

[Unibotian WA Mission]

Commend The Cat-Tribe
A resolution to recognize outstanding contribution by a nation or region.
Category: Commendation | Nominee: The Cat-Tribe | Proposed by: Unibotian WA Mission

Description:

The World Assembly,

RECOGNIZING a civil, but nonetheless productive debate on the topic of Abortion in the World Assembly was the result of The Cat-Tribe’s resolution, the Reduction of Abortion (GA#44),

NOTING that the Reduction of Abortion (GA#44) respected national sovereignty on the issue of abortion’s legality, and made a groundbreaking compromise that as a result has permitted a comprehensive sex education to help reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in all member-nations,

FURTHER NOTING the countless lives that GA#44 has undoubtedly bettered in (1) nations with otherwise high obstetric death rates, (2) nations where the prohibition of Abortion would have been the source of more dangerous self-induced abortions,

BEARING IN MIND that the nominee recently returned to the hallowed halls of the World Assembly to ardently counter Christian Democrats and several of its allies during a resurgence of the Abortion debate in the World Assembly. The Cat-Tribe's presence in the debate was instrumental --alongside several other actors-- in establishing a compelling case against numerous prohibitive abortion proposals and an attempted repeal of GA#128,

APPLAUDING the constructiveness that can follow when debate is abetted with the decorum, civility and thoughtful meticulousness that The Cat-Tribe has demonstrated in the World Assembly, but also in general,

IMPRESSED that The Cat-Tribe has been awarded twice (an unchallenged feat) the ‘Grand Prix for General Debating’ award in the 8th and 10th presentation of a popular award ceremony that recognizes "excellency in the Fields of General Debating",

CELEBRATING the conduct demonstrated to receive this popular recognition, which includes:

• Not accepting assertions as fact, thus requiring proper research and citation. ^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]}
• Distinguishing between fact and opinion.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]}
• Seeking to uncover assumptions, unquestioned beliefs and faulty logic. ^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]}
• Distinguishing between connotative and denotative meaning. ^[1][2][3][4]
• Being open to new ideas. ^[1][2][3]
• Applying reason and logic to discussions. ^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]}

ACKNOWLEDGING The Cat-Tribe's thorough willingness --in the spirit of goodwill-- to thoughtfully share their expertise in Law upon request,

UNDERSTANDING that as an exemplary model of constructive, critical, informed and civil forum and general conduct, The Cat-Tribe will help future generations of NationStates establish further resolutions of peace and goodwill,

For the sake of posterity,
HEREBY COMMENDS The Cat-Tribe.

References

---

• The "Get The Cat-Tribe A Commendation Project" --- General Drafting Thread for this Resolution
• Transcript of the Drafting thread for "Reduction of Abortion Act"
• Transcript of the Author's FAQ for "Reduction of Abortion Act"
• Reduction of Abortion Act
• Cat-Tribe's Approval of the Commendation
• [DRAFT] Beginning of Life Act
• [ABANDONED] Repeal "On Abortion"

[Unibot]

Some people have been asking if "Poster's Awards" is a Rule IV illegal term.. I don't think so, but I've been wrong before... and then some.

Anyway... here's my reasoning:

Rule Four makes it explicitly clear that it is illegal to…
(a) Refer directly to a player, rather than to the NationStates nation itself.

(b) Refer to the game, or events or actions in it, as a game or part of a game.

“Poster’s Awards” is the name of an awards ceremony, the word ‘poster’ refers to an individual that ‘posts’ bills, advertisements, public notices and even just sends mail. It is only describing the technical term of how the forum works if you want it to be.

I cite the legality of “Forum”, a word with an archaic meaning that has been used to describe the game as a game, but by using a word that has enough of a double meaning that it can be interpreted as being understandable as a nation simulation^[1].

[..] You may not mean it in the “forums of our nation” way, but it can be read that way. It’s consistent with the “nation” concept of NationStates.

“Role-player” and “gameplayer” use the word, ‘player’ in them, which unless used in the NS-Sports interpretation^[2], can only be interpreted as a term that is describing a individual playing a game, thus illegal under Rule IV. The word ‘poster’ does not explicitly refer to a game unless modern, virtual understanding of the word, ‘poster’ is exclusively used.

Further precedent expresses that if an organization exists using ‘feeder’ in its name (a blatantly illegal term under Rule IV ^[3]), that name is given immunity from Rule IV, as a proper noun. I don’t see the difference between an awards ceremony’s name, and a name of an organization. However, if there is, one could argue that an awards ceremony is an organization.

EDIT: I also got asked how a nation could win a "Poster's Award". A nation can win an award called the "Poster's Award" because a nation can win awards in all sorts of competetions like swimming, boxing and ping-pong that only individuals can play.. all you have to do is watch the Olympics and you'll see plenty of examples of countries taking the fame from individual athletes (e.g "Canada wins the Gold Medal!") or perhaps, "posters".

[The Rich Port]

I can only say good things about Cat Tribes.

He's rad at lawyering, he keeps NS informed and on the right track... Honestly, I'd be surprised if someone brought something BAD to say about him.

The Rich Port will be voting FOR.

[Wilgrove]

Cat Tribe has always been an asset to NSG, (s)he has always posted well informed postings, backed with tons of sources. I believe that I have learned how to better argue my own points of views because of TCT, and I'm sure that (s)he is one Hel of a lawyer IRL.

This proposal gets my seal of approval.

[Glen-Rhodes]

It is generally my policy to not vote on C&Cs, but I've made a few exceptions, notably with certain infamous repeals, and I believe one other C&C. I don't vote on them because they aren't usually written about World Assembly goings-on. This commendation will also be an exception, should it make it to vote. While I don't debate in General very often, I do read it often and his debates are refreshing, when compared to most other debates. TCT's actions in the World Assembly are also commendable. Abortion was one of those perennial controversies in the WA (and sometimes it still crops up out of somewhere), and the current resolution on abortion was excellent in that it reached a common ground on which most delegations could agree.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

As I already said in NSG, if any Generalite needs commendation, that generalite is TCT. He's a concise poster, informative, fair and knows how to keep his cool where others lose it.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Cat Tribe is a valuable asset to NSG because we need him to keep people honest. The Serene and Glorious Reich owes him a great debt for the valuable intelligence (i.e. sources, sources, and more sources) he has shared with us.

I don't love everything he's ever posted. Sometimes I am too lazy to read his posts. Sometimes I find him really irritating because I disagree with him and I have to let it go because I am too lazy to write a rebuttal to something that long. Regardless, I still respect his extensive research and the effort he has taken to educate the people of NSG. The fact that I get annoyed when I am too lazy to argue with him does not take away anything from the intellectualism and respectability that he brings to the forums. It just proves I am lazy. Most people who don't like Cat Tribe, it is probably because they are lazy like me and not honest enough to admit it.

And this was a bit of an eye-opener for me:

[*] Being open to new ideas. ^[1][2][3]

The 2nd link is a thread about Nazis, and it seems Cat Tribe really has come around on the subject since he first posted in that thread. He said in a TG that he respected me. So either I have failed terribly in my duties as a Nazi or he really does keep an open mind. Or both. Probably both.

He can be pretty stubborn when he feels strongly about an issue, so this was good to see.

[Person012345]

We support this proposal.

[Helertia]

We very much support this proposal!

[A mean old man]

Yes, will comment on this when time have...

[Aglrinia]

Yes, will comment on this when time have...

Yoda?

[Unibot]

Yes, will comment on this when time have...

Yoda?

Yoda is nicer, but the age is about right.

[New Ziedrich]

I support this, too.

[Sedgistan]

The ruling:

Game-related proper nouns are not allowed - they are not a way of sneaking in references to game mechanics that are otherwise illegal under Rule 4. 'Feeder' is different, since it refers to game mechanics in a less direct way than 'posting'.

The Regional Administration page may say 'post' on it, but that is just describing a game mechanic - distinct from the mention of the 'Regional Message Board' on that page.

This means no "Poster Awards", and no "excellency in the Fields of General Debating and Posting". I suggest using more general terms to describe the awards.

---

Additionally, both the 'Celebrating' and 'Understanding' clauses can't be comprehended when attributed to the nation 'The Cat-Tribe'. I recommend saying "the representative(s) of The Cat-Tribe" instead, eg:

CELEBRATING those policies of The Cat-Tribe which allow its nation's representatives to excel in general discussion and debate, including ...

UNDERSTANDING that as exemplary models of constructive, critical, informed and civil debate, the representatives of The Cat-Tribes' forum and general conduct will help future generations of NationStates establish further resolutions of peace and goodwill

---

I think you need to decide whether you're using this proposal to Commend The Cat-Tribe, or to push the boundaries of Rule 4. If it's the former, you'll take these rulings on board, and adjust your proposal accordingly.

[Unibot]

I think you need to decide whether you're using this proposal to Commend The Cat-Tribe, or to push the boundaries of Rule 4. If it's the former, you'll take these rulings on board, and adjust your proposal accordingly.

I just don't want to have to write the proposal as a blatant piece of IC ilk which would be disrespectful for the nominee, as you've always tried to make your resolutions be interpretable both in OOC and IC, I think you'd understand why I'm hesitant to approve of a line like "ambassadors of the Cat-Tribe".. such a line would be a lie. I don't lie in resolutions *nods in Guy's direction*, I don't mind equivocating but "ambassadors" would be a blatant lie.

Ambassadors represent their nation, therefore the conduct of the Cat-Tribe and the conduct of the Cat-Tribe's ambassadors in the international forum should be interpretatively the same thing. I don't see why a nation cannot have policies for discussions or be an exploratory model in the international forum.

I will make changes to include your first ruling.

[Christian Democrats]

[*] [DRAFT] Beginning of Life Act

Why is my draft being cited?

Hey, wait! My drafts receive enough attention that they're actually cited.

[Aglrinia]

[*] [DRAFT] Beginning of Life Act

Why is my draft being cited?
Hey, wait! My drafts receive enough attention that they're actually cited.

That atrocious article? Until you understand criticism and how to edit your proposal to fit it, I believe it should never come about again.

[Christian Democrats]

Why is my draft being cited?
Hey, wait! My drafts receive enough attention that they're actually cited.

That atrocious article? Until you understand criticism and how to edit your proposal to fit it, I believe it should never come about again.

You mean this is a bad thing.

[Sanctaria]

That atrocious article? Until you understand criticism and how to edit your proposal to fit it, I believe it should never come about again.

You mean this is a bad thing.

I wouldn't quite say "bad thing". Evidence of the worthiness of a commendation for The Cat-Tribe was shown, most recently, in your thread and it's for that reason it was used as a source.

[Sedgistan]

Christian Democrats, you asked for your drafting thread in the General Assembly to be locked. Don't start up the discussion here. Aglrinia, you too. This thread is for 'Commend The Cat-Tribe'.

[Unibot]

You mean this is a bad thing.

I wouldn't quite say "bad thing". Evidence of the worthiness of a commendation for The Cat-Tribe was shown, most recently, in your thread and it's for that reason it was used as a source.

Sanctaria's got it. Your resolution, Christian Democrats was not necessarily bad, but it provided an outlet for TCT to show his ability at providing a well-articulated argument on the subject of Abortion. That thread could very well serve as a microcosmic depiction of TCT as a generalite and as a WA player.

[The Rich Port]

I wouldn't quite say "bad thing". Evidence of the worthiness of a commendation for The Cat-Tribe was shown, most recently, in your thread and it's for that reason it was used as a source.

Sanctaria's got it. Your resolution, Christian Democrats was not necessarily bad, but it provided an outlet for TCT to show his ability at providing a well-articulated argument on the subject of Abortion. That thread could very well serve as a microcosmic depiction of TCT as a generalite and as a WA player.

So... Why isn't this proposal allowed?

[Unibot]

Sanctaria's got it. Your resolution, Christian Democrats was not necessarily bad, but it provided an outlet for TCT to show his ability at providing a well-articulated argument on the subject of Abortion. That thread could very well serve as a microcosmic depiction of TCT as a generalite and as a WA player.

So... Why isn't this proposal allowed?

Because a nation's representatives aren't seen as representative of a nation. To think that a nation could say, see, discuss or agree with anything is quite a silly notion.

[Saigonsin]

Full support for this.
We need more nations like that.

[The Rich Port]

So... Why isn't this proposal allowed?

Because a nation's representatives aren't seen as representative of a nation. To think that a nation could say, see, discuss or agree with anything is quite a silly notion.

Um... Did any of those links have anything to do with the question?

And they agreed on the representative... So I suppose that they'd at least agree with what the representative says.

Well, excluding instances where the representative wasn't elected.