[PASSED] Repeal SC#501 "Liberate Eclipsis"

[Tinhampton]

The all-caps look somewhat jarring; just normal sentence case (even without italics or other formatting) should do.

House style since December 2016, sorry

[Tinhampton]

I will not be submitting this proposal on Sunday. However, I hope that this draft will be ready to submit by Thanksgiving Thursday, on November 22nd.

[Tinhampton]

Due to events, I am now very much confident that I will be able to submit this ahead of schedule. Comments welcome.

[National Coraland of Fishery]

Support, Scratch my back, I scratch yours.

[Tinhampton]

I hope to submit this by St Andrew's Day! (I can bear a delay, though, as it's not possible for anything to go to vote until December 3rd.)

[Tinhampton]

I'll submit this in 18 hours. Comment or bust

[Ambroscus Koth]

I'm not sure why nobody pointed this out before now, but Asunnia was not a puppet of New Sunville like the proposal claims. Asunnia was originally made by Bendicion, then handed to me for the operation, and handed back afterwards. New Sunville's nation in Eclipsis was North Nebula, and he was the operation commander. I just happened to have the nation with the most influence, so I spent a lot of time as the point.

[Lupercalia]

I'm not sure why nobody pointed this out before now, but Asunnia was not a puppet of New Sunville like the proposal claims. Asunnia was originally made by Bendicion, then handed to me for the operation, and handed back afterwards. New Sunville's nation in Eclipsis was North Nebula, and he was the operation commander. I just happened to have the nation with the most influence, so I spent a lot of time as the point.

If this resolution passes then it means the Security Council will have determined that to be New Sunville's nation and they will be retroactively banned for WA rules violations.

[Tinhampton]

We go again again again again. Already 7/56 approvals on this (Tinhampton, Xoriet, North Sion, Blaenavon, Improper Classifications, Eco-Paris Reformation); will be at vote between the major updates of Wednesday 11th December and Sunday 15th December in any event, given that the only proposal ahead of it is a DOA repeal that's gotten half as many approvals in forty-four hours as this has in four minutes. Figures below are for the original.

AS OF 2130 GMT ON MONDAY: Approvals: 93 out of 56 needed (Tinhampton, Marquess of Marchmain, Doslonsu, Petriland, What A Human, United Bongo States of the New America, North Sion, The Hurricane, Sutherland Federation, Eco-Paris Reformation, Norway-Sweden-Finland, Clanbrasil, The Free Brethren, Improper Classifications, Of The Revived Soviet Union, Haymarket Riot, Frontier Isles, Otfes, South Newlandia, Venico, I lick pig, Varnash, Arcane Coast, United Lammunist Republic, Mikeswill, Gideon, Strogamehouf, Qudrath, Jonarar, The Age of Dystopia, Hidrandia, North Helorgeroestarda, Zombiedolphins, Keennani, Democratic Federation of New Utopia, Speederia, New Samon, Andech, L V M H, The Goh Dynasty, Greater Thanu, Maxfax, Kethania, The Islamic Khilafah, The Sinistress, Khancanburi, Pinicada, Yammmy, Darkarion, Secret Agent 99, The Hanzanburg Union, Wozmania, TheGoldenEmpireGermany, Extravania, Donynezia, Floyssauu, Kheburbity, Franconia Empire, Lunarvi, Sunny Glade, Eurkian Gosuludria, Nyain, GreaterOhio, Yurtishka, Hipearia, Plainview, Moukden and Kirin, Cansilica, The Marineri Islands, French New Wake Island, Japuile, Xoriet, General TN, Battadia, Dregs of the Earth, Dwight David Eisenhower, Fujai, Boredland, HereBeEmbos, United Desri, Maurnindaia, Hawkwas Sovustian, Gratus Libertaria, Sliabh Grianas, Asase Lewa, Sernet, Bali Kingdom, Lumpsnation, Russisch, Davioof, Daphomir, Picairn, Potatoville)

[Fachumonn]

Can we stick to [Draft], [Last Call], [Submitted], [Queue/Quorum], [At Vote], and [Passed/Defeated], not [OKAY, WHAT THE HELL?].

It goes without saying. I will not be approving or supporting this proposal. (Although this is not the main reason).

[General TN]

While I’d much rather not…. Have these repeals…. I also don’t care much and will sway with the vote on this one…. Mph….. but I did approve… te… he…. So take another to the pile …

[Tinhampton]

On the advice of Haymarket Riot (approval #18 out of 56 needed), I have taken the original proposal out the back and shot it, which I was planning to do around midnight GMT anyway. I expect the new proposal to reach quorum in the coming hours for obvious reasons.

[Tinhampton]

Approval #56 has been earned from Floyssauu. This will go to vote in roughly fourteen-and-a-half hours, therefore; I'll post a full list of approving delegates before the big moment.

[Unibot III]

I think these repeals are generally an unwise course of action, as I’ve argued in the case of many of the repeals (many of them politically-motivated) cited in this resolution.

The notion that our resolution history gets “clogged” by dead-letter resolutions is a visual .. an idea… an abstraction, but it’s a notion that is not based in reality.

People leave the game. Nations, CTE. Founders, CTE. Time can undermine the permanency of annexations. Liberations can become useful again. Moreover, the passage of a new WA Liberation can draw unwanted attention to a potential refound opportunity.

[Tinhampton]

This is a fundamental divergence of opinion that I've tried to justify (on my end) in both of the Repeal SC#501 threads. Put simply, I feel as though the extra context in this repeal - and in repeals of resolutions that have served their purpose more generally is necessary to enlighten the wider SC on the situation at hand and why it is no longer a priority for this body. (Hell, the first resolution I ever passed was along these lines.)

[Mythral]

Hi guys. I hope it’s ok to ask. I’m not 100% sure what this is about? Is it for going in and taking over a region or against? I need clarification or an easier explanation before I vote

[Tinhampton]

Hi guys. I hope it’s ok to ask. I’m not 100% sure what this is about? Is it for going in and taking over a region or against? I need clarification or an easier explanation before I vote

Eclipsis was Liberated by the Security Council. This was a measure intended to ensure that Eclipsis was not destroyed. Unfortunately, the region was destroyed in the end, which means that the Liberation no longer serves any purpose and needs to be repealed.

[Fachumonn]

Hi guys. I hope it’s ok to ask. I’m not 100% sure what this is about? Is it for going in and taking over a region or against? I need clarification or an easier explanation before I vote

Eclipsis was Liberated by the Security Council. This was a measure intended to ensure that Eclipsis was not destroyed. Unfortunately, the region was destroyed in the end, which means that the Liberation no longer serves any purpose and needs to be repealed.

Actually, the liberation could've stayed on the books. It didn't need to be repealed. The original resolution may be unnecessary - but so is this

[Okona]

Support due to naming the raiders.

Thanks As I said in the NSWA server a few months ago: "my approach to writing resolutions has always been: I'm a new nation with five million population that just joined NationStates and I've decided that the SC sounds fun, so I'm going to look through their archive of resolutions. if I read this resolution by Tinhampton, will I be more or less informed about what was going on in that particular corner of the world at that time?"

As a new nation, I greatly appreciate this mindset! It's helped me create informed opinions on these situations despite not being there to witness it, and I feel that I can vote on these resolutions without worrying that I'm missing part of the picture!

[Unibot III]

This is a fundamental divergence of opinion that I've tried to justify (on my end) in both of the Repeal SC#501 threads. Put simply, I feel as though the extra context in this repeal - and in repeals of resolutions that have served their purpose more generally is necessary to enlighten the wider SC on the situation at hand and why it is no longer a priority for this body. (Hell, the first resolution I ever passed was along these lines.)

I’m not sure I see in the resolution a justification for why the region is better served with a liberation repealed, then a dead-letter liberation.

Practically speaking, the liberation does become of value if an occupying nation goes dormant which does happen from time to time, especially as the years pass.

Let’s say the founder nation was DEATed tomorrow - perhaps some general rule breaking was involved - there’d be a mad scramble to replace this liberation that was accused with being “useless” only a day ago. For that reason, it doesn’t seem wise to prioritize bookkeeping over practical security measures.

As for the native’s wishes … 10% of a defender’s job is defending, and 90% of is counselling and supporting natives whose regions are getting destroyed (and there’s nothing anyone can do about it). I saw it all during my time as a defender: people don’t think straight when their region is being grieved - perhaps they leave the region and announce “I don’t care” (but they do), they join forces with the raiders thinking if they ally themselves with the raiders they’ll get special treatment (instead, they get exploited for PR), they flamebait the raiders (and get themselves in trouble with moderation), etc. you see all sorts of bad decisions from natives which forces you to navigate a lot of tense conversations. I think the WASC should put more stock in what is or isn’t objectively the best course of action than the input of one former resident.

[Tinhampton]

Let’s say the founder nation was DEATed tomorrow - perhaps some general rule breaking was involved - there’d be a mad scramble to replace this liberation that was accused with being “useless” only a day ago. For that reason, it doesn’t seem wise to prioritize bookkeeping over practical security measures.

There's a successor in place already. Also, as far as I'm aware, Liberations do not apply to Governor-imposed passwords, even if the Governor then vanishes.

The Eclipsis community is largely scattered and inactive beyond Lunarvi, who was coincidentally the foremost native of the region.

[Great Britain-and Northern Ireland]

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland officially supports this proposal.

[Freemarket]

Freemarket supports the repeal of SC#501 ‘Liberate Eclipsis,’ as the Liberation no longer serves its intended purpose and imposes unnecessary control over a region whose native leadership supports this repeal. We believe in respecting sovereignty, practicality, and rational governance, and this repeal aligns with those principles.

[Ableland]

Full Review and Additional Ideas in Support of the Repeal Resolution "Liberate Eclipsis"

Introduction
This resolution aims to repeal Security Council Resolution #501 "Liberate Eclipsis" on the grounds that the conditions which justified its implementation have changed, rendering the Liberation ineffective. Support for this repeal is based on practical, historical, and ethical considerations that respect the rights of the native inhabitants to determine the future of their region.

Full Review of the Resolution
The Liberation is No Longer Effective

Resolution SC#501 was originally passed to prevent the destruction of Eclipsis following an invasion. However, Eclipsis ultimately fell to the invaders and was entirely destroyed.
Evidence of Failure:
Key invaders such as Asunnia were able to wield 165 endorsements, a number far beyond what the native leader Lunarvi could match.
Military efforts from 70 troops across various regions failed due to insufficient numbers.

Conclusion: The Liberation now serves as a symbolic gesture without practical impact. Allowing it to remain would only prolong false hope for a region that cannot be restored.

Historical Precedent Supports Repeals

The Security Council has previously repealed Liberations for numerous regions, including Wonderful Paradise, Yessssss, and Femdom Empire, after they fell or were refounded.
This demonstrates that the Security Council has the flexibility to review and repeal resolutions when circumstances change.
Core Message: Security Council resolutions are not final; they can and should be reconsidered in light of current realities.
Respecting Native Rights

Lunarvi, the original founder and native leader of Eclipsis, has explicitly stated they have no intention of returning to the region. Instead, they have established a new community in Arborhaven, where they serve as Founder and Delegate.

Ethical Argument:

Respecting the will of the native inhabitants is a longstanding principle upheld by the Security Council.
Denying this repeal would mean ignoring Lunarvi’s right to determine the future of their former homeland.
Humanitarian Message: Allowing Lunarvi to move forward and focus on building Arborhaven demonstrates empathy and respect for their efforts to recover.
Unusual Global Circumstances

The global blackout that lasted for 13 days exacerbated the situation in Eclipsis. This unprecedented event prevented meaningful resistance at a critical time.
Lesson Learned:

External factors can severely limit the success of Liberations. Therefore, the Security Council must reassess resolutions that have become ineffective due to such circumstances.

Additional Ideas in Support of the Resolution

Recognizing Lunarvi's Contribution in Arborhaven

To show support for the native inhabitants, the Security Council could formally recognize Lunarvi's efforts in building a new community in Arborhaven. This sends a message of solidarity and support for natives who persevere despite adversity.

Additional Proposal: Issue a symbolic declaration or recognition of Arborhaven as an example of successful recovery following the loss of a homeland.
Establishing a Review Mechanism for Ineffective Liberations

This resolution highlights the fact that some Liberations lose relevance over time. To address this issue, the Security Council could develop a framework for periodically reviewing Liberations.

Benefits:

Prevent the accumulation of ineffective resolutions.
Demonstrate the Council's adaptability in aligning decisions with current realities.
Strengthening the Principle of Respect for Native Rights

This repeal emphasizes the importance of respecting native voices, such as Lunarvi's, in determining the fate of their regions.
Additional Proposal: Develop formal guidelines ensuring that native inhabitants' opinions are prioritized during the creation or repeal of Liberations.
Acknowledging the Failure of the Initial Strategy

Supporting this repeal acknowledges that the original Liberation did not achieve its intended goal. This is not a sign of weakness but a wise decision to accept reality and pursue more effective strategies moving forward.
Focusing on Community Recovery

By repealing this resolution, the Security Council can redirect its attention and resources toward supporting regions and communities that still have the potential to survive or thrive.
Additional Proposal: Offer diplomatic or military support to vulnerable regions that demonstrate a capacity for recovery, ensuring the Council's actions have tangible impacts.

Final Conclusion
The resolution to repeal SC#501 "Liberate Eclipsis" is well-supported by practical, historical, and moral arguments. The key points include:

The Liberation has failed to serve its purpose and is no longer relevant.
Historical precedent justifies repealing ineffective resolutions.
Respecting the wishes of native inhabitants is an ethical imperative.

The additional ideas presented, such as recognizing Lunarvi's contributions, creating a review mechanism for Liberations, and focusing on community recovery, further strengthen the case for repeal. Repealing the Liberation of Eclipsis is not only a pragmatic decision but also a demonstration of empathy, justice, and the Security Council’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

[Tinhampton]

Repeal "Liberate Eclipsis" was passed 9,144 votes to 1,818. (83.42% support)