SC Questions & Answers

[Divitalia]

Can a nation or region have a commendation repealed for a reason not related to the reason they were commended?

Also, can a region by simultaneously condemned and commended for different reasons?

[Jar Wattinree]

Can a nation or region have a commendation repealed for a reason not related to the reason they were commended?

Also, can a region by simultaneously condemned and commended for different reasons?

It is possible but I've not heard of such a thing happening before. There's no hard rule that says a Condemnation must be repealed for a Commendation.

[Lenlyvit]

Can a nation or region have a commendation repealed for a reason not related to the reason they were commended?

Also, can a region by simultaneously condemned and commended for different reasons?

1. Not sure, actually. You have to address the resolution you are repealing, while at the same time proving why they no longer deserve it.

2. That is 100% possible, but its never been done before.

[Wrapper]

Can a nation or region have a commendation repealed for a reason not related to the reason they were commended?

Not really. According to Rule 2(d), "Repeals should address the contents of the resolution they're repealing, and not by just stating the reverse of the arguments given in the resolution." That said, you can add a lot of other clauses that aren't related to the reason they were commended (or condemned), to bolster your argument.

Also, can a region by simultaneously condemned and commended for different reasons?

Yes, absolutely, and so can a nation.

[PatrickStar]

Would referencing the "Guide to the SC" topic be appropriate in a proposal?

[Wrapper]

I can't imagine a scenario where it would be legal to do so.

[PatrickStar]

That's what I thought. Thank you Wrapper.

[Blood Wine]

Would the term "puppetmasters" run afoul of rule 4b?

Enraged that Lazarus, a region of great importance, has allowed itself to be subverted and to be converted into a recruitment base by the evil, condemned puppetmasters from Lone Wolves United

[Wrapper]

No, it's been ruled fine.

[Divitalia]

If a proposal does not reach quorum, can it be resubmitted without any changes, or are changes a requirement for resubmission?

[Lenlyvit]

If a proposal does not reach quorum, can it be resubmitted without any changes, or are changes a requirement for resubmission?

You can resubmit without changes.

[Divitalia]

If a proposal does not reach quorum, can it be resubmitted without any changes, or are changes a requirement for resubmission?

You can resubmit without changes.

Thanks.

[Lenlyvit]

So, due to a conversation in another thread I need to ask this question. Can GCRs be liberated by the SC, or are they exempt due to passwords not being able to be placed upon them?

[United Massachusetts]

They can, at least game-code wise (I proposed Liberate TEP--check the WA happenings)

So, that's cool.

[Lord Dominator]

So, due to a conversation in another thread I need to ask this question. Can GCRs be liberated by the SC, or are they exempt due to passwords not being able to be placed upon them?

I just looked at the compedium of mod rulings and one of the things in the edit list says they are, but it didn't look like anywhere else in said thread mentions it. So I have no actual idea

[Wrapper]

So, due to a conversation in another thread I need to ask this question. Can GCRs be liberated by the SC, or are they exempt due to passwords not being able to be placed upon them?

Yes, it's legal (relevant ruling), though such a liberation would only be symbolic, as it will have no effect gameside.

[Lord Dominator]

So, due to a conversation in another thread I need to ask this question. Can GCRs be liberated by the SC, or are they exempt due to passwords not being able to be placed upon them?

Yes, it's legal (relevant ruling), though such a liberation would only be symbolic, as it will have no effect gameside.

Thanks Wrapper!

[Lenlyvit]

So, due to a conversation in another thread I need to ask this question. Can GCRs be liberated by the SC, or are they exempt due to passwords not being able to be placed upon them?

Yes, it's legal (relevant ruling), though such a liberation would only be symbolic, as it will have no effect gameside.

Thanks Wrapper!

[Consular]

Is it legal to submit joke proposals now? I wasn't gone THAT long

[Lenlyvit]

Is it legal to submit joke proposals now? I wasn't gone THAT long

I also would like an answer to this. Souls admitted in his thread that it was a joke proposal, yet its marked as legal and going to vote sooner or later.

[Fratt]

Is it legal to submit joke proposals now? I wasn't gone THAT long

If you're talking about Liberate TEP, that was (partly) my objection too, but since it was ruled legal by three mods I guess it's fine somehow.

The definition of what counts as a "joke proposal" is also unclear (as in, never clarified): "Commend You" was considered legal in the past.

On Condemn Souls, that's not a joke proposal, imo. The only "joke" part, really, is the fact that it's a self-condemnation. However self-C&Cs are explicitly considered legal.

[Ransium]

Give me a break, you don’t want us to take a hard line on joke proposals, besides [violet] has always maintained the voters are the main assessment of quality. Most proposal have an element of humor in them, was Condemn Wrapper a joke proposal? The second I start removing proposals that have a serious chance of passing because they are “joke proposals” 50 aggrieved parties will be breathing down my neck for being biased and overly eager to interfere with the WA.

[Flanderlion]

Give me a break, you don’t want us to take a hard line on joke proposals, besides [violet] has always maintained the voters are the main assessment of quality. Most proposal have an element of humor in them, was Condemn Wrapper a joke proposal? The second I start removing proposals that have a serious chance of passing because they are “joke proposals” 50 aggrieved parties will be breathing down my neck for being biased and overly eager to interfere with the WA.

I think either ditch the rule or enforce it. Having joke proposals where the author literally said it was a joke proposal to make fun of the SC is something I'd put on the wrong side of the line. Condemn Wrapper on the other hand I'd put as alright as it was just recognising a deserving player in an amusing way, so its always a judgement call it the rule is kept.

[Ransium]

In the past, it's been used to throw out things like "Condemn Your Mom", and that's a power I'd rather not get rid of.

[Frisbeeteria]

In the past, it's been used to throw out things like "Condemn Your Mom", and that's a power I'd rather not get rid of.

Ransium is not alone in this judgement. I don't want the rule tossed either.

Having joke proposals where the author literally said it was a joke proposal to make fun of the SC

I haven't seen that post. Was it on the forums prior to the proposal being ruled legal? Because apart from the one line about the overuse of pink, I think it reads as a serious proposal. Pretty much every SC proposals pokes somebody with a sharp stick through the bars of their cage. I'm not seeing anything significantly different in "Liberate The East Pacific".