Commend and Condemn

[Weylara]

I think this is the right forum, sorry if it's not.

I just wondered, with Commend and Condemn resolutions, is it possible for the nominee to vote for a commend or against for a condemn?

[Absolvability]

Of course it is.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

It's not the right forum - it belongs in Security Council, where, as far as I am aware, there is already an open thread on the subject.

[Urgench]

I've made this point in the at vote thread and I don't want to spam it by repetition, so can i make a suggestion ?

I'm concerned, and have been from the start, that C&Cs are really just a way of certain powerful blocs of players showing their approval and disapproval because the vote is still won by simple majority.

If C&Cs are to be the actual, credible "opinion" of the WA can we at least make it by a qualified majority that this is expressed. I suggested that this would be something like more than 80% of nation votes and more than 90% of delegate votes as a base from which one might be able to truly justify the claim that a C or C is in fact the opinion of the WA, is this possible to code ?

[Weylara]

It's not the right forum - it belongs in Security Council, where, as far as I am aware, there is already an open thread on the subject.

I thought we were in security council.

[Ardchoille]

It's not the right forum - it belongs in Security Council, where, as far as I am aware, there is already an open thread on the subject.

I thought we were in security council.

You are now; the thread's been moved from where it was when Kenny posted.

Any WA nation can vote on any WA proposal. If your nation or region is the subject of a C&C proposal, you can debate it at the drafting stage and in the At Vote thread, you can vote individually and you can also try to persuade other delegates to vote the way you want (eg, by TG campaigns, RMB posts if regions permit, etc).

NOTE: Usually a drafting thread is concerned more with the category, strength and wording of a proposal in an effort to make it legal before it is submitted. "Debate", in drafting threads, should be attempts to show up technical flaws in the proposal that would prevent Regional Delegates endorsing it.

C&Cs differ from other WA proposals in that they can be solely expressions of an opinion, so it would make sense that if you think you have proof that the opinion is wrong, you should show it at the drafting stage -- it could be considered a "technical" flaw.

I'm not saying it's the mods' job to delete "wrong" proposals. I'm saying it's the Regional Delegates' job to decide whether the proposal is wrong. If enough of them think it is, it won't win their endorsement, it won't reach quorum in time and so it won't even get to the voting stage.

Proposals that do reach quorum are still open to a formal legality challenge. If that's upheld, the proposal will be removed before it reaches At Vote.

Formal legality challenges aren't all that common. The challenger has to be able to point to a specific breach or quote relevant precedent.

Once any proposal reaches At Vote, it can't be deleted, but it can still be debated (and rejected).

EDIT: Urgench, to avoid threadjack, please take that to another thread.

[Urgench]

Oops I got confused by the title o the thread and thought it was the one of the other C&C threads sorry.

[West Newmanistan]

The next proposal, calling for a commendation of Kandrian appears to be deserved to be passed. However I am annoyed by this wording:

OBSERVING his tireless efforts in maintaining order, stability, and leadership in a "collecting" region without means of ejecting or banning the competition.

VIEWING his knowledge, teaching, and leadership in NationStates roleplay, in both in character and out of character aspects, for off-site and on-site forums.

OFFICALLY praises the player behind the nation of Kandarin and recognizes his achievements with a commendation from the World Assembly.>>

I'm putting this on a general "commend and condemn" thread because I'm not interested in waging a campaign against this particular proposal and this request is for future reference. However the use of the words "his" and "player behind the nation" are WAY too informal for what would be an official commendation. Can we please, avoid using these words and these phrases. Instead of words like "praises the player behind", can't we just say "the leadership of"? That looks a lot more appropriate as a World Assembly resolution. Not something that is part of a game. (even though it is).