[DRAFT #2-ish] Condemn Auralia (the nation)

[Bormiar]

I agree with Zyvetskistaahn. Condemning for cheating is ridiculous, and if you wonder why the SC doesn't condemn for rule violations and OOC problems anymore, it's because it's created nothing but problems in the past. I'll give three examples.

• SC#3 condemned NAZI EUROPE for fascist ideology. Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE" had several failed attempts from the likes of Glen-Rhodes, Todd McCloud, Omigodtheykilledkenny, and Topid, the resolution's original author. It was not until AMOM playing a political game that it was finally repealed. The mods enacted a ruling banning resolutions condemning an ideology, and the original author apologized for it in a long-winded forum post.
• Wham's condemnation of Allied States of Euroislanders for destroying the forums of DEN, Invaders Army, and The Black Hawks. There was a fight over whether or not ASE deserves it, when EuroSoviets seems to have been the primary culprit, and some criticism that the forum destruction happened years before the condemnation was past (suggesting it was just a grudge). While the resolution remains, many drafts (such as those from Cormac, NuCa, and Lord Dominator) persist on the forums.
• Condemn Unknown, also for forum destruction, also by Topid. All Unknown had to do was apologize, and then Topid was quick to talk about the new leadership.

The lesson is that these OOC condemnations lead to pointing fingers in weird directions; they lead to drafts spurred by mob mentality and difficult to remove; and they often don't deserve to last as long as they do. Condemnations are badges of honor, and they should be kept that way. Why else would we have repealed Condemn Jakker and the Predator condemnations?

Additionally, I don't trust Auralia when he says he does not want the condemnation.

I will be ready to repeal in the unlikely event that this passes.

[Wallenburg]

I would prefer not to be condemned. I would not see it as a "badge of honour".

Seeing as Auralia doesn't want this, his supporters don't want it, and his detractors don't want it, I cannot comprehend how this proposal can be worth the effort so far expended in it.

[Fachumonn]

I would like to point out some reasons for at least giving Auralia a badge in this thread:
- viewtopic.php?f=10&t=431633&hilit=Commend+Auralia&start=25.
Especially look at Scion's posts.
Anyways, support, although I point Tin to Auralia's post here.

[Astrobolt]

Edit: I think if Auralia denounces these previous problematic views if he really no longer holds them, I'd be willing to support a Commendation or Condemnation. But until then, strong against.

One of these is IC. See "The Auralian government"

Even if you think one of those is IC, the other collection is not. That alone (not even counting non-compliance or a self-Commend attempt) make this proposal dead on arrival.

PS: I accidentally created a post with a puppet, then deleted it, sorry for any confusion that caused.

[Giovanniland]

Still against badging a WA cheat.

Ditto.

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

I go back and forth regarding the Commendation/Condemnation of Auralia. Undeniably, they were a very prolific author of WA resolutions for a very long time. Much of their work is still in effect today. They were an extremely active member of the General Assembly forum - perhaps the most active for a time - and they prompted interesting discussions about whether players can and should change founding GA principles (and effectively change the rules of the game we are playing). As this proposal subtly points out, they pursued bold if somewhat contradictory ideas for the WA, like prohibiting a WA court but demanding a WA army. They also had the courage to vigorously defend and pursue many minority views based on their unalterable convictions; a feature I found exasperating but at least partially admirable.

Anyway, the cheating scandal. It was a long time ago. People can be forgiven. Much of what we're talking about commending (or, I guess, condemning) Auralia for also occurred a long time ago. Does it matter that, after the scandal, Auralia's activity and accomplishments largely waned? Perhaps focusing on Auralia's accomplishments after the scandal which demonstrate reform and a recommitment to the betterment of the community would rehabilitate the offender and make more room for redemption? I don't know.

Statistically, Pete Rose is one of the best baseball players of all time. It's undeniable that his contributions are deserving of the Hall of Fame, but he remains out. Why? In 1991 he was deemed permanently ineligible because he violated a sacred rule in baseball: he gambled on the outcome of games while he was a player and manager (major league baseball was permanently harmed and almost destroyed in the early 1900s due to player gambling scandals). It's getting to the point where we as a playerbase have to decide whether breaking the one-WA-nation limit in an effort to self-commend should make a player permanently ineligible for a future SC badge. That's what it seems to come down to for me anyway. I suspect we would mostly agree that, were it not for the cheating, Auralia likely would have been commended at some point. I suspect we would mostly also agree that violations of the one-WA-nation limit - if permitted or encouraged - would destroy or at least permanently alter this community.

Anyway, I agree with the general sentiment that Auralia should not be condemned. The only real basis for condemning this nation is the cheating scandal. Apart from that I do not believe a proclivity for writing and pursuing ideas (unless violent, dangerous, or truly wicked) is a basis to condemn someone. Giving the condemnation badge to a nation solely because they tried to cheat to get themselves a different SC badge is a hard no, for me. The other things mentioned in this proposal seem more worthy of commendation than condemnation.

I'd be open to the idea of a commendation based on prior accomplishments and contributions if I were also satisfied by evidence of substantial rehabilitation. Those are my personal thoughts.

[Bormiar]

If Auralia truly is a changed person since their WA multi-ing attempt, they should not be commended for anything that occurred prior to their self-commend. It's not the same player. Plus, I think that stripping that from history — a form of damnatio memoriae — is adequate punishment.

furthermore, they should not be commended for any actions done in non-compliance or with malicious compliance. I don't care whether their nation is religious; it chose to join the WA and influence other compliant nations through its resolutions, and it should have to accept when the WA does not lean its way.

After taking away all those accomplishments, if there's enough left to still commend, I'd support.

[Tinhampton]

This is not a Commendation and I am not sufficiently tempted to convert this to one

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

This is not a Commendation and I am not sufficiently tempted to convert this to one

Yeah yeah; you say in the OP:

IMPORTANT: I happily voted in favour of UM's Commendation proposal when it got to vote last summer. While I do believe that Auralia is worthy of Commendation, many voters (by no means all ;P) believe that his other achievements are outweighed mostly by the Afrasiab scandal. This should be much less relevant now but it does apparently remove any hope that he can be Commended; hence the below.

The emphasis in "I do believe that Auralia is worthy of Commendation" was from you. I can appreciate fun cheekiness, but you're skirting the line between that and trying to trick people into giving Auralia some kind of badge because you think they deserve one.

If you really think Auralia deserves commendation I told you what I might support (and what I suspect and hope others might support): a Commendation resolution focused on Auralia's "other achievements" as you call them, mentioning with specificity the fall from grace (because certainly, any commendation of Auralia would have to reckon with that), and a redemption story about how and why the nation ought to be forgiven, redeemed, and restored.

[The Forest of Aeneas]

OOC: I only speak for myself, but personally my opposition to this is not at all because of Auralia's self-commendation attempt... 8 years ago, which he's publicly apologised for. My issue with this remains his problematic views surrounding the LGBT+ community. As I said earlier in this thread, if Auralia really no longer holds those views, I'd be willing to support this; but if not, those problematic views remain a dealbreaker for me.

[Bormiar]

If you really think Auralia deserves commendation I told you what I might support (and what I suspect and hope others might support): a Commendation resolution focused on Auralia's "other achievements" as you call them, mentioning with specificity the fall from grace (because certainly, any commendation of Auralia would have to reckon with that), and a redemption story about how and why the nation ought to be forgiven, redeemed, and restored.

He's clearly not a redemption story. He's learned to play ball and not make incredibly vain, rash decisions. That's enough for me to consider his commendation, but we shouldn't lionize him as some kind of Jean Valjean story.

OOC: I only speak for myself, but personally my opposition to this is not at all because of Auralia's self-commendation attempt... 8 years ago, which he's publicly apologised for. My issue with this remains his problematic views surrounding the LGBT+ community. As I said earlier in this thread, if Auralia really no longer holds those views, I'd be willing to support this; but if not, those problematic views remain a dealbreaker for me.

NationStates' community isn't really a representative sample of the real world. I'm not really a Christian, but I went to Sunday school as a kid, and I met a lot of very good people who believe that homosexuality is a vice that people must overcome, like alcoholism or lust. Like you, I find these opinions sickening and dangerous, but there are too many people who believe that for us to individually condemn* each of them. I'm more content with letting opinions change over time, which is why I'm content with commending someone who has a religious opposition to homosexuality (as long as their opinions don't become a subject of the proposal). I consider educated people like Auralia to simply have very disagreeable theological opinions— they're not bigots.

The more serious issue is non-compliance. Auralia lays out an argument in favor of non-compliance, stating that realistically the United Nations would not be capable of enforcing its laws. Many have argued that the Security Council would not commend a nation non-compliant with the World Assembly. I believe that the much more serious issue is that it nullifies all of his accomplishments (weakening the condemnation too, Tin). If he doesn't want to comply with abortion legislation, I don't have to comply with anything he writes. Therefore, nothing he's ever passed in the GA has had much of an effect.

* The dictionary definition, not SC condemnation.

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

My issue with this remains his problematic views surrounding the LGBT+ community. As I said earlier in this thread, if Auralia really no longer holds those views, I'd be willing to support this; but if not, those problematic views remain a dealbreaker for me.

He's clearly not a redemption story. He's learned to play ball and not make incredibly vain, rash decisions. That's enough for me to consider his commendation, but we shouldn't lionize him as some kind of Jean Valjean story. * * * The more serious issue is non-compliance. * * * I believe that the much more serious issue is that it nullifies all of his accomplishments (weakening the condemnation too, Tin).

Fair points all. It would be difficult to badge a nation if one believes that the nation holds disparaging views about others. It would be difficult to commend a nation if one believes their accomplishments in game are canceled out by harm they've introduced in game. Perhaps there is a different course to pursue.

[Hulldom]

Echoing Borm and inserting my personal opinion into this: GA authors being commended for their GA stuff absolutely do not deserve a badge if their commendation is based on their GA work and they have a stated (I mean, how else?) history of non-compliance.

The argument for “but Halo” holds no water because Halo was never a GAer, never pretended to be a GAer, and crucially, work in the WA was never a part of his commend.

By comparison, work in the GA is much of, if not all of, Auralia’s legacy. Therefore, non-compliance is a big issue for his potential badge and disqualifies him from receiving a badge based on his GA work.

Coupled with some, to put it nicely, disagreeable opinions on the issue of birthing people’s reproductive freedoms (yes, yes, I am wording it that way) and it’s an easy, easy no for me.

If you can make the case for Auralia independent of the GA, maybe I could give it a minute amount of consideration, but otherwise no.

[Imperium Anglorum]

If this is some attempt to honour contributions to the game, we ought to respect nominee wishes and this proposal is dead on arrival. If it isn't, then I don't see the point.