[PASSED] Repeal "Condemn The Black Riders"

by **Cormac A Stark** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:11 am

Repeal "Condemn The Black Riders"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.

Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#91 | Proposed by: Cormac A Stark

Description: WA Security Council Resolution #91: Condemn The Black Riders shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council:

Recognizing that SC#91: Condemn The Black Riders does not meet the standard of high quality that the Security Council has come to expect from such resolutions;

Noting that The Black Riders cravenly target all regions that are least capable of defending themselves and provide easy though fleeting victories which require little military skill, and not just those that "contradict or challenge their ideology or power," contrary to the claims of SC#91;

Observing that The Black Riders are completely powerless to destroy a regional community even despite the destruction of regional territory and recorded history, negating the fear of "cultural genocide" cited by SC#91;

Repudiating the assertion by SC#91 that the regions and nations of the world should be "fearful" of The Black Riders, instead challenging regions and nations to pursue the restoration of interregional peace and goodwill when such is threatened by The Black Riders;

Recalling that The Black Riders have been more comprehensively condemned by a subsequent resolution, SC#127: Condemn The Black Riders;

Determining that permitting two condemnations of The Black Riders to remain in force grants The Black Riders greater recognition before the Security Council than they deserve and creates an unwarranted climate of fear, which may be interpreted by The Black Riders as a perverse reward for their destructive behavior:

Hereby Repeals SC#91: Condemn The Black Riders.

Another attempt at repealing SC#91. Your suggestions are welcome.

by **Chester Pearson** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 6:46 pm

You are more of fucking pest than DIp is, when it comes to this resolution. Can you please just let this shit die?

by **Western Borderlands** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 6:50 pm

This is a joke right? No? Fully Against this repeal no matter what.

by **Nephmir** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 6:57 pm

The Black Riders don't deserve to have two condemnations, especially the first one. One is sufficient. In other words, I support, and I think this should be seen through.

by **Tim-Opolis** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:12 pm

Western Borderlands wrote:This is a joke right? No? Fully Against this repeal no matter what.

They have two at the moment, and they treat them as badges of pride. Repealing this will hurt their ego more than anything else with. The Gameplay mentality towards most Condemn or Commend badges are that they are backpats that you should be proud of. This proposal makes sense to me, as it removes TBR's unnecessary badge and may perhaps remove some of the hot air they're filled with.

by **The New American commonwealth** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:14 pm

You know what? Why don't we use reverse pyschology against them and Commend them.

by **Darwinish Brentsylvania** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:16 pm

I'd support it.

by **Elke and Elba** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:16 pm

I support the repeal. However if anything, the wording of the repeal must be more scathing than the repeal itself to effect on the future players that their condemnation was removed as a retaliation.

by **Walk Like A Defender** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:44 pm

Against, if only because I don't support Cormac taking out his butthurt against TBR in a SC resolution.

All that yapping back and forth in their thread, and now you propose this? Its obvious you are just trying to escalate a frivolous beef, no one cares that they have two condemnations until you bring attention to it. Are you jealous or something?

by **Tim-Opolis** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:53 pm

Walk Like A Defender wrote:Against, if only because I don't support Cormac taking out his butthurt against TBR in a SC resolution.

All that yapping back and forth in their thread, and now you propose this? Its obvious you are just trying to escalate a frivolous beef, no one cares that they have two condemnations until you bring attention to it. Are you jealous or something?

Using puppets is cool and shows how adept in NS you are *nods encouragingly*

Actually a fair bit of people care that they have two condemnations. I've been juggling the thought of passing a repeal of one of them for a while, for example. Furthermore, the intent was to insta-repeal the first one the second the second one passed. However, other things got in the way and now they're ended up with two.

by **Walk Like A Defender** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:55 pm

Tim-Opolis wrote:
Walk Like A Defender wrote:Against, if only because I don't support Cormac taking out his butthurt against TBR in a SC resolution.

All that yapping back and forth in their thread, and now you propose this? Its obvious you are just trying to escalate a frivolous beef, no one cares that they have two condemnations until you bring attention to it. Are you jealous or something?

Using puppets is cool and shows how adept in NS you are *nods encouragingly*

Actually a fair bit of people care that they have two condemnations. I've been juggling the thought of passing a repeal of one of them for a while, for example. Furthermore, the intent was to insta-repeal the first one the second the second one passed. However, other things got in the way and now they're ended up with two.

dur dur dur, everyone knows the story of how they got two condemnations. Thanks for the pointless rehash, buster.

The point is this proposal could as well be titled, "Validate My Butthurt Against The Black Riders" - because Stark is proposing this now after going full on crybaby in their thread about how they don't respect him and Osiris enough, boo hoo hoo.

by **Cormac A Stark** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:09 pm

Walk Like A Defender wrote:Against, if only because I don't support Cormac taking out his butthurt against TBR in a SC resolution.

All that yapping back and forth in their thread, and now you propose this? Its obvious you are just trying to escalate a frivolous beef, no one cares that they have two condemnations until you bring attention to it. Are you jealous or something?

I've supported repeal of SC#91 on and off for months. Do a little research and try posting under your main or an actually identifiable puppet, coward.

I'm open to substantive suggestions for revising the resolution, but "this sucks," "opposed," or arguments against will be completely ignored. I'm submitting this in some form within the next week, probably less, though there is likely to at least be a second draft.

by **Walk Like A Defender** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:16 pm

Oooooooh the c-word.

Butthurt Cormac is butthurt.

by **The Serbian Empire** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:17 pm

Tim-Opolis wrote:
Western Borderlands wrote:This is a joke right? No? Fully Against this repeal no matter what.

They have two at the moment, and they treat them as badges of pride. Repealing this will hurt their ego more than anything else with. The Gameplay mentality towards most Condemn or Commend badges are that they are backpats that you should be proud of. This proposal makes sense to me, as it removes TBR's unnecessary badge and may perhaps remove some of the hot air they're filled with.

Maybe that's a good reason to repeal both of them as to give them a dose of humility.

by **Tim-Opolis** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:20 pm

The Serbian Empire wrote:
Tim-Opolis wrote:
They have two at the moment, and they treat them as badges of pride. Repealing this will hurt their ego more than anything else with. The Gameplay mentality towards most Condemn or Commend badges are that they are backpats that you should be proud of. This proposal makes sense to me, as it removes TBR's unnecessary badge and may perhaps remove some of the hot air they're filled with.

Maybe that's a good reason to repeal both of them as to give them a dose of humility.

Trust me, mate, I am all for that. I've got no love for TBR. I do figure Cormac should get this one killed off first, as it's the more inaccurate one, before he starts in on the more recent one that he authored.

by **Cormac A Stark** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:25 pm

I'm not repealing the condemnation I authored, as it's an accurate condemnation that appropriately addresses The Black Riders' history. They deserve a condemnation. They don't deserve two, and SC#91 is terribly written and shouldn't still be on the books of the Security Council.

My entire goal with SC#127 was to take a page from AMOM and replace SC#91 before trying to repeal it, as he had previously done with Condemn NAZI EUROPE. Unfortunately others' repeal attempts of SC#91 have failed, so I'm trying now. SC#127 was always intended to be a replacement for SC#91 though, and I'm not going to try to repeal it.

If someone else wants to try to repeal SC#127, be my guest, but I have no intention of repealing a resolution I authored. I have to draw the line on my waffling somewhere.

by **Sternberg** » Thu Jul 03, 2014 10:30 pm

Tim-Opolis wrote:
Western Borderlands wrote:This is a joke right? No? Fully Against this repeal no matter what.

They have two at the moment, and they treat them as badges of pride. Repealing this will hurt their ego more than anything else with. The Gameplay mentality towards most Condemn or Commend badges are that they are backpats that you should be proud of. This proposal makes sense to me, as it removes TBR's unnecessary badge and may perhaps remove some of the hot air they're filled with.

As much as I personally might not fully agree with removing prior condemnations from record, I will have to concede that both Cormac and Spiritus founder Opolis (*a wave from a former Spiritusan*) have raised good points. Besides, as the resolution has noted, later legislation has technically supplanted this.

I will support this - even if a minor part of me just wants to do it to violently spit in TBK's collective eye.

by **Feuer Ritter** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 2:01 am

Nephmir wrote:The Black Riders don't deserve to have two condemnations, especially the first one. One is sufficient. In other words, I support, and I think this should be seen through.

You two are working together lately eh

by **Cormac A Stark** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:01 am

Feuer Ritter wrote:
Nephmir wrote:The Black Riders don't deserve to have two condemnations, especially the first one. One is sufficient. In other words, I support, and I think this should be seen through.

You two are working together lately eh

That's a pretty big stretch. Didn't Gest say I'm supposed to be the paranoid one? :lol:

by **Feuer Ritter** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:36 am

Cormac A Stark wrote:
Feuer Ritter wrote:
You two are working together lately eh

That's a pretty big stretch. Didn't Gest say I'm supposed to be the paranoid one?

You being a member in TEK forum and Nephmir being one in Osiris is enough, Osiris having an embassy with an enemy of Raider Unity, a region that attacks fellow raiders.

by **Nierr** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:38 am

Feuer Ritter wrote:
Cormac A Stark wrote:That's a pretty big stretch. Didn't Gest say I'm supposed to be the paranoid one?

You being a member in TEK forum and Nephmir being one in Osiris is enough, Osiris having an embassy with an enemy of Raider Unity, a region that attacks fellow raiders.

Which is something The Black Riders have never nope.

Nope. Never.

C'mon Feuer, don't make me post in defence of Cormac :/

by **Feuer Ritter** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:41 am

Nierr wrote:
Feuer Ritter wrote:
You being a member in TEK forum and Nephmir being one in Osiris is enough, Osiris having an embassy with an enemy of Raider Unity, a region that attacks fellow raiders.

Which is something The Black Riders have never nope.

Nope. Never.

C'mon Feuer, don't make me post in defence of Cormac :/

Is a difference between doing something with intention and doing it by mistake.
Cormac dealing with the likes of Nephmir shows us his true nature, and then he wants respect.

by **The Serbian Empire** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:56 am

Cormac A Stark wrote:I'm not repealing the condemnation I authored, as it's an accurate condemnation that appropriately addresses The Black Riders' history. They deserve a condemnation. They don't deserve two, and SC#91 is terribly written and shouldn't still be on the books of the Security Council.

My entire goal with SC#127 was to take a page from AMOM and replace SC#91 before trying to repeal it, as he had previously done with Condemn NAZI EUROPE. Unfortunately others' repeal attempts of SC#91 have failed, so I'm trying now. SC#127 was always intended to be a replacement for SC#91 though, and I'm not going to try to repeal it.

If someone else wants to try to repeal SC#127, be my guest, but I have no intention of repealing a resolution I authored. I have to draw the line on my waffling somewhere.

Understood, SC#91 was in fact poorly written to the point I could have written something of similar quality. That is not a good thing as I am not exactly known for being competent.

by **Wetwork XIII** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 5:39 am

I can see the duplication as the first res cites certain ops but is a general condemnation of overall activity, and the second is simply a more comprehensive version of the same.
That said, it find it rather disingenuous not to acknowledge recent happenings as at the very least, partial motivation for bringing this forward now.

I think if this goes to the floor and passes, it would be great motivation for us to strive for something truly breathtaking in scope. I for one would welcome such a challenge from the SC, and would thank them in advance for providing something of this calibre to motivate our troops.

by **Nephmir** » Fri Jul 04, 2014 5:56 am

Feuer Ritter wrote:You being a member in TEK forum and Nephmir being one in Osiris is enough

And how are you enjoying our forums so far, Feuer? Is everything to your liking? I trust you've already transitioned to the new one, correct?

I actually already tried to create a proposal to repeal SC#91, but sadly I am not yet an experienced WA author, so when I see someone threatening to take your precious medal away, I support them. That's all I can do, and I admit that. (I have already begun attempting to draft my first honest proposal, however; but it's not a repeal for SC#91).

[PASSED] Repeal "Condemn The Black Riders"

[PASSED] Repeal "Condemn The Black Riders"

Who is online