[Passed] Condemn The Black Hawks

[Mallorea and Riva]

Stalker, there is a 3,500 character limit to proposals, and while I haven't run it through a character counter this looks too long.

I call for two condemnations.

Two condemnations for one region because the character limit is too small? Unprecedented. We need a new feature, the Super Condemnation. Twice the character limit, triple the badge size.

[Kaboomlandia]

Just ran this through a character counter. 5303.

The bright side is that I don't think BBCode counts towards that.

[Drasnia]

I call for two condemnations.

Two condemnations for one region because the character limit is too small? Unprecedented. We need a new feature, the Super Condemnation. Twice the character limit, triple the badge size.

Certainly we can break it up into a condemn and a commend?

But seriously, I'd vote for both a condemn and commend, especially if they were back to back. I do like this draft but does need to be cut down a bit.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

I think it can be done largely by simplifying wording without cutting too much info.

[The Stalker]

Ahh bummer, yea gonna need to cut down a lot on this. Ran it through word, says it has 5,280.

@Kaboomlandia, I'm guessing you didn't remove the code around Comrac's name.

4,479 without counting spaces, but i'm guessing spaces count in the 3,500 limit.

I'm gonna work on making this shorter, hopefully can keep most of the content.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Character limit for proposals:
Security Council proposals, like all WA proposals, have a character limit. This is approximately 3500 characters, including formatting marks, spaces and line breaks.

Don't ask me why it says "approximately" because I really don't know.

[The Stalker]

Character limit for proposals:
Security Council proposals, like all WA proposals, have a character limit. This is approximately 3500 characters, including formatting marks, spaces and line breaks.

Don't ask me why it says "approximately" because I really don't know.

Hmm, I went to the submitting page, hit preview and it doesn't say it's too long. Looks like it would allow me to submit it. Maybe it says approximately as you can submit one longer than that, it's more a matter if the mods will pull it for being too long.

[Frisbeeteria]

it's more a matter if the mods will pull it for being too long.

Nope, never done that. The Post Proposal page has some sort of character limit. I don't know if it fails to post or truncates. I suspect the former.

Don't ask me why it says "approximately" because I really don't know.

I've never counted it myself. I think we based the count on player experimentation.

[The Stalker]

Ah yea, I tried to submit it, but it wouldn't let me.

Said I was over by 2330 characters, meaning my resolution is 5,830 total, which means it does count the coding of [region]. :/

[Kaboomlandia]

Ah yea, I tried to submit it, but it wouldn't let me.

Said I was over by 2330 characters, meaning my resolution is 5,830 total, which means it does count the coding of [region]. :/

Weird, I thought BBCode didn't count. I stand corrected.

I hit this issue with Commend r3n where I was frantically trying to shorten sentences, but I had to only deal with 180 chars, not 2,300

[The Stalker]

Ah yea, I tried to submit it, but it wouldn't let me.

Said I was over by 2330 characters, meaning my resolution is 5,830 total, which means it does count the coding of [region]. :/

Weird, I thought BBCode didn't count. I stand corrected.

I hit this issue with Commend r3n where I was frantically trying to shorten sentences, but I had to only deal with 180 chars, not 2,300

Yea, it's a lot to trim down, about 40%... If anyone has any suggestions on what is less or more important, and/or what should be cut, please feel free to share. I'll likely try to have a shorter draft by Monday or so.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Weird, I thought BBCode didn't count. I stand corrected.

I hit this issue with Commend r3n where I was frantically trying to shorten sentences, but I had to only deal with 180 chars, not 2,300

Yea, it's a lot to trim down, about 40%... If anyone has any suggestions on what is less or more important, and/or what should be cut, please feel free to share. I'll likely try to have a shorter draft by Monday or so.

Passing a second and third condemnation in one go is an alternative to cutting out material. Certainly would be unheard of.

[Sygian II]

Passing a second and third condemnation in one go is an alternative to cutting out material. Certainly would be unheard of.

Genius!

[Kaboomlandia]

Yea, it's a lot to trim down, about 40%... If anyone has any suggestions on what is less or more important, and/or what should be cut, please feel free to share. I'll likely try to have a shorter draft by Monday or so.

Passing a second and third condemnation in one go is an alternative to cutting out material. Certainly would be unheard of.

So both would have to have an active clause and just find some way to split it in two?

I'm intrigued, and I'd find it hilarious to see TBH with condemnation badges lined up across the top of the screen.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Passing a second and third condemnation in one go is an alternative to cutting out material. Certainly would be unheard of.

So both would have to have an active clause and just find some way to split it in two?

I'm intrigued, and I'd find it hilarious to see TBH with condemnation badges lined up across the top of the screen.

I'm not going to make any rulings on the matter but I would imagine that both proposals would need active clauses, yes since that is Rule 3.

[Xuskeuclite]

Well raiding regions could be used as vacuums though they wouldn't agree becoming the sites vacuum.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Well raiding regions could be used as vacuums though they wouldn't accept to becoming the sites vacuum.

You're either saying that raiders are trash, or you're saying something incomprehensible. Either way, we need to build you a grammar check to go with that spell check.

[Xuskeuclite]

Well raiding regions could be used as vacuums though they wouldn't accept to becoming the sites vacuum.

You're either saying that raiders are trash, or you're saying something incomprehensible. Either way, we need to build you a grammar check to go with that spell check.

Yeah :C

[Kaboomlandia]

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

2. Proposals must contain a unique and relevant argument.
That means:
(a) Don't plagiarise - that will get you expelled from the WA.
(b) Don't duplicate. Nations that have already been Commended/Condemned for a certain set of actions can't be Commended or Condemned again for that set of actions.

Would this not mean that Condemn TBH can't be condemned again for raiding?

[Cerian Quilor]

These are different raids though.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

These are different raids though.

That would be my idea. You can't condemn twice for "raiding Asiana"," but you can condemn twice for different raids. The set of actions is the specfic events (in this case mainly raids, but also a number of other things).

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

2. Proposals must contain a unique and relevant argument.
That means:
(a) Don't plagiarise - that will get you expelled from the WA.
(b) Don't duplicate. Nations that have already been Commended/Condemned for a certain set of actions can't be Commended or Condemned again for that set of actions.

Would this not mean that Condemn TBH can't be condemned again for raiding?

No, don't think so - if you look in the Compendium there's this:

Duplication and Contradiction:
This still allows one to condemn or commend a different nation or region for the same or similar action or set of actions. Additionally, nations/regions can be commended/condemned more than once - so long as the proposals are based on different sets of actions. A region can now 'stack up' multiple Liberations, so long as they do not duplicate each other (see here).

[Kaboomlandia]

Oh, I see. I stand corrected, then.

[Crazy girl]

I'm not entirely sure this wouldn't break the duplication rule, as the first condemnation already condemned them for raiding in general.

Will have to have a closer look at this and a little chat with other mods, sorry guys. On first glance it does look like a well written proposal.

If it does break the duplication rule, you could always repeal the first one (arguing it doesn't do justice to the atrocities, for example) and then try to pass this one.

But will get back to you guys when I know. Thank you for your patience.

[Cormactopia Prime]

I have a repeal written if this would break the duplication rule.