World Assembly: Commend and Condemn

[Grub (Lenlyvit)]

www.nationstates.net/page=news/2009/05/27/index.html#commendandcondemn

"World Assembly: Commend and Condemn
by Max Barry

Now for something fun. The World Assembly has just gained two new Resolution categories:

*

Commend
*

Condemn

A Commendation expresses the World Assembly's warm support and approval for the nation or region in question; a Condemnation, its outrage and dismay. Either way, the recipient is branded with the graphic you see above, ensuring their fame (or infamy) is broadcast for all to see.

The usual Resolution rules apply: you need to be a WA member with at least two endorsements to Propose a Commendation or Condemnation, and passed Resolutions can be repealed (which removes the badge).

And, of course, exactly when and why these Resolutions should be employed is a matter for World Assembly members. But I'm sure you'll think of something. "

[Ananke II]

Interesting. Could make interregional relations more useful again, since you'd need to convince a certain amount of delegates about the merit of your commendment/condemnation to get it through. I figure most proposals won't go through (at least those dealing with Joe random nation/region), but if imperialists like Unknown or the Commonwealth regions get interested we might see some 'abuse' (e.i condemnations of peaceful and/or defender regions).

[Chronopolice]

Interesting concept.

Throwing pies and sending flowers just went up another level. ;D

[Anime Daisuki]

Posted by one of the mods on the NS forum:

"Commend/Condemn proposals are exempt from the violations that apply to legislation proposals. Legislation proposals establish WA laws that apply to all WA nations. Commend/Condemn proposals are expressions of WA nations' opinion and may refer to nations or regions outside the WA, but only insofar as they concern the WA. For example, a "condemn" resolution may refer to a non-WA nation's treatment of prisoners but may not refer to the player who wrote the posts concerning the treatment of prisoners.

References in the proposal to RPd activities of the nation/region must be accompanied by links to threads or posts in which those actions take place.
References to voting patterns of the nation/region concerned must be accompanied by

*(five?) links to posts in which a vote is cast OR
*(five?) snapshots of the nation/region's vote as delivered by the nation's WA representative or the region's endorsed WA Delegate OR
*other independently verifiable source taken from the NationStates board. NOTE: References to offsite activity will cause the proposal to be deleted.

References to individuals must be to IC characters (nations' leaders, Ministers or other personalities) ONLY; direct references to the player behind the character(s), whether negative or positive, will cause the proposal to be deleted. Excessively negative direct references will be treated as flaming.
References to the Gameplay function of a player such as a Regional Delegate or a Founder must be confined solely to WA activities on behalf of the region concerned. It is not acceptable, for example, to condemn the methods a Regional Delegate used to gain endorsements or a Founder's decision to put a password or endorsement cap on a region."

[Ananke II]

Boring. Why limit the references to IC and WA stuff? Would be far more fun if you could use it for regional politics and gameplay stuff.

[Crazy Girl]

Feel free to suggest it

[Ananke II]

Alright, seems like the wording I was annoyed over was just Ardchoille trying to fit the new feature into the WA structure. [violet] sounds pretty positive about letting everyone use it their own way.

Speaking of which, would anyone else be up for having a pinned thread, where we could post suggestions for proposals (whether they be WA or C&C) we'd like HockeyNutville support? Might as well use his ability to approve proposals.

[Anime Daisuki]

Seems like there's going to be a changes soon. Quote by [violet]

"I want to personally apologize for not understanding the Metagaming ruling properly; my own reading of that was clearly out of line with what everyone here understood, and in my early posts I gave the impression that I wanted to overrule it. That absolutely wasn't my intention. Nobody wants to force the WA community to change the way it plays the game. And, for the record, nobody doubts its significance to NS.

So we'll work it out. If it means separating C&Cs from WA legislation, even retrospectively, we'll do that. We'll do whatever's required to allow WA and Gameplay to co-exist."

[Salinthal]

I am unsure about this legislation. It seems like to direct a way to attack or harass nations and regions. I enjoy my anonymity, it provides and comfort when liberating or defending to be unheard of.