NATION

PASSWORD

PASSED: Liberate the Security Council !!

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Southern Bellz
Diplomat
 
Posts: 623
Founded: Oct 04, 2008
Democratic Socialists

Postby Southern Bellz » Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:32 pm

This resolution is very confusing for anyone who doesn't spend their time lurking the SC subforum on a regular basis. I guess if you want to be witty, then congrats, awards all around. I know I felt like a fool debating the merits of what I thought the resolution was, and why gameplay ideas shouldn't be dictated by a small group of few. Because this WA resolution is a joke, I feel it has zero bearing on how people actually feel.

I know in my region, members misunderstood it, were planning to vote against it just because they read Max wasn't going to have any gameplay changes be voted in the WA. If you were planning to dupe people to gage public opinion then this is really no worse than the multiple TITO resolutions that have been passed here that you guys complain about being fed by misinformation.

The way I see it, this WA resolution is a joke or a slick way to gage peoples opinion about something without them really knowing. Considering you guys are joking among yourself about how no one gets this, shows me how little of the population is in on what is actually going on. It would be one thing if you guys were ignorant of this fact, but most of you are well informed NS players. So for a second let's us recap, you guys understand that not a lot of people understand what is going on, AND you want it to seriously gage what popular opinion on this issue? In what world is that how it works?

I will be doing everything I can to make sure people understand what is going on, at least in my region.

User avatar
EVIL BEYOND COMPARE
Envoy
 
Posts: 247
Founded: Aug 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby EVIL BEYOND COMPARE » Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:37 pm

just so you know a liberation gets rid of a password on a region. your region has no password. this thing is pointless

User avatar
Southern Bellz
Diplomat
 
Posts: 623
Founded: Oct 04, 2008
Democratic Socialists

Postby Southern Bellz » Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:39 pm

EVIL BEYOND COMPARE wrote:this thing is pointless.

User avatar
Unibotian WASC Mission
Diplomat
 
Posts: 729
Founded: Oct 27, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Unibotian WASC Mission » Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:46 pm

Southern Bellz wrote:I will be doing everything I can to make sure people understand what is going on, at least in my region.


Thanks, the more people that know the better.

As I've said before in this thread, the plan is not to gauge support, because the idea has already been approved, [violet] is implementing this...

If anything, this proposal will serve as a warning bell/evangelical choir to all those who do not frequent these forums.. change is coming, and everyone who follows the WA should be informed of this. The best way to get that message out there is by a proposal.

Because even if they do not understand, they'll hopeful ask someone who does.
Last edited by Unibotian WASC Mission on Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Southern Bellz
Diplomat
 
Posts: 623
Founded: Oct 04, 2008
Democratic Socialists

Postby Southern Bellz » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:00 pm

Oh so this is a PSA to the greater NationStates community? If anything, it is a bit more like a slap in the face that the small group of people that do frequent the forum have a larger say than the rest of the NationStates community. Gameplay changes are a pretty big deal, and I would say the average player deserves more than a "woah ho ho change is on the way" WA resolution that is an after the fact "warning".

Also if you were doing your part to warn people, it wouldn't be making a silly resolution that people think they are voting on and their vote matters, when in reality the decision has been made for them. That is your warning? A real warning is spreading the word, this isn't a legit warning. Using me to tell the truth isn't doing your part. I was duped, I am just making sure other people are not duped again.

Anyways a real warning would be an edit in the FAQ, not just some joke of a WA resolution.

User avatar
Unibotian WASC Mission
Diplomat
 
Posts: 729
Founded: Oct 27, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Unibotian WASC Mission » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:08 pm

You know it hasn't been implemented yet. Just approved, and well.. promised.

But if you, or anyone who becomes newly aware of the idea of change from this proposal, has a problem with the idea, it would be wise to bring it up now. Not afterwards it gets implemented.

This thread would be a good place to start for debating the idea itself, while getting noticed by an admin. > viewtopic.php?f=15&t=22185&start=25

User avatar
Mikeswill
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 170
Founded: Antiquity
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Mikeswill » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:13 pm

This Resolution refers to the Region not the World Assembly entity. As such we believe that the Delegate of a Region who has situation id powers ought o be allowed to bar entry to the Region of their Delegacy pursuant to the rules of the game.

In this particular situation the Delegate has not imposed barriers to entry and the Founder of the Region does not seem too concerned or he would act in accordance to his fancy.

We think that this Resolution is a guise to confuse WA Nations in believing that the effect is to Liberate the Security Council of the World Assembly. Were this to be true the only effective Resolution in agreement with our perspective would be to disband the abusive entity in its entirety.

Until then, NationStates Region will continue to vote against Resolutions which erode the rights of Delegates in Sovereign Regions from outside interference and dangerous precedent.

Therefore, Mikeswill's vote against "Liberate The Security Council" has been noted.
Love Conquers Fear
NationStates

User avatar
Unibot
Senator
 
Posts: 4292
Founded: May 25, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Unibot » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:30 pm

Mikeswill wrote:This Resolution refers to the Region not the World Assembly entity. As such we believe that the Delegate of a Region who has situation id powers ought o be allowed to bar entry to the Region of their Delegacy pursuant to the rules of the game.

In this particular situation the Delegate has not imposed barriers to entry and the Founder of the Region does not seem too concerned or he would act in accordance to his fancy.

We think that this Resolution is a guise to confuse WA Nations in believing that the effect is to Liberate the Security Council of the World Assembly. Were this to be true the only effective Resolution in agreement with our perspective would be to disband the abusive entity in its entirety.

Until then, NationStates Region will continue to vote against Resolutions which erode the rights of Delegates in Sovereign Regions from outside interference and dangerous precedent.

Therefore, Mikeswill's vote against "Liberate The Security Council" has been noted.


As delegate of the Security Council, I must note NationStates' stance against our rights of national sovereignty. As we wish to establish a region which can never be passworded or trophied -- you are preventing us from doing so.

Have a good day,
Unibotian WASC Mission -- Delegate of the Security Council

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5614
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Capitalizt

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:38 pm

Unibotian WASC Mission wrote:You know it hasn't been implemented yet. Just approved, and well.. promised.

But if you, or anyone who becomes newly aware of the idea of change from this proposal, has a problem with the idea, it would be wise to bring it up now. Not afterwards it gets implemented.

This thread would be a good place to start for debating the idea itself, while getting noticed by an admin. > viewtopic.php?f=15&t=22185&start=25

I don't think anyone is objecting to the idea by itself, just the fact that it is being introduced in a proposal. At any rate, I would not encourage posters to start flooding the Technical forum with complaints after a decision has already been made. You don't want an idea you like to be suddenly bombarded by confusion and (likely) uninformed rants. The Technical forum is open to all players, but it is not designed for rowdy town-hall style debates where admins have to sift through pages of nonsense just to find a few productive comments that actually help them do their jobs.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Unibot
Senator
 
Posts: 4292
Founded: May 25, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Unibot » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:44 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:
Unibotian WASC Mission wrote:You know it hasn't been implemented yet. Just approved, and well.. promised.

But if you, or anyone who becomes newly aware of the idea of change from this proposal, has a problem with the idea, it would be wise to bring it up now. Not afterwards it gets implemented.

This thread would be a good place to start for debating the idea itself, while getting noticed by an admin. > viewtopic.php?f=15&t=22185&start=25

I don't think anyone is objecting to the idea by itself, just the fact that it is being introduced in a proposal. At any rate, I would not encourage posters to start flooding the Technical forum with complaints after a decision has already been made. You don't want an idea you like to be suddenly bombarded by confusion and (likely) uninformed rants. The Technical forum is open to all players, but it is not designed for rowdy town-hall style debates where admins have to sift through pages of nonsense just to find a few productive comments that actually help them do their jobs.


So .. correction from my earlier statement, read the thread in its entirety before posting if you feel like your voice needs to be heard on the issue.

An angry town hall meeting is something nobody in the SC wants to see again.

User avatar
Goobergunchia
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 1623
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Goobergunchia » Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:06 pm

Goobergunchia votes in favor.
(+5175 posts from mostly pre-Jolt)
Making NationStates a different place since 17 May 2003.
NSwiki Administrator
Priest of the Council of Ma'at, Osiris
Citizen of the Rejected Realms
Nasicournian Officer
IRC: Goobergunch @ irc.esper.net or irc.gamesurge.net
Sponsor, HR#22, SC#4
Member, UNOG
Timelines: Historical GA SC
Rules: GA SC
NS Forum Moderator
For your forum moderation needs: The Moderation Forum
For your in-game moderation needs: The Getting Help Page
What are the rules? See The One-Stop Rules Shop.
Who are the mods? See the All About Moderators sticky.

User avatar
Doitzel
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Jul 03, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Doitzel » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:53 am

Unibotian WASC Mission wrote:Unibot says "you do know this idea has already been agreed upon by the admins, right? A gauge really isn't needed, the idea that this proposal should be used as a gauge just started as joke. Though it still remains a joke or as you called it ' a cute little stunt', the proposal is meant to be a way to transition the WA into a era of divided proposal floors, others have even heralded it as a founding document for the WASC ... which is anything but humbling, but my goal with it was just to help smooth the transition of the WA using a proposal while getting a few laughs out of it (and passing the first joke proposal in the WA? Yes/No?), as years from now when newbies join the game and try to make sense of this mess of events they might not have these threads to look from as 'primary sources of history', if you will, but the WA resolutions will always exist".

I have read all the relevant threads and I will again iterate the point that just because you can does not mean you should.

Kandarin wrote:There's an argument to be made here that the resolution isn't a very good gauge of player opinion of the aforementioned thread if most people can't agree on what it's about. However, that will have to wait for more people to come in and say that they don't know what it's about in order to be credible - as it stands, most commenters seem to know the suggestion implicit in the resolution and the ratio of those perplexed hasn't exceeded that which can be expected from any resolution in either chamber.

That's because most don't really give a hoot what happens in the WA, and those who do inform themselves. One look at the region being "liberated" is all it really takes here to realise that there's more to this.
TWP: Where stupid goes to die
Official Tree-hugger of The West Pacific.

-2.12, -4.67

User avatar
Firstaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8406
Founded: Jun 29, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Firstaria » Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:31 am

I like the SC and i think we should get the same, no wait MORE importance than the GA, but i think this "Liberation thing" seems more a joke than a real revolution. So i'm sorry, i support your cause, but i'll vote aganist.
OVERLORD Daniel Mercury of Firstaria
Original Author of SC #5 and SC #30

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2347
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:35 am

Actually the only point this is proving is that the far majority of WA voters regardless of which side is their "preferred" are simply too lazy to review the thing they are voting on. Be it GA resolution replete with errors, or a SC resolution designed to make a point that only those who are playing this part aspect of the game would get.
The Unified Districts Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlet - President

Ideological Bulwark #236

User avatar
Mavenu
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mavenu » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:44 am

Philimbesi wrote:Actually the only point this is proving is that the far majority of WA voters regardless of which side is their "preferred" are simply too lazy to review the thing they are voting on.


Hell yea. But they've been doing it for 6 years, so why should they stop ;)

Plus i thought it was supposed to be the feeders, or the raider/defenders, or the RPers that were supposed to be this cliquish (Yes i'm quite aware that every part of the game that people strictly play feel that theirs is the most important, and they don't always overlap interest.) :p

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2347
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:55 am

Hell yea. But they've been doing it for 6 years, so why should they stop


Don't expect them to, I've often thought of putting together a GA proposal that mandates putting babies on spikes and calling it "The Child Protection Act". Just to see if it was able to get legs. 8)
The Unified Districts Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlet - President

Ideological Bulwark #236

User avatar
Spartan Philidelphia
Minister
 
Posts: 2222
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Spartan Philidelphia » Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:02 am

Philimbesi wrote:+25 Points for "Was created to make a point"
-25 Points for "No one got the point"


Quite true considering the following quotes:

EVIL BEYOND COMPARE wrote:just so you know a liberation gets rid of a password on a region. your region has no password. this thing is pointless


Southern Bellz wrote:this thing is pointless.


Just because you didn't receive a point from Santa Claus, doesn't mean that there are no points at all. It just means that you've been a bad boy/girl this year and didn't study hard enough in school to get it. [The] SC may not seem busy most of the time, but when there is something needing liberating, commending, or condemning, they're the nations with a plan to uphold the Switzerlandishness of the WA! (NEUTRAL FTW!)

Firstaria wrote:I like the SC and i think we should get the same, no wait MORE importance than the GA, but i think this "Liberation thing" seems more a joke than a real revolution. So i'm sorry, i support your cause, but i'll vote aganist.


SUPPORT THE REVOLUTION (and I guess the resolution)! Liberate the Security Council!
Last edited by Spartan Philidelphia on Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
Spartan Philidelphia
Region: Sparta
[Defunct] National Corporation:
The Spartan Philidelphia Almost Anything Corporation
Leader: Luigi Mario
National Religion: Pastafarianism
Population: 50,420,000

Thank you all powerful moderators who were sent by Max Barry to protect us from all things spammy and trollish.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:14 am

Sedgistan wrote:Its not illegal, otherwise Ardchoille wouldn't have encouraged it.


If you read my post on the subject upside down and backwards, while processing -- skyclad -- nine times widdershins round a cathedral in the dark of the moon, you might be able to interpret it as encouragement.

The post I saw linked to earlier as my "encouragement" was in fact encouraging the idea of using C&Cs in this way, to make political statements. To use a Liberation proposal for the purpose seems to me to be using a chainsaw to open an egg. I had expected, once [violet] had agreed to the changes you were seeking, that there would be a Getting Help request to kill this.

However, I didn't delete it because it is legal as it stands, and I assume the other Game Mods/Admins who take an interest in the SC came to the same conclusion. As far as I can make out from Pyth's explanations, it's not that a region with a Founder can't be Liberated, just that there isn't much point in doing it. Topid, as Founder, can still password the region. However, if Topid goes MIA for a while, Unibot (or whoever is then Delegate) is going to have an ... interesting time, I would think.

If the SC wants to spend its time debating something it's already achieved -- and, by the approvals that weren't withdrawn, a fair slew of you evidently do -- it's not my job to stop you. The NS UN had to find out in practice how far its remit extended, and this chamber has to too. The NS UN's Enodian Conventions took a while to hash out, and then gave way to Hack's and Fris's Proposal Rules. Earlier proposals that would have been illegal under later rules stayed on the books, they were just not invoked/worked around/repealed, when that became possible. There's no reason the SC can't evolve in the same fashion.

So I can't say I encourage it, but then, I'd probably have told the original Boston Tea Party folk not to waste all that lovely tea. If you need a symbol, I guess this is as good as any.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17970
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:52 am

Philimbesi wrote:
Hell yea. But they've been doing it for 6 years, so why should they stop


Don't expect them to, I've often thought of putting together a GA proposal that mandates putting babies on spikes and calling it "The Child Protection Act". Just to see if it was able to get legs. 8)

OOC: It would (almost certainly) be deleted as illegal, because there's already been a ruling that the content of a NSUN GA proposal has to match the title.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:11 am

Ms. Harper votes in favour without question. it may not lead to a real revolution, but at least it's symbolic.

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2347
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:13 am

OOC: It would (almost certainly) be deleted as illegal, because there's already been a ruling that the content of a NSUN GA proposal has to match the title.


Ah yes.... Rules... I forgot one side of this body actually has them. I digress...
The Unified Districts Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlet - President

Ideological Bulwark #236

User avatar
UpperWales
Secretary
 
Posts: 26
Founded: Jan 01, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby UpperWales » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:34 am

So under this proposal, the Security Council would be a separate organisation from the General Assembly...

I don't see a problem with that, but surely one would have to "pick sides" as it goes. And what of those nations in the WA that don't know half of what's going on?

In the long term I think that separating the 2 powers would cause a power strife and divisions appearing within the WA.

As the For votes are currently a lot higher than the Against, I shall abstain instead.
UpperWales
The Return of the Thin White Duke

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2347
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:48 am

+25 Points for "Was created to make a point"
-25 Points for "No one got the point"
The Unified Districts Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlet - President

Ideological Bulwark #236

User avatar
Jey
Attaché
 
Posts: 99
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Jey » Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:20 pm

Jey casts its votes as the Delegate of the United Nations region FOR this resolution.
The Allied Empire of Jey (Jey Wiki - Featured Article) See also: Jevian, Universitus University - FAs
NSwiki Bureaucrat
Delegate: United Nations
Member: UN Old Guard
UN Resolutions: 125, 138, 139(C), 153, 157(C), 161(C), 166(S), 176, 191, 199, 213, 240, 244
WA Resolutions: 77(GA)

User avatar
Sedgistan
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 27332
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Sedgistan » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:09 pm

Ardchoille wrote:*snip*


Apologies for misrepresenting your views. Reading it again, you did just say that this resolution would be legal, but suggested using the C&C system instead, as a liberation resolution would be 'clunky'. That said, it was more encouragement than the other mod involved in the WA gave :P

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads