by Railana » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:51 pm
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:57 pm
by Bhang Bhang Duc » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:00 pm
Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.
RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.
Sedgistan wrote:The SC has just has a spate of really shitty ones recently from Northumbria, his Watermelon fanboy…..
by Railana » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:07 pm
Mallorea and Riva wrote:You want to condemn him already? Jesus let him get a few thousand ejections under his belt first.
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:You're referencing and linking to the electronic forums? That would make it illegal under R4.
by Bhang Bhang Duc » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:11 pm
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:You're referencing and linking to the electronic forums? That would make it illegal under R4.
Railana wrote:I know that I'm not allowed to link to the forums, which I plan to remove the links before the proposal is submitted, as I noted at the top of the OP.
Am I not allowed to even mention the offsite forums, though? I thought it was legal unless I "plainly refer[ed] to the electronic entity."
Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.
RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.
Sedgistan wrote:The SC has just has a spate of really shitty ones recently from Northumbria, his Watermelon fanboy…..
by Railana » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:17 pm
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:You're referencing and linking to the electronic forums? That would make it illegal under R4.Railana wrote:I know that I'm not allowed to link to the forums, which I plan to remove the links before the proposal is submitted, as I noted at the top of the OP.
Am I not allowed to even mention the offsite forums, though? I thought it was legal unless I "plainly refer[ed] to the electronic entity."
I read this;
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... 24&t=52242
Your mentions of the forums seems to be outside of NS as described in the link.
If you express it in such terms – destruction of @@REGION@@’s community, shock and distress to the members of @@REGION@@ (which can be read in the sense “member nations”), loss of its history, invasion or destruction of, or attack on, its forums – you’ll be sweet with Rule 4.
by Imperium Anglorum » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:23 pm
Railana wrote:Doesn't Ardchoille say that it's okay to talk about offsite forums in the sense of "the forums of our nation"?If you express it in such terms – destruction of @@REGION@@’s community, shock and distress to the members of @@REGION@@ (which can be read in the sense “member nations”), loss of its history, invasion or destruction of, or attack on, its forums – you’ll be sweet with Rule 4.
by Railana » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:26 pm
by SouthMac » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:26 pm
by Railana » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:39 pm
SouthMac wrote:I'm not sure about the forum references -- I think they're fine, given that Allied States of EuroIslanders and Unknown have both been condemned in the past for forum destruction -- but you definitely have R4 violations. Your uses of "his" violate R4; you're talking about nations, in the SC, not players. The pronouns need to refer to nations rather than players.
SouthMac wrote:The technical problems aside, I oppose this condemnation. Not every step taken in a Feeder or Sinker that is inconsistent with its laws is worthy of condemnation, as the dissolution of the Kemetic Republic of Osiris and the later establishment of the Osiris Fraternal Order demonstrated. Why condemn Hileville before seeing what results this produces? If the results are positive, he shouldn't be condemned. This is premature, at best.
by Icecream Princess » Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:59 pm
by Lord Ravenclaw » Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:48 pm
by Railana » Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:50 pm
Lord Ravenclaw wrote:Waaaaaaait, I'm sorry are you talking about using proper procedures or be condemned for it? A little rich coming from you isn't it? I'd hardly say your judgement is perfect, nor are you spotless in this area.
by Railana » Mon Feb 01, 2016 3:00 pm
Ridersyl wrote:They do mean that you're not exactly the best author to be writing a condemnation for him, though. That's what I think Lord Ravenclaw was getting at.
by Unibot III » Mon Feb 01, 2016 3:44 pm
Observing that on 22 January 2016, Hileville and their cabinet created a new regional forum and issued a declaration stating that this forum was the new "official" regional forum of the South Pacific; Hileville also installed himself and two other Cabinet ministers as the forum's administrators,
Recalling that on 27 January 2016, in a ruling (HCLQ1602) issued by Farengeto, the South Pacific's High Court declared that this forum move was unconstitutional and illegal,
Bearing in mind that the Charter states that the South Pacific's Assembly "reserves the sole right to authorize the creation of a new Regional Forum" and that Hileville and their cabinet received no such authorization from the legislature for this forum move,
Noting that on 31 January 2016, in response to this constitutional challenge, Hileville and their cabinet claimed that they had unilaterally dissolved the Charter, establishing a new "transitional government" of the South Pacific; moreover, Hileville banned dissenting members, Sandaoguo and Kringalia, as well as the Court Justice which had ruled against Hileville, from the region indefinitely,
Further noting that the Charter states that the power to amend the constitution rests with the Assembly of the South Pacific, not the delegate or their cabinet,
Appalled by the illegal, undemocratic, and completely unjustifiable actions of Hileville and their cabinet,
Finding the executive's behaviour constitutes both a coup d’état and grave threat to good governance and democratic rule in the South Pacific; the above actions are illegal, usurp the powers and remit of the region's legislative powers and are otherwise, utterly unjustifiable in a democratic society,
Acknowledging that the Committee of State Security (CSS) charged with the internal security of the region has declared a State of Emergency in the South Pacific, calling the executive's actions "[...] a serious breach of constitutional order and tantamount to a coup d’état" and vowing to "[...] work tirelessly towards a restoration of the Coalition under legitimate and democratic leadership,"
Calling for their timely and orderly removal from power by loyal residents of the South Pacific and their allies, as well as for the restoration of the Coalition, the South Pacific's legitimate government,
The Security Council,
Hereby condemns Hileville.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by RiderSyl » Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:50 pm
Unibot III wrote:Here's some suggested reworkings of the text to make it flow better; I've condensed it a bit and added a clause about the CSS.
I agree with Raven though, Auralia, that you would be strongly better off pursuing this one with someone else as author. My suggestion would be to find a local in TSP who is less of a Gameplayer but someone who is widely respected as a TSP native. You could remain as a co-author perhaps. You're a fine author but in disputes over the legitimacy of regimes, it's best that the person speaking the resolution is someone with a lot of legitimacy. It'll also remove the crappy "he just wants a badge" argument.
by Consular » Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:22 pm
by Railana » Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:57 pm
by Unibot III » Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:24 pm
Railana wrote:I've integrated some of Unibot's suggestions and have started asking some other TSP natives if they're interested in being co-authors.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by Belschaft » Tue Feb 02, 2016 6:02 pm
by Aigyptos » Tue Feb 02, 2016 6:07 pm
Belschaft wrote:Hi guys;
I don't think this draft really represents the situation fairly; there were decent reasons for the forum move, and it enjoyed fairly large support both inside TSP and abroad. I'm willing to go over the whole thing with you later if you want to proceed with this, but I'd ask that this be delayed for now. TSP is calmed down right now, and I really don't want anything to inflame the situation again.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement