NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] Condemn The Black Hawks

A chamber dedicated to the dissemination of inter-regional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.
User avatar
Frontier Isles
Secretary
 
Posts: 39
Founded: Jan 19, 2021
Civil Rights Lovefest

[DRAFT] Condemn The Black Hawks

Postby Frontier Isles » Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:04 pm

Outer Sparta created a forum thread for my SC proposal before I created this thread.
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=498896

Anyway, my SC proposal is below. I'd appreciate any constructive feedback.
https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1613889457

The Security Council,

Acknowledging that The Black Hawks have been condemned twice by resolution SC #52 and resolution SC #217.

Noting that The Black Hawks have continued to carry out raids on other regions since the passage of resolution SC #217, and asserting that a third condemnation is needed to emphasize the constant threat that The Black Hawks pose to "interregional peace and goodwill".

Further noting that The Black Hawks have established 234 embassies with other regions; many of these regions were raided by The Black Hawks, and some of these raided regions are still controlled, or "colonized", by The Black Hawks, such as Westphalia, which has been controlled by The Black Hawks for nearly two years.

Horrified that The Black Hawks participated in the recent invasion of The Embassy, a neutral region that held 3519 embassies; the World Factbook entry of The Embassy became an advertising space for The Black Hawks and its allies following the invasion. Further shocked that the invaders dismissed the officers in The Embassy, and the invaders ordered all 3519 embassies to be shut down.

Recognizing that recently, The Black Hawks and Lily "look towards a bright future" between them and their militaries, indicating that The Black Hawks are now allied with another "invader" region.

Restating that, to emphasize the threat that The Black Hawks pose to "interregional security and goodwill", it is necessary for the Security Council to use force and condemn The Black Hawks because the purpose of the Security Council is to "[spread] interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary".

Hereby condemns The Black Hawks.
Last edited by Frontier Isles on Sun Feb 28, 2021 6:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11534
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:39 pm

I think it would be the best if you withdraw your current submission and work on a draft in the first place. I'll just rehash a few things why I oppose it: not drafted on the forums, seems hastily-written, also looks like bandwagon jumping similar to the Condemn Lily resolution at-vote. I also am not convinced why TBH needs a third badge when the first two cover a lot of their raiding basis and this one, again, was seemingly made to bandwagon TBH hate (same with the Lily one) following The Embassy raid.
Last edited by Outer Sparta on Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Bhang Bhang Duc
Minister
 
Posts: 2835
Founded: Dec 17, 2003
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bhang Bhang Duc » Fri Feb 26, 2021 12:08 am

As has been stated elsewhere this is nothing more than an attempt to cash in on TBH’s recent involvement in the raid on The Embassy.

And it’s going to suffer the same fate as the currently at vote “Condemn Lily”.

Your work is not particularly original, nor is it well thought out. Okay I’m going to say it - it’s a badge hunt and nothing more than that.

I will be advising TWP’s Delegate to vote early and vote against.

However, I do have some time to dissect your attempt.

Frontier Isles wrote:The Security Council,

Acknowledging that The Black Hawks have been condemned twice by resolution SC #52 and resolution SC #217.

This, at least, is correct.

Frontier Isles wrote:Noting that The Black Hawks have continued to carry out raids on other regions since the passage of resolution SC #217, and asserting that a third condemnation is needed to emphasize the constant threat that The Black Hawks pose to "interregional peace and goodwill".

So, what were some of those raids and why do you think having a third condemnation is going to be more of an emphasis than two?

Frontier Isles wrote:Further noting that The Black Hawks have established 234 embassies with other regions; many of these regions were raided by The Black Hawks, and some of these raided regions are still controlled, or "colonized", by The Black Hawks, such as Westphalia, which has been controlled by The Black Hawks for nearly two years.

Rubbish clause, means nothing. You talk about a number of embassies that is purely a snapshot, the number can vary on an almost daily basis. Only one region is mentioned as being in long term control, you could have done a lot more research on this.

Frontier Isles wrote:Horrified that The Black Hawks participated in the recent invasion of The Embassy, a neutral region that held 3519 embassies; the World Factbook entry of The Embassy became an advertising space for The Black Hawks and its allies following the invasion. Further shocked that the invaders dismissed the officers in The Embassy, and the invaders ordered all 3519 embassies to be shut down.

It was Lily’s operation. They set it up, they were lead on it. TBH was there to support as were other militaries. Shouldn’t Lily be condemned for this? Oh, wait, it’s been tried and has failed miserably.

Frontier Isles wrote:Recognising that recently, The Black Hawks and Lily "look towards a bright future" between them and their militaries, indicating that The Black Hawks are now allied with another "invader" region.

Not even original.

Frontier Isles wrote:Restating that, to emphasize the threat that The Black Hawks pose to "interregional security and goodwill", it is necessary for the Security Council to use force and condemn The Black Hawks because the purpose of the Security Council is to "[spread] interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary".

Hereby condemns The Black Hawks.

Filler and what is worse it’s a cliched filler.
Last edited by Bhang Bhang Duc on Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
Former Delegate and Guardian of The West Pacific. TWP's Former Minister for World Assembly Affairs

The West Pacific's Official Welshman, Astronomer and Old Fart

Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.

RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11534
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:18 am

Would the author at least attempt to explain their motives for making the proposal and address the criticisms brought forth by BBD?
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Atheris
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5711
Founded: Oct 05, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Atheris » Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:21 am

No. We shouldn't give them any more attention.
Kannap wrote:It is I, the stranger in the night who cuts the power lines with hedge clippers
Valentine Z wrote:**a m b i e n c e**
Kick cancer's ass for me, Owlograd!
LIIIIIIIIIVE IN IGNORANCE, AND PUUUUURCHASE YOUR HAPPINESS! WHEN BLOOD AND SWEAT IS THE REAL COST, THINKING CEASES, THE TRUTH IS LOST!
The self-proclaimed Resident Shitposter of NSG.
Proudly sex-repulsed ace and bisensual aro. Cis he/him. Trans ally. ADHD.
"To comment is human, to preview, divine." - Godot
Orthodox Preterist non-denominational Christian Universalist.
I write fanfiction (of the non-explicit kind). Fuck you if you judge me.
Pirate Politics are fucking awesome.

User avatar
The Reformed American Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 3543
Founded: May 23, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Reformed American Republic » Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:23 am

They've already been condemned twice, so why do they need a third?
Last edited by The Reformed American Republic on Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11534
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:28 am

The Reformed American Republic wrote:They've already been condemned twice, so why do they need a third.

As BBD said earlier, this one looks like an attempt to cash-in on the recent Embassy raid. I also agree in that it's pure bandwagoning.
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Eumaeus
Envoy
 
Posts: 216
Founded: Jan 27, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Eumaeus » Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:54 pm

Since I no longer have the ability to respond in the original thread, I'm going to respond to this post and this post here: I am aware that it is a semicolon in the submitted proposal, my point was that it should be a colon. I changed the semicolon into a colon and marked it in blue to call attention to the change. My exact words regarding the semicolon were "that semicolon should be a colon".

Outer Sparta wrote:Would the author at least attempt to explain their motives for making the proposal and address the criticisms brought forth by BBD?

Echoing Outer Sparta's question, I would like to hear a bit more from the author regarding why they feel a third condemnation is necessary.

As I said in my feedback in the original thread, SC #217 justifies condemning The Black Hawks for a second time on the basis that it was updating the list of wrongdoings perpetrated by them and providing a more detailed account of TBH's transgressions. This proposal does not, in my opinion, follow that precedent because it does not detail much of what TBH have done since the passage of SC #217. Therefore this author must, surely, have a different justification for why an additional condemnation is necessary, however based on the text of the proposal alone I remain unconvinced.
Last edited by Eumaeus on Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
\▼/We Are Not the NSA\▼/

Raiding HistorySecurity CouncilDear NativesTWP Raid

"You ask my honorable name? My name is Nohbdy:
mother, father, and friends, everyone calls me Nohbdy."

User avatar
Frontier Isles
Secretary
 
Posts: 39
Founded: Jan 19, 2021
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Frontier Isles » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:30 pm

After reading your posts, I have concluded that there are four main things you all want to discuss.

The motive behind my proposal is clearly to bandwagon.
My response: Essentially, my friend on NS (I'm not going to say who), wrote an SC propsal to condemn TBH after the raid on The Embassy. However, their proposal had numerous flaws: it was written in the style of a blog entry; there was no evidence; there was no "hereby condemns TBH" line. It clearly would have been marked as illegal, so, after being asked by them, I wrote an SC proposal to condemn TBH.
So was my friend bandwagoning? I don't know, man. Why don't you go ask them? But I still won't tell you who they are, so good luck!

We should not give TBH more attention by giving them a third condemnation, which they don't even deserve.
My response: We're all sick and tired of seeing regions be raided by TBH.

Why didn't I create a drafting thread for my SC proposal? It looks hastily written.
I like doing things independently. Besides, this is my first ever SC proposal.

That damn semicolon.
OK, fine. A colon is preferable, but a semicolon is fine there because it's seperating two independent clauses.
Last edited by Frontier Isles on Sun Feb 28, 2021 7:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Pluvie
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 148
Founded: Apr 14, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Pluvie » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:58 pm

Frontier Isles wrote:Why didn't I create a drafting thread for my SC proposal? It looks hastily written.
I like doing things independently. Besides, this is my first ever SC proposal. What did you expect.

To be entirely honest, now that you are on the forums and are arguing for your proposal, I see no problem with pulling the proposal for now so you can really improve the draft later. It’s your first proposal and everybody knows that, if you wanted to accept the help of a lot of amazing and experienced writers, we’re more than willing to help you edit it into a more complete draft. I personally think proposals are made or broken on how solid the writing is and writing can only be written so well with one pair of eyes. I’d recommend just pulling it for now and I and everyone else would be more than willing to help edit it with ya ^-^

Of course that’s up to you, but I will say in its current form, it almost certainly will not pass. If you edited and improved it, I guarantee you’d receive at least some additional support.
Main of Aramantha, resident Enby, Fox, Dragon, Catgirl, Time Traveller, Spectre of Hearts, Kangaroo(???), possibly or possibly not a madcap magician, apparently Dolphin?, and friend to (almost) all! You better be having a good day or I'll have to come give you a good day myself :<

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11534
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:24 pm

Frontier Isles wrote:We should not give TBH more attention by giving them a third condemnation, which they don't even deserve.
My response: We're all sick and tired of seeing regions be raided by TBH, and don't mollycoddle TBH like you all are doing now. I'll draft a commendation for TBH if you love 'em so much.

None of us are mollycoddling TBH. Most of our criticisms are aimed at your draft itself, which does a very poor job at outline the arguments as to why TBH should get a third condemnation. There's virtually nothing in your submission that warrants another condemnation.

Frontier Isles wrote:Why didn't I create a drafting thread for my SC proposal? It looks hastily written.
I like doing things independently. Besides, this is my first ever SC proposal. What did you expect?

You can't really do things independently in regards to WA resolutions. You have to get the necessary feedback on your work, what you can do to improve it, and of course, more than one pair of eyes can catch any possible errors. It is highly advised you draft on the forums, even as a first-time writer. The regulars will happily work with you provided you are willing to listen to their feedback. They won't have much patience with poorly thought out ones.

Frontier Isles wrote:The motive behind my proposal is clearly to bandwagon.
My response: Essentially, my friend on NS (I'm not going to say who), wrote an SC propsal to condemn TBH after the raid on The Embassy. However, their proposal had numerous flaws: it was written in the style of a blog entry; there was no evidence; there was no "hereby condemns TBH" line. It clearly would have been marked as illegal, so, after being asked by them, I wrote an SC proposal to condemn TBH.
So was my friend bandwagoning? I don't know, man. Why don't you go ask them? But I still won't tell you who they are, so good luck!

It's exactly what you are doing. You're using recent events to cash-in on a badge and by using a popular raider as a condemnation target. Given that TBH is known for their raiding activities, there will be people that will automatically vote to condemn no matter if the draft is of good quality or not. Unfortunately, your draft isn't well thought-out and will need a lot of work. The fact that you submitted it without drafting on the forums also reeks of opportunism.
Last edited by Outer Sparta on Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Eumaeus
Envoy
 
Posts: 216
Founded: Jan 27, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Eumaeus » Sat Feb 27, 2021 8:56 pm

Frontier Isles wrote:After reading your posts, I have concluded that there are four main things you all want to discuss.

The motive behind my proposal is clearly to bandwagon.
My response: Essentially, my friend on NS (I'm not going to say who), wrote an SC propsal to condemn TBH after the raid on The Embassy. However, their proposal had numerous flaws: it was written in the style of a blog entry; there was no evidence; there was no "hereby condemns TBH" line. It clearly would have been marked as illegal, so, after being asked by them, I wrote an SC proposal to condemn TBH.
So was my friend bandwagoning? I don't know, man. Why don't you go ask them? But I still won't tell you who they are, so good luck!

Weird thing to withhold, but okay. Personally, I don't generally care about the reasons an individual author has for writing any given proposal. It would be pretty hypocritical of me in particular, considering the fact that one of my three resolutions is a repeal of a Liberation of a region that I had raided and refounded. I'm more concerned with the rhetorical/legal justifications than I am about personal justifications.
We should not give TBH more attention by giving them a third condemnation, which they don't even deserve.
My response: We're all sick and tired of seeing regions be raided by TBH, and don't mollycoddle TBH like you all are doing now. I'll draft a commendation for TBH if you love 'em so much.

Trust me, there are few SC contributors who would like to see a third condemnation of The Black Hawks more than myself. Regardless, this addresses neither my previous question of why a third condemnation is necessary nor my concerns about the lack of detail regarding the past half decade of history that has happened since the last condemnation of TBH.
Why didn't I create a drafting thread for my SC proposal? It looks hastily written.
I like doing things independently. Besides, this is my first ever SC proposal. What did you expect?

I learned a long time ago that it is unreasonable to expect neophytic authors to draft before submission, but that reality does not diminish the fact that it is generally a better idea for new authors to adapt to the long held traditions of the Security Council than to flagrantly disregard them. This is well written but, frankly, you are capable of better. The tone of this response leads me to believe that the author may have misinterpreted the intentions of those they are responding to. Most of the people who frequently post in this forum typically do so with the goal of helping others to improve their work (whether directly or indirectly), and though the tone of our feedback may seem terse at times it is more accurately described as candid.

You are not doing yourself any favors by sniping at those who have dedicated their time to offering you feedback.
That damn semicolon.
OK, fine. A colon is preferable, but a semicolon is fine there because it's seperating two independent clauses.

Fair enough. I noticed that there seemed to be a misunderstanding of what I said and I was simply trying to correct the mistake.
Last edited by Eumaeus on Sat Feb 27, 2021 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
\▼/We Are Not the NSA\▼/

Raiding HistorySecurity CouncilDear NativesTWP Raid

"You ask my honorable name? My name is Nohbdy:
mother, father, and friends, everyone calls me Nohbdy."

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6979
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:17 pm

Just pull the proposal. It's okay to do that, and make adjustments to it so it's in a much better shape.

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11534
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:12 pm

I see the proposal has been withdrawn. At least the author will go back to the drawing board and focus on making it better.
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6979
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:51 pm

Outer Sparta wrote:I see the proposal has been withdrawn. At least the author will go back to the drawing board and focus on making it better.

I'm glad they listened!


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Security Council

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Altmoras

Advertisement

Remove ads

cron