[DRAFT] Commend New South Hell

[Unibot]

The Security Council,

Recalling an unofficial survey concluded in April 2009 that suggested that the isolationist community in NationStates is outnumbered 6 to 1 by other communities that generally revel in international incidents or interregional conflicts,

Believing that a community, no matter how small or quiet can encompass many members who deeply contribute to their communities and abroad,

Seeking to acknowledge the achievements and contributions of nominees across the various communities of NationStates,

Acknowledging that behind New South Hell is a professor that is extremely dedicated to exploring the mysterious forces and political sciences that govern the NationStates universe,

Celebrating the tireless experimentation and contributions of this scholar, known by many as “Professor Hell” in his School of Ideological Studies where he has critically analyzed:
• Government types,
• Repetition of government issues,
• Ideological categories for nations,
• National qualities (Political Freedoms, Economy, Civil Rights),
• Economic Calculators,
• “National History” categories,

Noting that New South Hell, with its professor's scholarly knowledge and his boundless creativity was instrumental in the reform of nations' governments-- to provide new national descriptors for factbook entries, and to reduce the repetition of government issues,

Further noting the innumerable quantity of colonies that New South Hell has established over the years to experiment with the hidden and mysterious forces of NationStates,

Believing that any nominee as dedicated and contributive to their community as New South Hell is worth recognizing with a commendation from the World Assembly,

Hereby Commends New South Hell.

Rule IV?

[Naivetry]

Recalling an unofficial survey concluded in April 2009 that suggested that the isolationist community in NationStates is outnumbered 6 to 1 by other communities that generally revel in international incidents or intraregional conflicts,

Inter-, not intra-, if you mean to refer to raiders and defenders. (Latin. inter = between, intra = within.)

Believing that a community, no matter how small or quiet can encompass many members who deeply contribute to their communities and aboard,

*abroad (Also, 'contribute deeply' sounds odd to me.)

Noting that New South Hell, with its professor's scholarly knowledge and his boundless creativity was instrumental in the reform of nations' governments-- to provide new national descriptors for factbook entries, and to reduce the repetition of government issues,

Forgive me for the lack of familiarity with the topic, but is this professor and the quasi-RP reality of his existence within the nation of New South Hell an actual element NSH's self-portrayal, or is it something you're introducing just to be able to talk about multiple aspects of the nation at the same time? (And if the latter, why? The characteristics of his nation are not something you're discussing as if they were fit for Commendation, so why bring them up at all?)

[Unibot]

Noting that New South Hell, with its professor's scholarly knowledge and his boundless creativity was instrumental in the reform of nations' governments-- to provide new national descriptors for factbook entries, and to reduce the repetition of government issues,

Forgive me for the lack of familiarity with the topic, but is this professor and the quasi-RP reality of his existence within the nation of New South Hell an actual element NSH's self-portrayal, or is it something you're introducing just to be able to talk about multiple aspects of the nation at the same time? (And if the latter, why? The characteristics of his nation are not something you're discussing as if they were fit for Commendation, so why bring them up at all?)

Er, the latter. I'm going to remove the part about the nation, because it a reminder of a time when I was using it to protest Rule IV's prevention of commending good people/bad nations.

[Ballotonia]

Acknowledging that behind New South Hell is a professor that is extremely dedicated to exploring the mysterious forces and political sciences that govern the NationStates universe,

'behind' is referring to the player and seems to me to be running into Rule IV. How about "Acknowledging New South Hell is ruled by a professor who is ..."

where he has critically analyzed:
• Government types,
• Repetition of government issues,
• Ideological categories for nations,
• National qualities (Political Freedoms, Economy, Civil Rights),
• Economic Calculators,
• “National History” categories,

First mention he has done something, a bit late into the resolution... Are these analysis made public? Can you provide links in this thread? Only then can other nations investigate whether these analyses are worthy of commendation. If they're not public, they're not a contribution to NS.

Noting that New South Hell, with its professor's scholarly knowledge and his boundless creativity was instrumental in the reform of nations' governments-- to provide new national descriptors for factbook entries, and to reduce the repetition of government issues,

The reduction of repetition of government issues was achieved by the Great Admin in the Sky, not by any player. At most the player requested this to be done. Can you please clarify "new national descriptors"? I do not know what you are referring to with that (which immediately makes me think it must be some RP thing, but even then a link in this thread would be useful to back up the claim).

.. and that's all the actual contents of something commendation-worthy. The rest is descriptive of who this professor is and how he does things in NS. For instance, I use lots of puppets too, this is not worthy of commendation. So, overall, the resolution feels 'light', and thus IMHO not sufficient to grant a commendation.

Ballotonia

[Unibot]

It was a much better resolution before Rule IV, its now just about impossible to write without it being ridiculous and kind of a disgrace to the Prof, so I'm just dropping the whole project and flipping my middle finger in the direction of Rule IV.

You were asking, Ballo...
http://cityofulthar.wordpress.com/ns-school/

[Unibot]

NSH just reminded me about the nation, Kindly Professor Hell. I've got a question for SC mods... if this nation is an eponymous nation of one, is the use of personal pronouns an appropriate use for this nation which has a clear and official personification.

[A mean old man]

How has what Prof. Hell researched helped the world? Where has he recorded his data?

[Mousebumples]

NSH just reminded me about the nation, Kindly Professor Hell. I've got a question for SC mods... if this nation is an eponymous nation of one, is the use of personal pronouns an appropriate use for this nation which has a clear and official personification.

I'm pretty sure this was addressed in this thread - if not one of the other similar R4 threads.

If I recall correctly, even in cases such as Todd McCloud (which is a different nation of one, and was, I believe, an example given in the thread), referring to the nation as "he" was inappropriate and a violation of R4. I believe the (suggested, by no means only) way around that was to reiterate the nation's name throughout the proposal text.

I don't have the patience/energy/interest to find the exact post where that was stated, but I'm pretty sure this topic has already been covered - and your question has been answered in the negative.

[Unibot]

If I recall correctly, even in cases such as Todd McCloud (which is a different nation of one, and was, I believe, an example given in the thread), referring to the nation as "he" was inappropriate and a violation of R4. I believe the (suggested, by no means only) way around that was to reiterate the nation's name throughout the proposal text.

I don't have the patience/energy/interest to find the exact post where that was stated, but I'm pretty sure this topic has already been covered - and your question has been answered in the negative.

I recall a similar ruling, but I'm not sure if it was a ruling by a mod or not...

[Mousebumples]

If I recall correctly, even in cases such as Todd McCloud (which is a different nation of one, and was, I believe, an example given in the thread), referring to the nation as "he" was inappropriate and a violation of R4. I believe the (suggested, by no means only) way around that was to reiterate the nation's name throughout the proposal text.

I don't have the patience/energy/interest to find the exact post where that was stated, but I'm pretty sure this topic has already been covered - and your question has been answered in the negative.

I recall a similar ruling, but I'm not sure if it was a ruling by a mod or not...

I'm pretty sure it was Ard or Nerv, if not both. I remember asking a similar question - could pronouns be used to represent the LEADER of a given nation - and getting a modly answer of No.

I doubt that the mods would have answered my query in such a way but failed to refer to the Todd McCloud, etc., in such a ruling.

OOC: I've ... imbibed a bit tonight, and I can't say that I want to really go searching through the archives right now. However, if this question persists, I may give a search a shot tomorrow night after work ... ??

[Sedgistan]

NSH just reminded me about the nation, Kindly Professor Hell. I've got a question for SC mods... if this nation is an eponymous nation of one, is the use of personal pronouns an appropriate use for this nation which has a clear and official personification.

A one person nation is still a nation, and it's the nation which the World Assembly would be commending - therefore you can't use personal pronouns to refer to it.

[Unibot]

NSH just reminded me about the nation, Kindly Professor Hell. I've got a question for SC mods... if this nation is an eponymous nation of one, is the use of personal pronouns an appropriate use for this nation which has a clear and official personification.

A one person nation is still a nation, and it's the nation which the World Assembly would be commending - therefore you can't use personal pronouns to refer to it.

You seem to be confusing the nation of the Kindly Professor Hell with the state of Kindly Professor Hell. I wouldn't be able to refer to a state with a personal pronoun, but the nation is merely a populace of one, with one gender, one set of eyebrows and a specifically appropriate personal pronoun.

or as targeting a Nation or Region

Rule IV neither says targeting a State, nor a Nation-State. It says a nation -- and because the maker of the site was wise enough to make the name of his site, NationStates, I'd say the distinction between, a state, a nation and a nation-state is a distinction worth noting.

State: The accepted definition of a state was supplied by Max Weber in his book Politics as a Vocation: "A sovereign entity (rules itself), within a defined/specific territory (in defined borders), that holds a monopoly of the legitimate use of violence in the enforcement of its order. An empire does not have borders as it chooses to continually advance them. A state does not necessarily rule a people with a common culture, it is merely a political concept. Examples of a state: Iraq/Yemen/any state in the United Nations.

A nation is a body of people who share a real or imagined common history, culture, identity, religion, morality, language, traditions, ethnicity or ethnic origin; typically inhabit a particular country/territory/region. Examples of a nation: the Kurds, which reside in northern Iraq and parts of Turkey; the Basque, which inhabit parts of northern Spain and southern France; the Palestinians.

Nation-State: Countries where the social concept of "nation" coincides with the political concept of "state" are called nation-state. Examples of a nation-state: France, USA, Israel.

[Sedgistan]

I'm not sure why you're bringing states into this, since it's the nation you're saying you want to use a personal pronoun for:

I wouldn't be able to refer to a state with a personal pronoun, but the nation is merely a populace of one, with one gender, one set of eyebrows and a specifically appropriate personal pronoun.

It was ruled during the Rule 4 debates that personal pronouns cannot be used to refer to nations. Therefore, you can't use personal pronouns to refer to the nation Kindly Professor Hell.

[Metania]

Looking at past rulings... referencing individual people 'directly' is seemingly forbidden from being mentioned in SC resolutions, no matter how relevant they are to any commendation.

The only loophole I see is perhaps mentioning the RULER of the nation, which is something that can be defined inside the game. But I wouldn't be surprised if they forbade that, too.

[Sedgistan]

The only loophole I see is perhaps mentioning the RULER of the nation, which is something that can be defined inside the game. But I wouldn't be surprised if they forbade that, too.

Hey, have you been looking at our secret forums?

[Unibot]

I'm not sure why you're bringing states into this, since it's the nation you're saying you want to use a personal pronoun for:

I wouldn't be able to refer to a state with a personal pronoun, but the nation is merely a populace of one, with one gender, one set of eyebrows and a specifically appropriate personal pronoun.

It was ruled during the Rule 4 debates that personal pronouns cannot be used to refer to nations. Therefore, you can't use personal pronouns to refer to the nation Kindly Professor Hell.

But what I'm saying is that it makes it no sense for a nation of one to be referred to anything else but "he" or "she", when there is only one person with a clearly defined gender... the obligatory avoidance of personal pronouns is only necessary when infusing a state into the concept of a nation as a person. Which I am not, but I suspect that the secretariat is.

And yes, Metania, according to word of mouth, they are trying to avoid the mentioning of the nation's ruler by personal pronouns.

[Metania]

I've made more than enough rules for my own things to be able to see a trend. The powers that be dislike mentioning of individual people in SC resolutions, period.

Therefore it is mostly not allowed to make any resolution based on good nation/bad player or vice versa. This just isn't wanted; neither is anything to do with who's playing that nation, or anything else that breaks the kayfabe of 'That's a nation, not a person.' Contrary to past debates, this doesn't quite enforce RP over OOC; there is such a thing as NS OOC, which mostly refers to out-of-roleplay mode, when nations are just referring to the functions of NS involving other nations. But these are just nations, still, not people, for the purpose of SC resolutions.

The earlier chaos with rule 4 came from this line being confused with OOC-IC divider, which... as was found out, varies wildly in each person's mind. It ended when IC-OOC was replaced with the... more predictable definition seen today.

Of course I may just be assuming too much, so one can paint me with the idiot brush where I go too far, but in any case, I think I can gauge the intent of most rulings involving Rule 4 to be preventing any more references to individual people. As such, the Kindly Professor will probably have to Kindly find somewhere else to get awards, like in RP or something. *shrug*

[Unibot]

Of course I may just be assuming too much, so one can paint me with the idiot brush where I go too far, but in any case, I think I can gauge the intent of most rulings involving Rule 4 to be preventing any more references to individual people. As such, the Kindly Professor will probably have to Kindly find somewhere else to get awards, like in RP or something. *shrug*

That won't me stop from attempting as an active and not yet pacified citizen of the Security Council to prevent Rule IV from being an ambiguous cloud that has no independent worth or reason besides our authority's arbitrary preference -- like the No WA Army rule that has persisted for years in the GA. I may be stubborn, but I'd rather be stubborn than pacified, and watch a ruleset emerge with no determinable root of universal reason.

[Metania]

I have fought 5+ years wars of attrition with other sites on such things... all I learned is that such things are unlikely to be changed, unless you yourself ascend to modly powers and change it from behind the desk.

Hence, while I disagree with it, I consider it similar to a mountain in the way--it isn't impossible to move, but probably not worth the effort, with success rate being dismal even with multi-year efforts spent on it.

But that is my way and yours is yours; so by all means continue. I just wanted to bring up my own experience on the matter---the mods will likely just clamp down harder if pressed, just as I and those I opposed did on the various sites elsewhere, when I used to try and push rules I disliked out of the picture.

[Unibot]

I have fought 5+ years wars of attrition with other sites on such things... all I learned is that such things are unlikely to be changed, unless you yourself ascend to modly powers and change it from behind the desk.

Hence, while I disagree with it, I consider it similar to a mountain in the way--it isn't impossible to move, but probably not worth the effort, with success rate being dismal even with multi-year efforts spent on it.

But that is my way and yours is yours; so by all means continue. I just wanted to bring up my own experience on the matter---the mods will likely just clamp down harder if pressed, just as I and those I opposed did on the various sites elsewhere, when I used to try and push rules I disliked out of the picture.

No, no. You're absolutely correct, most likely. But it is my duty as a player to contest when the rules aren't fair or guided by preference (instead of principle) -- a duty which gets really tiring when one's authority retains such an unyielding defense of their inclinations that it is equal in will to one's own defense of their duty. Sometimes it is depressing enough to make one abandon his duty, and leave the game -- I've done that before, for, like a day.. and then my friends asked me to come back. So here I am, stubborn and unyielding as always.

[Ballotonia]

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but I don't see why a C&C could not refer to the ruler of the nation as a person, including saying 'he' or 'she'. One cannot refer to the NATION as a he or she.

Just keep in mind, in the end you'd be C&C'ing the nation, not the person. That's inherent in the mechanism of the game: badges aren't sent to someones home but instead displayed within the game at the top of either a region or nation page.

Again, my suggestion is:

How about "Acknowledging New South Hell is ruled by a professor who is ..."

After that sentence one could talk about what that professor has done for NS, etc... (still insufficient as it is, IMHO) and then one could proceed with expressing gratitude toward the nation NSH for being a good home for said professor, and then commend the nation.

Frankly, I don't think Rule IV is a real hindrance to this commendation at all. The real problem lies in the content of the Commendation: it is IMHO lacking.

Ballotonia

[Ardchoille]

A one person nation is still a nation, and it's the nation which the World Assembly would be commending - therefore you can't use personal pronouns to refer to it.

Unibot, I've bolded the words you need to focus on in that ruling. It was discussed previously and Sedge has now ruled on it (much more succinctly) again.

I notice you are still debating his ruling. The appropriate place for a ruling challenge is Moderation. Should you make one, you will find that I uphold his ruling.

On the subsidiary question of the RPd person in a one-person nation, you must establish in the text whether you are referring to the nation or the RPd person. The two may be eponymous, but they are not synonymous.

As is evident in the linked post and in other discussions on this topic, you may use gender-appropriate pronouns in the text when referring to an RPd person, but not when referring to an NS nation.

If you are referring to the RPd person, they must not be shown in the text of the proposal as doing anything an RPd person could not do.

[Todd McCloud]

*perks up at the argument over personal pronouns*

[A mean old man]

The only loophole I see is perhaps mentioning the RULER of the nation, which is something that can be defined inside the game. But I wouldn't be surprised if they forbade that, too.

Hey, have you been looking at our secret forums?

Hmm. I thought I coined that idea with my discussion on the rabbit tyrant of Krulltopia. Maybe I had that discussion in my head, but I remember thinking up this idea on my own at that time, though I didn't really play off of it much in the final text of my commendation of Krull. I'm also feeling like I might have brought it up before I drafted that commendation...

Though who knows. Maybe Unibot also came up with it before I did and is going to steal my glory once again like he did with the RPed resolutions idea. Damn you, Unibot!



Anyway, if you need any help in this department, Uni, I'm sure I could create a successfully IC wording.

[A mean old man]

Oh, and I would still like an answer to this.

How has what Prof. Hell researched helped the world? Where has he recorded his data?