Illegal SC proposals - post them here

[Crazy girl]

That's not branding (4b), but rule 1a, the proposal needs to be written from the SC (or WA) perspective. Also breaking rule 1d, no operative clause. Definitely illegal.

[Tsaivao]

Noting that the General Assembly has violated National Sovereignty with regards to human rights repeatedly and without remorse, the Security Council notes that:

1.) The General Assembly attempts to use ad hominem arguments in order to pass legislation (that is: arguments that attack a dissenter's character rather than arguments that attack a dissenter's facts and opinions);

2.) the General Assembly blatantly and willfully attempts to prevent member-nations from using the Death Penalty while also haphazardly arranging the respective resolutions in a manner that can be easily exploited by non-member nations;

3.) attempts to legislate directly _how member nations deal with conduct within their own militaries;_

4.) puts unequal gravitas on proposals "against" capital punishment compared to those "for" capital punishment.

The Security council hereby condemns the General Assembly.

Gonna say this is the most blatant use-case of 4c I've seen in my time. Also maybe 1a could be considered, since this would effectively be the world assembly... condemning itself? (And based on the actual target nation in the proposal, I highly doubt the author is referring to them)

[Drew Durrnil]

Condemn Bananaistan
Category: Condemnation
Nominee: Bananaistan
Proposed by: Philipastan
ID: philipastan_1618333585

The World Assembly,

Noting that Bananaistan is a bitch,

Hereby:

1. Condemns Bananaistan

Rules broken: Refers to Bananaistan as a singular person (rule 2b), site rules (flaming)

[Outer Sparta]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1618564265

The World Assembly Security Council,

Noting that the region of Chicken overlords contains thousands of puppet states,

Disappointed that the founder of the region uses many puppet states to keep their region on the top,

Worried that this will draw many new nations away from quality regions,

Noticing that the sheer number of nations slows the rotation of the planet, therefore, slowing all daily operations down,

Disgusted that the puppet governments do nothing but let their citizens issues go unnoticed,

Horrified that Chicken overlords are currently corrupting the world census reports,

Seeing that the satellite states of Chicken overlords have no creativity in naming and that can be seen easily,

Feeling that this is the right thing to do,

We Hereby Condemn Chicken overlords

Largely plagiarized from Comfed's joke proposal.

[Drew Durrnil]

ID: jakit_1618771314

Condemn United Engiresco
Noticing that United Engiresco is a dictatorship;

Hereby Condemns United Engiresco.

Rule broken: Plagiarized from this.

[Lenlyvit]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1618873136

Security Council Proposal
ID: goundirk_1618873136

Repeal: “Condemn Koem Kab”
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.

Category: Repeal

Resolution: SC#287

Proposed by: Goundirk

Security Council Resolution #287 “Condemn Koem Kab” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The Security Council,

ACKNOWLEDGING our previous resolution,

CONFUSED at the fact the previous resolution managed to pass despite what it meant for everyone else,

DISPLEASED at the double standard held and the lack of enforcement of this resolution upon any other nation,

ADMITTING that our punishment against the nation of Koem Kab was disproportionate to their actions,

TAKING the following steps to undo our mistakes:
1) Repealing the condemnation of the nation of Koem Kab.
2) Revisiting our views upon art and how we should no longer hold this double standard against nations.

AWARE of the negative effects of hoarding artworks, intentional or otherwise,

REMINDING the world that they are allowed to do what they please with their owned artworks as long as it does not violate international law,

ASSURING the world that we will not continue to act against the ownership of art unless it is a severe threat that would require WA intervention.

FURTHERMORE reminding the earth that the nation of Koem Kab is not the sole reason for art inflation and therefore should not be punished for it,

MOVING ON from this and re-examining our policies on fair punishment against members of the WA,

Hereby repeals the condemnation of Koem Kab.

Jakker marked this legal, but I'm not sure if it breaks R2(b)? I feel like the mention of earth in the "furthermore" clause might be a real world reference.

[Crazy girl]

"earth" is fine.

[Tinhampton]

SECURITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL
ID: cccp_2_0_1619542949


Condemn Big Boyz
A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region.

Category: Condemnation

Nominee (nation): Big Boyz

Proposed by: CCCP 2 0

---

It has appeared that nation called Big Boyz, has sunken into the darkest waters of repressive dictatorship.

Revealed: Big Boyz has one of the highest levels of corruption in the world, and the government does not send corrupt officials to court.

Brought to light, that nation has abolished the court system.

Reminded, that both civil rights, and political freedoms are outlawed, including the right to protest, marriage, and freedom of religion.

Shuddering to recall, that people are NOT allowed to live until the old age, leave, or enter the country.

Astonished to find out, about the allowance of the child labor.

Disgusted to reveal, that sports, internet, computers, and aircraft are banned.

Shocked to discover, that government implemented, DNA, and compulsory organ harvesting!

Recalling, that corporal punishment is allowed in school.

Pointing out, that independent press, piercing, automobiles, and guns are banned!

Everything above condemns the Big Boyz.

Would it be a violation of Rule 1d to assert that a nation can be Condemned (or Commended) by the actions they have taken (i.e. "Everything above"), rather than by the World Assembly or its Security Council?

[Wrapper]

Would it be a violation of Rule 1d to assert that a nation can be Condemned (or Commended) by the actions they have taken (i.e. "Everything above"), rather than by the World Assembly or its Security Council?

The action that a resolution does (Condemning, Commending, Liberating or Repealing) does not have to be attributed to any body - however, if it is, it must be attributed to an appropriate authority - ie. the World Assembly or The Security Council. A proposal cannot have "Sedgistan Hereby Condemns Jakker" as its operative clause.

Based on the wording of that rule, the the proposal should be illegal, as it is attributing it to actions and conditions and not an appropriate authority (the WA or SC). I'd call it a 1d violation.

[Sedgistan]

Seconds ago: Sedgistan: Illegal — Rule 1d - viewtopic.php?p=38597020#p38597020

[Comfed]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1619552169
No operative clause, not written from the perspective of the SC.

[Big Boyz]

SECURITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL
ID: cccp_2_0_1619542949

(Image)
Condemn Big Boyz
A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region.

Category: Condemnation

Nominee (nation): Big Boyz

Proposed by: CCCP 2 0

---

It has appeared that nation called Big Boyz, has sunken into the darkest waters of repressive dictatorship.

Revealed: Big Boyz has one of the highest levels of corruption in the world, and the government does not send corrupt officials to court.

Brought to light, that nation has abolished the court system.

Reminded, that both civil rights, and political freedoms are outlawed, including the right to protest, marriage, and freedom of religion.

Shuddering to recall, that people are NOT allowed to live until the old age, leave, or enter the country.

Astonished to find out, about the allowance of the child labor.

Disgusted to reveal, that sports, internet, computers, and aircraft are banned.

Shocked to discover, that government implemented, DNA, and compulsory organ harvesting!

Recalling, that corporal punishment is allowed in school.

Pointing out, that independent press, piercing, automobiles, and guns are banned!

Everything above condemns the Big Boyz.

Would it be a violation of Rule 1d to assert that a nation can be Condemned (or Commended) by the actions they have taken (i.e. "Everything above"), rather than by the World Assembly or its Security Council?

I'm flattered, but I agree that this is probably a 1d violation.

[Traden]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1620243582

Condemning a staff member for actions regarding his role.

[Crazy girl]

Yup, that's a 3a violation there.

[Traden]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1620742305

1d - "The Republic of West Altair... Hereby Condemns Chadsauce12"

[Drew Durrnil]

Repeal: "Commend Deadeye Jack"
Proposed by: Sauquistan
ID: sauquistan_1622039989

Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

We have to repel this proposal since it is a threat to nations with expanded civil liberties and human rights, so we ask that it be deactivated, because otherwise nations will be affected by this proposal and their civil rights and political freedom will be will turn RED

Rule violated: Game mechanics

[Bears Armed]

Repeal: "Commend Deadeye Jack"
Proposed by: Sauquistan
ID: sauquistan_1622039989

Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

We have to repel this proposal since it is a threat to nations with expanded civil liberties and human rights, so we ask that it be deactivated, because otherwise nations will be affected by this proposal and their civil rights and political freedom will be will turn RED

Rule violated: Game mechanics

Meta-gaming, actually.

[Sedgistan]

Repeal: "Commend Deadeye Jack"
Proposed by: Sauquistan
ID: sauquistan_1622039989

Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

We have to repel this proposal since it is a threat to nations with expanded civil liberties and human rights, so we ask that it be deactivated, because otherwise nations will be affected by this proposal and their civil rights and political freedom will be will turn RED

Rule violated: Game mechanics

Meta-gaming, actually.

Neither! This is the SC, not the GA

[The Unified Missourtama States]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1622039989

Has been incorrectly ruled illegal because of 1d, but it does have an operative clause, "Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void."

I understand it may be illegal under 2a or 4b, but needs to be reviewed.

[Moonfungus]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=sauquistan_1622039989

Has been incorrectly ruled illegal because of 1d, but it does have an operative clause, "Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void."

I understand it may be illegal under 2a or 4b, but needs to be reviewed.

That is a default operative clause, I believe. Every repeal has it included in the resolution automatically by the game mechanics.

[Outer Sparta]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=sauquistan_1622039989

Has been incorrectly ruled illegal because of 1d, but it does have an operative clause, "Security Council Resolution #353 “Commend Deadeye Jack” shall be struck out and rendered null and void."

I understand it may be illegal under 2a or 4b, but needs to be reviewed.

Yeah definitely fits under game mechanics because it alludes to civil rights and political freedoms turning red (the ratings themselves).

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Moon is correct. The proposal should conclude with “Hereby Condemns/Commends/Liberates/Repeals...(delete as appropriate)..”. So definitely a 1(d) violation.

[Outer Sparta]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1622307026

Commend Arminland
A resolution to recognize outstanding contribution by a nation or region.

Category: Commendation

Nominee: Arminland

Proposed by: Arminland

Commend me please yes commend me please yes please commend me commend meeeeeee

Not written from WA perspective, no operative clause I assume, and branding.

[Jedinsto]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1622559973

"Me."

[Sedgistan]

Yep, that's a 1a violation, a clear sign the author didn't read the rules.