[AT VOTE] Commend Mikeswill

[Midnight Sparkle]

Category: Commendation | Nominee: Mikeswill | Proposed by: Jocospor

The Security Council,

Recognising unequivocally the nation of Mikeswill, NationStates' longest serving World Assembly Delegate.

Celebrating Mikeswill's 'crystal anniversary'; that is, its 15th year as World Assembly Delegate of NationStates.

Lauding Mikeswill for its exceptional dedication to the rigorous administration of NationStates' government, with NationStates itself acknowledged as a region of sizeable and cultural significance.

Appreciating Mikeswill's daily "Today's Featured Nation" announcement on NationStates' Regional Message Board (duly noted in SCR#55), a practise Mikeswill has continued consistently for the greater half of eight years.

Not at all ignorant to the controversies surrounding Mikeswill; addressing those controversies now:

• Rebuking the concern that Mikeswill was previously commended by this Security Council in SCR#55 but that commendation was repealed by SCR#72:
  
  • SCR#72 reads more as an attack against Mikeswill. It had the audacity to label Mikeswill's extended World Assembly Delegacy as "somewhat impressive" and called into question the nation's dedication. Nearly seven years later, Mikeswill has undoubtedly shattered the - effectively - jealous rhetoric of SCR#72.
  • SCR#55 commended Mikeswill for six years of service as NationStates' World Assembly Delegate. The nation's tenure in that position has now more than doubled and reached fifteen years. Needless, then, is it to alert this Security Council to the most misjudged slanders levelled against Mikeswill in SCR#72.
• Also aware that Mikeswill stands in proud defiance of this Security Council and has spoken critically of it on numerous occasions; believing this Security Council should honour Mikeswill anyway, as:
  
  • the nation boasts a World Assembly Delegacy of unprecedented, and arguably untouchable, length;
  • this Security Council is itself capable of drawing distinction between action and attitude; and
  • this Security Council has honoured nations for far lesser feats (with this being a general, objective fact, perchance disputed by only the most cantankerous of ambassadors).
• Finally, understanding relationships between Mikeswill and various raiding and defending organisations to be fractured; again, reminding this Security Council that it has a duty to commemorate outstanding accomplishments free of prejudice.

Thus, in a time marred by friction and depopulation, declaring Mikeswill an unfaltering bastion of hope and commitment to nations all across NationStates.

Once more, insisting that the nation's extraordinary achievements transcend any political squabbling, material fascinations and past contentions.

Therefore, this Security Council, with great mirth and jubilant fanfare, hereby commends Mikeswill.

[Midnight Sparkle]

A vote AGAINST is recommended for the following reasons:
The SC proposal at hand is written first and foremost by an author universally disliked by the decent regions and nations of the world for both their various self-aggradizaition and fascist nature. Furthermore, the nominee is being commended almost entirely for holding a regional delegacy for a long period of time, with little to no other notable features noted to their delegacy. Additionally, the proposal has received only the minimum of drafting needed in order to secure legality (with a previous version being illegal as submitted). Finally, the proposal asserts that "this Security Council has honoured nations for far lesser feats," a exceedingly false claim and slander against the names of those so commended by the Security Council.

[Cormac]

I think too much of the resistance to this is actually about authorship alone, which shouldn't happen. I realize Dom made other arguments in the recommendation, and I do think some of those other arguments are valid. But I don't think that's why most of gameplay is voting against this proposal, I think it's more petty personalization crap.

For that reason, it's a For vote from me.

[JRJR_SLAYER]

I think too much of the resistance to this is actually about authorship alone, which shouldn't happen. I realize Dom made other arguments in the recommendation, and I do think some of those other arguments are valid. But I don't think that's why most of gameplay is voting against this proposal, I think it's more petty personalization crap.

For that reason, it's a For vote from me.

Well, I'd personally rather avoid giving Joco any kind of sense of accomplishment.

[DoomHerald]

I think too much of the resistance to this is actually about authorship alone, which shouldn't happen. I realize Dom made other arguments in the recommendation, and I do think some of those other arguments are valid. But I don't think that's why most of gameplay is voting against this proposal, I think it's more petty personalization crap.

For that reason, it's a For vote from me.

Well, I'd personally rather avoid giving Joco any kind of sense of accomplishment.

How about Pride then? Kidding, but Cormac has a point here. We shouldn't encourage ad hominem.

[Cormac]

Well, I'd personally rather avoid giving Joco any kind of sense of accomplishment.

That would be the personalization crap to which I was referring.

The thing is, I don't like Jocospor either. But I think gameplay has become way too much about petty personalization, and what's worse, I think having burned down gameplay and being thoroughly bored with playing in its ashes, gameplayers are now trying to export their petty personalization routine to other parts of the game. We've seen this recently with members of The North Pacific arguing against General Assembly resolutions based on authorship, and now we're seeing it in the Security Council with people voting based on authorship in this case (though I acknowledge some are voting for other reasons). This petty personalization hasn't been healthy for gameplay; in fact, it has destroyed gameplay. So I think we should all take a good, long look at whether we want it to spread to other parts of the game. I've quit gameplay because of how shitty it is, but I haven't quit the overall game, so I'd like to see the worst elements of gameplay quarantined to the toxic culture of gameplay where it belongs. Otherwise there's going to be no part of this game worth bothering with anymore.

[JRJR_SLAYER]

Well, I'd personally rather avoid giving Joco any kind of sense of accomplishment.

That would be the personalization crap to which I was referring.

The thing is, I don't like Jocospor either. But I think gameplay has become way too much about petty personalization, and what's worse, I think having burned down gameplay and being thoroughly bored with playing in its ashes, gameplayers are now trying to export their petty personalization routine to other parts of the game. We've seen this recently with members of The North Pacific arguing against General Assembly resolutions based on authorship, and now we're seeing it in the Security Council with people voting based on authorship in this case (though I acknowledge some are voting for other reasons). This petty personalization hasn't been healthy for gameplay; in fact, it has destroyed gameplay. So I think we should all take a good, long look at whether we want it to spread to other parts of the game. I've quit gameplay because of how shitty it is, but I haven't quit the overall game, so I'd like to see the worst elements of gameplay quarantined to the toxic culture of gameplay where it belongs. Otherwise there's going to be no part of this game worth bothering with anymore.

In my experience this is nothing new at all. The SC has always voted down Joco's attempts to get shiny badges, and this is nothing different. Further, I fail to see how it is a problem to want to exclude the rulers of self-proclaimed (in another attempt at an SC badge no less) fascist region. They don't belong in GP, they don't deserve any acceptance, and their participation should never be accommodated for. That's not toxicity, it's basic social hygiene.

[Lukatonia]

Against