Rules regarding repeals of commendations & condemnations

[Grub]

I pretty new to this side of NS, so if I am not supposed to put this here or submit something like this, I apologize. I am writing this after certain nations have seemed to go out of the way to bust out the red tape and add bureaucratic nonsense that no one needs regarding Commendations & Condemnations. I believe some new rules are in order. Below is my proposed rule. Since this doesn't appear to be something we can vote on, here is my idea.

The time of World Assembly members is valuable and does not need to wasted on voting for repeated repeals of Commendations or Condemnations that were recently voted upon, all Commendations and Condemnations that have been passed by the World Assembly shall stand for at minimum 90 days before a repeal may be proposed.

After the 90 day waiting period has elapsed, nations will then have another 90 day period to propose a repeal of said Commendation or Condemnation.

If After that additional 90 day period has lapsed (180 days from the start of the Commendation or Condemnation) a repeal has not been granted by the body of the World Assembly by a majority vote, said Commendation or Condemnation will stand forevermore.

This is because excessive repeals slow the valuable time of the World Assembly and member nations and regions. Also regions or nations should not have to fight repeals ad nauseam and that the current system currently allows bureaucratic nations to abuse the system of Commendations & Condemnations by filing multiple, excessive and spiteful repeals.

The reason I had this idea is that our commendation for the 10000 Islands was submitted by a grateful nation and it was, in part, in honor of our 1000th TITO defense mission. The commendation wasn't grammatically perfect and had a typo as well, but the person who proposed it was not a native English speaker. Anyway, the Commendation passed by 1,200 votes and immediately a repeal was called for. On top of that, another nation was submitted a repeal of the commendation and the original nation that tried to repeal the commendation is most likely going to try again to get a repeal. The first repeal narrowly avoided a new vote in front of the World Assembly (it had 47 votes/50). My point in all of this is how long is a commendation or condemnation good for? Regions & nations should not have to put up extended fights for whatever once something like this is passed. There should be a waiting time and the a time where repeals can be heard, but after that, let it be.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Grub
Founder - 10000 Islands

[Topid]

Lol first off, I telegrammed around 50 delegates, hardly out of my way. You launched a massive tg campaign to keep your badge. Who really went out of their way.

Secondly, if a resolution is so faulty a repeal can reach quorum a matter of hours after the original passes, it deserves to be repealed. The quorum is already there to cut out pointless proposals.

No one is going to try to take your badge away; you don't need to beg to the admin to let you keep it for at least 90 days. As far as I'm concerned the quality of the resolution reflects the quality of the region well. That no one with the grammar skills of a third grader stood for this region speaks a lot. I only started this repeal because I liked your region and knew it deserved a commendation that would impress everyone, I was wrong; the fact that anyone over the age of 10 would mock your resolution is fine by me.

If my resolution was so useless, it wouldn't have met quorum. And I agree that the resolution shouldn't need to be repealed so quick, solution, don't pass resolutions of such low quality.

[Goobergunchia]

I don't think we need detailed rules specifying exactly when a C&C is ripe for repeal. For one thing, it's easily conceivable that the WA might want to repeal a C&C because the nation/region's behavior has changed significantly since it was granted. Making a C&C unrepealable after 6 months would make this impossible.

While I'm usually not the biggest fan of submitting a repeal right after a resolution has passed, I think that this has to come down to the discretion of the WA delegates. C&Cs are still too new to make any real judgments about how debate is progressing on them; of the 4 that have been passed, nobody's made any real efforts towards repealing Condemn Macedon or Commend Kandarin, while Condemn NAZI EUROPE was one of those wonderful examples where the forum debate and the vote were completely different. (Although I'm becoming more and more sympathetic to those that think quorum is too low right now.)

[Grub]

Regarding us, on the face of things, you were right. The commendation was not grammatically perfect and had typos. It was proposed by a nation who did not speak English as his first language. That being said, it was the thought behind that proposal that nations supported and by a good margin it was passed. It was the thought of the commendation that passed that we liked. We didn't want some fancy WA resolution. I thought it was pretty cool that a nation from a region we helped a while back proposed this commendation. If the region/nation that gets the commendation doesn't want it repealed then that is also something that others nations should consider.

I spoke to a lot of nations over the past few days and the people that supported the repeal fell into a few camps.
1) Nations who didn't like defenders & the 10000 Islands regardless.
2) Nations that agreed about the grammar issues.
3) Nations that didn't like the whole commendation/condemnation idea altogether.

So, there will always be some nations who will support whatever. I just think if a commendation/condemnation is passed there should be a waiting period first and then another window to repeal it.

Condemn Nazi Europe was just passed on 7/20/09. Why is this up for a repeal already? It makes no sense to me. It makes the WA seem like a hamster wheel where a commendation/condemnation is passed one day and a week later the repeal is up for a vote. My rule would change that and I believe it is something that the WA or Mods will need to address at some point.

[Topid]

Condemn Nazi Europe was just passed on 7/20/09. Why is this up for a repeal already? It makes no sense to me. It makes the WA seem like a hamster wheel where a commendation/condemnation is passed one day and a week later the repeal is up for the vote. My rule would change that and I believe it is something that the WA or Mods will need to address sooner rather than later.

NAZI EUROPE decision reflects horribly on the WA as a whole. If we had to keep this decision on the books for 6 months before repealing it...

If enough people feel like you, they won't approve repeals, that dosn't seem to be the case because I just telegramed a few of the last delegates to vote against your proposal, and the biggest delegates, and the delegates active in the WA, and made it to 50 pretty easily. But that is the only way repeals will be limited. As Goob said, you could raid belgium tomorrow password it and have the region halfway destroyed before we could remove our approval of you... surely the badge isn't that important to you.

EDIT: And I understand Fris can't speak english very well, that's why it should be drafted, which he did do, but no body paid attention to the proposal.

[Grub]

Are commendations/condemnations supposed to be viewed as up to date markers or just marks of history? For example, Nazi Europe has a condemnation right now. Just say a few months down the road the entire region renounces Nazism, feeds starving children, helps an old lady across the street, and discovers the cure for cancer. At that point do they get a commendation that would sit next to their condemnation? I kind of envisioned it like that where a region/nation could get several commendations/condemnations as marks of history as opposed to just having one depending on the current feeling about said nation/region.

[Topid]

Are commendations/condemnations supposed to be viewed as up to date markers or just marks of history? For example, Nazi Europe has a condemnation right now. Just say a few months down the road the entire region renounces Nazism, feeds starving children, helps an old lady across the street, and discovers the cure for cancer. At that point do they get a commendation that would sit next to their condemnation? I kind of envisioned it like that where a region/nation could get several commendations/ condemnations as marks of history as opposed to just having one depending on the current feeling about said nation/region.

It could, most would probably want the condemnation repealed before the commendation was passed though.

[Lion Kindom]

I agree with Grub, we shouldn't give and remove C&C based on the WA's mood swings. They should be stackable.

[Dream Killers]

One Question Grub, would you have proposed this rule of yours if 10KI's Commendation was not on the chopping block?

Because this sounds like a desperate cry for help to the Game Admin.

[Sniper Wolv VI]

I don't see why you're even scared of such a lame repeal Grub...

[Grub]

The matter has already been decided, so it isn't effecting me right now. But, it did over the last few days where I had to fight off the main repeal and this is indeed the reason I am writing. I am not just writing for myself, but also for future regions/nations who receive these. A commendation or condemnation should mean something. When one of those is passed, it should have some staying power as well. It was cool when I found out we were nominated and it was going up for a vote. When it passed by a good margin, I thought that was cool as well. The bad thing was immediately seeing a repeal going forward and gathering enough steam for a vote. 3,000+ voted for this, but it only took 50 to cause another vote. We narrowly avoided things going farther, but C&C's should mean a little more than that and the WA shouldn't have to waste its time voting on something it just overwhelming agreed upon the week or so before like Nazi Europe.

So, these rules would be for the regions/nations that get the C&C's, but also for the WA so that it's not an endless loop of C&C/repeal.

[Inflatable Gandalfs]

Complain as you might about the proposed repeal of your Commendation, the fact of the matter is, it failed to achieve quorum, and the NAZI EUROPE one is going to fail at vote in mere minutes. As far as I'm concerned, the system works. Dysfunctional though its voting patterns are, the WA has a curious way of filtering out nuisance proposals on its own.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Eh. It does sound like you're just trying to grasp on to your commendation. If a repeal reaches quorum, then there's obviously something worth repealing. It may be annoying things like wanting to fix typos, and it may be extremely important things like trying to set a precedent against ideological C&Cs. I don't buy the whole complacency thing. If somebody doesn't like a resolution, they have every right to try and immediately repeal it. Granted, insta-repeals almost never work, but they can still try.

the WA has a curious way of filtering out nuisance proposals on its own.

I resent my obviously superb repeal being in the same paragraph as this sentence. :\

[Yelda]

I have to agree with Inflatable Gandalfs. We don't need new rules for repeals, the current system works even if it doesn't work in quite the way some would wish.

[Grub]

I guess I am alone in thinking that it is crazy to have something voted upon with a clear majority one week and then it only taking 50 votes to bring it up for a vote again. We just have a difference of opinions on this. That type of thinking was probably the reason I kept away from the WA proposals in the first place. I think I'll head back to where I came from and let you all go about your WA business.

[Goobergunchia]

I think that's more of an issue with the number of delegates requisite for quorum being the lowest it's ever been than any other rules.