NationStates

-------------------------------------------------------------
This condemn was cancelled
-------------------------------------------------------------

Thats probably too many characters. Also you can't show a picture of evidence in a proposal I think.

-

“Sharia law”, particularly “radical Islamic sharia law” and the descriptions of what it allows, reads like a real-world reference. Unless you can prove otherwise, that would violate rule 4(a).

Wrapper wrote:“Sharia law”, particularly “radical Islamic sharia law” and the descriptions of what it allows, reads like a real-world reference. Unless you can prove otherwise, that would violate rule 4(a).

How is it any different then a reference to common law? Or is the standard stricter in the SC?

(to go on a slight tangent why isn't Nazism/Stalinism a RL reference, being named after real people and political parties?)

-

Quincie wrote:

Wrapper wrote:“Sharia law”, particularly “radical Islamic sharia law” and the descriptions of what it allows, reads like a real-world reference. Unless you can prove otherwise, that would violate rule 4(a).

Sharia law is what I explained in the condemn. I don't really understand what you mean by "real world reference". Isn't the game inspired on real world collaboration and nations apart from a book?

You’re not allowed to reference the “real world” in proposals. You have to write the proposal as if NS was the real world and the actual real world doesn’t exist.

Kaboomlandia wrote:

Quincie wrote:
Sharia law is what I explained in the condemn. I don't really understand what you mean by "real world reference". Isn't the game inspired on real world collaboration and nations apart from a book?

You’re not allowed to reference the “real world” in proposals. You have to write the proposal as if NS was the real world and the actual real world doesn’t exist.

(But Al-Amin himself uses that term in his Factbooks and Personal canon too)

If you take out real world references, YES, I would support.

Honestly, I'd probably vote in favor regardless of whether or not you take out the RL references (provided the mods would let it pass)

-

Frievolk wrote:Honestly, I'd probably vote in favor regardless of whether or not you take out the RL references (provided the mods would let it pass)

I was in the same region he was, and under his former rule, it be a nightmare for the less conserviative in the region, going on a spree of attacks on other nations, before having his term end.

Aclion wrote:

Wrapper wrote:“Sharia law”, particularly “radical Islamic sharia law” and the descriptions of what it allows, reads like a real-world reference. Unless you can prove otherwise, that would violate rule 4(a).

How is it any different then a reference to common law? Or is the standard stricter in the SC?

(to go on a slight tangent why isn't Nazism/Stalinism a RL reference, being named after real people and political parties?)

Tangents first. Naziism is roleplayed extensively, is prevalent in gameplay (as is fascism), and has an NS equivalent (as does Francoism), so it is legal. Stalinism, as far as I know, does not, and would probably be illegal.

Now then, the problem here is more than just use of a term. The author’s list of Sharia law components (the whole “stoning, beating, flogging” paragraph) more likely refers to real-life Sharia law (if true, I’m no expert on Sharia law) than the NS version of it. If the author can cite evidence that the target nation carries out all those things listed (in dispatches, RPs, Factbooks, etc.), then the proposal could be ruled legal, but may need to be reworked a bit to make it so. It has to be plain that the references aren’t relying solely on a real world definition of Sharia law.

You can't possibly be serious. A half-assed factbook and a 12 post embassy thread is not grounds for a condemnation. I'll think about it when their RP actually merits the badge.

-

Quincie wrote:Problem, the caliphate refers to it as 'sharia law' and doesn't write more about it. So isn't it pretty logical that I picked the real life definition of it? I mean, what would the other definition possibly be!?

Whatever that nation wants it to be. There used to be a Nazi Flower Power nation, do you think that their version of Nazism was identical to Hitler’s?

-

Your arguments, like your proposal, are rooted in real life and not in the NS world. Unless you can distinguish the difference, I can’t help you.