Lenlyvit wrote:Kylia Quilor wrote:Okay, I think you're misunderstanding the entire point of the exercise here. At least in terms of what is motivating me.
Taking the old resolution off the books is the entire point for me. The only reason I am contemplating writing a replacement condemnation based on decade old evidence in the first place is to accede to the arguments made by roleplayers here that, irrespective of the text of the resolution itself, for historical and OOC reasons, Blackhelm Confederacy deserves a condemnation.
Further, unless the SC changed the rules while I wasn't looking, which is possible, you can't condemn a nation for the same thing twice (at least if the original condemnation is still active), and since all I'll be doing is endeavoring to write a resolution that does the job of original, but (in theory) better, I would run afoul of that rule
So, what I am aiming to do here is
1. Write a better condemnation so that people can see I have it in hand to present once the original is repealed
2. Write an updated and improved version of the repeal I've already drafted (Admittedly, significantly altered, as there are several obvious areas for improvement)
3. Repeal the old resolution
4. Replace it with the new, better one.
No, I'm not misunderstanding anything. I entirely get your motivation because I've been following this thread since you posted it. Your motivation behind this is to repeal the original one because it is aesthetically displeasing to you and you alone. Not to the RP community, not to the nominee, but to you. And this is perfectly okay. However, I am trying to give you advice.
Your interpretation of the rules is correct in one way, but off in another. Since the old condemnations are filled with giant holes and not as detailed as current ones it is entirely possible to pass a new condemnation containing some of the same content. As long as the new resolution holds more detail, and goes more in-depth, it will pass the mod check and can be voted upon.
This has been the case in the new condemnation of both Macedon and Durkadurkiranistan II, where both new proposals were passed while the old ones were still in place. In fact, Durkadurkiranistan II still has both the original and the new resolution in place which is what I personally think should be done for Blackhelm Confederacy.
...Giving me advice on what? You were giving advice on how to achieve something other than what I was setting out to achieve.
That would have been like giving... I don't know, Edison advice on how to buy cheap candles, or something. Completely unrelated, and indeed, in the opposite direction that intended.
Wallenburg wrote:Kylia Quilor wrote:The only reason I am contemplating writing a replacement condemnation based on decade old evidence in the first place is to accede to the arguments made by roleplayers here that, irrespective of the text of the resolution itself, for historical and OOC reasons, Blackhelm Confederacy deserves a condemnation.
...
4. Replace it with the new, better one.
You cannot C&C an ex-nation.
The odds are fairly decent that by the time I had a replacement written, Blackhelm would come back, again.