[Report] Rule Violation in "Liberate Capitalist Paradise"

[Shadow Afforess]

I think the tit-for-tat rules in the World Assembly rule thread is fairly vague and makes it unclear if resolutions other than commend/condemn fall under that banner. However I would like a moderator ruling on whether the submitted proposal to "Liberate Capitalist Paradise", ostensibly to "free up" the region from the natives, is a indirect attempt to seek revenge against my draft of "Liberate Haven".

Tit for tat rules:

Tit-for-tat proposals:
Proposals which are solely 'tit-for-tat' proposals (ie Condemns Nation X for Condemning Nation Y) will be deleted. However, if they have other substance to them besides the 'tit-for-tat' argument, they are unlikely to be deleted:

Ardchoille wrote:
For the reasons above, Sedge, I'm very reluctant to invoke "tit for tat" against any half-way substantive proposal. I used it on a series of "if you condemn me, I'll condemn you. And your dog, and your aunt, and your aunt's dog" proposals, but I don't think mods should interfere in SC proposals much beyond that. In the GA we have to hold proposals to standards that allow new laws to interact with old, but each SC proposal is, in a sense, a one-off: if you condemn nation X, that doesn't mean that you have to condemn nation Y for the same thing.

In the SC, I think the mods' role is to de-clutter the proposals list of things that do nothing, that can be dealt with in another way, or that are the waste-of-space individual feuding that the original tit-for-tats were.

I think the tit-for-tat case is supported by the relative brevity of the Liberate Capitalist Paradise proposal, and amount of fluff/filler text it contains:

Description: Noting this Council's mission statement to spread interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.

Declaring that peace is more important to the international community than goodwill

Acknowledging therefore, that sometimes goodwill must be sacrificed for peace, the World Assembly Security Council;

Recognises that the residents of Capitalist Paradise are not fulfilling the region's potential

Deciding that others could put Capitalist Paradise to better use

Observes the presence of one or more nations who are engaged in dubious practices in Capitalist Paradise

Hoping that one day this resolution will be able to contribute to the goal of fulfilling Capitalist Paradise's potential to the fullest

Accepting that this might take some time

Hereby Liberates Capitalist Paradise

Lines 1 and 2 simply restate the Security Council mission, and line 8 says absolutely nothing at all. That leaves only 5 lines of substance, which is mostly spent waxing eloquent about the role of the Security Council, and the desire to improve the "regions potential" (whatever that is...). Most damning is line 6, which is a clearly overt reference to myself and my activities in drafting resolutions in the Security Council.

Based on the evidence provided, I would move for the proposal to be rejected for rule violations.

[Nierr]

It is pure coincidence that Liberate Capitalist Paradise just happened to be submitted when it was. I'd sat on the draft for the while, debating just whether Afforess's actions across NS were worth targeting his home region for. Finally decided just before Mall started his Liberate Haven thing and then when that blew up I forgot about it.

[Shadow Afforess]

It is pure coincidence that Liberate Capitalist Paradise just happened to be submitted when it was. I'd sat on the draft for the while, debating just whether Afforess's actions across NS were worth targeting his home region for. Finally decided just before Mall started his Liberate Haven thing and then when that blew up I forgot about it.

Given we have no way to verify the veracity of your claims, we need to stick with the hard facts.

[Mousebumples]

Rule violations for proposals that have been submitted should be handled through GHR. If you've already filed one, swell.

Regardless, this is not meant to be a debate and a thread here is not the appropriate way to handle reporting things from the gameside of things, so iLock.