[DRAFT] Repeal: Commend Kandarin

[Far-Tortuga]

The Far Tortugan delegation formally submits the following draft to the World Assembly Security Council for review.

DRAFT #1

Description: WA Resolution #52: Commend Kandarin (a Security Council Commendation) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: ACKNOWLEDGING the esteem with which the nation of Kandarin is held in various quarters of the world community,

Nevertheless CONCERNED with the vague and equivocal language used to justify the attention received by that nation from the World Assembly,

BELIEVING that resolutions to commend or condemn a nation must state a clear and concise arguing of their case within the resolution itself,

REGRETTING that Resolution #52 made due with hearsay and the avoidance of details, noting that Resolution #52 fails to even mention the region Kandarin is being commended for running so smoothly,

HOPING that a more explicit and convincing resolution that better upholds the traditions of the World Assembly will soon be drafted, reviewed, and passed to restore Kandarin’s commendation,

The World Assembly hereby repeals Resolution #52, the Commendation of Kandarin.

As clearly stated in the proposal, we do not seek to repeal Resolution #52 due to any opinion of the nominee, but due to what we strongly perceive to be flaws and failings within the text of the resolution itself. We ask all members of the World Assembly to assist us in crafting a repeal proposal to that end.

[Todd McCloud]

I'd be willing to support this... as long as I can re-write the C&C with the help of the WA people.

[Far-Tortuga]

We believe that if a second Commendation for Kandarin is first submitted to the normal drafting process, and given proper time, it will reach a final form that will be most palatable to the Security Council at large.

We believe (OOC: And I truly believe) that the intensity of the debate surrounding the passing of Resolution #52 arose in large measure for there having been no real drafting period. We certainly would have expressed our reservations there, instead of having to commit full-on to what was essentially a "do or die" conflict with the supporters of that resolution.

OOC: Unfortunately, as it stands right now I'm not sure a compromise is possible on the commendation directly. The problem is coming from the fact that there are at least two camps within the World Assembly holding opinions on how they think SC resolutions should be worded. There are those who want them to keep to the same standards that General Assembly resolutions stick to (i.e. be from an in-character standpoint). But as we saw in Kandarin's case, sometimes the only way to actually commend a nation is to skip the nation entirely, breaking through the fourth wall to commend the player. Needless to say this can be difficult to reconcile with the first position, since "roleplayers" would have to deal with what are essentially Out-of-character gaps in the historical record of the WA.

Right now I'm writing this resolution in what I think is a manner consistent with Camp #1, the "Roleplayers." If this becomes the norm for C&Cs, I don't know how we could go about commending Kandarin who by all accounts is a rather nasty in-character nation. You, Todd McCloud, don't want to commend him for his RP but his Gameplay contributions. I think the best way to ensure that both groups, roleplayers and gameplayers, will be able to commend and condemn who they chose is to first separate the Security Council record from the General Assembly record, and then further divvy up the C&Cs between In-Character and Out-of-Character resolution styles.

(Oy, all that probably belongs in one of the half-dozen threads we have on the dilemma...)

[Kandarin]

Having thoroughly recused myself from the original discussion to reduce conflict, I find a few points here that I'd like to have addressed then but didn't.

You've got the gist of why this can't be an IC-worded proposal. It's not my place to say whether my OOC actions are commendable. That's other people's call to make. I can say, however, that my nation's IC actions aren't commendable, because I wrote them so as not to be. My IC nation is not a reflection or representation of my OOC actions, and it is for this reason that I only post with it under certain controlled circumstances. As a result, Todd could not use IC wording, as this would give him a choice between erasing my RP nation and saying demonstrably false things about it.

The main problem that people had with the resolution (at least here - I didn't see anyone say that on any regional forum) was the idea that it did not make its case properly. Or as you put it:

Nevertheless CONCERNED with the vague and equivocal language used to justify the attention received by that nation from the World Assembly,

BELIEVING that resolutions to commend or condemn a nation must state a clear and concise arguing of their case within the resolution itself,

REGRETTING that Resolution #52 made due with hearsay and the avoidance of details, noting that Resolution #52 fails to even mention the region Kandarin is being commended for running so smoothly,

In your specific case, you repeatedly stated that instead of general themes, the resolution should have consisted of examples. I do not believe that this is possible in this case for a variety of reasons.

For one, my actions do not fit the pattern your preference suggests - that is, major, significant examples of defining actions. Running the RR has been a matter of resolving hundreds of (usually small) disputes and crises over a very long period of time. Other activities have been likewise. I see my involvement in NS as based on long processes of consistent activities rather than single events. A Commend of Goobergunchia would surely need to mention his act of creating NSWiki; A Condemn of Lady Phedre would likely need to be a laundry list of specific grievances; I have no such Great Epic Deed to my name that people can point to and say "Aha! That's the one thing Kandarin did that we know him for!" What I have are processes, policies, and stances that I've stuck to, and that is in essence what Todd's original resolution says. If it is your belief that this invalidates the Resolution, that only nations that have done such Great Epic Deeds ought to receive C&Cs, then by all means you ought to say so.

Still, I realize that that is probably not your belief. You may have meant any example, even one of a relatively minor action. The problem with that is that to include an example is to make the example the linchpin of the discussion. Using an example of a player's behavior would, like it or not, turn much of the discussion from "Does this player's behavior merit commendation?" to "Does this action listed as an example merit commendation?" And that's fine - for players whose history is remembered most by some Great Epic Deed as described above. In my case, or the case of anyone else like me, it would instead be misleading and do more harm than good. Giving as an example one or a few (relatively small) specific deed(s) would surely elicit a chorus of "That's all he ever did? That doesn't deserve a resolution. Against!" or "I've never heard of that event, it's too obscure. Against!" or even "That's great, but what's he done lately? Against!" Giving an example of a trend would draw attention to the example instead of the trend in many eyes. If it is the trend that matters, it should be referred to instead.

[Unibot]

I give my full support for this repeal.

In the hopes that Kandarin can be given a proper commendation in the future which follows some of the conventions we've been trying to establish in the WASC.

So long as the replacement doesn't start referring to 'the player behind Kandarin', I'll be as happy as ... well, what ever is happy, a frolicking alpaca?

[Quintessence of Dust]

I didn't like it either, but what you're proposing would entail taking up 10 days of WA time discussing a repeal and a replacement. That's a waste of a week and a half that could be better spent watching paint dry.

[Ballotonia]

Just leave it as is. Live with it

Ballotonia

[Ananke]

Any chance a draft of the new commendation of Kandarin could be posted before delegates are asked to approve this repeal? Like Ballotonia, I'm currently most inclined to leave the already voted upon commendation as it is. I'd hate for the repeal to go through and then not actually get followed up by a new commendation.

[Unibot]

I didn't like it either, but what you're proposing would entail taking up 10 days of WA time discussing a repeal and a replacement. That's a waste of a week and a half that could be better spent watching paint dry.

*looks over at the freshly painted wall*

Oh the irony.....

_________________________________

Todd seems to have voiced his opinion that he'd like to write a replacement, drafting it here of course, before submitting. I'd be interested to see how much could be discussed about Kandarin's involvement in NationStates without referring to the 'player behind Kandarin'. It might take some creativity.

Though there haven't really been any rules set in stone - personally I feel mentioning players is the WASC's equivalent of a 'Real Life Violation'. Surely we can figure out a way to commend the delegate of the Rejected Realms properly, without mentioning the player behind the nation.

[Valipac]

Just leave it as is. Live with it

Ballotonia

I'd personally rather not live with it, as other users will refer to it as precedent.

[Ballotonia]

Just leave it as is. Live with it

Ballotonia

I'd personally rather not live with it, as other users will refer to it as precedent.

It's not a bad precedent to set. Anyone whom has helped others and the game as much as Kandarin has done deserves a Commendation, in my opinion, and as such I welcome that precedent. Right now I can't think of anyone else who matches Kandarin's contributions and efforts, but if anyone in the future does then a commendation would certainly be in order.

Ballotonia

[North Wiedna]

What if we could...
Add a proposal category- Revise.
Similar to repeal, but it replaces the resolution. Alt title: Amend

WA Resolution #** shall be rewritten due to errors overlooked while voting.

Thoughts?

[Unibot]

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18&sid=32f9acef67187152a3055b32b33b9586#p195 < this describes why the WA doesn't have Amendments.


I wonder if in the new world of the Security Council if the logistical problems of adding amendments to the GA is not such a nightmare. Considering C&Cs always have one intended goal, to either commend or condemn - if the wording in the amendment strayed away from that it would be easy for a mod to modbomb it, I would think.

If you bring this up in technical, and you might be able to get an admin response on this subject. As they're the only ones who can provide such a category.

[Meekinos]

We find that the original commendation was suited for all intents and purposes. Why scrap it because of a bunch of pointless bureaucratic nonsense? It was an excellent proposal at the time it was written and it is still excellent. This nitpicking is utterly pointless.

[Firstaria]

Personally, what is done is done.
Probably the resolution wasn't the best, probably there is some serious "motive for commendation" lack; but i don't think WA will repeal it only because those little errors.

SC resolution are different from GA resolution: if you want to repeal it, you have to find proof AGANIST it, not errors in the text.

[Unibot]

SC resolution are different from GA resolution: if you want to repeal it, you have to find proof AGANIST it, not errors in the text.

Here's my proof:

"the player behind Kandarin" is a reference to sex-addict who's standing behind the border of Kandarin coincidentally at the time of Kandarin's commendation.

Not Kandarin's puppetmaster.

If you'd like to commend Kandarin, commend Kandarin.

Why scrap it because of a bunch of pointless bureaucratic nonsense?

As the first commendation to be passed, it makes sense to scrutinize it. Future generations of WASC players are going to basing their resolutions on the early work of the Security Council - let's make it a good set of resolutions to base it off.

[Warner Channel]

The Far Tortugan delegation formally submits the following draft to the World Assembly Security Council for review.

DRAFT #1

Description: WA Resolution #52: Commend Kandarin (a Security Council Commendation) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: ACKNOWLEDGING the esteem with which the nation of Kandarin is held in various quarters of the world community,

Nevertheless CONCERNED with the vague and equivocal language used to justify the attention received by that nation from the World Assembly,

BELIEVING that resolutions to commend or condemn a nation must state a clear and concise arguing of their case within the resolution itself,

REGRETTING that Resolution #52 made due with hearsay and the avoidance of details, noting that Resolution #52 fails to even mention the region Kandarin is being commended for running so smoothly,

HOPING that a more explicit and convincing resolution that better upholds the traditions of the World Assembly will soon be drafted, reviewed, and passed to restore Kandarin’s commendation,

The World Assembly hereby repeals Resolution #52, the Commendation of Kandarin.

As clearly stated in the proposal, we do not seek to repeal Resolution #52 due to any opinion of the nominee, but due to what we strongly perceive to be flaws and failings within the text of the resolution itself. We ask all members of the World Assembly to assist us in crafting a repeal proposal to that end.

If I'm admitted, I support this...