[draft] Condemn Durkadurkiranistan II again

[Flemingovia]

ORIGINAL VERSION:

[proposal=]The security council

Recalling that the Nation of Durkadurkiranistan II has proved to be one of the most duplicitous and underhand nations in the world – as evidenced by lies and blandishments during their rogue delegacy in The North Pacific in 2009.

Further recalling that when it became clear that the outrage of the nations of that region would bring this delegacy to a premature end this nation violently thrust over 600 innocent nations out of that region and into The Rejected Realms.

Noting that this action was condemned in SC#33.

HOWEVER, Noting since the passing of that Resolution the failure of Durkadurkiranistan II to show any remorse for these actions, nor to make any atonement for them.

Further Noting that since the passing of SC#33 the nation of Durkadurkiranistan II has continued to support a head of state who is clearly delusional and paranoid, and has supported him by professing loyalty and affection for “the state of Montana”. Durkadurkiranistanians deny that this refers to Montana but insist that Montana refers to a mythical place outside of the NS universe, where the sky is blue and the grass is deep and black bear and bison frolic in the icy waters of the Missouri River, where the citizens of all good Nations will go when they die (or, as Durkadurkiranistanians refer to it, "log off").

Hereby condemns Durkadurkiranistan II. [/proposal]

VANILLA VERSION, AFTER LOADS OF EDITS:
[proposal=]The security council

Recalling that the Nation of Durkadurkiranistan II has proved to be one of the most duplicitous and underhand nations in the world – as evidenced by lies and blandishments during their rogue delegacy in The North Pacific in 2009.

Further recalling that when it became clear that the outrage of the nations of that region would bring this delegacy to a premature end this nation violently thrust over 600 innocent nations out of that region and into The Rejected Realms.

Noting that this action was condemned in SC#33.

HOWEVER, Noting since the passing of that Resolution the failure of Durkadurkiranistan II to show any remorse for these actions, nor to make any atonement for them.

Further Noting that since the passing of SC#33 the nation of Durkadurkiranistan II has continued to support a head of state who is clearly delusional and paranoid, for reasons that may not be mentioned here, but which can be discovered by the discerning nation which wishes to hunt a bit outside of the halls of this chamber, in the Security Council Discussion Forum

Hereby condemns Durkadurkiranistan II.[/proposal]

Esteemed and respected Moderators, please can you look this over before rejecting it. Thank you.

[Flemingovia]

I feel the section on Montana may be a little understated. Durkadurkiranistan also claims that Montana is the home of a "stunt rider" called Evel Knievel and a porn star called Victoria Paris. Do you feel that the insertion of these notables would improve the resolution?

It is all further evidence that Durk is a bit ga-ga.

I would also add that in his mythical state of Montana there is a place named after the posterior, called Butt. I am not sure of the spelling. I pointed out to Durk the unlikelihood of this, but he clings to his fantasy, poor love.

[Flemingovia]

I have just received a message from Durk, where he offers as proof of the existance of Montana that Frank Zappa (on the album "Over-nite sensation") wrote a song about the place. However, since I can find no reference in the entire Nationstates world to the existance of Frank Zappa, I urge the security council to treat this submission as further evidence of Durk's delusional state.

[Darenjo]

I would support this - he sounds like an NS version of Gadhafi minus tanks.

By the way, you spelled "premature" wrong.

[Durkadurkiranistan II]

LOL. Yep, NS Kaddaffy is a fair description.

[Flemingovia]

I would support this - he sounds like an NS version of Gadhafi minus tanks.

By the way, you spelled "premature" wrong.

Typo corrected. TY

Also he has tanks. I asked him how many. He said "millions. In fact, tanks a million."

(c) Spike Milligan 1942

[Flemingovia]

From the general lack of response can I assume that the proposal has reached a state of perfection hitherto only achievable by Tibetan monks fed from childhood on a diet of bean curds?

[Sedgistan]

Further Noting that since the passing of SC#33 Durkadurkiranistan II has lapsed into the mental instability and paranoia rife among tyrants, notably by professing loyalty and affection for “the state of Montana”, while denying that this refers to Montana but insisting that this refers to a mythical place outside of the NS universe, where the sky is blue and the grass is deep and black bear and bison frolic in the icy waters of the Missouri River, where all good Nations will go when they die (or, as Durkadurkiranistanians refer to it, "log off").

I think you know that one violates Rule 4...

[Flemingovia]

I do not see how it violates Rule 4 at all.

The Rules wrote:
4. Your proposal must be able to be read as being submitted by a Nation, and as targeting a Nation or Region, and therefore must use nation-simulation language (“SC IC”).

For example, you proposal cannot:
(a) Refer directly to a player, rather than to the NationStates nation itself.
(b) Refer to the game, or events or actions in it, as a game or part of a game.
(c) Read as if you're speaking for you-the-player (eg, "I think", "I feel", "I believe". Try "my nation feels", "my government believes", etc.)
(d) Reference the real world, in the sense of the place that is not the NationStates community.
(e) Contain reference to ideologies without explaining how they apply to NationStates in terms of actions, policies or attributes of nations/regions.

It is submitted by a nation (Flemingovia) and refers to a nation (Durkadurkiranistan II) I do not use the singular pronoun that may not be used (he), and have edited it to refer to a nation rather than an individual.

No reference is made to any "real" world. In fact the whole basis of the clause is that there is no world but the nationstates world. That is the whole point of Durk's delusion. In a feat worthy of tricksy ninja philosophers, my proposal is more rule 4 compliant than rule 4 itself.

No reference is made to an ideology. Believing in the existence of Montana is not an ideology like communism. It is a delusion.

[Mahaj WA Seat]

Further Noting that since the passing of SC#33 Durkadurkiranistan II has lapsed into the mental instability and paranoia rife among tyrants, notably by professing loyalty and affection for “the state of Montana”, while denying that this refers to Montana but insisting that this refers to a mythical place outside of the NS universe, where the sky is blue and the grass is deep and black bear and bison frolic in the icy waters of the Missouri River, where all good Nations will go when they die (or, as Durkadurkiranistanians refer to it, "log off").

I think you know that one violates Rule 4...

I see that you're looking at 4(d).

There is a way to make it Rule IV compliant, as far as I can see, and that is if we change "a mythical place outside of the NS Universe" to "A mythical place at the far realms of the NS Universe".

That should be compliant.

[Flemingovia]

Ah, but his delusion is that it is outside the NS universe. That is the point. Montana does not exist, period. THat is the wonder of rule 4.

[Sedgistan]

Going through it:

Durkadurkiranistan II has lapsed into the mental instability and paranoia rife among tyrants

A nation can't lapse into mental instability.

notably by professing loyalty and affection for “the state of Montana”, while denying that this refers to Montana but insisting that this refers to a mythical place outside of the NS universe, where the sky is blue and the grass is deep and black bear and bison frolic in the icy waters of the Missouri River, where all good Nations will go when they die

There's real-world references (the state of Montana, the Missouri River), and the "outside of the NS universe" violates Rule 4.b. The NationStates World Assembly can only refer to what happens within NationStates.

(or, as Durkadurkiranistanians refer to it, "log off").

Another Rule 4.b violation by suggesting that NationStates is an online game.

[Flemingovia]

Going through it:

Durkadurkiranistan II has lapsed into the mental instability and paranoia rife among tyrants

A nation can't lapse into mental instability.

Of course it can. Think of mass delusion or mass hysteria. I note in passing that the water in Durkadurkiranistan has a high lead content, which might explain it.

I mean - just look at the name of the nation. Does that look like a stable nation to you?

notably by professing loyalty and affection for “the state of Montana”, while denying that this refers to Montana but insisting that this refers to a mythical place outside of the NS universe, where the sky is blue and the grass is deep and black bear and bison frolic in the icy waters of the Missouri River, where all good Nations will go when they die

There's real-world references (the state of Montana, the Missouri River), and the "outside of the NS universe" violates Rule 4.b. The NationStates World Assembly can only refer to what happens within NationStates.
There is no violation in my proposal. My proposal makes absolutely clear that such places do not exist. If the Missouri River did exist, then Durk would not de a delusional nation. Paradoxically, by questioning my submission you subvert rule 4

(or, as Durkadurkiranistanians refer to it, "log off").

Another Rule 4.b violation by suggesting that NationStates is an online game.

My argument here is similar to that above. I do not refer to logging off. I condemn durkadurkiranistanians for thinking there is such a thing.

[Flemingovia]

Although I see no flaw, I have slightly reedited to make it clearer who believes what.

[Sedgistan]

I'm afraid that condemning an entire nation for delusionally believing that they're just playing a game called NationStates is not a viable way of dodging Rule 4.

[Flemingovia]

I am not dodging rule 4, I am sticking to the letter and the spirit of it. Montana does not exist. I get that. "logging off" does not exist. Natch. My proposal makes that clear.

Any criticism should be directed at Durk, who (collectively, naturally) believe all these things and worse. I hope you will show your displeasure by supporting this proposal

[Mallorea and Riva]

I'm afraid that condemning an entire nation for delusionally believing that they're just playing a game called NationStates is not a viable way of dodging Rule 4.

(I don't even know if this is in character or not)
You must admit that it is rather clever. If it is deemed illegal then oh well, but if it reaches quorum I will vote for it.

[Todd McCloud]

I'm afraid that condemning an entire nation for delusionally believing that they're just playing a game called NationStates is not a viable way of dodging Rule 4.

Aha, but on that same token, can a nation really be condemned for making an out-of-character regional forum pink?

[Unibot II]

I'm afraid that condemning an entire nation for delusionally believing that they're just playing a game called NationStates is not a viable way of dodging Rule 4.

Aha, but on that same token, can a nation really be condemned for making an out-of-character regional forum pink?

Yep because a forum isn't necessarily an internet forum. I think Sedge is making this ruling because you could use the 'Insanity plee' to dodge all sort of things and essentially render Rule IV pointless. Perhaps I'm wrong.. he could also just be ruling that it's highly unlikely that billions people could be deluded into thinking their world is not reality.... or he could be ruling that you'd be condemning them for holding a belief. In fact he's got copious justifications that he could select from to not fly for this circumvention.

[Metania]

Additionally, many of us already did the Rule IV Dodging Game. The truth is, the mods want Rule IV to remain effective, and just because you can state something in some bizarre way won't mean it's valid, even if it appears to dodge Rule IV on the surface.

However, it is amusing to watch you try, so go ahead and continue trying. Better have tried this game and failed, right Unibot?

[Flemingovia]

Firstly, I deny that there is any better in this world ( I will not utter the rule 4 heresy of calling this a game),

Second, I am not dodging rule 4. I am upholding it against those who would call this a game, and believe that there is another world out there, filled with placed like Montana with its stunt riders and porn stars.

I would repeat, my proposal at no point admits the existence of any world outside of Nationstates. It at no point refers to an individual rather than a nation or region. Stating that someone believes in Wibble wobble Land does not make the assertion that Wibble Wobble Land exist.

[Unibotian WA Mission]

However, it is amusing to watch you try, so go ahead and continue trying. Better have tried this game and failed, right Unibot?

That's always my saying.. ^_^

[Todd McCloud]

Aha, but on that same token, can a nation really be condemned for making an out-of-character regional forum pink?

Yep because a forum isn't necessarily an internet forum. I think Sedge is making this ruling because you could use the 'Insanity plee' to dodge all sort of things and essentially render Rule IV pointless. Perhaps I'm wrong.. he could also just be ruling that it's highly unlikely that billions people could be deluded into thinking their world is not reality.... or he could be ruling that you'd be condemning them for holding a belief. In fact he's got copious justifications that he could select from to not fly for this circumvention.

Well that was my point. Condemning a nation, an entire nation, for painting a forum in the tangible sense pink?

[Mahaj WA Seat]

Yep because a forum isn't necessarily an internet forum. I think Sedge is making this ruling because you could use the 'Insanity plee' to dodge all sort of things and essentially render Rule IV pointless. Perhaps I'm wrong.. he could also just be ruling that it's highly unlikely that billions people could be deluded into thinking their world is not reality.... or he could be ruling that you'd be condemning them for holding a belief. In fact he's got copious justifications that he could select from to not fly for this circumvention.

Well that was my point. Condemning a nation, an entire nation, for painting a forum in the tangible sense pink?

It makes just as much sense as condemning a nation for believing in something.

In other words, it should be good.

I mean... did the entire nation participate in the painting of the forum? Eh?

Whereas an entire nation can reasonably believe in something.

[Unibot II]

Yep because a forum isn't necessarily an internet forum. I think Sedge is making this ruling because you could use the 'Insanity plee' to dodge all sort of things and essentially render Rule IV pointless. Perhaps I'm wrong.. he could also just be ruling that it's highly unlikely that billions people could be deluded into thinking their world is not reality.... or he could be ruling that you'd be condemning them for holding a belief. In fact he's got copious justifications that he could select from to not fly for this circumvention.

Well that was my point. Condemning a nation, an entire nation, for painting a forum in the tangible sense pink?

If Canada screwed up the last G8 summit by putting all the world leaders in an igloo ( ), and one of the world leaders got hypothermia ..Canada would probably have recieved some serious backlash from the international community because our nation is held accountable for our representatives and their decisions.