Glen-Rhodes wrote:The problem with that Araraukar is that there's no logical step between "I'm okay if individuals outside of a government violate WA resolutions" and "It's not okay if people inside a government violate WA resolutions."
Poor roleplay quality is no excuse for inconsistent rules. It's dumb to create rules based on the lowest common denominator of players. Either you think it's acceptable, in terms of the rules recognizing its existence, for non-compliance to occur in all its forms, or you don't. This middle of the way path just muddles up everything.
Perhaps, if this were a roleplaying forum. It's not. Though a fair amount of RP is injected into the proceedings here, this is primarily a debate forum, and encouraging newbies to ignore resolutions if they dislike them does not promote good debate. "We refuse to comply with this resolution" is not a response to anything; it's just defiant, not-terribly-interesting bullshit that does not contribute to discussion at all -- and on the whole, it ought to be discouraged here. Also, as I'm quite sure you are aware, because you are a student of logic, RPing noncompliance requires actual RP. You have to make an earnest effort to roleplay your noncompliance if you expect anyone to respect your claims to "RP" in any fashion. "I'm not in compliance because RP!" is not roleplay. But if you are interested in actually roleplaying your defiance of the World Assembly, there are several dedicated RP forums for you to use for that purpose. This one ain't it.
Debate proposals and resolutions while you're here. Resolve upon your nation's internal response to a passed resolution on your own time.
