NationStates

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Outer Sparta wrote:There is virtually nothing we can say that improves your draft. It is what it is: a rubbish attempt at a self-commend and badge hunt. End of story.

So I should submit as is?

Why not? The rest of us will get a laugh seeing it get shot down in flames.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Outer Sparta wrote:No, you should basically put it in the garbage can. Abandon it and move on. Your badge hunting attempt and opportunism is really showing.

To prove that I am not in this for a "badge hunting attempt", a typical accusation of bad faith and in this case (as with most) entirely untrue, I will submit this on a separate WA puppet to my main.

Sure like that's going to really do anything to convince people you aren't trying to get a coveted commend badge and SC author badge.

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:So I should submit as is?

Why not? The rest of us will get a laugh seeing it get shot down in flames.

.

Outer Sparta wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:To prove that I am not in this for a "badge hunting attempt", a typical accusation of bad faith and in this case (as with most) entirely untrue, I will submit this on a separate WA puppet to my main.

Sure like that's going to really do anything to convince people you aren't trying to get a coveted commend badge and SC author badge.

An SC author badge... on a separate WA puppet? Your accusation is almost as transparently ridiculous as South Reinkalistan's.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Outer Sparta wrote:Sure like that's going to really do anything to convince people you aren't trying to get a coveted commend badge and SC author badge.

An SC author badge... on a separate WA puppet? Your accusation is almost as transparently ridiculous as South Reinkalistan's.

No. South Reinkalistan has a point

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:APPROVING of the cause Nationalist Northumbria was founded upon

What cause?

How are you even going to submit it? You aren't in the WA

The King Isle wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:An SC author badge... on a separate WA puppet? Your accusation is almost as transparently ridiculous as South Reinkalistan's.

No. South Reinkalistan has a point

First of all, no they don't. Second of all, if you actually believed their post, which you don't and you shouldn't, you wouldn't be replying to me, would you? So even you acknowledge that it's a bogus accusation. Which I appreciate, thank you.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

The King Isle wrote:No. South Reinkalistan has a point

First of all, no they don't. Second of all, if you actually believed their post, which you don't and you shouldn't, you wouldn't be replying to me, would you? So even you acknowledge that it's a bogus accusation. Which I appreciate, thank you.

I'm just generally saying that this is never going to pass. I'm going to vote "against" on this proposal

"The delegates from Nationalist Northumbria are still bitter about Lindisfarne, I see..."

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

The King Isle wrote:No. South Reinkalistan has a point

First of all, no they don't. Second of all, if you actually believed their post, which you don't and you shouldn't, you wouldn't be replying to me, would you? So even you acknowledge that it's a bogus accusation. Which I appreciate, thank you.

OOC: That makes no sense. The proposal appears to be just a badge hunt, which usually I don't feel the need to criticize (as a badge hunt proposal can actually be a good proposal), but this one is so obvious there is just no looking away.

Barfleur wrote:"The delegates from Nationalist Northumbria are still bitter about Lindisfarne, I see..."

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:First of all, no they don't. Second of all, if you actually believed their post, which you don't and you shouldn't, you wouldn't be replying to me, would you? So even you acknowledge that it's a bogus accusation. Which I appreciate, thank you.

OOC: That makes no sense. The proposal appears to be just a badge hunt, which usually I don't feel the need to criticize (as a badge hunt proposal can actually be a good proposal), but this one is so obvious there is just no looking away.

"The honourable delegates from Barfleur must know that our invasion of Denmark had nothing to do with historic grudges. Those longships posed a clear and present danger, to paraphrase a 1989 Tom Clancy novel, to Northumbria."

OOC: A badge hunt is, I am pretty sure, about the SC authorship badge. So it absolutely makes no sense to talk about badge-hunting when I have already said I will be proposing it on a separate WA puppet.

The King Isle wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:First of all, no they don't. Second of all, if you actually believed their post, which you don't and you shouldn't, you wouldn't be replying to me, would you? So even you acknowledge that it's a bogus accusation. Which I appreciate, thank you.

I'm just generally saying that this is never going to pass. I'm going to vote "against" on this proposal

Well, at least it's nice to see that you agree it's going to get to vote.

Dialectically opposed to this draft. Frankly left eye-rollingly unimpressed at this pathetic self-endorsing narrative. Nationalist Northumbra fails to qualify for even a minimum standard of a commend due to these chief reasons I'll elucidate for the convenience of others:

1) It is a self-nomination based on weak justification arguments.
2) These weak justifications being involvement on an insignificant international incidents role play that has no quantitative nor qualitative impact upon the greater NS meta-community as a whole.
3) Anyone can write a Nationstates that is egalitarian, pro-rights and absolutely cherish freedoms. That does not make a user commend-worthy, and to think so is a gross misunderstanding of what the Security Council is about.

I suggest you try expand your metaphorical resume so to speak, because being a "lead advocate" of ONE proposal that also FAILED to be ratified is at best an attempt in bad faith to gain some compensation for the failure of a past proposal.

In conclusion, this half-assed transparent bid for a badge deserves every ounce of ire and disdain it has received and will receive from members of the World Assembly.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Barfleur wrote:"The delegates from Nationalist Northumbria are still bitter about Lindisfarne, I see..."


OOC: That makes no sense. The proposal appears to be just a badge hunt, which usually I don't feel the need to criticize (as a badge hunt proposal can actually be a good proposal), but this one is so obvious there is just no looking away.

"The honourable delegates from Barfleur must know that our invasion of Denmark had nothing to do with historic grudges. Those longships posed a clear and present danger, to paraphrase a 1989 Tom Clancy novel, to Northumbria."

"While that may certainly have been the case, we fail to see why a war between two nations, which had little effect on the wider world, is worthy of a commendation from the World Assembly. Perhaps the Northumbrian troops deserve a commendation from your country's parliament or equivalent, but there is no reason for this Assembly to issue one.

OOC: A badge hunt is, I am pretty sure, about the SC authorship badge. So it absolutely makes no sense to talk about badge-hunting when I have already said I will be proposing it on a separate WA puppet.

OOC: Regardless of the proposing nation, it would be "Nationalist Northumbria" which would receive the commendation badge. Which on its own is not a deal breaker for me, but with no other substance to it, this proposal falls flat. Also, a self-commend (even with two different puppets) is never viewed kindly.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:Okay, can any of you three comment on this proposal without using the word 'rubbish' or a synonym? And don't try some 'no because that's what it is!' line.

Nope, can’t be done I am afraid. The draft is shit, it is a self commend and is nothing more than a badge hunt.

Wayneactia wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:Okay, can any of you three comment on this proposal without using the word 'rubbish' or a synonym? And don't try some 'no because that's what it is!' line.

Nope, can’t be done I am afraid. The draft is shit, it is a self commend and is nothing more than a badge hunt.

Can you explain how it is a badge hunt, then?

Can you explain why you think you deserve such a commendation?

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Wayneactia wrote:Nope, can’t be done I am afraid. The draft is shit, it is a self commend and is nothing more than a badge hunt.

Can you explain how it is a badge hunt, then?

Because it's lazy and I could make a puppet more commendable than your nation in around 5 minutes. I'd just have to copy the Wikipedia page for an RL country and emphasize the "detail" of my puppet's "lore". I'd even say "badge hunt" is a stretch, that implies some chance of passage.

To answer your question, "badge hunt" typically refers to an attempt to pass a resolution that is of low quality and minimal effort in exchange for shallow recognition in the chamber. It does not typically need to be provided by an author who does not have a badge, so long as the qualify of the draft in question is perceived as low. Since the text of this proposal makes minimal arguments and could be thought up in less than a minute, it will of course be interpreted that way.

No support from me, I expect better of the Security Council than what this provides.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Wayneactia wrote:Nope, can’t be done I am afraid. The draft is shit, it is a self commend and is nothing more than a badge hunt.

Can you explain how it is a badge hunt, then?

I could, but explaining it would require more effort than you actually put into the draft.

Wayneactia wrote:

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:Can you explain how it is a badge hunt, then?

I could, but explaining it would require more effort than you actually put into the draft.

No, because you can't. Badge refers to an authorship badge, which as already explained wouldn't be the case here because I would be using a separate WA puppet to submit the proposal. Therefore accusations of 'badge-hunting' have no grounding in reality.

Besides, if I was badge-hunting I'd be submitting proposals (over)pandering to the SC, wouldn't I? Can't really do a badge hunt with a self-commend.

I'm sorry to say this, but this will fail at vote. The majority of regions that make up the Security Council always oppose self-commends. Therefore, this is a waste of your time if your intent is to pass this as a serious proposal. I would suggest abandoning this.

If you really want to author something, you can always take a nominee idea from the SC ideas thread, research said nominee, and look into some recently passed resolutions to learn about the standards of an SC resolution.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:

Wayneactia wrote:I could, but explaining it would require more effort than you actually put into the draft.

No, because you can't. Badge refers to an authorship badge, which as already explained wouldn't be the case here because I would be using a separate WA puppet to submit the proposal. Therefore accusations of 'badge-hunting' have no grounding in reality.

Besides, if I was badge-hunting I'd be submitting proposals (over)pandering to the SC, wouldn't I? Can't really do a badge hunt with a self-commend.

Badge hunting does not necessarily refer to just an authorship badge. You are hunting for a commend badge for your nation, even though you have accomplished a grand total of jack shit while playing this game. So yeah I can.

Nationalist Northumbria wrote:I have worked in the SC before. I was instrumental in the 'For' campaign of the almost record-breaking 'Condemn TCB' proposal earlier this year, as well as in getting that proposal to vote in the first place.

This one? One which was an even bigger waste of time than this, seeing as how the author of that one managed to get their own drafting thread locked and was issued several bans because they couldn't follow the rules? That one? Not exactly something I would run around bragging about.

Self commend shitilly written