[PASSED] Condemn Gatesville Inc

[Pierconium]

You're probably wrong, Todd.

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

No, you're wrong.

Anyway, against.

[Darkesia]

I have just read the current Condemnation of Gatesville Inc.
Unfortunately, it is inaccurate and misleading concerning my role in both Gatesville and the Lots of Ants incident. While I love having a scary reputation, I cannot take credit/blame for orchestrating that operation. I was a small bit player in the wider drama.

That is the direct section I am qualified to speak about.

Given this problem, I will be voting against and asking that others please do the same. I don't want to see this inaccuracy become part of NS cannon.

[Bormiar]

I have just read the current Condemnation of Gatesville Inc.
Unfortunately, it is inaccurate and misleading concerning my role in both Gatesville and the Lots of Ants incident. While I love having a scary reputation, I cannot take credit/blame for orchestrating that operation. I was a small bit player in the wider drama.

That is the direct section I am qualified to speak about.

Given this problem, I will be voting against and asking that others please do the same. I don't want to see this inaccuracy become part of NS cannon.

I called you an orchestrator (like a co-conspirator) just to illustrate Gatesville's involvement- the word is up to so much interpretation that your involvement becomes ambiguous. Going into the specifics, I made it clear that you're involvement is unknown through "it is entirely unknown as to whether or not Darkesia always controlled Lots of Ants".

With all due respect, I wouldn't say you're so important in a condemn Gatesville proposal that the entire thing should fail because of a minor ambiguity (or even inaccuracy) in your involvement in one espionage operation (GV still did it), especially because of the lack of details in the LoA event.

[Westwind]

With the number of inaccuracies in the proposal, it will be unfortunate if this passes.

In example, Peirconium did not "seized the nation" of Pixiedance, rather access was given freely. Access to Pixiedance was also given to Insane Power.

[Bormiar]

With the number of inaccuracies in the proposal, it will be unfortunate if this passes.

In example, Peirconium did not "seized the nation" of Pixiedance, rather access was given freely. Access to Pixiedance was also given to Insane Power.

“Seized the nation” is a conventional way of saying it was given. “Nation sharing” isn’t really a thing that makes sense IC. I don’t see how it applies that access was given to Insane Power. Either way, Gatesville supported it.

Condemnations have inherently questionable tones- they demonize a nation or group of nations for IC actions when really the fourth wall is very important to these things, and as such they can’t be looked to as entirely terminologically accurate. Go against the WA if you must.

The main problem here is the expectation that every word’s connotative (not definitive) accuracy is pristine, when most resolution authors are picking at scraps of information on the forums- we do our best. If your proposed mandate is historical perfection, we’re not only going to run into a lot of problems, but maybe you should sit down and write about these events (preferably before the proposals two days into vote). I do my best, but if this one word doesn’t meet your standards on word choice, there’s nothing anyone can do- say it during drafting or approval stage.

[Darkesia]

So now, it is our responsibility to scour the SC for your mistakes, and we should hang our heads in shame that we didn't write a history for you?

I cannot imagine a circumstance where I would have given permission for you to write lies about Darkesia had I seen it before now. You chose to include Darkesia. You chose to embellish the tale. You chose to do these things without checking accuracy or even feasibility.

I am disappointed.

[Bormiar]

So now, it is our responsibility to scour the SC for your mistakes, and we should hang our heads in shame that we didn't write a history for you?

No, just please don't act like you're so obsessed with historical accuracy if you don't.

I cannot imagine a circumstance where I would have given permission for you to write lies about Darkesia had I seen it before now. You chose to include Darkesia. You chose to embellish the tale. You chose to do these things without checking accuracy or even feasibility.

I attempted to ask you about the event, but you answered vaguely and I figured there wasn't much you would tell me (I may have misunderstood).

As for embellishment, I feel that you're embellishing your argument on the semantics of a single word with claims of incompetence, gross historical revisionism, and "lies".

I hope you'll understand that I'm not questioning your knowledge of the event, simply the interpretation of my words.

[Cormactopia Prime]

With the number of inaccuracies in the proposal, it will be unfortunate if this passes.

In example, Peirconium did not "seized the nation" of Pixiedance, rather access was given freely. Access to Pixiedance was also given to Insane Power.

That's a rhetorical flourish, not an inaccuracy.

This all sounds like blown out of proportion nitpicking from the longtime do-nothing armchair quarterbacks of the West Pacific. Why should anyone care?

[Wickedly evil people]

With the number of inaccuracies in the proposal, it will be unfortunate if this passes.

In example, Peirconium did not "seized the nation" of Pixiedance, rather access was given freely. Access to Pixiedance was also given to Insane Power.

That's a rhetorical flourish, not an inaccuracy.

This all sounds like blown out of proportion nitpicking from the longtime do-nothing armchair quarterbacks of the West Pacific. Why should anyone care?

Actually it is a laundry list of lies supported by the Ancient Prevaricator Cormactopia.

[Cormactopia Prime]

That's a rhetorical flourish, not an inaccuracy.

This all sounds like blown out of proportion nitpicking from the longtime do-nothing armchair quarterbacks of the West Pacific. Why should anyone care?

Actually it is a laundry list of lies supported by the Ancient Prevaricator Cormactopia.

Seconds ago: Cormactopia Prime changed its national nation type to "Ancient Prevaricator".

Thanks for that!

[Tiranai]

The point of the condemnation is to condamn Gatesvill Inc., yet, many facts attributed to Gatesville (not Inc.) are mentionned. If Gatesville Inc. does deserve to be condemned for a coup in 2013, then things done by another organization (even if its members are the same) are not relevant. Or shouldn't. Like, if the husband kills someone, you won't sentence both the husband and the wife for that one murder, right? Thus, voting FOR might create a precedent of nations followed to their new regions after they have amended for past crimes, and still being punished over and over again.

In consideration of this, and even though Gatesville Inc. might actually have done wrong to Osiris, voting AGAINST this particular Resolution seems appropriate.

[Bormiar]

The point of the condemnation is to condamn Gatesvill Inc., yet, many facts attributed to Gatesville (not Inc.) are mentionned. If Gatesville Inc. does deserve to be condemned for a coup in 2013, then things done by another organization (even if its members are the same) are not relevant. Or shouldn't. Like, if the husband kills someone, you won't sentence both the husband and the wife for that one murder, right? Thus, voting FOR might create a precedent of nations followed to their new regions after they have amended for past crimes, and still being punished over and over again.

In consideration of this, and even though Gatesville Inc. might actually have done wrong to Osiris, voting AGAINST this particular Resolution seems appropriate.

I posted a response to a similar comment on 10KI’s forum, and the commenter seemed satisfied by it, so:

Gatesville Inc was created and run by the same people, and perpetrated one of the most successful coups in NationStates' history: the Dourian Embassy coup, so the "sins of the fathers" thing is erroneous- they changed the banner they rallied under slightly because their region was refounded by a non-Gatesville member. Gatesville Inc isn't just a branch off; it's a direct continuation analogous to what would happen if your region's founder CTEd and you just had to move the community to avoid raids. Gatesville Inc actually bears resemblance to what Gatesville should be, as evident by its WFE and founder. As such, it's entirely justified, and should be encouraged, to condemn Gatesville's second incarnation for the actions taken by it and its predecessor- the clear meaning being to condemn Gatesville in the organization's entirety without prejudice in its home.

[Byenochin]

The point of the condemnation is to condamn Gatesvill Inc., yet, many facts attributed to Gatesville (not Inc.) are mentionned. If Gatesville Inc. does deserve to be condemned for a coup in 2013, then things done by another organization (even if its members are the same) are not relevant. Or shouldn't. Like, if the husband kills someone, you won't sentence both the husband and the wife for that one murder, right? Thus, voting FOR might create a precedent of nations followed to their new regions after they have amended for past crimes, and still being punished over and over again.

In consideration of this, and even though Gatesville Inc. might actually have done wrong to Osiris, voting AGAINST this particular Resolution seems appropriate.

Well you are indeed right, it seems that Gatesville Inc. is only guilty of the coup. There is really no reason that we should condemn a region for things another region has done. From what i understand after looking into Gatesville Inc., the region does not appear to have any of the former members of Gatesville.

So you are right, it dies in fact seem appropriate to vote AGAINST the resolution.

[Bormiar]

The point of the condemnation is to condamn Gatesvill Inc., yet, many facts attributed to Gatesville (not Inc.) are mentionned. If Gatesville Inc. does deserve to be condemned for a coup in 2013, then things done by another organization (even if its members are the same) are not relevant. Or shouldn't. Like, if the husband kills someone, you won't sentence both the husband and the wife for that one murder, right? Thus, voting FOR might create a precedent of nations followed to their new regions after they have amended for past crimes, and still being punished over and over again.

In consideration of this, and even though Gatesville Inc. might actually have done wrong to Osiris, voting AGAINST this particular Resolution seems appropriate.

From what i understand after looking into Gatesville Inc., the region does not appear to have any of the former members of Gatesville.

How closely did you look? It can't have been that extensive considering the founder is the same as the original founder of Gatesville.

[Westwind]

How closely did you look? It can't have been that extensive considering the founder is the same as the original founder of Gatesville.

This is not true.

Founder of Gatesville is Gates the god
Founder of Gatesville Inc is Gates the great

Two different nations, by two different players.

Gates the god closed Gatesville, ejected it's nations, and left the game.

[Bormiar]

How closely did you look? It can't have been that extensive considering the founder is the same as the original founder of Gatesville.

This is not true.

Founder of Gatesville is Gates the god
Founder of Gatesville Inc is Gates the great

Two different nations, by two different players.

Gates the god closed Gatesville, ejected it's nations, and left the game.

Maybe I misread this, but Gates the God posted the re-opening of Gatesville thread, and made several other posts during the GV Inc time.

Either Gates or Nevader was the second founder, but Gates was definitely a co-founder.