[DRAFT] Commend The North Pacific

[Fedele]

The last commendation proposed was inward focused and misdirected. While it is the belief of myself and many that the region deserves a commendation, the commendation is not deserved for the reasons that were presented in the defeated proposal. This draft seeks to be outward focused, detailing the positive influence that The North Pacific has had beyond its waters.

I submit the following for your criticism.

Recognizing the inter-regional standards The North Pacific has championed for respecting the rights of citizen nations, such as presumption of innocence and due process;

Acknowledging the gravity The North Pacific has had in inter-regional affairs, influencing how treaties have been written in other regions and holding its own allies accountable;

Grateful for the work The North Pacific as a whole has prioritized in mentoring developing nations;

Applauding The North Pacific's long history of combating unjust tyranny domestically through successful resistance campaigns and abroad through the North Pacific Army's numerous battles against fascist forces;

Cognizant of the trials and challenges of the past that make its accomplishments all the more impressive;

Hereby commends The North Pacific.

[Cormactopia Prime]

This is one of the worst Security Council drafts I've ever seen from an experienced player. Congratulations.

I support commendation of The North Pacific -- I even voted for the last one -- but it should be a commendation that actually matches their accomplishments. They deserve a commendation that gets specific about their achievements, not a lazy badge hunting attempt by an ego stroking Feeder Delegate who just wants to prove he can pass garbage through the Security Council solely because he's a Feeder Delegate. TNP deserves better than that.

[Drop Your Pants]

I don't know if this is serious or a pisstake If it is serious then its horribly generic, replace TNP with almost any other region and it could apply.

[Aclion]

This one has even less content the the previous one. Given that that the previous one failed do to a lack of relevant commendable actions i don't see why this one should pass either. :/

[Reventus Koth]

I'm going to assume this is a joke. It's probably in your best interests to pretend it is too, if the intent really was to write a serious commendation.

[Wallenburg]

As previously suggested, I recommend a bit more detail to get some of the clauses out of generalities. Otherwise, it's certainly much better than the previous commendation effort.

[Altinsane]

Lol. Scar just hates TNP, I don't think it's serious, y'all. This seems like a pretty obvious "couldn't think of anything nice to say, so here's this" presentation.

Sad tho bc actually TNP would probably do well to be commended, idk why we're getting these empty drafts for a region that's got so much positive history on easy access.

[The Gilded Star]

I too support the [insert praise here] of [insert region name here].

[Syberis]

I'm going to assume this is a joke. It's probably in your best interests to pretend it is too, if the intent really was to write a serious commendation.

It's Scardino. Low-effort pseudo-humor is like 90% of his personality.

[Battlion]

They raided a small defenceless region and effectively made it a shining target, they’re a feeder (which imo adds an extra onus on them) and have voted against GA resolutions that I personally don’t find justifiable.

That and the sarcasm dripping from this makes me laugh

[Glen-Rhodes]

As far as your standard commendation, this isn’t a bad start, regardless of the unhelpful criticism above. What it needs is 1-2 supporting examples for each claim that’s being made.

[Unibot III]

As far as your standard commendation, this isn’t a bad start, regardless of the unhelpful criticism above. What it needs is 1-2 supporting examples for each claim that’s being made.

I agree with Glen-Rhodes, it just needs some specifics to support the argument provided. It’s not as bad a text as some have made it out to be.

[BlackLight Covenant]

As far as your standard commendation, this isn’t a bad start, regardless of the unhelpful criticism above. What it needs is 1-2 supporting examples for each claim that’s being made.

I agree with Glen-Rhodes, it just needs some specifics to support the argument provided. It’s not as bad a text as some have made it out to be.

It's not that it's bad, it's more that in its current state, this proposal feels so...painfully generic (I guess). With some more examples, it would definitely be a lot better, but until then, it really doesn't stand out from the mass of drafts that quietly die off over time, which is a tad of a shame.

[Flying Eagles]

I feel there is little appetite to revisit this issue. Perhaps you should wait a bit. Then, your proposal might get a fairer hearing. People don’t like dealing with the same thing twice in a row.

[Cormactopia Prime]

As far as your standard commendation, this isn’t a bad start, regardless of the unhelpful criticism above. What it needs is 1-2 supporting examples for each claim that’s being made.

I agree with Glen-Rhodes, it just needs some specifics to support the argument provided. It’s not as bad a text as some have made it out to be.

The complaint about it is the lack of specific detail. I said "they deserve a commendation that gets specific about their achievements." The advice you and Glen-Rhodes are giving him is just a more politely worded reiteration of what has already been said by the people you're both saying you disagree with.

[Drop Your Pants]

The complaint about it is the lack of specific detail. I said "they deserve a commendation that gets specific about their achievements." The advice you and Glen-Rhodes are giving him is just a more politely worded reiteration of what has already been said by the people you're both saying you disagree with.

I think it's more myself and Koth he's talking about on this one

[Unibot III]

I agree with Glen-Rhodes, it just needs some specifics to support the argument provided. It’s not as bad a text as some have made it out to be.

The complaint about it is the lack of specific detail. I said "they deserve a commendation that gets specific about their achievements." The advice you and Glen-Rhodes are giving him is just a more politely worded reiteration of what has already been said by the people you're both saying you disagree with.

I think the reason why G-R and I aren't dunking on the proposal text is because as GA authors we've seen what proper crap looks like the WA. This isn't it: its structure is there, the substance is not.

[Kinnies]

Doesn’t matter how well you write the proposals are written, when are the feeders gonna stop doing the elephant walk

[Wallenburg]

I agree with Glen-Rhodes, it just needs some specifics to support the argument provided. It’s not as bad a text as some have made it out to be.

The complaint about it is the lack of specific detail. I said "they deserve a commendation that gets specific about their achievements." The advice you and Glen-Rhodes are giving him is just a more politely worded reiteration of what has already been said by the people you're both saying you disagree with.

Your criticism is about attacking the author, with substantive critique tacked on as justification for everything else you say. G-R and comparable posters, on the other hand, are actually criticizing the proposal on the basis of a need for some substantive improvement.

[Jocospor]

We would have thought that the first two clauses hinted at the sincerity of this proposal.

Recognizing the inter-regional standards The North Pacific has championed for respecting the rights of citizen nations, such as presumption of innocence and due process;

Acknowledging the gravity The North Pacific has had in inter-regional affairs, influencing how treaties have been written in other regions and holding its own allies accountable;