NationStates

I have decided to refocus my Condemn TBH repeal attempt on SC#52 at first, given a repeal of this older proposal seems more popular among NSGP.

I note that, regardless of whether you believe TBH deserves a condemnation or not, SC#217 much better details TBH's "achievements", and a single condemn is apparently sufficient for every other nation/region condemned in the history of the Security Council.

The Security Council,

Recognising that SC#52 was originally passed with the intention of demonstrating the vile nature of The Black Hawks' raiding operations to world;

Noting, however, that the region has seen a recent decrease in the severity of their actions;

Realising that The Black Hawks has failed to successfully conduct any major raiding operations as of late;

Disputing the claim that The Black Hawks is an aggressive raiding organisation; acknowledging the region has displayed a recent decrease in their needless aggression;

Observing that the region's few recent occupations have been quasi-raids, resulting in the targeted region eventually being returned the control of natives;

Insisting that The Black Hawks' recent actions have only served to demonstrate the relatively harmless nature of the region;

Believing that SC#52 could potentially mislead nations into percieving The Black Hawks as a threat to international security;

Hereby repeals SC#52: “Condemn The Black Hawks”.

Didn’t like Souls’ jokes in the CCD thread in Gameplay eh? You are really getting petty.

Also how does this repeal address the items raised in the original Condemnation, because I’m not seeing it.

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Didn’t like Souls’ jokes in the CCD thread in Gameplay eh? You are really getting petty.

I don't like raiders. I've had this one on my list for a long time.

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Also how does this repeal address the items raised in the original Condemnation, because I’m not seeing it.

It does not necessarily need to.

From the mod rulings sticky:

"A Commendation or Condemnation is an expression of opinion by the WA. Repealing it is saying that the WA has changed its mind. You should therefore give reasons for the change of mind. These may include matters that have come to light or changed since the original resolution."

This repeal addresses the fact that TBH sees their two condemnations as badges of honour.

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Didn’t like Souls’ jokes in the CCD thread in Gameplay eh? You are really getting petty.

I don't like raiders. I've had this one on my list for a long time.

...

Hasn't the CCD raided...? Or at least attempted to.

I'm going to completely put aside who it is authoring this, and just say... It's not a bad idea, and it's also not bad for a first draft.

Because of how unpopular this author is in the Security Council, though, I don't think they really have a chance with this.

Praeceps wrote:

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:I don't like raiders. I've had this one on my list for a long time.

...

Hasn't the CCD raided...? Or at least attempted to.

Full disclosure: yes, we did have a small raiding force in the past, but this was primarily used for defending our allies from various attacks.

We do not currently have an active raiding force.

Yokiria wrote:I'm going to completely put aside who it is authoring this, and just say... It's not a bad idea, and it's also not bad for a first draft.

Because of how unpopular this author is in the Security Council, though, I don't think they really have a chance with this.

Looks like the thinly disguised victim complex has claimed its first victim.

The point of a condemnation is to provide recognition for their horrendous deeds. That’s the point. If what you say is true, the WA should remove condemning outright.

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Also how does this repeal address the items raised in the original Condemnation, because I’m not seeing it.

It does not necessarily need to.

From the mod rulings sticky:

"A Commendation or Condemnation is an expression of opinion by the WA. Repealing it is saying that the WA has changed its mind. You should therefore give reasons for the change of mind. These may include matters that have come to light or changed since the original resolution."

This repeal addresses the fact that TBH sees their two condemnations as badges of honour.

Let’s quote the full sticky.

Repeals: A REPEAL of a C&C should address the contents of the C&C in question. However, a repeal that consists of nothing but a negative of the original -- eg, Commend X because he is a good guy, Repeal Commend X because he is NOT a good guy -- may be deleted on the grounds that the SC already discussed this in the original debate. (cf "I don't like this" being forbidden in GA Repeal arguments.)

A Commendation or Condemnation is an expression of opinion by the WA. Repealing it is saying that the WA has changed its mind. You should therefore give reasons for the change of mind. These may include matters that have come to light or changed since the original resolution. See further discussion here.

So, to repeat my question, how does this draft address the contents of the Condemnation?

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:

Praeceps wrote:...

Hasn't the CCD raided...? Or at least attempted to.

Full disclosure: yes, we did have a small raiding force in the past, but this was primarily used for defending our allies from various attacks.

We do not currently have an active raiding force.

I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Kuriko wrote:

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Full disclosure: yes, we did have a small raiding force in the past, but this was primarily used for defending our allies from various attacks.

We do not currently have an active raiding force.

I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Plus they tried to conquer the North Pacific and humiliatingly failed.

Kuriko wrote:

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Full disclosure: yes, we did have a small raiding force in the past, but this was primarily used for defending our allies from various attacks.

We do not currently have an active raiding force.

I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Keyword being "primarily". I'm an officer of the CCD but I'm not personally responsible for everything the region has done over the past four years.

Kyundao wrote:

Kuriko wrote:I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Plus they tried to conquer the North Pacific and humiliatingly failed.

See above. What you're referring to was not even a raid, and both nations involved are no longer a part of the CCD.

I'll add - this thread isn't about the CCD, it's about Repealing TBH's condemnation. If you really want to discuss CCD foreign policy you know where to find our gameplay thread.

Kuriko wrote:I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Can safely say that we didn't ask CCD to 'defend' us when their Chrome Company decided to raid my region

That it comes from CCD is probably largely irrelevant (except perhaps to some defenders) because most every possible permutation of this repeal has already been tried.

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:

Kuriko wrote:I call bullshit on the bolded part. Boston wasn't an ally of your "Chrome Company", neither are the other regions you invaded.

Keyword being "primarily". I'm an officer of the CCD but I'm not personally responsible for everything the region has done over the past four years.

Kyundao wrote:
Plus they tried to conquer the North Pacific and humiliatingly failed.

See above. What you're referring to was not even a raid, and both nations involved are no longer a part of the CCD.

I'll add - this thread isn't about the CCD, it's about Repealing TBH's condemnation. If you really want to discuss CCD foreign policy you know where to find our gameplay thread.

A coup is just a long-term raid. And some of the nations involved are still a part of the CCD.

Hypocrisy from the author is very much relevant to this thread.

Can u not?

Praeceps wrote:

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:Keyword being "primarily". I'm an officer of the CCD but I'm not personally responsible for everything the region has done over the past four years.


See above. What you're referring to was not even a raid, and both nations involved are no longer a part of the CCD.

I'll add - this thread isn't about the CCD, it's about Repealing TBH's condemnation. If you really want to discuss CCD foreign policy you know where to find our gameplay thread.

A coup is just a long-term raid. And some of the nations involved are still a part of the CCD.

Hypocrisy from the author is very much relevant to this thread.

I'm not a raider. I've never even participated in a raid. I was not personally involved in either Chrome Company or the TNP coup. Again, although you can try and make out I'm somehow personally responsible for everything the CCD does, that's really not the case.

Also, because we're still talking about the CCD for some reason, the only nation that played a major part in the TNP coup and still remains within the region is Jocospor themself.

I'll respond to any further statements here: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=460511

Bhang Bhang Duc is right that you need to address the contents of the resolution you're looking to repeal. That's a fundamental enough principle that it's enshrined as Rule 2d.

(Note: this isn't a ruling on whether what you've drafted complies with Rule 2d, just emphasising that this is a requirement.)

Sedgistan wrote:Bhang Bhang Duc is right that you need to address the contents of the resolution you're looking to repeal. That's a fundamental enough principle that it's enshrined as Rule 2d.

(Note: this isn't a ruling on whether what you've drafted complies with Rule 2d, just emphasising that this is a requirement.)

I think we can generally say that the Noting/Presuming/Believing clauses do not address the target. To me, the question would be if the Acknowledging/Recognising clauses description of portions of the target qualify, which I lean towards not, but am not sure on.

Uh no lol.

How many petty spam resolutions we gonna have to put up with?

Hahahahahaha

This gave me a good laugh. Imagine CCD, repealing a condemnation. For raiding.

Look, Shrew, I know Souls hurt your feelings over the last few days, but this is truly terrible in both quality and meme value. Please just stop.

ShrewLlamaLand wrote:

Praeceps wrote:A coup is just a long-term raid. And some of the nations involved are still a part of the CCD.

Hypocrisy from the author is very much relevant to this thread.

I'm not a raider. I've never even participated in a raid. I was not personally involved in either Chrome Company or the TNP coup. Again, although you can try and make out I'm somehow personally responsible for everything the CCD does, that's really not the case.

Also, because we're still talking about the CCD for some reason, the only nation that played a major part in the TNP coup and still remains within the region is Jocospor themself.

I'll respond to any further statements here: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=460511

I've nowhere made out that you are personally responsible for what the CCD does.

When you are the Delegate of the region in which the founder was involved in an attempted coup, expect that to be relevant when you propose a resolution denouncing those types of actions.

Praeceps wrote:I've nowhere made out that you are personally responsible for what the CCD does.

When you are the Delegate of the region in which the founder was involved in an attempted coup, expect that to be relevant when you propose a resolution denouncing those types of actions.

If I'm not personally responsible, I don't see why you keep bringing up this old coup attempt that I was never involved in. The CCD didn't submit this proposal - I submitted this proposal.

Badivermeraed wrote:Hahahahahaha

This gave me a good laugh. Imagine CCD, repealing a condemnation. For raiding.

What exactly about this do you find funny>

I mean if you want to give more reason to get raided when the time strikes, so be it.