[PASSED] Repeal "Commend Topid"

[Unibot III]

Looking forward to the new draft.

As for the SC's community, while I'd conceded that it seems to have a weaker one than the GA, it's not due to Rule IV. Frankly, I can't see how you could argue it was because of Rule IV when you had previously argued that Rule IV was weakened to the point of being what your group had intended. The SC has not had such a community because by nature one would have to have a great deal of experience in other areas of NS to write a good draft. Nonetheless, in the last few years there's been a push towards making drafting more communal, mainly in TWP, TRR, TNP, WALL, Europeia, and TSP. Additionally, co-authorship seems to be on the rise. Finally, I would consider myself almost purely a Security Council player, and I think others (e.g. Kuriko) would consider themselves SC players even if that's not the only thing they do.

I think the 3WB did accomplish some major stuff:
- Would Sedge have been named moderator without the boycott and the debacle?
- Rule IV was significantly moderated … today, it’s basically everything I wanted.

I don’t think Rule IV destroyed the SC, but I do think the Rule IV ‘debate’ really did disrupt the SC’s community development and put it on a worse trajectory. We (3WB) gained ground, but we also spent an entire summer arguing — attacking each other viciously — organizing, petitioning, having meltdowns, and blocking resolutions. By the end of it all, it burned out a lot of the passion people had had previously for the SC.

I’m an optimist! Always! So I definitely have faith that the SC can find its footing and may be in the process of doing so. I’m not sure what to think about the 3WB today: whether it’s something to be proud of or something to reject. I think what I’m most disappointed in is that it took months of scorched earth tactics to deliver some reasonable concessions.

As for the forum destruction, "Condemn Unknown" might've worked — I'll give you that — but SC#98 treats the resolution as though it was some sort of SC-changing event in terms of the precedent it supposedly set, and that is simply not the case. There's only been (I think) one other case of that happening, and it's incredibly controversial and kind of a mess. There was no vote (not that there could have been, declarations are too new), but I think the vast majority of the SC views condemnations as almost-strictly badges of honor, and has shifted to offensive liberations for punishment.

I don’t think there’s anyway to know how the SC truly feels about this for as long as these kinds of condemnations are not only rarely submitted these days, but also blocked by queue raiding and opposed by large WA Voting Blocs.

I would argue that the WASC had a good history of effectively condemning regions… Macedon, The Pacific, Unknown, Nazi Europe, and it got results. Some regions sought to reconcile their image, many struggled to continue to recruit for as long as their region was linked to the condemnation.

History, in my opinion, doesn’t support many “badge of honour” theories and if the SC wants to oppose a region, it can and should do so by condemning that region.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

I don't really like the idea of repealing this proposal, unless it's to replace it with a better one. There are few nations who had more involvement in the WASC in the early days than Topid- for every resolution he wrote himself, there'd be many more that had his influence in the drafting process.

[Thousand Branches]

Recognizing Topid as an impressive nation, but more so for their region-building efforts than for their work in the Security Council,

Second "for" can be nixed.

Conceding that Topid was indeed an early pioneer of the Security Council, but arguing that their contributions were sparse compared to those of other participants like Naivetry, Sedgistan, and A Mean Old Man, none of which received commendation solely for their Security Council work, as Topid did,

Comma after work can be nixed.

Noting that this disparity in contributions extends to The Security Council, the region which SC#98 commends Topid for founding, as said region’s drafting threads were primarily contributed to by nations like Sedgistan, and A Mean Old Man,

The Security Council desperately needs a region tag if it's not referring to the actual SC.

"said" --> "the"

This should also make it clear that they were not contributed to by Topid?

Slightly embarrassed by the early crusade against Security Council Rule IV (renamed to Rule 2 in recent years), which stipulates that proposals mentioning events which did not truly occur in this reality must be removed by designated moderation nations. They believed that this would shut out condemnations and commendations for those who have participated in subsections of NationStates such as raiding and defending, but in fact the reverse came to pass, with those subcultures enjoying consistent and disproportional dominance in the SC. The hysteria of the early Security Council and groups such as Topid’s region has since been refuted by history,

"which" --> "that"

"slightly embarrassed" is a weird way to write this one too. It also occurs to me that this clause is more about some random movement and not at all about Topid's role in said movement, in fact not mentioning them until the very end.

Noting that The Security Council’s World Factbook Entry to this day arrogantly claims that with the region’s demise, the Security Council itself collapsed, and states that the Security Council cannot have a real community of nations with Rule IV in place, again a claim that has been refuted by our own august standing,

"our own august standing" is admittedly a weird way to word that. Maybe "this council's continued success"?

Nix "again".

Further rejecting SC#98’s ridiculous claim that the Security Council’s activity was only held up by the very short-lived and ultimately inconsequential Third Wall Bloc, that, hilariously, SC#98 implies to have collapsed at most 2.5 months following its announcement of its presence in international forums. That clause in SC#98 proceeds to make the suspect claim that the loss in activity sparked by the Third Walled Bloc was somehow recovered by Topid’s passing of “Condemn Unknown”, a claim that should have been elucidated further, as the frequency of resolutions passed did not significantly change prior to and after the passing of “Condemn Unknown”,

rewrite for a million tiny changes.

"Further rejecting SC#98’s claim that the Security Council’s activity was only held up by the very short-lived and ultimately inconsequential Third Wall Bloc that SC#98 implies collapsed only two and a half months after its announcement of its presence in international forums. That clause in SC#98 proceeds to make the shaky claim that the loss in activity sparked by the Third Wall Bloc was somehow recovered by Topid’s passing of “Condemn Unknown”, a claim with no statistical backing as the frequency of resolutions passed did not significantly change prior to or after the passing of “Condemn Unknown”,"

Seeking to rid the Security Council of the celebrations of the Third Walled Bloc and “Condemn Unknown” contained in the text of SC#98,

Okay, why is it sometimes the "Third Walled Bloc" and other times the "Third Wall Bloc"? Gotta pick one or the other

Understanding Topid’s Security Council history to have been occasionally detrimental (though this by no means detracts from their ultimate worth as a nation), including through their passing of “Condemn NAZI EUROPE”, a resolution which led to an outright ban on proposals condemning regions or nations for an ideology they believe in, and which Topid would later embarassedly apologize for; and their passing of “Condemn Unknown” for forum destruction, expressing a sentiment that is not supported by the Security Council today,

Why does the other unknown clause exist if you're gonna remark on it again here? Don't need to detail the failures of condemn unknown twice. Also the parentheses bit is just sort of unnecessary. If you're not writing a replacement, you don't need to be so careful about one happening in the future. Also the "embarrassedly" can be nixed.

Not particularly impressed by the other resolutions from Topid’s early history in the Security Council, which were of a lower quality than those by other pioneers, containing far less concrete evidence than other resolutions,

"other resolutions" --> "other resolutions of its era"

Recognizing that the sections of SC#98 not otherwise refuted here are merely a mention of a liberation Topid drafted, and a vague reference to work in General Assembly,

Comma after drafted isn't necessary.

Concluding that Topid is still a respectable nominee, but their description of Topid as a pioneer of the Security Council ended up being grossly exaggerated and premature, as much of their work has since been rejected by future generations of the Security Council community,

Who is "their"? Topid didn't claim that so you need to be more clear you're talking about the resolution there.

That's about it. Admittedly I'm unconvinced of the horrors of this draft, but I'd also probably be more convinced if a replacement were actually in the works.

Have a great day,

-A

[Bormiar]

Total rewrite!

I may not yield any more ground to Sedge and Unibot, especially because I think this repeal is pretty air-tight as is.

I've also tried to make it more legal.

The Security Council,

Conceding that Topid was involved in the early Security Council, and many of their contributions were impressive,

Arguing, however, that SC#98 greatly exaggerates the ultimate meaningfulness of Topid’s involvement, especially given that much of their career in the Security Council was plagued with damaging mistakes,

Noting that immediately following the foundation of the Security Council, Topid — using a vassal state named TannerFrankland which Topid would later describe as “the most hated [nation] in SC history”— passed the infamous resolution “Condemn NAZI Europe”, which led to months of angry debate, several attempts by prominent nations to repeal, and a strong push for an outright proscription of resolutions condemning ideologies,

Citing that after this debacle, Topid, under another puppet state known as Daynor, created yet another messy fight in the form of “Condemn Grub”, naively and wrongfully accusing the 10,000 Islands founder of “harassing” and “embarrassing” the natives of the raider region Empire of Power, in a proposal widely-disliked by Security Council members,

Recognizing that Topid attempted to distance themselves from their early work by abandoning TannerFrankland, deprioritizing Daynor, and creating Topid,

Concerned, however, that Topid would again misstep in their early accusations against the General Assembly, which Topid would later describe as misguided,

Certain that Topid’s Repeal “Commend 10000 Islands” — written under the nation Topid — was unconvincing and, due to political tactlessness, caused a much larger fight between Topid and 10,000 Islands than necessary,

Noting that Topid has written two letters to members of the Security Council apologizing for much of their early work in the Security Council,

Granting that while Topid did indeed found The Security Council, as mentioned in SC#98, nations such as Sedgistan and A Mean Old Man were the primary contributors to drafting. Topid was a nation with far less experience or clout, and was largely mentored by other nations in the region,

Believing that the campaigns of Topid and others against Security Council by-laws early on in the assembly’s gestation were premature. These nations claimed that these by-laws would shut out commendations and condemnations for nations which had involved themselves in inter-regional war, but the reverse came to pass, with those nations receiving disproportionate attention,

Disappointed that the World Factbook Entry of The Security Council states that the existence of these by-laws ensured that the Security Council collapsed and could not have a real community, a claim that is not only insulting, but incorrect, as the Security Council has successfully maintained a community of dedicated nations over the last ten years,

Unsure of SC#98’s claim that the most major campaigner against these by-laws, the Third-Walled Bloc, was single-handedly maintaining Security Council activity, and that after its collapse, Topid revived the Security Council with the passage of “Condemn Unknown”. While “Condemn Unknown” may have signified an acceptance of existing Security Council by-laws, SC#98 does not say this, instead making suspect claims about activity. The frequency of resolutions simply did not change significantly before and after “Condemn Unknown”,

Unconvinced that “Condemn Unknown” was, as SC#98 states, an example of Topid’s supposed pioneering, as the opinion promoted by “Condemn Unknown” — that the destruction of regional communication systems is condemnable — was never a widespread or standardized belief in the Security Council,

Unimpressed by many of Topid’s other resolutions, which were of a lower quality than those by other pioneers, containing far less concrete evidence than other resolutions, and typically being far vaguer,

Concluding that much of Topid’s history of the Security Council was tainted by repeated mistakes, and that their valid contributions were sparser and of lesser quality than other early members, like Sedgistan, A Mean Old Man, and Naivetry, none of which have received commendation for their Security Council work alone,

Hereby repeals SC#98 “Commend Topid”.

[Bormiar]

I would also mention that many want me to tarnish Topid's legacy further with talk of Pacifica and other errors. I'm not interested in doing so. I have agreed not to describe Topid as commendable, but believe that talk of his regions is best kept to any proposals attempting replacement.

That being said, I don't believe this resolution should ever have passed or should continue to be on the books. I will give this proposal teeth if need be.

[Black Swan-Topia]

Recognizing that while Topid did attempt to distance themselves from their early work by abandoning TannerFrankland, deprioritizing Daynor, and creating Topid,

Concerned, however, that Topid would again misstep in their early accusations against the General Assembly, which Topid would later describe as misguided,

OOC: This sounds... really weird? 'While Topid did attempt to distance themselves from their early work', then what? The way it's written implies that 'while Topid did attempt to...' is an introductory clause and should be followed by something else before 'Concerned'.

tl;dr drop the 'while' there

[Bormiar]

Recognizing that while Topid did attempt to distance themselves from their early work by abandoning TannerFrankland, deprioritizing Daynor, and creating Topid,

Concerned, however, that Topid would again misstep in their early accusations against the General Assembly, which Topid would later describe as misguided,

OOC: This sounds... really weird? 'While Topid did attempt to distance themselves from their early work', then what? The way it's written implies that 'while Topid did attempt to...' is an introductory clause and should be followed by something else before 'Concerned'.

tl;dr drop the 'while' there

Yeah, you're right. That's a mess.

"Recognizing that Topid attempted to distance themselves from their early work by abandoning TannerFrankland, deprioritizing Daynor, and creating Topid,"

Fixed, I think.

[Bormiar]

I think I fixed all major potential issues with this repeal, and the SC doesn't have much going on.

So I've since done some proofreading, including fixing some minor writing errors. I also added nation / region tags.

Unless someone else plans on passing their proposal next week, I'm thinking I can do this after the current resolution passes.

[Bormiar]

This has been submitted.

[Fachumonn]

This has been submitted.

This has been approved.

[Lenlyvit]

I don't really like the idea of repealing this proposal, unless it's to replace it with a better one. There are few nations who had more involvement in the WASC in the early days than Topid- for every resolution he wrote himself, there'd be many more that had his influence in the drafting process.

I'm going to have to agree with Klaus on this one, so I'll be voting against this resolution. Not that that means much these days.

[Refuge Isle]

I don't really like the idea of repealing this proposal, unless it's to replace it with a better one. There are few nations who had more involvement in the WASC in the early days than Topid- for every resolution he wrote himself, there'd be many more that had his influence in the drafting process.

Agreed with this sentiment. There is no replacement available, and it appears unlikely that the author will draft it. It's consequently, not a repeal and replace, but just a straight repeal for no discernable political reason.

The writing does not convince me that there is either cause or pressing need to remove this commendation. Most especially, targetting early legislative work and measuring an author against whether or not their writing has held up to modern standards, or turned out to be within the modern SC canon, is quite absurd. It would be surprising if there was much in the way of legislation or political documents from this point that survive thirteen years into the future, but surely that expectation becomes ridiculous when the timeframe is the chamber's formative years. Someone has to lay the groundwork, and get it both right and wrong.

Nothing is gained from this repeal, except to canonise some bitter sentiment that the past doesn't live up to the grand imaginings people wish it were.

[Bormiar]

I don't really like the idea of repealing this proposal, unless it's to replace it with a better one. There are few nations who had more involvement in the WASC in the early days than Topid- for every resolution he wrote himself, there'd be many more that had his influence in the drafting process.

Agreed with this sentiment. There is no replacement available, and it appears unlikely that the author will draft it. It's consequently, not a repeal and replace, but just a straight repeal for no discernable political reason.

The writing does not convince me that there is either cause or pressing need to remove this commendation. Most especially, targetting early legislative work and measuring an author against whether or not their writing has held up to modern standards, or turned out to be within the modern SC canon, is quite absurd. It would be surprising if there was much in the way of legislation or political documents from this point that survive thirteen years into the future, but surely that expectation becomes ridiculous when the timeframe is the chamber's formative years. Someone has to lay the groundwork, and get it both right and wrong.

Nothing is gained from this repeal, except to canonise some bitter sentiment that the past doesn't live up to the grand imaginings people wish it were.

You seem to have misunderstood the purpose of the repeal. I'm not comparing Topid to the "standards of today", whatever that might be. I'm repealing for the following reasons:

• Topid's presence was in some ways damaging to the SC.
• Topid's writing was lackluster, compared to the writing of his time. See the resolutions written by Unibot, Sedgistan, or AMOM. Those were the standard.
• SC#98 makes skeptical claims about Topid, as elucidated in the proposal.

As for specific comments:

ost especially, targetting early legislative work and measuring an author against whether or not their writing has held up to modern standards, or turned out to be within the modern SC canon, is quite absurd.

A clear misunderstanding of the proposal, which isn't forgiveable because I clarified it quite clearly in the thread. I'm not comparing his writing to standards of today. I'm comparing his writing to the proposals of his time. As explained quite clearly here:

Unimpressed by many of Topid’s other resolutions, which were of a lower quality than those by other pioneers, containing far less concrete evidence than other resolutions, and typically being far vaguer,

And at any rate, that's a very small part of the draft, which you've chosen to cause a fuss about.

It would be surprising if there was much in the way of legislation or political documents from this point that survive thirteen years into the future, but surely that expectation becomes ridiculous when the timeframe is the chamber's formative years.

Not true. This forum was created around about the time that the Security Council was (the forum came first). The Security Council's forum still exists as well. Actually, this is one of the few historical situations where there doesn't seem to be any gaps in the records.

Additionally, most of the content in my proposal comes from posts Topid wrote themselves. That's a pretty good source in my opinion.

A substantial portion of SC resolutions are done posthumously. By your logic, we should fail all of them because of some hazy and clearly exaggerated skepticism about what records survived.

canonise some bitter sentiment that the past doesn't live up to the grand imaginings people wish it were.

No grand imaginings. No bitterness either. Just a realistic perspective that came from a lot of research and my own contemporary expertise in the SC.

Not that that means much these days.

I still value your perspective Lenly, whether or not your vote counts.

I don't really like the idea of repealing this proposal, unless it's to replace it with a better one.

This is not a repeal due to the quality of the resolution. For his SC work alone, Topid does not appear commendable.

If someone were to attempt replacement, it would best be for his region building work. But that's completely irrelevant to this proposal, and honestly a completely different set of problems, considering he doesn't have a history of remaining committed to his regions. Many would suggest that he's not commendable at all.

This whole "there needs to be a replacement" thing seems to be the argumentation of a group of players who simply want Topid to keep his badge. If that describes you — and it looks like it does — merely say you still think he deserves it despite the evidence presented, and vote against. I'm not being sarcastic; that's a completely valid reason. However, there's really no need to invent arguments or straw-man the proposal in order to do so.

[Bormiar]

I apologize; I did not provide y'all with all the necessary evidence.

Here's one of his "confessions". It'll substantiate most of the proposal. He himself diminished his involvement in the Security Council, which he was commended for.

Here's a more in-depth apology for Nazi Europe.

There are two major parts of this that more closely reflect my opinion rather than Topid's. The first is on how Condemn Unknown did not have the lasting effect on the SC and might not have "revived activity" (no evidence of the latter), as SC#98 implies; I don't think that requires elaboration. The second is that the fight against Rule IV was premature. Some have pointed to Sedge's post to discredit this opinion. His opinion, however, is best applied to the first draft, which is substantially different. I rewrote it to reflect his information.

Again, this post was simply to provide some of the evidence that others implied were necessary.

[Fachumonn]

The Libertarian Socialist Confederation [delegate] has voted FOR this proposal, with tentative support,

[Sedgistan]

There are two major parts of this that more closely reflect my opinion rather than Topid's. The first is on how Condemn Unknown did not have the lasting effect on the SC and might not have "revived activity" (no evidence of the latter), as SC#98 implies; I don't think that requires elaboration. The second is that the fight against Rule IV was premature. Some have pointed to Sedge's post to discredit this opinion. His opinion, however, is best applied to the first draft, which is substantially different. I rewrote it to reflect his information.

Can confirm. While I don't wholly agree with the proposal's interpretation of the Rule 4 events, you've changed it sufficiently for me to vote for the proposal.

[Yelda]

Opposed. Just seems silly and vindictive.

[Tinhampton]

Repeal "Commend Topid" was passed 8,692 votes to 5,706. (60.37% support)