Page 10 of 10

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2019 11:42 am
by Ivelboria
What happens when a region either gets commended or condemned?

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2019 11:51 am
by Armaros
Ivelboria wrote:What happens when a region either gets commended or condemned?

A badge will permanently display on their region page.

That's it.

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2019 11:52 am
by Ivelboria
Armaros wrote:
Ivelboria wrote:What happens when a region either gets commended or condemned?

A badge will permanently display on their region page.

That's it.

Ah, ok.

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2019 5:01 am
by Bears Armed
Ivelboria wrote:
Armaros wrote:A badge will permanently display on their region page.

That's it.

Ah, ok.

The badge is a clickable link to the resolution, so that people can see why it was granted.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:13 am
by Artsotska
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:
Sargon Reman wrote:Is mentioning UCRs legal? It seems like I saw it in other resolutions.

Must admit it always sounds like a 4(c) violation to me, but I can’t find a specific ruling to that effect. Might want an SC Mod to confirm or not.

If you supposedly saw it in other resolutions, then I can guarantee that it's legal, otherwise it wouldn't be a resolution.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:20 am
by Lord Dominator
Artsotska wrote:
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Must admit it always sounds like a 4(c) violation to me, but I can’t find a specific ruling to that effect. Might want an SC Mod to confirm or not.

If you supposedly saw it in other resolutions, then I can guarantee that it's legal, otherwise it wouldn't be a resolution.

Usage in past resolutions does not guarantee present legality, for a number of reasons.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 12:16 pm
by Kuriko
Lord Dominator wrote:
Artsotska wrote:If you supposedly saw it in other resolutions, then I can guarantee that it's legal, otherwise it wouldn't be a resolution.

Usage in past resolutions does not guarantee present legality, for a number of reasons.

For instance, before the creation of Rule 4 personal pronouns and mentioning the player behind the nation was legal. Since Rule 4 was enacted it has been illegal to do so, however all the pre-R4 proposals are still considered legal.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2019 12:59 pm
by Bhang Bhang Duc
Artsotska wrote:
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Must admit it always sounds like a 4(c) violation to me, but I can’t find a specific ruling to that effect. Might want an SC Mod to confirm or not.

If you supposedly saw it in other resolutions, then I can guarantee that it's legal, otherwise it wouldn't be a resolution.

Nope, in SC#1 the operative clause condemns Macedon and the Macedonian Empire and is legal. For any resolution since such a clause would be an R3 violation.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:28 pm
by Himyer
How do I get endorsements?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:39 pm
by Eumaeus
Himyer wrote:How do I get endorsements?

There are only two primary that I can think of. The first is posting on your regional message board asking if people would be willing to endorse you, and the second is endorsing other WA nations in your region and hoping they endorse you back.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:08 pm
by Kuriko
Question for moderation:

Is RMB still considered a legal term, or not? According to this post by Sedgistan, it's considered a legal term under Rule 4. This post is even linked to in the Compendium of Mod Rulings. On Fris's most recent ruling on the illegal proposal Commend Aumeltopia part of his ruling is an illegality under R4(c) due to the term RMB. So, is it still a legal term or no? Proposal is below just in case it gets removed.

Security Council Proposal
ID: goundal_1567358738

Commend Aumeltopia
A resolution to recognize outstanding contribution by a nation or region.

Category: Commendation

Nominee: Aumeltopia

Proposed by: Goundal

ACKNOLWEDGING that this nation is the very new delegate of the South Pacific and it has worked hard to gain that place,

NOTICING that this nation has been very active in the RMB and has been entertaining for new nations,

STATING that Aumeltopia has kept the South Pacificin a very good condition since the first second of her term,

Hereby commends Aumeltopia.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:18 pm
by Frisbeeteria
I wasn't aware of the Sedge ruling, so I didn't intend to override it. The proposal was still illegal for "her", of course.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:19 pm
by Kuriko
Frisbeeteria wrote:I wasn't aware of the Sedge ruling, so I didn't intend to override it. The proposal was still illegal for "her", of course.

Thanks Fris, and of course!

Edit: I wish you were still on the WA Discord, we had a huge debate about it lol

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:31 pm
by Bunker 51
AS NEWLY ASSIGNED DELEGATE OF MY REGION
What privileges does being WA Delegate give a Nation-State outside of its region?
Do I now have more influence on WA Happenings?
And is there any way to communicate/propose to other Delegates?

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:58 pm
by Eumaeus
Bunker 51 wrote:AS NEWLY ASSIGNED DELEGATE OF MY REGION
What privileges does being WA Delegate give a Nation-State outside of its region?

Hi there, welcome to the Security Council. World Assembly Delegates have the extra ability of being able to approve proposals to the General Assembly and the Security Councils. Anyone can submit a WA proposal (as long as they have 2 endorsements), but a proposal requires a certain number of delegate approvals to make it to vote.
Do I now have more influence on WA Happenings?

It depends on what you mean. People won't automatically respect you more or listen to you if you are a delegate, but delegates' votes count for more than normal WA nations. If a delegate has 5 endorsements they cast 6 votes, 10 to 11, 100 to 101. You currently have 3 endorsements, so it will count as 4 votes.
And is there any way to communicate/propose to other Delegates?

You can participate (though not only with other delegates) in debate or the drafting of proposals either here in the Security Council forum or in the General Assembly forum. Each body has its own powers, and you can find information on them in their respective forums.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2019 5:57 am
by Bunker 51
Thank you, Eumaeus.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:27 am
by Stanislas
:ugeek:

PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:35 am
by Marxist Germany
Stanislas wrote::ugeek:

Please do not spam.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:17 pm
by Imperium Anglorum
If I said something like the following:

The Security Council ... finding that it is an immense demonstration of one’s character to remain committed to one’s moral and philosophical beliefs even in the face of overwhelming opposition ...

would it be a violation of Rule 4? I would think not, as it doesn't break an "in-character" wall, but rather, simply states a broad belief of how one's character can be demonstrated.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:58 pm
by Ransium
The sentence is not inherently rule breaking IMO, but could certainly be depending on the context, especially WRT R4(b)

PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:28 pm
by Imperium Anglorum
Ransium wrote:The sentence is not inherently rule breaking IMO, but could certainly be depending on the context, especially WRT R4(b)

Similarly, a draft I'm reviewing wants to use a theatre metaphor, saying something along the lines of "Believing that one's contribution to theatre ought to be judged by the quality by which a character is brought to life". This too seems to be a statement about theatre-going and the thespian in general rather than breaking character.