Broaden the Reaches of Commend and Condemn Resolutions

[A mean old man]

BROADENING SECURITY COUNCIL C&Cs

I believe it is in all of our best interests to expand the reaches of C&C resolutions. The most recent ones have been limited to raider/defender activity, and while some believe that this is fine for C&C proposals, it is still a single category that C&Cs are being devoted to while different types of positive contributions to our NS community are going completely unnoticed. It is time for proposal writers to begin writing more C&Cs, rather than only C&Cs based off of raiding/defending.

This topic has been initiated to compile helpful, supported ideas for commending nations for their beneficial contributions to NS, and condemning nations for their detrimental contributions (NOT including offences that call for moderator intervention, as these sort of offences are not relevant to the WA).

If any of you support my ideas and would like to contribute my own, that is what this topic has been made for you to do. It's time for the WA to get more creative and more interesting.

I will list my own ideas here, and edit in any others that people supply while quoting their names.

COMMENDATIONS:

Supplied by: A mean old man
----- Displaying strong knowledge of effective politics and debate
Evidence: Jolt(past)/NationStates forums, especially related to the WA or Roleplaying

Note: I believe a few of the nations who we always see on the top and bottom of the current World Census Reports could receive a few commendations based on this idea; They've definitely mastered the art of NS politics and have managed to support certain specific aspects of their nation's economy and beliefs well enough, long enough, and consistently enough to be the strongest among the world in their categories. They also often represent NationStates itself, after being around for so long and being so commonly seen in the World's pages.
I know that this opens up quite a few nations to commendation, which is why I’m only proposing it as an idea.

----- Making positive, fun, and progressive contributions to NS role-playing
Evidence: Jolt(past)/NationStates role-playing forums

----- Displaying outstanding achievements in leadership and community-building, whether in extra-regional affairs or within the limits of one's own region
Evidence: Regional size and stability

----- Being an active and highly progressive influence in the WA
Evidence: Past passed resolutions that have been widely supported, outstanding contribution in Jolt (past)/ NationStates forums

Supplied by: R/D C&C supporters
Commentary by A Mean old man
----- Outstanding and influential actions through using WA "military" power (I'm not saying raiding or defending, as either one could possibly fit here).

Note: Even though I personally am uncomfortable with using this, I will put it up out of respect for those who believe in its legitimacy. However, if you do put this in a commendation, PLEASE use evidence of another reason why the region should be commended as well (achievements in organization, perhaps). This will make your commendation more justified in the eyes of those who would like to remain neutral.

CONDEMNATIONS:

Supplied by: A mean old man
-----Constantly being a vastly misleading political influence to other nations in the forums
Evidence: Jolt (past)/ NationStates forums

----- Displaying poor writing and/or political skills in the Jolt(past) and/or NationStates forums

Note: This should most certainly NOT be the basis for a condemnation, but can be a suitable addition to a stronger argument should it apply.

----- Displaying a fiery and unpredictable temper, poor attitude, and/or an overall meanness towards other nations
Evidence: Jolt (past)/ NationStates forums

Supplied by: R/D C&C supporters
Commentary by A Mean old man
----- Numerous inhospitable and selfish actions through using WA "military" power (I'm not saying raiding or defending, as either one could possibly fit here).

Note: Even though I personally am uncomfortable with using this, I will put it up out of respect for those who believe in its legitimacy. However, if you do put this in a commendation, PLEASE use evidence of another reason why the region should be condemned as well (griefing and disrupting numerous NS communities, perhaps). This will make your condemnation more justified in the eyes of those who would like to remain neutral.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

Condemning someone for bad spelling and political skills is a terrible idea. They need to be actually evil.

[A mean old man]

Condemning someone for bad spelling and political skills is a terrible idea. They need to be actually evil.

Well, Macedon has been condemned for their choices in font color.
However, that was not the only or leading aspect in their condemnation.

Though you do have a point.

EDIT: I have slightly modified it in the list.

[Quintessence of Dust]

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers. As such, they are of necessity a bad fit for any other part of the game.

Furthermore, most of the cases you posit don't need commending/condemning, as they are their own reward/demerit. For example:

I believe a few of the nations who we always see on the top and bottom of the current World Census Reports could receive a few commendations based on this idea; They've definitely mastered the art of NS politics and have managed to support certain specific aspects of their nation's economy and beliefs well enough, long enough, and consistently enough to be the strongest among the world in their categories. They also often represent NationStates itself, after being around for so long and being so commonly seen in the World's pages.

The Grendels's Economic Report already does this. Knights of Zion interviewed various of the perennial chart toppers and published the results. Hatred (before they CTEd) used to make a point of posting the inane TG spam he received. Being named #1 in the world for potato peeling manufacturing is a commendation in itself.

[A mean old man]

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers. As such, they are of necessity a bad fit for any other part of the game.

The irony of that is that you have to go to the forums to debate and C&Cs. Are the forums not also part of the gameplay? NationStates is a text based game. The most player-written text in the game is in the forum, and you can find people's best (and worst) traits just by seeing what they contribute to the community through the forum. A commendation is "A resolution to recognize outstanding contribution by a nation or region." A condemnation is "A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region." These descriptions do not say that C&Cs are limited to only the gameplay outside of the forum. The "...or region." line limits that to outside of the forum a bit, but even then, if a region participates as a whole in the forum (whether in a positive or negative way), you could cite that as well.

Furthermore, most of the cases you posit don't need commending/condemning, as they are their own reward/demerit. For example:

I believe a few of the nations who we always see on the top and bottom of the current World Census Reports could receive a few commendations based on this idea; They've definitely mastered the art of NS politics and have managed to support certain specific aspects of their nation's economy and beliefs well enough, long enough, and consistently enough to be the strongest among the world in their categories. They also often represent NationStates itself, after being around for so long and being so commonly seen in the World's pages.

The Grendels's Economic Report already does this. Knights of Zion interviewed various of the perennial chart toppers and published the results. Hatred (before they CTEd) used to make a point of posting the inane TG spam he received. Being named #1 in the world for potato peeling manufacturing is a commendation in itself.

...I know that this opens up quite a few nations to commendation, which is why I’m only proposing it as an idea...

It's only an idea.

Besides simply trying to shoot all of my ideas for C&Cs down, you could actually try to contribute your own.

[Sedgistan]

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers. As such, they are of necessity a bad fit for any other part of the game.

I know they were done as a prelude to the liberation resolutions (which were definitely for gameplayers) but I don't think that they were introduced with the idea that only gameplayers would use them. There haven't been many non-gameplay related resolutions proposed, but most of those that I've seen have seemed pretty good. I think its definitely possible to pass ones for RPers, GAers & others, it would just require the proposer to do a fair bit of campaigning.

[Enn]

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers.

I've seen this a few times, is there any evidence to back up this assertion? A mod/admin ruling?

Is there any reason why RPers couldn't commend/condemn other RPers for entirely IC actions? Yes, it might well prompt a whole lot of tit-for-tat C&Cs, but the GPers have hardly been innocent of that type of action.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers.

I've seen this a few times, is there any evidence to back up this assertion? A mod/admin ruling?

Is there any reason why RPers couldn't commend/condemn other RPers for entirely IC actions? Yes, it might well prompt a whole lot of tit-for-tat C&Cs, but the GPers have hardly been innocent of that type of action.

There's no reason why they can't (in fact, the very first C&C, which failed, was an RP one), but [violet] has indicated in a series of back-and-forth posts that the new categories were introduced "particularly for the gameplay part" of the WA -- only she wasn't aware when she created the new categories that gameplay elements in proposals violated the rules, which is why C&Cs had to be split off from the WA to form the SC.

[Kandarin]

I'm happy to review all changes going forward. But C&Cs were not introduced solely for this community. If they had been, I'd probably agree with you: they've presented more problems than benefits. But they were added for the entire WA, particularly the gameplay part of it, and they represent a substantial potential benefit for NS overall. I thus want to keep the benefit while ameliorating the damage.

Emphasis mine. C&Cs were added for the use of players from any and all parts of the game. Whether they are Gameplayers, RPers, Generalites, GA regulars or others, members of any community can put forth nations and regions from that community for commendation or condemnation. Gameplay and GA players have used the feature the most (though not exclusively) due to their familiarity with mass campaigning, but anyone may use it. We simply haven't seen much in the way of serious attempts to use it by RPers and neutral regions.

It'd be disappointing if those groups somehow thought it wasn't for them, because they have some good concepts to bring to vote if they'd but try. I'd really like to see Condemns for some of the more infamous (and well-played) evil RP nations out there. It'd also be good to start seeing Commends for some of the better regions out there - places like Texas, Canada and Wysteria that have a long legacy of excellence in multiple areas.

[Saurea]

Alright, here's both a query and an example for you:

Let's say, for argument's sake, after the events of a region-wide war the nation that instigated the entire affair by invading a neighboring country could be condemned for the In-Character reasons of human rights violations, violating another country's sovereignty, ignoring the legal rights of another nation by attempting to forcibly extradite foreign nationals to be executed within their own country, etc.

Would something like this roughly be along the lines of what your proposing?

[Sedgistan]

I'm not an RP expert, but I believe that is what people are suggesting for a condemnation done by RPers.

[A mean old man]

There's a perfect scenario. That condemnation sure would create an interesting RP-based campaign for and against the resolution, and would create an entirely new and fun sort of debate for the WA. Of course, the topic for it would need to be [in-character].

This'd be a nice break from these intense raider/defender C&Cs where everyone is at each other's throat and the people who'd like to stay neutral to the debate don't know where to turn. People need to lighten up a bit; we're not here to be constantly tearing each other apart. The Security Council should have a lighter side.

There's so many possibilities for C&Cs; it's been left almost totally open-ended by the admin. It's truly an opportunity for us to branch out and get creative.

[Saurea]

Good to hear, because after a regional war in my region of Escapikickass runs it's course I plan on leveling a proposal exactly like the one I just described (except far more detailed and better thought out, obviously) at another nation for essentially starting the entire conflict.

I'm actually re-joining the Assembly for this, which is good because the entire reason I left was the Commendations/Condemnations and how they felt essentially useless.

[A mean old man]

Emphasis mine.

In fact, I have been using your commendation as a perfect example of this idea. It is based purely on your leadership ability and guidance in the RP forums, and is exactly the sort of basic idea that we can expand on for future C&Cs.

I'd also like to acknowledge Delegate Todd McCloud, the writer of this resolution. He is a supporter of my ideas and a supporter and writer of non-objective C&Cs, and is working hard to keep more C&C resolutions neutral and expand their limits from simply R/D. His resolutions have been widely supported by the Security Council as a whole.

I'd also like to acknowledge, to a lesser extent, one of the recent proposals "Condemn The Imperial Combine." by Slazenagaras People. This proposal will certainly not reach queue, but is, I believe, showing us something. While this proposal contains countless spelling/grammatical errors, material that cannot be enforced ("...never be Allowed to Operate again..."), and contains claims that cannot be totally supported, it is evidence that even the less skilled proposal writers (no offence to Slazenagaras People, perhaps he has better writing abilities but is not showing them in this particular piece) are beginning to stray away from the usual, promotional C&Cs or C&Cs based off of another's proposed C&C, and are beginning to take steps into different styles of C&C proposals. If this proposal had been better written and had contained more substantial claims against The Imperial Combine's general poor attitude and hostility towards others, it may have actually been an acceptable condemnation proposal (and, if it were to reach Delegate acceptance queue, resolution).

The Imperial Combine is a Region of Hate and one of Opression. I think when i say that they are a Disgrace to Nationstates alot of people will agree with me.

The Imperial Combine has been Agressive to many Nations, For unknown Reasons.
The Imperial Combine has Oppressed all nation that are Less Powerful then them.
The Imperial Combine is Drunk with power and threatens all who stand in their Way.
Also The Imperial Combine (NATION) Has Kicked many nations from Threads and the Region because of small things Like speaking out of term. I propose that The Imperial Combine be Condemned and shall never be Allowed to Operate again.

[A mean old man]

Good to hear, because after a regional war in my region of Escapikickass runs it's course I plan on leveling a proposal exactly like the one I just described (except far more detailed and better thought out, obviously) at another nation for essentially starting the entire conflict.

I'm actually re-joining the Assembly for this, which is good because the entire reason I left was the Commendations/Condemnations and how they felt essentially useless.

Go for it! You have my support, and, if it the proposal is legal and well-designed, I'll see if Corporate will be willing to support the proposal and have our Delegate approve it (I'm sure that they will, we're a very progressive community)! I'm thrilled that these compiled ideas have inspired you.

You may want to tag in your proposal that it is Roleplay-based. Some WA nations might not know what the hell is going on if they see a resolution about a massive war between nations. You may also want to tag the thread in which the war was described somewhere in the proposal; maybe at the top. A lot of WA members who aren't active in the forum may be unfamiliar to RP-based C&Cs, however they'll get used to the idea after a few are put out there.

[Saurea]

Noted. When the time comes I'll be sure to consult with you on this.

[Quintessence of Dust]

The irony of that is that you have to go to the forums to debate and C&Cs.

No, you don't. The forums are an add-on: there is no obligation to use them to debate C&Cs, or for that matter Liberations, or proper WA resolutions. Almost no one in Wysteria uses these forums, yet our regional forum (72,000 posts) demonstrates it's not an aversion to the concept.

Besides simply trying to shoot all of my ideas for C&Cs down, you could actually try to contribute your own.

Their introduction led to my resigning my delegacy, and then my WA membership. Why would I want even more of the damn things? They have ruined what used to be a fun part of the game, and from now on my contributions are being limited to trying to perfect time travel so that I can go back to five minutes before [violet] introduced them and yell "NO!" very loudly in her ear.

I still think you're missing the basic point that C&Cs were specifically introduced for the gameplayers.

I've seen this a few times, is there any evidence to back up this assertion? A mod/admin ruling?

I suppose I'm taking my cue from what Max himself said:

<+MaxBarry> We were discussing ways of fixing a particular gameplay problem
<+MaxBarry> Specifically, that a particular tactic in the invasion game was to password-lock a region for all time
...
<+MaxBarry> So I thought, I know! We should add these Commend and Condemn resolutions, which will let the WA express its approval or disapproval of whatever they like
...
<+MaxBarry> but the C&C resolutions couldn't exist within the scope of the game the WA community had defined
...
<+MaxBarry> So those two Councils are essentially to support different communities; they're a means to an end

[A mean old man]

No, you don't. The forums are an add-on: there is no obligation to use them to debate C&Cs, or for that matter Liberations, or proper WA resolutions.

And yet they are so widely used, and have been used for years. They are especially used by the admin and moderators to give us news updates, and for us to make suggestions. They're more than just an "add-on." And, as you say, there is no obligation to use them, however it is widely expected that one does.

NoTheir introduction led to my resigning my delegacy, and then my WA membership. Why would I want even more of the damn things? They have ruined what used to be a fun part of the game, and from now on my contributions are being limited to trying to perfect time travel so that I can go back to five minutes before [violet] introduced them and yell "NO!" very loudly in her ear.

Well, that's just defeatist and completely useless. C&Cs are a part of the game now, whether you like it or not, and you can't go back in time and yell in [violet]'s ear. You could either throw your hands in the air and give up on the WA over this setback, or you could do what the rest of us are doing and try to make something more acceptable of it.

I suppose I'm taking my cue from what Max himself said:

<+MaxBarry> but the C&C resolutions couldn't exist within the scope of the game the WA community had defined
...
<+MaxBarry> So those two Councils are essentially to support different communities; they're a means to an end

Isn't this exactly the sort of problem we're trying to pull the WA C&Cs away from here? It's being monopolized by raiders and defenders at the moment, and that's not what it was made for. I personally don't think raiders and defenders should be using it at all, however, there are those that disagree with me and I respect their opinions. C&Cs really weren't made to be used as a weapon by these two groups against each other like right now.

However, even if R/D is going to continue to be used in C&Cs, I think we all can agree that we need to stray away from it a bit and not let it take over completely. It's getting overwhelming.

[Naivetry]

And yet they are so widely used, and have been used for years. They are especially used by the admin and moderators to give us news updates, and for us to make suggestions. They're more than just an "add-on." And, as you say, there is no obligation to use them, however it is widely expected that one does.

Depends on whom you ask. I would say 95% of the most active players in Gameplay do not even read these forums regularly, nor do we expect that people should. EDIT: I will note that this is in the process of changing; as these forums become a center of power and dialogue within the game for the first time since Influence, more of us are seeing a need to keep an eye on what happens here. We use our own forums, and view these along with everyone else's as a sort of foreign territory.

I am for broadening the reaches of these things (in rhetorical contrast to your earlier 'keep R/D out' idea), but I think the problem is that issues of raiding and defending are, for all that they cause confusion, events which happen within the scope of the coded game. They therefore seem more immediate or "real" to voters than events in even the best RP. The RP is simply not as accessible, buried as it is in who-knows-what threads, with a history that might take days, as opposed to hours, to understand.

I would love to see a RP C/C, but because it lacks the immediacy and ease of access of the coded game, I think it would have to move beyond the generic or allusive in providing details and justification. I don't want to hear about offenses against human rights, I want to hear that Admiral Havoc of Badtopia routinely torpedoed shiploads of Civilwarringian refugees in international waters and sold the survivors into slavery, and that Badtopia has profited from this trade, repeatedly refusing to bring Admiral Havoc and others to trial for these actions, etc.

In other words, what exactly has this nation done that makes it worthy of condemnation or commendation before all the other nations out there.

[Gobbannium]

Condemning someone for bad spelling and political skills is a terrible idea. They need to be actually evil.

To some nations, bad spelling is evil. Where would we be if the Ladies of Ardchoille spelled badly? Or what would we be?

Ribbit.

[Quintessence of Dust]

And yet they are so widely used, and have been used for years. They are especially used by the admin and moderators to give us news updates, and for us to make suggestions. They're more than just an "add-on." And, as you say, there is no obligation to use them, however it is widely expected that one does.

Please provide evidence that it is 'widely expected', or retract so obviously stupid a statement.

Well, that's just defeatist and completely useless. C&Cs are a part of the game now, whether you like it or not, and you can't go back in time and yell in [violet]'s ear. You could either throw your hands in the air and give up on the WA over this setback, or you could do what the rest of us are doing and try to make something more acceptable of it.

And having been defeated, I'm wondering what other -ist I am meant to be. C&Cs represent, in hard coded format, [violet]'s views that the WA is 'irrelevant' having 'discussed pretty much every issue there is': that WA players had nothing more to contribute to the game. There is no way to make this 'more acceptable'; one cannot be "more acceptably irrelevant".

Isn't this exactly the sort of problem we're trying to pull the WA C&Cs away from here? It's being monopolized by raiders and defenders at the moment, and that's not what it was made for.

Except, as the quoted passage shows, that is exactly 'what it was made for': there is a reason I emphasised the phrase 'different communities'. If C&Cs were intended to be used by WA players, Max would instead have said 'exactly the same communities'. He does not consider them compatible with 'the scope of the game the WA community had defined': that is a fair indication to me that they are square pegs, and the WA community a round hole. But if you won't accept the word of the game designer himself...

I personally don't think raiders and defenders should be using it at all, however, there are those that disagree with me and I respect their opinions. C&Cs really weren't made to be used as a weapon by these two groups against each other like right now.

...we might perhaps consider the question of why what you 'personally...think' should be made gospel unto everyone else. Thus far your arguments have consisted of a list of things you don't like: why should your list trump everyone else's?

[A mean old man]

Bringing back something you mentioned earlier:

Furthermore, most of the cases you posit don't need commending/condemning, as they are their own reward/demerit.

You say "most of the cases" that I posit, yet you only address one. Perhaps you could elaborate?

Please provide evidence that it is 'widely expected', or retract so obviously stupid a statement.

I will retract that statement, since the evidence for it is based on my own opinion. Just from simple observation, however, it seems to be expected that that one uses these forums if they want to be involved in the NationStates community as a whole instead of only their own individual regional communities. I think quite a few of the average nations of the world are actually a bit intimidated by this forum, but nations like us are ready to place their ideas here to be debated on by anyone in the world who may have any bias and any set of opinions.

Bringing up something that Naivetry said:

I will note that this is in the process of changing; as these forums become a center of power and dialogue within the game for the first time since Influence, more of us are seeing a need to keep an eye on what happens here.

I also believe that more and more nations are growing bolder and are beginning to get involved here, since these forums do allow us to converse with the entire NationStates community (or, at least, the NationStates community that is willing to be involved in the forums) in a very practical and accessible way. And though these forums may be looked upon, as Naivetry said, as a sort of 'foreign territory,' they allow people to post to and receive feedback from a huge assortment of audiences in a way that is relatively quick and simple. Don't say that regional forums are just as effective, since they are less accessible by the complete community of the world and usually have a bias related to the type of people the region caters to. I will also compare your example of Wysteria's post count of 72,000 to the NationStates forums' current post count of over 882,620. While one can argue that this is around 8% of the posts in the NationStates forum, one cannot argue that it is by as diverse and collectively powerful a community.

I personally have observed, or feel that I have observed, that these forums are widely used by nations that are actively involved in WA affairs (especially establishing and promoting proposals/resolutions, though, like you say, they don't actually have an obligation to use these forums when doing so), and are motivated enough to bring up their opinions in a way that allows them to be viewed not only be their regionmates, but by the entirety of the populace of NationStates itself. For many people I am sure it is out of their comfort zone, but I think I can confidently say that the leading influences in the World Assembly are often active here and use these forums to facilitate their campaigns for the passing of World Assembly GA or SC resolutions and, in my case, to present and receive feedback on their ideas.

However, these are only my personal opinions based on what I have seen myself when using the NationStates forums, so you are free to consider them true or false as you like. The majority of posters here seem to agree that the forums are an important part of the game.

If the forums are not used by everyone involved in NationStates, does that mean that we should ignore the contributions of activists here? No! Though the contributors aren’t involving all of the NS community in their actions, I think their beneficial influence on the NS forums community should certainly be recognized by the world. Like Max said and you quoted, the C&Cs were made to support different communities, and I think the community within the NS forums could definitely fall under that category. Not all of the NS community as a whole is involved in raiding and defending either, but R/D is currently being used as a basis for C&Cs. The NS forums community, the regional communities, and the R/D community are all made up of numerous members of NationStates. While I personally don’t like the sort of see-saw affect that we are currently seeing with the R/D C&Cs, I still admit that this is a developed community in the game and is currently involving the C&C feature in its actions. I think you’re being too discriminative and not open-minded enough as to what you believe a community is. The NS forums are definitely a community within the game.

Except, as the quoted passage shows, that is exactly 'what it was made for': there is a reason I emphasised the phrase 'different communities'. If C&Cs were intended to be used by WA players, Max would instead have said 'exactly the same communities'. He does not consider them compatible with 'the scope of the game the WA community had defined': that is a fair indication to me that they are square pegs, and the WA community a round hole. But if you won't accept the word of the game designer himself...

You mean the word of the game designer himself as interpreted by you yourself? This statement, 'the scope of the game the WA community had defined,' from what I have pulled from Max's statements immediately after it which you chose to omit, was related simply to the confusion caused by the purpose of the C&Cs and Liberations getting mixed up with the purpose of the original WA resolutions, which were strictly for national legislation. You're trying to use Max's conversation about C&Cs getting confused with legislative GA proposals to somehow say that these parts of the game like RPing are denied access to C&C resolutions, which is totally inaccurate and makes no sense.

If you've actually been paying attention to the conversation going on in this thread besides that which has been revolving around your own, our ideas for C&C proposals and resolutions are not, in fact, involved in the 'scope of the game the WA community had defined.' We are observing entirely different aspects of the game, such as a nation's "leadership skills" (taking evidence of the successful use of a variation of this idea in a commendation from Kandarin's commendation) or a nation's actions in or contributions to NS Roleplaying. Of course, you weren't going to admit that those are not within 'the scope of the game the WA community had defined,' or the legislative scope of the WA related to WA GA proposals. You're twisting the MaxChat conversation into something entirely different than it was actually about.

I'm going to put up this entire thing just for easier access by all of us.

<+Sirocco> Our next question comes from Gruen!
<+Sirocco> <Gruen> Max: do you have any thoughts on the changes made to The World Assembly?
<+MaxBarry> You mean the split into the General Assembly and Security Council?
<+Gruen> yes
<+MaxBarry> ok
<+MaxBarry> Well, that all came about because of a screwup, essentially
<+MaxBarry> We were discussing ways of fixing a particular gameplay problem
<+MaxBarry> Specifically, that a particular tactic in the invasion game was to password-lock a region for all time
<+MaxBarry> ejecting residents one at a time until they were all gone
<+MaxBarry> That ended the conflict, and wasn't a tactic we wanted to support
<+MaxBarry> So the solution I favored to that was a World Assembly "Liberation" resolution
<+MaxBarry> which would put the moral decision of when to break a password lock in the hands of the WA
<+MaxBarry> But first I wondered, Will the WA actually do this? Maybe the WA will happily start griefing regions
<@Reploid_Productions> (Note to the invaders: politics can be used here to further your goals.)
<+MaxBarry> So I thought, I know! We should add these Commend and Condemn resolutions, which will let the WA express its approval or disapproval of whatever they like
<+Sirocco> I don't know about anyone else but I love internet drama.
<+MaxBarry> It seemed like a really simple idea
<+MaxBarry> WITH NO DOWNSIDE
* +Melkor snickers
<@Scolopendra> Foolish Max.
<+Erastide> hahah you wish
<@Reploid_Productions> Then he left us poor, overworked mods to clean up his mess
<+MaxBarry> Then it turned out that these resolutions presented a huge problem for a goodly chunk of the existing World Assembly community
<+MaxBarry> It was one of those complex issues you probably need 6 months' worth of study to understand properly... at least that's my excuse
<+MaxBarry> but the C&C resolutions couldn't exist within the scope of the game the WA community had defined
<+MaxBarry> and this was going to be a problem for all further gameplay-related WA legislation
<+MaxBarry> So the solution we all hammered out was a split, leaving the existing WA legislative community as untouched as possible, and putting the new resolutions in a separate council
<+MaxBarry> So those two Councils are essentially to support different communities; they're a means to an end
<@|Karma|> Thanks Gruen
<+MaxBarry> And may I just apologize for screwing that whole thing up
<+MaxBarry> Because while I think Liberation has been very good for the game, we could have done that whole thing better
<+MaxBarry> thanks Gruen!

"Different communities" - Well, let's see... There's a NS RPing community, a R/D (Raiding/Defending) community, numerous regional communities...

The "WA community" vaguely mentioned by Max in this conversation is simply related to the community of WA members who wrote and voted on resolutions designed with the intent of influencing national government, which is now the style of GA resolutions. The reason they split and the subject of this conversation, was because of people’s confusion with whether the currently GA style resolutions were at all related to the currently SC style resolutions. They weren’t, as the GA Resolutions dealt with, as I’m going to repeat, national legislation, and the SC dealt with in-game communities. If you’re basing your entire attack on this thread of my one mention of commending those often at the top of the World Census Reports, then I recommend you take a look at the other ideas that have been proposed. Even I admit that commending the people at the top of the World Census Report isn’t a very good idea, and I think I’ll strike it out.

...we might perhaps consider the question of why what you 'personally...think' should be made gospel unto everyone else. Thus far your arguments have consisted of a list of things you don't like: why should your list trump everyone else's?

I'm simply displaying my set of opinions while also displaying my strong trust in their being right. My arguments have consisted of a lot of issues that I think need to be recognized, and actually are currently being recognized and considered by most of the posters in this topic. Just because you personally don't like C&C resolutions and think that I'm too assertive in how I present my opinions does not suddenly mean that I'm making what I think 'gospel unto everyone else' or trying to 'trump everyone else's list.' In fact, the confidence you are displaying in what you personally think (though you may not use those words to describe it, since you're obviously trying to be more discrete and deceptive about the parts of your arguments that are opinion-based and the parts that are evidence-based) could say the same thing about the way you're arguing here.

What's 'everyone else's' list? I didn't see any attempts to make any sort of organized list of helpful suggestions for C&Cs here in these forums. Perhaps I saw attempts to bring it to peoples' attentions, but I'm trying a whole new idea that I hope will prove to be helpful to C&C writers. I'm trying to get ideas together for improving the WASC C&C feature, these ideas being from others as well as from myself. I'm not trying to enforce everyone to follow some sort of code or to follow exactly the ideas brought up in this list, I'm trying to get people to be more creative in designing C&Cs and I am suggesting possible ways to do this.

So, I repeat, what's 'everyone else's' list? Yours? Your 'list,' if that's what you're calling your perpetual stream of pessimistic attacks on this thread, is simply a complaint against the C&C system as a whole and against my hopes to improve it, and is so jumbled in its organization and points that I am constantly having to jump between your posts to try and figure out how you really stand on this issue and how you are using your cited evidence to support your claims.

What I have stated at the beginning of the thread about how the C&C system is lacking in diversity is, of course, my own opinion that I believe in, so I'm not going to display it meekly while constantly mentioning that it is probably wrong (because, as I believe, it isn't wrong). I'm sure that is what you'd like to see from me, since you are apparently my opposition, but that simply isn't going to happen. Don't you understand how persuasive argument works? Are everyone else's opinions that don't follow your personal system of beliefs oppressive? Using this argument is simply showing that you cannot see the abundant opinion-based statements within your own posts. You believe that those you disagree with, when showing their opinions in their posts, are trying to unfairly press them onto others, or, when they do not state their opinions in opinion-based material as you do, you attack their failure to use evidence and try to tag their ideas as being unsubstantial.

In fact, the only oppressive, “trump”ing action going on here is your trying to shoot down all of our collaborative efforts to improve this currently weak and confusing C&C system, not my simply stating my belief that there is creativity lacking in it and we as WASC members need to broaden our ideas a bit. I'm not declaring my rule over the World Assembly Security Council, as you seem to be trying to make me out as doing; I'm trying to encourage people to make the WASC C&Cs more interesting by compiling a list of ideas. Whether you agree with this list is up to you, but you don't have to make attempts to twist my assertive writing style into some sort of evil conspiracy designed by myself to enforce some sort of horrible, evil, oppressive law over the entire WA Security Council. If this were actually my intent, it would’ve been much more transparent and would’ve been stopped much earlier by the other posters in this thread. To put it simply: you’re the only one to come up with such a paranoid account of my attempts to help the WASC C&C writers apparently being cruelly devised in order to trump everyone else’s ideas for… what? Your personal idea that the C&C feature shouldn’t even exist? If that’s the case, then, I’m sorry, but C&Cs aren’t going away any time soon.

Why should my list of suggestions "trump everyone else's"? Well, it isn't entirely MY list, considering I'm editing it based on the feedback I'm receiving from the productive members of this conversation, and, should the majority of posters support it as they do now, I think that makes it pretty well accepted that these ideas can and should be used in future C&C resolutions to improve their diversity. You’re ignoring the fact that I’m trying to make this everyone’s list, not just my own, and I even tried to get you to contribute, though that’s obviously a lost cause.

[Sedgistan]

Their introduction led to my resigning my delegacy, and then my WA membership. Why would I want even more of the damn things? They have ruined what used to be a fun part of the game, and from now on my contributions are being limited to trying to perfect time travel so that I can go back to five minutes before [violet] introduced them and yell "NO!" very loudly in her ear.

Can I suggest then that if your only agenda is the removal of C&Cs, that you don't partake in a debate on encouraging other types of NSers to use them, since there isn't really anything you can contribute to the discussion?

[A mean old man]

I have updated the initial post.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

Their introduction led to my resigning my delegacy, and then my WA membership. Why would I want even more of the damn things? They have ruined what used to be a fun part of the game, and from now on my contributions are being limited to trying to perfect time travel so that I can go back to five minutes before [violet] introduced them and yell "NO!" very loudly in her ear.

Can I suggest then that if your only agenda is the removal of C&Cs, that you don't partake in a debate on encouraging other types of NSers to use them, since there isn't really anything you can contribute to the discussion?

Quod might be fully anti-C&C, that wouldn't surprise me at all, but he/she did bring up a good point a while back (a while back) that C&C's should not be limited to only living nations. If we were allowed that I think you'd see a lot less of these highly political, gameplay fueled proposals and more proposals which are respectful (or boastful) nods to the great/past masters and contributors to the game, and hey we'd be allowed to commend Maxtopia!

I think if such a technical idea was implemented it should be by way of a quasi-"Hall of Memory" designed in-game. By commending or condemning an ex-nation, you would be putting their name and their badge to an index of ex-nations who are commended or condemned. If a nation like... Kandy, went inactive, which would be a tragedy, his nation would be archived in the Hall of Memory too, and if he decided to join again (yah!) his nation would return with his badge, and would no longer appear in the Hall of Memory. Yes/No?