NationStates

British Niatirb wrote:We should not rush to judgment.

I agree.

Bormiar wrote:I think I’ve pointed out many glaring problems with it in my last post, yet those don’t matter? Are you just inable to answer?

Well... I was typing up the answers, one by one, but then..

Bormiar wrote:Even if you can provide adequate answers to those questions, you’ll need to do some heavy re-drafting, especially because the burden of proof is on you, and this proposal is unconvincing of Riakou’s “positive leadership”.

...I got to this part, and didn't see the point in answering anymore. Even if I provide adequate answers to your several questions, it still wouldn't be enough for you. So why bother? I don't have your support. I'm just going to accept that and move on.

What's with this recent trend of authors/co-authors ignoring feedback and/or rushing to vote?

Against.

Praeceps wrote:What's with this recent trend of authors/co-authors ignoring feedback and/or rushing to vote?

Against.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I won't even argue against the fact that some feedback was left behind in favor of getting this submitted. (Namely, we didn't manage to work out your specific feedback with regards to how the TNP part was worded, and we never got to Lord Dom's thoughts)

I still feel that despite this rocky start, we still have a functional proposal that's worthy of passing the SC.

Yokiria wrote:

Praeceps wrote:What's with this recent trend of authors/co-authors ignoring feedback and/or rushing to vote?

Against.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I won't even argue against the fact that some feedback was left behind in favor of getting this submitted. (Namely, we didn't manage to work out your specific feedback with regards to how the TNP part was worded, and we never got to Lord Dom's thoughts)

I think you covered basically everything I was thinking of in the 2nd draft, but could be wrong as I didn't closely look at the first right away.

Except of course, making a Thanos acrostic

Lord Dominator wrote:

Yokiria wrote:
I'm sorry to hear that, and I won't even argue against the fact that some feedback was left behind in favor of getting this submitted. (Namely, we didn't manage to work out your specific feedback with regards to how the TNP part was worded, and we never got to Lord Dom's thoughts)

I think you covered basically everything I was thinking of in the 2nd draft, but could be wrong as I didn't closely look at the first right away.

Except of course, making a Thanos acrostic

Okay, I'm glad to hear that! I felt bad about leaving out your input. I definitely thought of making a Thanos acrostic too, but I didn't want to run into any rule violations.

Yokiria wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:I think you covered basically everything I was thinking of in the 2nd draft, but could be wrong as I didn't closely look at the first right away.

Except of course, making a Thanos acrostic

Okay, I'm glad to hear that! I felt bad about leaving out your input. I definitely thought of making a Thanos acrostic too, but I didn't want to run into any rule violations.

Lol, fair

Yokiria wrote:

Praeceps wrote:What's with this recent trend of authors/co-authors ignoring feedback and/or rushing to vote?

Against.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I won't even argue against the fact that some feedback was left behind in favor of getting this submitted. (Namely, we didn't manage to work out your specific feedback with regards to how the TNP part was worded, and we never got to Lord Dom's thoughts)

I still feel that despite this rocky start, we still have a functional proposal that's worthy of passing the SC.

Absolutely not worthy of being passed.

There has not been a sufficient case to justify the rush to submission. I'm not even sure any case at all was made for why an immediate submission was necessary.

Yokiria wrote:

British Niatirb wrote:We should not rush to judgment.

I agree.

Then shouldn’t you also agree that rushing to judge that Raikou is commendable and submitting only a few hours after the event would be wrong?

Yokiria wrote:

Bormiar wrote:I think I’ve pointed out many glaring problems with it in my last post, yet those don’t matter? Are you just inable to answer?

Well... I was typing up the answers, one by one, but then..

Bormiar wrote:Even if you can provide adequate answers to those questions, you’ll need to do some heavy re-drafting, especially because the burden of proof is on you, and this proposal is unconvincing of Riakou’s “positive leadership”.

...I got to this part, and didn't see the point in answering anymore. Even if I provide adequate answers to your several questions, it still wouldn't be enough for you. So why bother? I don't have your support. I'm just going to accept that and move on.

[/quote]
You’re right in your assessment that it’s not enough. You need to take your time. Writing an SC resolution isn’t a text message; it’s more like an essay. It’s not a sprint; it’s a marathon. Try not to assume you’re above that.

But if you simply must pass the shortest draft proposal you can, you still need to defend it. Your job is not to get my support, but to get the majority of voter’s support. If any of them were to look in the thread, see a lack of response, dismissal of criticism, etc, they may just think you can’t respond to it or the proposal’s just not worth caring about. If they see that and think worse or the proposal, you have failed in not just 1) writing a good proposal via extensive drafting but also 2) campaigning well for your proposal. So I want you to actually try a bit here by thinking and defending this proposal.

Honestly, this is nowhere near enough for a commendation. Evil Wolf had to destroy Nazi Europe to get commended. While it is great and all what Rain did, it is all completely reversible. Maybe a mention in a dispatch or a headline in a newspaper? Yes. A full security council commendation? No.

Bormiar wrote:Your job is not to get my support, but to get the majority of voter’s support.

I agree.

Bormiar wrote:Then shouldn’t you also agree that rushing to judge that Raikou is commendable and submitting only a few hours after the event would be wrong?

Look at the queue. We're going to be here for 10+ days if this reaches quorum. Plenty of time to judge.

Bormiar wrote:If they see that and think worse or the proposal, you have failed in not just 1) writing a good proposal via extensive drafting but also 2) campaigning well for your proposal.

Bormiar, I've passed 2 SCRs before. Same as you. I know how it works.

Wayneactia wrote:Honestly, this is nowhere near enough for a commendation. Evil Wolf had to destroy Nazi Europe to get commended. While it is great and all what Rain did, it is all completely reversible. Maybe a mention in a dispatch or a headline in a newspaper? Yes. A full security council commendation? No.

I disagree. We should reward what "Rain"(Riakou) did. There's an argument to be made that, by not Commending those that have stopped coups and evil regions, we're not providing the kind of positive reinforcement that's necessary to enact this sort of change more often.

A lot of people are inherently selfish. For example, picture a member of a couping party in, say, TSP, deciding that they'd rather have a Commendation to their name than keep running with the people they're running with, and they end up defeating a coup that previously had zero chance of failing. Commendations like these will be looked upon as less "true" Commendations, sure, but they'll serve a practical purpose and help regional security.

Why not start that here, with a native delegate that turned against a widely unpopular UCR's fascist-friendly regime and caused mass celebration across NSGP?

Yokiria wrote:

Bormiar wrote:Your job is not to get my support, but to get the majority of voter’s support.

I agree.

Bormiar wrote:Then shouldn’t you also agree that rushing to judge that Raikou is commendable and submitting only a few hours after the event would be wrong?

Look at the queue. We're going to be here for 10+ days if this reaches quorum. Plenty of time to judge.

Well clearly you made your mind up when you submitted it. Or are you intending on deleting the proposal if you change it?

Yokiria wrote:

Bormiar wrote:If they see that and think worse or the proposal, you have failed in not just 1) writing a good proposal via extensive drafting but also 2) campaigning well for your proposal.

Bormiar, I've passed 2 SCRs before. Same as you. I know how it works.

Impressive. You repealed the commend of a blacklisted player and commended Hell, a strong nominee with a low approval rate on the proposal, so I think that you (as well as I, of course) still have some room for error.

Stop citing security council resolutions you’ve passed to defend your lazy and improper demeanor in drafting, and just respond to people’s comments. It’s not hard to say what you think, unless you don’t actually believe what you say.

Bormiar wrote:Well clearly you made your mind up when you submitted it. Or are you intending on deleting the proposal if you change it?

If it fails to reach quorum, it'll definitely see more extensive drafting the second go around.

Bormiar wrote:Stop citing security council resolutions you’ve passed to defend your lazy and improper demeanor in drafting

Uh... I cited my previous SC resolutions, once, to say you don't need to lecture me on the basics. Also, "lazy and improper demeanor"? I don't understand what I did to justify this kind of hostility from you, but whatever it was, I apologize for it, ok?

Bormiar wrote:and just respond to people’s comments.

I have.

Yokiria wrote:

Bormiar wrote:and just respond to people’s comments.

I have.

Not my latest one.

Yokiria wrote:Uh... I cited my previous SC resolutions, once, to say you don't need to lecture me on the basics. Also, "lazy and improper demeanor"? I don't understand what I did to justify this kind of hostility from you, but whatever it was, I apologize for it, ok?

Look, I don’t want to be mean or anything. I just want to be honest, and I just don’t think you’ve taken the proper measures here.

Well, due to some particularly nasty comments that have surfaced from this author via screenshots of Discord chats earlier this month, I'll no longer be supporting this. I still support the Commendation of Riakou, just by a different author.

I would like to thank the delegates that approved the proposal, though, especially McMasterdonia (I knew to exclude you from campaign spam!) and Kowani (You were super sweet in TGs).

I'm coming late to this as the dramas have happened while I was asleep. Glad to see this has been withdrawn, it would have had no support from me. In my opinion it was hastily written and submitted and I also don't believe the actions described merit a Commendation.

However, my main reason for not supporting this is that the author was, until recently, CoCD's mouthpiece and chief cheerleader in this Security Council. Leopards, spots etc., etc.

Edit: My comments above were made before reading the appropriate threads in Gameplay. What I saw there has just hardened my resolve to oppose this. It seems that my comment about leopards and spots was completely on the mark.

Albennia wrote:What just happened was pretty -inducing. I'll rejoin the WA to vote for it.

you guys were supporting a proposal supported by me, so I'm not sure what you were expecting

Were people really supporting a proposal written by a forum destroyer? The author was problematic even ignoring the fact that ever touched CCD or said anything fascist

Y'all are better than this