NationStates

Hi there, everyone. Recently, the Security Council resolution to Commend Suvmia was passed. Before going any further, I want it to be noted that I have little doubt there is at least some justification for commending Suvmia for their work, but the extant resolution which achieves this in my opinion is rather poorly written and does not do a great job of explaining why Suvmia is worthy of their commend. I do not intend to write a replacement because as far as I can remember I have not interacted with Suvmia very often if at all - a replacement commendation would likely be better written by another. 'Til then, I wanted to possibly start a discussion & see how we'd feel about going ahead with that. As always, open to constructive criticism & feedback. Thanks ^-^

TLDR - My issue is almost entirely with the resolution, rather than the nominee.

The Security Council,

Unconvinced that the contributions of Suvmia to The Ascendancy Federation (TAF) and The United Ascendancy (TUA) are commendable given neither region grew to more than 100 nations;

Strongly disagreeing that building a region to “just under 100” nations is a commendable achievement;

Alarmed that SC#368 mentions Suvmia’s role as TUA’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2019-2020, a period during which several diplomatic connections were held with problematic and dangerous regions;

Frustrated that SCR368’s Noting clause fails to expand on how Suvmia’s contributions to TAF and TUA have “[continued] to benefit other regions and the world as a whole”;

Disheartened by the resolution’s vagueness and profound lack of detail regarding how Suvmia’s “guidance in assisting new nations navigate the international political sphere” was manifested;

Doubtful that Suvmia’s humility, though admirable, is worthy of a Security Council Commendation particularly given apparent deceit on the part of Suvmia to ensure of the passage of SC#352: Commend Ellenburg;

Dismayed by the writing of SC#368, frequently containing unnecessarily long and clumsily-worded clauses such as the Highlighting, Lauding and Astonished clauses;

Conceding that Suvmia’s contributions to their regions could be grounds for a commendation from the Security Council, but skeptical that SC#368 adequately justifies said commendation;

Hereby Repeals Security Council Resolution #368 "Commend Suvmia".

Yeet.

Maybe add something encouraging a replacement resolution? Acknowledging that there could be a better commendation, as you did in the last non-operative clause, is not as good as outright stating that the World Assembly believes there should be a better-written replacement, I think, but I may be wrong.

I know what your intent is, but I'm just a bit worried that someone may think this is a petty way to clawback at the URA and co. after recent events.

Hulldom wrote:I know what your intent is, but I'm just a bit worried that someone may think this is a petty way to clawback at the URA and co. after recent events.

Even if I had any interest in petty clawbacks, I would have gone for August's commendation, not Suvmia's.

Besides, the URA was just the conveyor of information in that whole affair. Yknow how the old adage goes, don't shoot the messenger. Plus if anyone writes a better replacement commendation I'd be happy to support it.

Hulldom wrote:I know what your intent is, but I'm just a bit worried that someone may think this is a petty way to clawback at the URA and co. after recent events.

Aside from what Andy already said, notable URA members (or ex-members who are retired?) have criticized Suvmia's commendation.

Lol. Nice disclaimer.

Not gonna state my personal opinion here (don't really feel like it), but one thing:

Unconvinced that the contributions of Suvmia to The Ascendancy Federation (TAF) and The United Ascendancy (TUA) are commendable given neither region grew to more than 100 nations nor do either accommodate any kind of community any longer, with the latter merging into The Democratic Republic;

I'm not sure this is a good point. The SC has already recognized that even if things fall apart or are reversed in the future, that shouldn't reflect on the work of the nominee unless the nominee's actions directly led to said unravelling. Thus, I disagree with the premise that their work in TUA is uncommendable because TUA merged with TDA.Additionally, TUA existed for two years before merging- that's a pretty sizeable chunk of time.

I'm also not sure if Suvmia's work there is uncommendable if the regions didn't grow beyond 100 nations under Suvmia's leadership. Certainly they shouldn't be the spotlight of the resolution, but I do think work done in small regions can be a supporting point for any commend, if said work is notable enough.

Besides that, I think everything addresses the target properly. I think the repeal is a bit sparse though- you should consider trying to expand on your arguments a bit more.

Andusre wrote:nor do either accommodate any kind of community any longer

Let's not "region is now closed so any contributions when it existed are invalidated".

Andusre wrote:Alarmed that SC#368 mentions Suvmia’s role as TUA’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2019-2020, a period during which several diplomatic connections were held with problematic and dangerous regions;

Was Suvmia involved in maintaining relations with said problematic regions

Andusre wrote:Dismayed by the writing of SC#368, frequently containing unnecessarily long and clumsily-worded clauses;

Like?

“The region closed” is not a good argument. “It never got really big and didn’t last long” is.

Comfed wrote:“The region closed” is not a good argument. “It never got really big and didn’t last long” is.

This.

In favor. Again, Suvmia's accomplishments really are not noteworthy.

Hi all, the draft has been updated. I agree with the commenters, in retrospect, that where a nominee was not responsible for the destruction of commendable achievements, said destruction should not be used as justification for repeal - that section has been removed. I have also added examples of where the resolution's clauses are unnecessarily long, clumsily worded & poorly punctuated.

The Python wrote:

Andusre wrote:Alarmed that SC#368 mentions Suvmia’s role as TUA’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2019-2020, a period during which several diplomatic connections were held with problematic and dangerous regions;

Was Suvmia involved in maintaining relations with said problematic regions

They were MoFA so yeah I'd say so. I don't think it's unreasonable nor uncommon for MoFAs of regions to conduct due diligence on the OOC cleanliness of their diplomatic partners.

Guess and Check wrote:I'm also not sure if Suvmia's work there is uncommendable if the regions didn't grow beyond 100 nations under Suvmia's leadership. Certainly they shouldn't be the spotlight of the resolution, but I do think work done in small regions can be a supporting point for any commend, if said work is notable enough.

Though I do see what you mean, according to this page there are approximately 130 genuine (not puppet dump) UCRs with more than 100 nations. Some of these regions are unmarked puppet dumps but the majority of them are communities with WA Delegates, regional governments, et cetera. As a result I don't think building a UCR to over 100 nations is a particularly commendable feature - it can be done with $30-50 of stamps, maybe less if you know how to use them efficiently, if a player has that amount of money at their disposal (which, undoubtedly, many do).

Guess and Check wrote:Besides that, I think everything addresses the target properly. I think the repeal is a bit sparse though- you should consider trying to expand on your arguments a bit more.

I do agree & would like to bulk it out more, but am not sure where I could expand upon. Do you/anyone else have any suggestions I might be able to work on?

Andusre wrote:Alarmed that SC#368 mentions Suvmia’s role as TUA’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2019-2020, a period during which several diplomatic connections were held with problematic and dangerous regions;

Which regions?

Orca and Narwhal wrote:

Andusre wrote:Alarmed that SC#368 mentions Suvmia’s role as TUA’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2019-2020, a period during which several diplomatic connections were held with problematic and dangerous regions;

Which regions?

I'm not an expert on that region's history, but it currently has embassies with Montealba and New World Union. We could also talk about The Democratic Republic and its defense of some behaviors in the RCN, as well as some of the people who hold citizenship there... moving on,

TUA appears to have previously held embassies with Layem. This was opened during your Delegacy (as was Montealba's), not Suvmia's (though New World Union was opened under his), of course, though I'm not sure the role of the WAD in foreign affairs.

That said, plenty of reputable embassies such as Philippines and Thaecia were opened, so it doesn't seem like a clear pattern of ill behavior or intent, in fairness.

Those are some guesses as to the regions Andy would be referring to, anyway. I am not sure the exact dates of his tenure or his roles in these, so I'm not sure if it's the best case for this resolution (it probably isn't), but I assume those are the regions Andy is referring to.

Though I do see what you mean, according to this page there are approximately 130 genuine (not puppet dump) UCRs with more than 100 nations. Some of these regions are unmarked puppet dumps but the majority of them are communities with WA Delegates, regional governments, et cetera. As a result I don't think building a UCR to over 100 nations is a particularly commendable feature - it can be done with $30-50 of stamps, maybe less if you know how to use them efficiently, if a player has that amount of money at their disposal (which, undoubtedly, many do).

Fair.

I do agree & would like to bulk it out more, but am not sure where I could expand upon. Do you/anyone else have any suggestions I might be able to work on?

- Could argue that the TAF clause isn't exactly clear on what Suvmia did in the region besides founding it.


And besides that... I can't really see anything you didn't already adress, so it seems I was wrong on that front.

Have to get to sleep fairly soonish, so I will reply to everything asked both in this forum & otherwise tomorrow. Thanks for the feedback, all ^-^

Have you gotten the author of the resolution's feedback and what they have to think? Considering Laudesia is a part of the URA and whatnot, I do encourage them to give feedback and maybe why the commendation is justified.

Outer Sparta wrote:Have you gotten the author of the resolution's feedback and what they have to think? Considering Laudesia is a part of the URA and whatnot, I do encourage them to give feedback and maybe why the commendation is justified.

When given a chance to do that when I criticized Suvmia's commendation, people did a lot of handwringing and not a lot of answering. I don't expect the author to comment on this thread, this is just a trophy the URA wants to give to itself.

I would agree with Zukchiva that the repeal as it stands looks a bit sparse. I have a few ideas but since I'm not really familiar with Suvmia's history you'll have to do your own research if you want to expand any of these to include in the proposal:

- The second clause of the commendation states that "TAF was a precursor to other multi-regional organizations such as The United Region Alliance". As far as I recall I've never really seen evidence suggesting this, but you'll have to verify this yourself. It could be possible that TAF was an inspiration for the URA, but inspiration is very different from being a precursor.

- You could argue that most of the work mentioned in relation to TUA were things expected of the founder, and is therefore not commendable. Things like "laying the foundation of foreign affairs in the region, by co-authoring the constitution, authoring the Embassy Policy, and spearheading recruitment efforts for the region". Founding a region from the remnants of a former one is also something that happens frequently, and probably not commendable.

- The "Acknowledging" clause of the commendation seems to lack meat given that two of the three nations mentioned don't seem to have any significance and are CTE already.

I would also recommend reworking the first two clauses to focus less on the numbers and more on the fact that they didn't last long and had little impact on the world stage. And lastly I think a few introductory clauses are needed to give the proposal more structure and flow, rather than abruptly jumping into the first thing that's wrong with the proposal. I would point to my introduction for SC#302 as an example, but I confess it's the only repeal of this type that I remember since, well, I wrote it. There may be better examples.

Due to a busy RL scene, I'm going to be putting this on hold for a while. Not sure when I'll be able to pick it up again but I do hope to start working on it as soon as RL clears up.

Thanks, all, for the advice & feedback - it will be incorporated when this gets resumed.

Apologies to the author for posting while this draft is on hold, just wanted to say something before I forget-

I mostly agree with Gor's feedback except for using the idea that Suvmia doing basic Foundership duties inonitself is not commendable. For founding a small UCR, I get that argument. But I believe that if one founded a larger successful UCR, then doing basic Foundership duties should be commendable (more as a supporting point than as a whole goal of a resolution)- it is not easy work to build a region from scratch. And I think using something akin to "they did basic Founder things, which aren't commendable" as an argument for this repeal is can set bad precedent to set for the SC.