NATION

PASSWORD

Condemn The Dourian Embassy [Joke]

A chamber dedicated to the dissemination of inter-regional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.
User avatar
Bergnovinaia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7314
Founded: Jul 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Condemn The Dourian Embassy [Joke]

Postby Bergnovinaia » Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:41 pm

Image Condemn The Dourian Embassy

Category: Condemnation | Nominee: The Dourian Embassy | Proposed By: Bergnovinaia



Description: The Security Council,

NOTING the repeal effort by the ambassador of The Dourian Embassy of GA #106, Assitance Givers Protection [sic],

UNDERSTANDING that a primary reason for the repeal is the "misspelling in the title;"

ACKNOWLEDGING that although the ambassador believes the legislation is "poorly written," the ambassador maintains the objective to strike null GA #106 because The Dourian Embassy holds NatSov political values, therefore convincing the ambassador that a great deal of international legislation is an infringement upon the rights of member states;

APPALLED that a core part of the Dourian agenda is influenced so heavily by the egregious NatSov platform, one of the two radical WA political groups;

BELIEVING that the repeal of GA #106 at the hands of the Dourians with no intent of replacement will lead do a decline in activity of "Assistance Givers" since they now face potential lawsuit by the victims they help;

HORRIFIED, additionally, by the breeding of Grammar Nazis in The Dourian Embassy, such as the ambassador himself;

CONCERNED that the red pen, which is mightier than the sword, will continue to terrorize ambassadors and the common man everywhere, with Dourians eternally correcting even the most minor of grammatical errors;

DETERMINED to protect that WA from future petty bickering over grammatical errors rather than pertinent legislation,

Hereby CONDEMNS The Dourian Embassy.


Thoughts? (It should be noted that this is, primarily, a joke as an IC response by my delegation to the Dourians for their repeal of "Assitance Givers Protection.") If this actually receives general approval, I'll pursue it. Otherwise, I'll drop it as the IC response thing, as mentioned in the parenthetical. n the parenthetical.


Source for direct quotes by The Dourian Embassy.
Last edited by Bergnovinaia on Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am pursuing my undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University in Psychology and Spanish. My goal in life is to be a marriage and family counselor. If you have questions about me or my life, just ask!

My girlfriend and I blog about Christian & general marriage, relationship, and dating advice!

NS member since 2009. WA Resolution Author (mostly all repealed), NS sports fanatic.

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:37 pm

Yeah. You should battle out GA votes in the General Assembly. Dragging them here borders on tit-for-tat.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
The Human Centipede
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 25
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Human Centipede » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:02 pm

Bergnovinaia wrote:It should be noted that this is, primarily, a joke


Should have made it funny then. When I see something labeled as a joke I expect to laugh after reading it.

User avatar
The divided
Envoy
 
Posts: 349
Founded: Mar 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The divided » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:30 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Yeah. You should battle out GA votes in the General Assembly. Dragging them here borders on tit-for-tat.


Keep in mind the history of "tit-for-tat". It was implemented because of a flame war of condemnations. Surely condemning someone for a GA activity doesn't come close to condemning someone for trying to condemn someone for trying to condemn someone else who tried to condemn one of their friends (yes, iirc the chain went THAT long).

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:53 pm

The divided wrote:
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Yeah. You should battle out GA votes in the General Assembly. Dragging them here borders on tit-for-tat.


Keep in mind the history of "tit-for-tat".

I was here debating the rules back when the SC was first created. I don't need your history lesson.

I said "borders on", not "is". This person is butthurt that someone is trying to repeal his resolution, so he's trying to duke it out in the SC. Besides being supremely childish and immature, it really doesn't belong here. We have a General Assembly forum for a reason.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Bergnovinaia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7314
Founded: Jul 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bergnovinaia » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:11 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:
The divided wrote:
Keep in mind the history of "tit-for-tat".

I was here debating the rules back when the SC was first created. I don't need your history lesson.

I said "borders on", not "is". This person is butthurt that someone is trying to repeal his resolution, so he's trying to duke it out in the SC. Besides being supremely childish and immature, it really doesn't belong here. We have a General Assembly forum for a reason.


I don't think you understand that it is an IC response/joke. I really could give a damn less what happens in NS IRL. "Oh no... my electronic piece of legislation that nobody abides by anyways is being repealed. Boohoo!"

No... the response is an IC respone, something that my IC delegation would do.

IRL, there would probably be a RL response similar to this in the international government system we cannot name (considering how dumb RL international politics are).
Last edited by Bergnovinaia on Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am pursuing my undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University in Psychology and Spanish. My goal in life is to be a marriage and family counselor. If you have questions about me or my life, just ask!

My girlfriend and I blog about Christian & general marriage, relationship, and dating advice!

NS member since 2009. WA Resolution Author (mostly all repealed), NS sports fanatic.

User avatar
The divided
Envoy
 
Posts: 349
Founded: Mar 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The divided » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:42 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:
The divided wrote:
Keep in mind the history of "tit-for-tat".

I was here debating the rules back when the SC was first created. I don't need your history lesson.

I said "borders on", not "is". This person is butthurt that someone is trying to repeal his resolution, so he's trying to duke it out in the SC. Besides being supremely childish and immature, it really doesn't belong here. We have a General Assembly forum for a reason.


As long as you give a reason for why a certain GA action is condemnable, then it should be fine. Tit for tat takes over when someone is obviously condemning for the sole purpose of their action, without giving good justification. And we don't really know whether it will be submitted at all, so at this point it is just idle banter.

OOC: Calm down dude, you take this game way too damn seriously.
Last edited by The divided on Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jamie Anumia
Senator
 
Posts: 3797
Founded: Feb 15, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Jamie Anumia » Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:14 am

You may want to fix the code in the OP, it's linked to region instead of nation for the nominee.

User avatar
Lagaphroaig
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 51
Founded: Jan 17, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Lagaphroaig » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:01 am

OMG! Another "joke" prop! Is this the Senility Council or the Security Council? Shoot this junk off the skies!
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

User avatar
Skyrim Diplomacy
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1497
Founded: Jun 25, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Skyrim Diplomacy » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:38 am

I liked it better when we had a designated joke proposal thread. That way you could discern the srs from the non-srs more easily. Either way, didn't make me laugh, and doesn't even remotely make sense as an actual proposal. 2/10 would not read again.

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:56 am

Bergnovinaia wrote:
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:I was here debating the rules back when the SC was first created. I don't need your history lesson.

I said "borders on", not "is". This person is butthurt that someone is trying to repeal his resolution, so he's trying to duke it out in the SC. Besides being supremely childish and immature, it really doesn't belong here. We have a General Assembly forum for a reason.


I don't think you understand that it is an IC response/joke. I really could give a damn less what happens in NS IRL. "Oh no... my electronic piece of legislation that nobody abides by anyways is being repealed. Boohoo!"

No... the response is an IC respone, something that my IC delegation would do.

IRL, there would probably be a RL response similar to this in the international government system we cannot name (considering how dumb RL international politics are).

You said you were only "semi-joking," which I suppose means you're only semi-wasting everyone's time. What's more, I've seen the past behavior of your "delegation" on the GA floor when things aren't going your way. There's no way this is not at least partly driven by your desire to get back at Douria for trying to repeal your precious resolution.

P.S. And yes, I have been known to crack an IC joke or two in my time; the funny thing about this is, I'm not laughing.

The divided wrote:OOC: Calm down dude, you take this game way too damn seriously.

I'm not the one trying to referee the nuances of a mod ruling. All I've said is that something could be seen as "borderline" rulebreaking. Because someone submitted a resolution, and now someone else is introducing another resolution to get back at him. Which sounds an awful lot like tit-for-tat.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Bergnovinaia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7314
Founded: Jul 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bergnovinaia » Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:18 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:
Bergnovinaia wrote:
I don't think you understand that it is an IC response/joke. I really could give a damn less what happens in NS IRL. "Oh no... my electronic piece of legislation that nobody abides by anyways is being repealed. Boohoo!"

No... the response is an IC respone, something that my IC delegation would do.

IRL, there would probably be a RL response similar to this in the international government system we cannot name (considering how dumb RL international politics are).

You said you were only "semi-joking," which I suppose means you're only semi-wasting everyone's time. What's more, I've seen the past behavior of your "delegation" on the GA floor when things aren't going your way. There's no way this is not at least partly driven by your desire to get back at Douria for trying to repeal your precious resolution.

P.S. And yes, I have been known to crack an IC joke or two in my time; the funny thing about this is, I'm not laughing.


Again, the past was an IC dispute between myself and Knoot. It was resolved, in due time. Your imagination that the GA and the SC are somehow completely seperate entities is midly amusing. If you recall, I, and several others, have receieved GA commendations for our GA work. Condemnations have also occurred. Believe me, I really don't care IRL at all... as I said, NS is meaningless IRL. It is a game, and should be treated as such.

Clearly we share seperate senses of humor, because IRL I am quite hilarious (as all my schoolmates/friends will agree). I will admit, however, that this is amongst some of my dry humor. :(
I am pursuing my undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University in Psychology and Spanish. My goal in life is to be a marriage and family counselor. If you have questions about me or my life, just ask!

My girlfriend and I blog about Christian & general marriage, relationship, and dating advice!

NS member since 2009. WA Resolution Author (mostly all repealed), NS sports fanatic.

User avatar
Metania
Diplomat
 
Posts: 657
Founded: Dec 31, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Metania » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:20 pm

You know what we need to do? Condemn some people in this thread for having no sense of humor! :p
Determination Overcomes Adversity
Jul

User avatar
Sciongrad
Minister
 
Posts: 3060
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Sciongrad » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:57 am

Ermm... why does this seem familiar? Hasn't your delegation condemned someone for repealing your legislation in the past?

EDIT: I see that's already been addressed by Kenny. In which case, if you really have no investment in NS from an RL perspective, why do you find it necessary to drag all of your GA problems to the SC? That's irrational behavior IC (and despite your claims, no country would ever do something so silly in real life), and immature behavior OOC.

I won't even begin to touch on the factual inaccuracy of the condemnation, aside from noting that the bulk of the repeal is not about grammar - the situation outlined by this condemnation has the atmospheric license of total fantasy to those that have actually read Douria's repeal.

ETA: Gah, I accidentally said Douria's repeal was inaccurate - I meant your condemnation. :unsure:
Last edited by Sciongrad on Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:12 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Bergnovinaia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7314
Founded: Jul 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bergnovinaia » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:18 pm

Oh Kenny and Sciongrad... I can just imagine you two in your old age with your shotguns shouting "GET OFF MY LAWN!" in a dementia fit. In my personal opinion, the SC and the GA are not disjointed so I will continue to play out things here how I like that are in the scope of forum rules.

In all seriousness though, this was intended to be more of an IC response and a joke than an actual pursit proposal. So thanks for playing police of the world and stating your opinion. Douria and I are going to work on a new version of AGP, so this OOCly is dead. ICly, I still would like it to play out some since this is what my delegation does (as we have seen with Knoot and now Douria. :P)
I am pursuing my undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University in Psychology and Spanish. My goal in life is to be a marriage and family counselor. If you have questions about me or my life, just ask!

My girlfriend and I blog about Christian & general marriage, relationship, and dating advice!

NS member since 2009. WA Resolution Author (mostly all repealed), NS sports fanatic.

User avatar
The Dourian Embassy
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1547
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dourian Embassy » Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:45 pm

For.

Edit: I can't believe I noticted this only 3 days after it went up. Can someone please let me know next time? I will help you TG for it, I swear to god.
Last edited by The Dourian Embassy on Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Treize Dreizehn, President of Douria.

cause ain't no such things as halfway crooks

User avatar
Cromarty
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6198
Founded: Oct 09, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Cromarty » Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:57 am

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:I'm not the one trying to referee the nuances of a mod ruling. All I've said is that something could be seen as "borderline" rulebreaking. Because someone submitted a resolution, and now someone else is introducing another resolution to get back at him. Which sounds an awful lot like tit-for-tat.

Having you heard? Tit for tat is now a-ok.
Cerian Quilor wrote:There's a difference between breaking the rules, and being well....Cromarty...
<Koth>all sexual orientations must unite under the relative sexiness of madjack
Former Delegate of Osiris
Brommander of the Cartan Militia: They're Taking The Cartans To Isengard!
Кромартий

User avatar
Imperium of Tanith
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1231
Founded: Sep 29, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperium of Tanith » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:08 pm

Now hold on, in this Proposal, it says that Dourian actually is both the Nominee and the Proposer. So he's attempting to condemn himself? Something isn't computing here, and It's giving me probable cause to believe that he's been hacked.

So I refuse to have anything to do with this, joke or not, until I get some answers.

Proud Member of The Coalition of Steel, and The Stonewall Alliance.
★Proud Member of the United Monarchist Alliance★
Official Member of the Universal Technology Alliance!
★Comrade of the Commonwealth of Socialist States (CSS)★
This country does show my beliefs.

User avatar
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 33796
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:13 pm

The submitted proposal is different to this, and should be discussed in a separate thread.


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Security Council

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads