[DRAFT] Repeal "Commend Glen-Rhodes"

[Frenchy II]

Hi Security Council! I've been working on this resolution for a bit, and I finally felt like, after some edits and deep forum dives in Technical and the GA, it was time to post on the SC Forums! The repeal focuses on the inability of Glen-Rhodes' work to stand the test of time, and while I know putting modern standards on old work is a difficult task, I would also highlight that the Commendation of Glen-Rhodes was rather rushed, and I'm trying to figure out how to best convey that through the latter half of the resolution.

I know the resolution is a bit short, and I am a rather new author, so all criticism is appreciated and will be heard! Thank you!

The Security Council,

Disputing the claim of SC#78 that Glen-Rhodes is “...one of the most prolific resolution authors of all time;”

Noting that SC#70 contains six resolutions authored by Glen-Rhodes, four of which at this time have since been repealed, including:

• GA#61, WA Copyright Charter, which in its repeal, GA#185, is noted to force a system of guilt until proven innocence;
• GA#70, International Competition Laws, which was described as ineffective against anti-competition practices and that the General Assembly would be better off without in GA#252;
• GR#112, Convention on Execution, which reserved the right for member nations to exercise capital punishment, which has since been outlawed by GA#535 and GA#545;
• GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

Disappointed that while these resolutions may have been written and passed in good faith, their ability to withstand the diversifying needs of the international community was not commendable, and thus they no longer stand as beacons of the legislative prowess of Glen-Rhodes;

Asserting that the government of Glen-Rhodes has left member nations unable to efficiently recall votes, by abandoning it’s archive, “Vote Tracker,” which was supposedly created to allow nations to keep track of their voting history in a timely manner as mentioned by SC#70;

Recalling that the aforementioned archive was largely unfunctional from the day it became available to the international community, and was and abandoned by the government of Glen-Rhodes in a swift manner following its initial public opening in 2011;

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Convinced that failed resolution authoring, abandoning of recordkeeping without a failsafe, and tenacity, make Glen-Rhodes no longer an impressive figure in the international community;

Hereby Repeals SC#70, “Commend Glen-Rhodes.”

[Hulldom]

I don't particularly love the last line, but I think you make the argument well. I can't say I'll support it at vote, but nothing enough to arise my visceral opposition.

[Frenchy II]

I don't particularly love the last line, but I think you make the argument well. I can't say I'll support it at vote, but nothing enough to arise my visceral opposition.

Obviously I'm open to workshopping just about every line as need be! Thanks for the feedback!

[Hulldom]

I don't particularly love the last line, but I think you make the argument well. I can't say I'll support it at vote, but nothing enough to arise my visceral opposition.

Obviously I'm open to workshopping just about every line as need be! Thanks for the feedback!

It just comes off a bit mean to me. I think it could be rephrased and work just fine.

[WayNeacTia]

Full, unconditional, shoe banging support!

[Tinhampton]

Support - at least in principle. BUT...

Disputing the claim of SC#78 that Glen-Rhodes is “...one of the most prolific resolution authors of all time;”

Sciongrad and Unibot wrote SC#70 (NOT SC#78; that's typo the first) ten years ago, when writing six GA resolutions was a much more impressive achievement - actually seven because they didn't mention Repeal "On Humanitarian Aid". This latter figure was, as far as I know, matched at the time only by Sionis Prioratus (nine), Unibot/Stash Kroh (eight), and Charlotte Ryberg (eight).

GR#112

Typo the second.

GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

seems legit

it’s

Typo the third.

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Why?

[Outer Sparta]

How would you convince others of trying to repeal an older resolution that pertains to the GA over a decade ago? Obviously you make a good point about the number of resolutions they authored that are no longer on the books today, but maybe take into perspective what made them commendable at the time.

Disputing the claim of SC#78 that Glen-Rhodes is “...one of the most prolific resolution authors of all time;”

There's a typo. It's SC#70, not 78. Tinhampton already mentioned that.

Asserting that the government of Glen-Rhodes has left member nations unable to efficiently recall votes, by abandoning it’s archive, “Vote Tracker,” which was supposedly created to allow nations to keep track of their voting history in a timely manner as mentioned by SC#70;

When did they abandon the Vote Tracker? I don't recall ever seeing that in my time here, but I've only been here on the site since 2014.

Convinced that failed resolution authoring, abandoning of recordkeeping without a failsafe, and tenacity, make Glen-Rhodes no longer an impressive figure in the international community;

I wouldn't necessarily say that it's failed resolution authoring if prior resolutions were repealed a while later, either the standards have changed or it took a while to find a glaring loophole or flaw in the original resolution.

[Barfleur]

I do not see the need for this proposal--just because the mentioned resolutions were repealed at a later time does not mean they were not useful or beneficial when passed (not to mention, as Tinhampton pointed out, the amount of resolutions passed to merit "most prolific" status was much lower then than it is now, and it seems somewhat unfair to hold GR to such a different standard now).

[Frenchy II]

Sciongrad and Unibot wrote SC#70 (NOT SC#78; that's typo the first) ten years ago, when writing six GA resolutions was a much more impressive achievement - actually seven because they didn't mention Repeal "On Humanitarian Aid". This latter figure was, as far as I know, matched at the time only by Sionis Prioratus (nine), Unibot/Stash Kroh (eight), and Charlotte Ryberg (eight).

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Why?

Ugh, I'll get those typos. I really though I got that first one too and I missed it, oops. As for the resolution count, it's rather insignificant but more significant that they've been repealed. In reference to the last resolution listed, that could use some better thought and reasoning, it'll get fixed for the next draft.

As to why for the last one, I felt it was important to handle all clauses of SC#70. That may just be my inexperience showing! Overall- thank you, and It'll get worked on!

[Warzone Codger]

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

This is factually incorrect.

The appeal of 'RealVotes' was that it tracks how WA votes would have gone if Delegates have no extra votes. The game now shows total votes and votes of individual nations, but it still doesn't show what the vote count would be if Delegates only have 1 vote.

The issue is that it wasn't maintained, otherwise it could have been useful during those 'WA Elite' debates.

[Frenchy II]

How would you convince others of trying to repeal an older resolution that pertains to the GA over a decade ago? Obviously you make a good point about the number of resolutions they authored that are no longer on the books today, but maybe take into perspective what made them commendable at the time.

When did they abandon the Vote Tracker? I don't recall ever seeing that in my time here, but I've only been here on the site since 2014.

Just going to address these since I think I've hit the other comments in other responses. First of all, thank you!

1. I think the following clause about good faith authorship is a decent start at taking that into account as far addressing what those resolutions meant at the time. Of course there's going to be better ways to articulate that.

2. From my forum digging, it was abandoned rather quickly after some issues. It seemed rather inconsistent in its functionality.

[Honeydewistania]

GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

Unsatisfactory how?

[Apatosaurus]

Oh, please. Just, seriously. Seriously? This is fairly obvious an attempt by a raider-sympathising individual to repeal the Commendation of a prominent defender-aligned individual. It would be very different if this was a repealace effort, but given that this is written by an anti GA-er who hates Glen, combined with the timing of this, it is fairly obvious this is a blatantly bad faith and political attempt with ulterior motives. Really, you might as well add a clause here saying "Recognising that Frenchy II hates the nominee due to political differences,".

As to the actual proposal:

Noting that SC#70 contains six resolutions authored by Glen-Rhodes, four of which at this time have since been repealed, including:

• GA#61, WA Copyright Charter, which in its repeal, GA#185, is noted to force a system of guilt until proven innocence;
• GA#70, International Competition Laws, which was described as ineffective against anti-competition practices and that the General Assembly would be better off without in GA#252;
• GR#112, Convention on Execution, which reserved the right for member nations to exercise capital punishment, which has since been outlawed by GA#535 and GA#545;
• GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

It's been ten years since Commend Glen passed. Of course some would have been repealed.

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

Again, we're talking ten years. Things may or may not have changed, doesn't mean it wasn't commendable when it happened.

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Source?

Convinced that failed resolution authoring, abandoning of recordkeeping without a failsafe, and tenacity, make Glen-Rhodes no longer an impressive figure in the international community;

"Glen-Rhodes [is] no longer an impressive figure in the international community" LMFAO Glen is literally one of the biggest TSP'ers at the moment, and was literally Prime Minister earlier this year. Today I learned that being one of the biggest and most prominent long-time individuals in a feeder does not make you an "impressive figure in the international community". Also, the passage of time does not make it less commendable.

[Praeceps]

Linking to a channel I don't have access to isn't very helpful...

Also, I don't think I should have to say this but the SC is often used for politics.

[RiderSyl]

Pointing it out doesn't make it less egregious, Praeceps.

[WayNeacTia]

Linking to a channel I don't have access to isn't very helpful...

Also, I don't think I should have to say this but the SC is often used for politics.

When one is trying to cope with the truth being told, one tends to make mistakes…..

Oh, please. Just, seriously. Seriously? This is fairly obvious an attempt by a raider-sympathising individual to repeal the Commendation of a prominent defender-aligned individual.

Prominent defender aligned individual? I assume you have a list of Glenn’s latest R/D achievements that aren’t a decade or so old, for us to peruse?

[South Doge Land]

Oh, please. Just, seriously. Seriously? This is fairly obvious an attempt by a raider-sympathising individual to repeal the Commendation of a prominent defender-aligned individual. It would be very different if this was a repealace effort, but given that this is written by an anti[url] [url=https://discord.com/channels/536237817517441044/536239133631447041/908943804575412235]GA-er who hates Glen, combined with the timing of this, it is fairly obvious this is a blatantly bad faith and political attempt with ulterior motives. Really, you might as well add a clause here saying "Recognising that Frenchy II hates the nominee due to political differences,".

Politics is the point of the SC, Saurus. Also, Glen doesn't strike me as defender-aligned...

And then your 4 NSGP links isn't convincing anyone either.

Noting that SC#70 contains six resolutions authored by Glen-Rhodes, four of which at this time have since been repealed, including:

• GA#61, WA Copyright Charter, which in its repeal, GA#185, is noted to force a system of guilt until proven innocence;
• GA#70, International Competition Laws, which was described as ineffective against anti-competition practices and that the General Assembly would be better off without in GA#252;
• GR#112, Convention on Execution, which reserved the right for member nations to exercise capital punishment, which has since been outlawed by GA#535 and GA#545;
• GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

It's been ten years since Commend Glen passed. Of course some would have been repealed.

If a majority of your resolutions can't stand the test of time, then maybe it's not worth commending.

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

Again, we're talking ten years. Things may or may not have changed, doesn't mean it wasn't commendable when it happened.

Okay, yeah, this might be fair... but I mean... the resolution still has a valid point.

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Source?

You don't need a source. Read the line a couple times through; it's questioning the relevance of a point in the original resolution. If you want a source, go ask the original proposal.

Convinced that failed resolution authoring, abandoning of recordkeeping without a failsafe, and tenacity, make Glen-Rhodes no longer an impressive figure in the international community;

"Glen-Rhodes [is] no longer an impressive figure in the international community" LMFAO Glen is literally one of the biggest TSP'ers at the moment, and was literally Prime Minister earlier this year. Today I learned that being one of the biggest and most prominent long-time individuals in a feeder does not make you an "impressive figure in the international community". Also, the passage of time does not make it less commendable.

Glen's administration was... well... okay at best. A couple ministries did fine but most struggled from what I can remember.

---

Okay now feedback time

This seems like a solid resolution and I might vote for when it goes to vote. In the list of resolutions, it says "GR#112" which I assume is supposed to say "GA#112".

[Honeydewistania]

Apatosaurus' post swayed me. Full support.

[Guess and Check]

Can't say I support this, primarily because I disagree with someone's work having to stand the test of time to remain commendable in most cases. However, I think this is pretty well written.

Feedback:

Disputing the claim of SC#78 that Glen-Rhodes is “...one of the most prolific resolution authors of all time;”

Think this should be SC#70 as well

GA#61, WA Copyright Charter, which in its repeal, GA#185, is noted to force a system of guilt until proven innocence in its repeal, GA#185,;

I think this helps this clause match the structure of the others in the list

their ability to withstand the diversifying needs of the international community was not commendable

This doesn't necessarily make sense as I can't find a similar line in the original resolution (but I may just be blind). I'd rephrase this to say more explicitly how the resolutions didn't meet the needs of the community without saying it "wasn't commendable".

Recalling that the aforementioned archive was largely unfunctional from the day it became available to the international community, and was and abandoned by the government of Glen-Rhodes in a swift manner following its initial public opening in 2011;

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

If Codger is right, this probably needs some changing of the latter part of the clause

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to as claimed by SC#70;

makes more sense

[Barfleur]

Of course politics is a major influence in the SC, but that doesn't mean personal grudges and dislikes need to be elevated to the level of international law, much less as relates to stripping the recognition of a major player in the game. Though if this repeal is passed, perhaps a replacement could include GR's role as one of the first six members of the GA Secretariat, which I think merits accolade.

[WayNeacTia]

Of course politics is a major influence in the SC, but that doesn't mean personal grudges and dislikes need to be elevated to the level of international law, much less as relates to stripping the recognition of a major player in the game. Though if this repeal is passed, perhaps a replacement could include GR's role as one of the first six members of the GA Secretariat, which I think merits accolade.

It's already been done many time before this. This is nothing new.

[Barfleur]

Of course politics is a major influence in the SC, but that doesn't mean personal grudges and dislikes need to be elevated to the level of international law, much less as relates to stripping the recognition of a major player in the game. Though if this repeal is passed, perhaps a replacement could include GR's role as one of the first six members of the GA Secretariat, which I think merits accolade.

It's already been done many time before this. This is nothing new.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean that is a good thing, and this proposal seems a particularly egregious example.

[Great Algerstonia]

Oh, please. Just, seriously. Seriously? This is fairly obvious an attempt by a raider-sympathising individual to repeal the Commendation of a prominent defender-aligned individual. It would be very different if this was a repealace effort, but given that this is written by an anti GA-er who hates Glen, combined with the timing of this, it is fairly obvious this is a blatantly bad faith and political attempt with ulterior motives. Really, you might as well add a clause here saying "Recognising that Frenchy II hates the nominee due to political differences,".

As to the actual proposal:

Noting that SC#70 contains six resolutions authored by Glen-Rhodes, four of which at this time have since been repealed, including:

• GA#61, WA Copyright Charter, which in its repeal, GA#185, is noted to force a system of guilt until proven innocence;
• GA#70, International Competition Laws, which was described as ineffective against anti-competition practices and that the General Assembly would be better off without in GA#252;
• GR#112, Convention on Execution, which reserved the right for member nations to exercise capital punishment, which has since been outlawed by GA#535 and GA#545;
• GA#130, Elections and Assistance Act, which was deemed “unsatisfactory” in its repeal, GA#575;

It's been ten years since Commend Glen passed. Of course some would have been repealed.

Cognizant of the cessation of availability of “RealVotes,” a tool described in SC#70, that makes votes of member nations and delegates public, which is no longer necessary as the votes of member states and delegates are available;

Again, we're talking ten years. Things may or may not have changed, doesn't mean it wasn't commendable when it happened.

Questioning the relevance of the tenacity of Glen-Rhodes and other nations controlled by their government in debates surrounding General Assembly Resolutions and the admirability of being a debater to SC#70;

Source?

Convinced that failed resolution authoring, abandoning of recordkeeping without a failsafe, and tenacity, make Glen-Rhodes no longer an impressive figure in the international community;

"Glen-Rhodes [is] no longer an impressive figure in the international community" LMFAO Glen is literally one of the biggest TSP'ers at the moment, and was literally Prime Minister earlier this year. Today I learned that being one of the biggest and most prominent long-time individuals in a feeder does not make you an "impressive figure in the international community". Also, the passage of time does not make it less commendable.

I like all of this. Support!

[WayNeacTia]

It's already been done many time before this. This is nothing new.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean that is a good thing, and this proposal seems a particularly egregious example.

Lol. No.... this, this and this are egregious examples. The first one based up some OOC allegations (which I am not privy to), which are so egregious that both Cormac and Quebec seem to be required to put disclaimers in posts, should that nominee even post in a thread, and in fact just eluding to the nominee in a declaration may actually be enough to sink it. The other two, were for the coup of Lazarus. So no this isn't particularly egregious.

Commendations are a popularity contest. Glenn obviously isn't popular enough any more, so a repeal was drafted.

[Praeceps]

Pointing it out doesn't make it less egregious, Praeceps.

If I was to oppose all politically motivated resolutions there wouldn't be much to support.

Besides, pointing out that the resolution is political is also political. (so is pointing out that the pointing out of the politics is political but let's not go down that rabbit hole...)