[PROPOSAL] An important resolution for America's future

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:58 am

I have written a resolution to condemn the actions carried out by the founder of America, who has been hampering the economic and political progress of the region for 7 years:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vie ... 1487335827

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:00 am

Already noted as illegal here:

viewtopic.php?p=31131625#p31131625

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:05 am

I don't understand why... it doesn't exceed the allowed number of characters.

by **Angry Kittens** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:07 am

Read here for more detail.

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:10 am

So what can we do now?

by **Tinhampton** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:13 am

Ikaria wrote:So what can we do now?

If you're talking about the region, you'll probably need to wait. If you're talking about the resolution, I strongly urge that you file a GHR (under Others) to get this proposal removed, draft it on the forums, gain opinions about it there, and then submit it in after it gathers enough criticism.

by **Angry Kittens** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:15 am

Tinhampton wrote:
Ikaria wrote:So what can we do now?

If you're talking about the region, you'll probably need to wait. If you're talking about the resolution, I strongly urge that you file a GHR (under Others) to get this proposal removed, draft it on the forums, gain opinions about it there, and then submit it in after it gathers enough criticism.

I was about to post my own answer when I saw someone else had already responded.

You will basically have to do what the post above says. I would also suggest familiarizing yourself with the four rules.

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:27 am

Thank you! What I've tried is, above all, to write this problem IC to avoid breaking the rules.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:37 am

Ikaria wrote:Thank you! What I've tried is, above all, to write this problem IC to avoid breaking the rules.

There are 4 rules, really only Rule 4 (a, b, c and d) are sort of IC. You missed Rule 3. Your proposal was also poorly assembled, verbose and confusing.

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:37 am

Well, that's true! I wrote it in a humorous way. ^^

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:42 am

As you consider this resolution is too long so I'm trying to remove some parts:

When in the course of events it becomes necessary to condemn a nation a decent respect to all opinions requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to it. The history of the present founder of America is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

~~ACCEPTING the symbolic value of this resolution…~~

~~ACKNOWLEDGING the labour of so many regional founders and WA delegates…~~

~~ADMIRING their perseverance over the years…~~

~~APPLAUDING their enthusiasm…~~

~~APPRECIATING the work of the Security Council…~~

ASSERTING the founders right to freely govern their regions but also the right of its members to complain and take arms in a revolution…

BELIEVING a great work was done during the America's regional government…

~~CELEBRATING these short days of liberty…~~

~~CONSIDERING you both raiders and defenders are useful, ones to provoke a reaction in those who neglect their regions and others to protect them…~~

CONTENDING with Chief Laughing Dog for ruining a region with a great name…

~~DECLARING this is not a war among bands, tribes, chiefdoms and states but against a single chiefdom…~~

~~DENOUNCING what we consider an injustice…~~

~~DESIRING to return to the regional government…~~

~~DETAILING there was linguistic plurality during the regional government…~~

~~DETERMINING this could be the only way to achieve our aims…~~

~~DISCERNING nobody can change the heart or spirit of a nation except itself…~~

DOCUMENTING the existence of 8 WA delegates before Ikaria…

EMPHASIZING the need for a change…

~~ENUMERATING the reasons of this resolution as we believe we are doing…~~

~~EXPLAINING we could have refounded the region…~~

FEARING another 6 years of boredom and crassitude in America, where the only written words are "bonjour, je suis très bien" (misspelled, by the way)…

~~FINDING this possibility really worrying…~~

~~HIGHLIGHTING the need for a healthy debate about the regions without a(n) (active) founder…~~

HOPING nations of every political color and ideology, defenders and raiders, leave aside their differences aside for a moment…

IDENTIFYING Chief Laughing Dog as the reason of so many years of inactivity in America…

KNOWING nothing had changed in America in the last 6 years until last week, when Chief Laughing Dog disappeared and a regional government was created…

~~NOTICING this could be the longest Security Council resolution…~~

NOTING there has been more activity in America in a week than in 2 years…

OBSERVING Chief Laughing Dog has no reacted to our telegrams…

POINTING it is not the same a "boss", a "chief" or a "founder" than a "leader"…

~~PROCLAIMING freedom and liberty as the main values of the America we want…~~

~~REAFFIRMING our human rights…~~

~~REALIZING continental regions are singular and special, like other ones…~~

RECALLING the history of our region…

~~REMEMBERING the success of past resolutions…~~

REPUDIATING the actions carried out by Chief Laughing Dog since its refounding, including the abolition of our parliament…

~~SEEING we have lost all our forces and power…~~

~~SEEKING a solution…~~

UNDERSTANDING this could open discussion about the nature of continental regions such as the dying Asia, the inactive Africa and the successful Europe, that are not feeders, sinkers or warzones but are unique in their way…

VIEWING this does not have to set a necessary precedent for unwarranted insubordination…

WANTING the permanence of this resolution until the nominee nation change its attitude…

~~WISHING its pass…~~

…the Security Council hereby condemns Chief Laughing Dog.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:43 am

You should also have posted the draft in this thread, not started a new one.

Edit:

Tinhampton wrote:
Ikaria wrote:So what can we do now?

If you're talking about the region, you'll probably need to wait. If you're talking about the resolution, I strongly urge that you file a GHR (under Others) to get this proposal removed, draft it on the forums, gain opinions about it there, and then submit it in after it gathers enough criticism.

You've posted in this thread, seen the proposal is illegal and yet you still approved it? What is it, some sort of malign influence that bypasses your brain and goes straight for the rubber stamp?

by **LollerLand** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:20 am

Can't see anything worthy of condemnation.

by **Neo Danzig** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:01 am

Ikaria wrote:*snip*

You still don't have an operative clause. It needs to have a line saying "hereby condemns Chief Laughing Dog"
Additionally, there really isn't anything condemnable here. This is not a matter of international security, merely domestic affairs. If you really care all that much, the best solution is to found a new region. It's impossible to overthrow a founder.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:27 am

Apart from trying to be a smart arse by working your way through the alphabet with the opening word of each clause there is nothing noteworthy here and certainly nothing condemnable.

Still lacks an operative clause as ND has pointed out.

by **Ikaria** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:51 am

It's true that according to the rules there is nothing condemnable but this is about fair play, not only OoC but also IC. It's all explained here:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=772979

by **LollerLand** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:21 pm

Ikaria wrote:It's true that according to the rules there is nothing condemnable but this is about fair play, not only OoC but also IC. It's all explained here:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=772979

So you want SC to condemn someone just for not being active enough? There is nothing condemn worthy in there..

by **Ikaria** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 10:18 am

No, for undermining the efforts of active countries, that is, refounding with the sole intention of dismantling a regional government. Imagine the USSR reappears only to destroy, not the USA, but Russia.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 10:24 am

Ikaria wrote:No, for undermining the efforts of active countries, that is, refounding with the sole intention of dismantling a regional government. Imagine the USSR reappears only to destroy, not the USA, but Russia.

However you try and paint it your attempt is, how can I put this - oh yes, crap.

by **Ikaria** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:04 pm

Well, that's your opinion and it's perfectly respectable. I understand a guardian of a feeder has never had to face a similar problem.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:50 pm

Ikaria wrote:Well, that's your opinion and it's perfectly respectable. I understand a guardian of a feeder has never had to face a similar problem.

What would you know? I mean you've been around all of five minutes.

by **States of Glory** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:17 pm

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Ikaria wrote:Well, that's your opinion and it's perfectly respectable. I understand a guardian of a feeder has never had to face a similar problem.

What would you know? I mean you've been around all of five minutes.

What, and you've been around for over thirteen years or something?

Ikaria, BBD wasn't TWP's former Minister for WA Affairs for nothing. Ignoring the advice of SC regulars never ends well, especially if said regular is able to influence someone who has over five hundred votes. Just a heads-up.

by **Ikaria** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:52 pm

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Ikaria wrote:Well, that's your opinion and it's perfectly respectable. I understand a guardian of a feeder has never had to face a similar problem.

What would you know? I mean you've been around all of five minutes.

As you can imagine, I'm not a newcomer; this is just a puppet…

States of Glory wrote:
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:What would you know? I mean you've been around all of five minutes.

What, and you've been around for over thirteen years or something?

Ikaria, BBD wasn't TWP's former Minister for WA Affairs for nothing. Ignoring the advice of SC regulars never ends well, especially if said regular is able to influence someone who has over five hundred votes. Just a heads-up.

I don't think it was an advice… if so, what can I do to improve?

by **Karafuto-cho** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 10:01 pm

Ikaria wrote:I don't think it was an advice… if so, what can I do to improve?

Toss this resolution in the rubbish pile.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:53 am

Okay, let's shred this attempt.

Ikaria wrote:When in the course of events it becomes necessary to condemn a nation a decent respect to all opinions requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to it. The history of the present founder of America is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

Meaningless drivel.

Ikaria wrote:ASSERTING the founders right to freely govern their regions but also the right of its members to complain and take arms in a revolution…

The Founder has the right to do what he likes - his region, his rules.

Ikaria wrote:BELIEVING a great work was done during the America's regional government…

Prove it.

Ikaria wrote:CONTENDING Chief Laughing Dog for ruining a region with a great name…

Contending does not mean what you think it means.

Ikaria wrote:DOCUMENTING the existence of 8 WA delegates before Ikaria…

So what? Has no bearing on a Condemnation.

Ikaria wrote:EMPHASIZING the need for a change…

Good luck with that - a Condemnation will have no effect on the Founder apart from giving him a nice shiny badge.

Ikaria wrote:FEARING other 6 years of boredom and crassitude in America, where the only written words are "bonjour, je suis très bien" (misspelled, by the way)…

I think you mean "Fearing another". You can always go elsewhere you know.

Ikaria wrote:HOPING nations of every political color and ideology, defenders and raiders, leave aside their differences aside for a moment…

Drivel.

Ikaria wrote:IDENTIFYING Chief Laughing Dog as the reason of so many years of inactivity in America…

Good grief, something that could be used in a Condemnation. Almost missed it amongst the rubbish.

Ikaria wrote:KNOWING nothing had changed in America in the last 6 years until last week, when Chief Laughing Dog disappeared and a regional government was created…

Again so what?

Ikaria wrote:NOTING there has been more activity in America in a week than in 2 years…

Ditto.

Ikaria wrote:OBSERVING Chief Laughing Dog has no reacted to our telegrams…

He's under no obligation to talk to you.

Ikaria wrote:POINTING it is not the same a "boss", a "chief" or a "founder" than a "leader"…

What does this mean?

Ikaria wrote:RECALLING the history of our region…

Complete non sequitur

Ikaria wrote:REPUDIATING the actions carried out by Chief Laughing Dog since its refounding, including the abolition of our parliament…

Oh watch out, you now have two sentences that could be used in a Condemnation.

Ikaria wrote:UNDERSTANDING this could open discussion about the nature of continental regions such as the dying Asia, the inactive Africa and the successful Europe, that are not feeders, sinkers or warzones but are unique in their way…

Yet again something that has no place in a Condemnation.

Ikaria wrote:VIEWING this does not have to set a necessary precedent for unwarranted insubordination…

?

Ikaria wrote:WANTING the permanence of this resolution until the nominee nation change its attitude…

Well the first step is getting it in place and that's not going to happen.

Ikaria wrote:…the Security Council hereby condemns Chief Laughing Dog.

So, basically, when you boil out the drek, the drivel and the gobbeldy-gook you're left with about two sentences.

Edits: Various spelling mistakes.

[PROPOSAL] An important resolution for America's future

[PROPOSAL] An important resolution for America's future

Who is online