Thoughts on WA commendations of states.

[Syritania]

Honourable members of the World Assembly, dear brethren,

it has come to my attention that lately (and also earlier in history) you're hell bent on commending different nations for their supposedly remarkable and highly appreciated deeds and policies both in regards to their internal and foreign affairs.

As a state which values social equality and complete rationality and neutrality when making decisions, be that for a family, village, local government, the nation or let alone the whole membership of the honoured World Assembly (which is indeed an assload of nations), the Community of Syritania finds this practice wrong, immoral and corrupt.

As the World Assembly is there to protect and unite all of its members, regardless of their region or who's in charge, and to promote equality within itself, we find that it is wrong for the Assembly to endorse any of its nations, thus showing them to be superior to the rest. That is, simply, unequal and disrespectful to the rest of us who may not even be presented with the opportunities to stand out like some nations do.

Please share your points of views here, fellow members of the Assembly.

The Community of Syriatnia feels our ultimate goal, in relation to this particular issue, is to prevent all kinds of commendation polls from taking place, although as a start it would be acceptable if they were all just voted down.

"Let them eat jellybeans!"

[Grays Harbor]

Yay. Lets hear it for mandatory egalitarianism.

[Canadaiana]

[Syritania]

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

[Beldonia]

Honourable members of the World Assembly, dear brethren,

it has come to my attention that lately (and also earlier in history) you're hell bent on commending different nations for their supposedly remarkable and highly appreciated deeds and policies both in regards to their internal and foreign affairs.

As a state which values social equality and complete rationality and neutrality when making decisions, be that for a family, village, local government, the nation or let alone the whole membership of the honoured World Assembly (which is indeed an assload of nations), the Community of Syritania finds this practice wrong, immoral and corrupt.

As the World Assembly is there to protect and unite all of its members, regardless of their region or who's in charge, and to promote equality within itself, we find that it is wrong for the Assembly to endorse any of its nations, thus showing them to be superior to the rest. That is, simply, unequal and disrespectful to the rest of us who may not even be presented with the opportunities to stand out like some nations do.

Please share your points of views here, fellow members of the Assembly.

The Community of Syriatnia feels our ultimate goal, in relation to this particular issue, is to prevent all kinds of commendation polls from taking place, although as a start it would be acceptable if they were all just voted down.

(Image) "Let them eat jellybeans!"

I see where you're coming from, but a commendation (or a condemnation, for that matter) don't actually do anything. If a nation commits an outstanding act, they should be praised or spat on for it. Under the eyes of the WA, they're equal. One nation=one vote.

[Grays Harbor]

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Or.... We are just dead set against stupid ideas. Which this is. Completely.

[Corporation de Apple]

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Can we not question the sexual and political orientation of players and nations? We're supposed to be respectful (not that anyone ever is )

[Syritania]

I see where you're coming from, but a commendation (or a condemnation, for that matter) don't actually do anything. If a nation commits an outstanding act, they should be praised or spat on for it. Under the eyes of the WA, they're equal. One nation=one vote.

Yes but some countries don't have the chance to do something noble enough to be praised for it.
Also, nations in the World Assembly have different opinions and some nations think they deserve to be acknowledged while they're actually despised. While indeed, each nation has a vote, I must say that the minorities are not represented if the majority just goes ahead and commends or condemns anyone as they please.

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Or.... We are just dead set against stupid ideas. Which this is. Completely.

I would actually argue this. The WA is ought to be a role model for all nations, not only the majority.
If nations want to commend anyone, they can do so by endorsing them themselves. They don't need the whole world to do so. Thus it's just the majority bandwagoning the minorities.

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Can we not question the sexual and political orientation of players and nations? We're supposed to be respectful (not that anyone ever is )

You certainly can, my friend.

[Grays Harbor]

Or.... We are just dead set against stupid ideas. Which this is. Completely.

I would actually argue this. The WA is ought to be a role model for all nations, not only the majority.
If nations want to commend anyone, they can do so by endorsing them themselves. They don't need the whole world to do so. Thus it's just the majority bandwagoning the minorities.

What you term "bandwagoning", we call "voting". This idea is completely flawed.

(OOC: It is also calling for a complete change in the games coding, which, quite frankly, ain't gonna happen unless you come up with more compelling arguments than "It isn't FAIR!" or "We should all be equal by mandate!")

[Offenheim]

Perhaps you might consider looking for the exceptional and commendable aspects of every nation in NationStates and start drafting proposals to commend them all.

[Sedgistan]

As the World Assembly is there to protect and unite all of its members, regardless of their region or who's in charge, and to promote equality within itself, we find that it is wrong for the Assembly to endorse any of its nations, thus showing them to be superior to the rest. That is, simply, unequal and disrespectful to the rest of us who may not even be presented with the opportunities to stand out like some nations do.

Of course the World Assembly treats all nations equally. It just treats some of us more equally than others.

*polishes commendation badge*

[Frattastan]

Commendations do not give any kind of privilege or power to nations, so they do not actually harm equality.

[Those who want it]

these resolutions commending states is a complete waste of time.

[Beldonia]

these resolutions commending states is a complete waste of time.

It instills a feeling of goodwill between all nations.

[Roman Templars]

I too feel like they are a waste of time when we could have more important things to do[vote] instead of voting for commendations

[Syritania]

Commendations do not give any kind of privilege or power to nations, so they do not actually harm equality.

No privilege indeed, but the Assembly is not a status club. It makes me feel bad that some other nation is considered superior to mine. It would also make me feel bad if all of a sudden I was condemned for something I considered benevolent, like some people consider ethnic cleansing benevolent.

[Euroslavia]

Commendations do not give any kind of privilege or power to nations, so they do not actually harm equality.

No privilege indeed, but the Assembly is not a status club. It makes me feel bad that some other nation is considered superior to mine. It would also make me feel bad if all of a sudden I was condemned for something I considered benevolent, like some people consider ethnic cleansing benevolent.

So you would say that it'd be wrong to commend a nation for aiding another after a natural disaster, by offering billions of dollars in aid for reconstruction and aiding in rescue operations? Compare that nation (equal in finances, and provided that their nation was well off) to another who refused to send any aid to the devastated nation. You really think it's fair to say, based on actions, that they are on equal ground when both could've offered similar aid?

[Great Nepal]

Commendations do not give any kind of privilege or power to nations, so they do not actually harm equality.

No privilege indeed, but the Assembly is not a status club. It makes me feel bad that some other nation is considered superior to mine. It would also make me feel bad if all of a sudden I was condemned for something I considered benevolent, like some people consider ethnic cleansing benevolent.

If it makes your government feel bad that someone else is commended while yours isn't, perhaps you should try to do stuff that majority appreciates.

((OOC: I dont agree with voting system in SC, should be 2/3rd majority for all three: but I guess that doesn't go here...)

[Metania]

Another person who doesn't understand the SC complaining about it.

How new and surprising.

[Grays Harbor]

Another person who doesn't understand the SC complaining about it.

How new and surprising.

Yes, we were completely shocked as well.

[Canadaiana]

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Is the guy preaching equality and fairness being homophobic?

[Syritania]

So you would say that it'd be wrong to commend a nation for aiding another after a natural disaster, by offering billions of dollars in aid for reconstruction and aiding in rescue operations?

Yes. If you think the nation deserves recognition, have your administration endorse it, why drag the whole world into it?

No privilege indeed, but the Assembly is not a status club. It makes me feel bad that some other nation is considered superior to mine. It would also make me feel bad if all of a sudden I was condemned for something I considered benevolent, like some people consider ethnic cleansing benevolent.

If it makes your government feel bad that someone else is commended while yours isn't, perhaps you should try to do stuff that majority appreciates.

We're an independent nation and proud of it. All of a sudden I'm supposed to feel bad about it because while being independent I cannot get into the cool club.

Also note that I do not wish to be in the cool club, I wish for there not to be one at all. I don't want others to be more important than me, but I also don't want to be more important than others. We can't fit everyone in the cool club so I say we eliminate it.

Of course capitalist states with sexually unsure leaders would immediately speak up against neutrality and tolerance.

Is the guy preaching equality and fairness being homophobic?

You're implying an awful lot. Nowhere did I mention homosexuality, much less my dissatisfaction with it or any other kind of sexuality.

[Metania]

So in other words, "If I can't have it, no one else should be able to have it, either."

I'm sorry, that's a logical fallacy.

[Great Nepal]

If it makes your government feel bad that someone else is commended while yours isn't, perhaps you should try to do stuff that majority appreciates.

We're an independent nation and proud of it. All of a sudden I'm supposed to feel bad about it because while being independent I cannot get into the cool club.

Also note that I do not wish to be in the cool club, I wish for there not to be one at all. I don't want others to be more important than me, but I also don't want to be more important than others. We can't fit everyone in the cool club so I say we eliminate it.

We cant fit...
everyone in mod club so we should eliminate it.
everyone in admin club so we should eliminate it.
everyone in issue editor club so we should eliminate it.
everyone in max barry club so we should eliminate him...

Am I right?

[Naivetry]

I too feel like they are a waste of time when we could have more important things to do[vote] instead of voting for commendations

Actually... in terms of voting in the SC, you do not have more important things to do. Unless there is a Liberation at vote, in fact, you don't have anything else to do at all.

So you would say that it'd be wrong to commend a nation for aiding another after a natural disaster, by offering billions of dollars in aid for reconstruction and aiding in rescue operations?

Yes. If you think the nation deserves recognition, have your administration endorse it, why drag the whole world into it?

One very simple reason, which I can't fault you for having overlooked, but... you can't endorse a nation unless you're in the same region as that nation. Game-coded reality, there.

We're an independent nation and proud of it. All of a sudden I'm supposed to feel bad about it because while being independent I cannot get into the cool club.

I want to be sure I understand you, here. By "independent" do you mean "not cooperating with other nations in the game"?