[Complete]SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION: Condemn Southern Bellz[Archived]

[Blackshear]

Condemn Southern Bellz


Description: DENOUNCING The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz for interfering with a free and fair election by tampering with an election in progress and corruptly maintaining power, through the unjust ejection of candidate nations.

AWARE that universally applied principles of international law mandate the democratic election of Regional Delegates by providing in every region of the world that the nation with the most endorsements at the time of the votes are counted is automatically elected Regional Delegate;

NOTING that the nation of The Allied States of Devonitians replaced The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz and became Regional Delegate of the South Pacific by using this democratic, universally accepted method of election,

APPRECIATING that The Allied States of Devonitians respected democratic rule by announcing free elections and by inviting and allowing all nations in the South Pacific to freely endorse other nations so as to freely and democratically select a new Regional Delegate,

UNDERSTANDING that after convincing enough nations to unendorse The Allied States of Devonitians, The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz resumed the role of Regional Delegate,

RECOGNIZING that at the time The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz resumed the role of Regional Delegate a democratic election was still in progress,

APPALLED that upon returning to power The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz suspended democratic rule to remain in power, violating the political and civil rights of the nations of the South Pacific with a campaign of repression which included:

* Unilaterally terminating an election in progress,
* placing the South Pacific under a state of martial law,
* ejecting candidate nations which had received valid endorsements,
* effectively destroying the votes of nations which endorsed the candidate nations

NOTING that such actions effect democratic decision making of the world community because the Regional Delegate of the South Pacific with it's large number of votes has outsized influence over if resolutions pass or fail in the World Assembly;

PROTESTING that by ejecting candidate nations involved in an on-going election The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz not only interfered with the civil and political rights of said nations, but effectively engaged in vote tampering by effectively destroying the ballots of a approximately 100 nations which the two candidate nations prior to ejection;

DENOUNCING the disenfranchisement of over 100 nations during an on-going election as an unwarranted attack on the right of the nations of a region to democratically select a Regional Delegate;

FINDING such actions to be dangerous, discriminatory, and a threat to the right of nations to democratically choose Regional Delegates;

FEARING such corruption and disregard for the spirit of democratic rule may spread unless these corrupt and undemocratic actions are condemned.

HOPING that by publicly condemning The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz the Security Council will discourage other nations from the deplorable and undemocratic practice of undermining, tampering with or otherwise interfering with on-going elections;

The nations of the Security Council hereby condemn The Smoking Gun of Southern Bellz.


Voting Ends: in 3 days 2 hours

 

[Eluvatar]

This is a big deal: It's basically an attack on feeders.

It's condemning a native delegate for stopping a swapper who seized power and started banning all opposition. The "election" SB interrupted was one where Devonitians not only excluded SB but banned SB's supporters and suppressed their posts and posts linking to TSP's forum.

We simply must express a stance on this, and I obviously think we should vote against it.

This is equivalent to the WA condemning a delegate of ours retaking the region after a tyrannical coup d'etat for not letting the rogue hand off the delegacy to Anybody Not From Here.

I vote AGAINST

 

[Topid]

Exactly as Elu said, I have no WA here, so don't count my vote, but as a native of TSP I have to say this.

The election Bellz is accused of being corrupt during was an election called by our invader delegate, who allowed anyone from outside the region to run but would not allow Bellz to run for her old seat back. And because Bellz was the only person with native support for the delegacy, she rapidly overtook Sedge and all the candidates he drafted into the region to run in his election, there in ignoring the election. The corruption was not allowing SB to run in the election because Sedge knew she'd win. Well, that and lying to the natives to get their endorsements in the first place.

The resolution is written by one of the candidates in the sham election.

Also, if Bellz was corrupt I would be banned for challenging her delegacy now. But I'm doing it the legal way and she has been very fair to my challenge. These charges are false.

 

[Felasia]

For, I didn't agreed with most of what is written and I don't support the coup, but she deserve condemnation for strangling the life out of TSP.

 

[Eluvatar]

For, I didn't agreed with most of what is written and I don't support the coup, but she deserve condemnation for strangling the life out of TSP.

1. So you're okay with a Condemnation on the books being full of falsehoods?

2. How exactly did SB strangle the life out of TSP?

 

[unibot]

I echo the sentiments of Elu and Topid, some UCR delegates seem to be under the impression that an endo-cap is undemocratic (and uncommon for that matter).. even though an endo-cap protects democracies instead of allowing dictators the ability to tart their way to power.

If TNP is voting against, as an experienced voting strategist and trend viewer, I would highly recommend that you vote against soon before the "FOR" side reaches critical mass and isn't catchable. Just a suggestion. *shrugs*

 

[Felasia]

1. So you're okay with a Condemnation on the books being full of falsehoods?

I think it's a different in opinion rather then falsehood. The author of this resolution and Sedge view the endorsement system as the selected method for election in TSP in the absence of other system like an election on off-site forum. I think her "succession" act is create to maintain power, not to pass it on to another who are outside of the group, as can be seen on a clause that demand three months membership on TSP inactive forum before an intent for delegacy can be made.

In my opinion, the lack of democracy in TSP should be condemned because of it's phony attempt of hiding this fact. I don't support the coup, but I think Southern Bell should be condemned for her negligence of the region (Which leads to the coup) and for creating this phony democratic system.

2. How exactly did SB strangle the life out of TSP?

Before the coup, TSP forum is dead and the RMB are mostly full of spam. As head of government, SB had made no attempt to change the situation or to engage in anyway with the population that didn't registered on the forum. She didn't even make an attempt to maintain the security of the region by giving out endorsement thus allow Sedge to overthrow without outside interference. If she can't protect her region and serve it's nation then she should resign and find someone who can actually do it, not leaving it stagnant. (Topid would be a good choice or Lady Rebel, IMO)

I echo the sentiments of Elu and Topid, some UCR delegates seem to be under the impression that an endo-cap is undemocratic (and uncommon for that matter).. even though an endo-cap protects democracies instead of allowing dictators the ability to tart their way to power.

It's undemocratic when the endo cap of 50% and the percentage of endorsements needed to declare intent for delegacy is at least more then 50%.

If TNP is voting against, as an experienced voting strategist and trend viewer, I would highly recommend that you vote against soon before the "FOR" side reaches critical mass and isn't catchable. Just a suggestion. *shrugs*

It is my opinion that TNP should only vote when the region had made a decision. and not when it benefit a for or against bloc of voters. Also, currently against is leading.

 

[Topid]

I think it's a different in opinion rather then falsehood. The author of this resolution and Sedge view the endorsement system as the selected method for election in TSP in the absence of other system like an election on off-site forum. I think her "succession" act is create to maintain power, not to pass it on to another who are outside of the group, as can be seen on a clause that demand three months membership on TSP inactive forum before an intent for delegacy can be made.

In my opinion, the lack of democracy in TSP should be condemned because of it's phony attempt of hiding this fact. I don't support the coup, but I think Southern Bell should be condemned for her negligence of the region (Which leads to the coup) and for creating this phony democratic system.

We have an election system, anyone can challenge Bellz at any time. None of us have (well, HEM did earlier in the year but he dropped it) for our various own reasons, but mainly we weren't to concerned with ousting her. Why should everyone else? Now, after all the shit-storm, I'm attempting to win the region over in a fair election by legal ways, which Sedge could have done himself.

Has The North Pacific ever legally elected a nation delegate that has been a member of the region less than three months? *waits* Shame on you, too, then.

If the Martial Law / Law of Succession is a plot to keep SB in power I would think she'd respond differently to my challenge. As of now, she's really not made any argument as to why we should re-elect her... She certainly isn't the squash-the-opposition type, I assure you.

Finally, Bellz inactivity did not lead to the coup. Admittedly, she might have been able to stop it before he took over by banning Sedge had she noticed him, but, had she been active Sedge still would have couped her. It was never about the activity it was about stirring up discussion in the Gameplay forum on NS which Sedge and CG have been trying to do for some time. That's how little the feeders mean to them.

Before the coup, TSP forum is dead and the RMB are mostly full of spam. As head of government, SB had made no attempt to change the situation or to engage in anyway with the population that didn't registered on the forum. She didn't even make an attempt to maintain the security of the region by giving out endorsement thus allow Sedge to overthrow without outside interference. If she can't protect her region and serve it's nation then she should resign and find someone who can actually do it, not leaving it stagnant. (Topid would be a good choice or Lady Rebel, IMO)

First of all, Sedge's campaign would have been effective no matter what. Endorsing every single member of the region and sending them a telegram saying "I endorsed you to show I am your friend, will you please do the same?" or something like that will get you shit-tons of endorsements. Actually, comparatively it worked 3x better than my telegram to every nation in the region about my attempt to become delegate... Also, we knew SB didn't endo-tart well at all, she said that in the delegate forums a little while ago. And we knew she went too many hours between log ins sometimes. But none of us wanted to do it either, I was delegate elsewhere, LadyRebels only came to TSP after the coup, HEM had been just as inactive at the time, Todd is delegate elsewhere, etc. Can't blame her for not doing what no one else was willing to do either. We are one of the few feeders who have the problem of having an active player base that has no interest what-so-ever in becoming delegate.

It's undemocratic when the endo cap of 50% and the percentage of endorsements needed to declare intent for delegacy is at least more then 50%.

That is not how that works. The endocap is 50%, if you get more than 50% you MUST make a statement of intent or non-intent so we know. If you make a statement of intent it is election time, if you make a statement of non-intent we'll give you a while to get back bellow the cap.

But you can make a statement of intent whenever you want, it doesn't become 'official' per say and start the election process until you get the 50%. I for instance made my statement of intent at around 40%.

 

[FALCONKATS]

I WILL VOTE AGAINST THIS RESOULTION

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

My problem is that the statement of events as described in the resolution does not seem to be consistent with the discussion of these events within the R.A. here.

Even if Southern Bellz deserves disapproval for being inactive and neglectful, that is not what this resolution bases its call for condemnation upon. The fact that the sponsor of the proposal (if I follow the discussion correctly) was a participant in the events makes this resolution dubious at best.

I will be voting against the resolution in its current form. Has the author and proponents based it on the longer term problems, this might have had my support. I urge Blackshear to cast the region's votes against this, as well.

 

[Blackshear]

I will submit the regional vote (as always) when the discussion is complete. Additionally, I will only be taking into account (as always) the votes of TNP WA members and Regional Assembly members.

 

[Topid]

Ahem, weeell, even though I argued against it please count my vote as a RA member as abstain then Blackshear. I find the SC stuff important, too important to influence the delegate of two regions by voting in the poll, if that makes sense. I was just here to debate.

 

[Felasia]

We have an election system, anyone can challenge Bellz at any time. None of us have (well, HEM did earlier in the year but he dropped it) for our various own reasons, but mainly we weren't to concerned with ousting her. Why should everyone else? Now, after all the shit-storm, I'm attempting to win the region over in a fair election by legal ways, which Sedge could have done himself.

I believe that the condemnation just point out that TSP current method of delegate selection tends to maintain nation in power and doesn't encourage new nation participation. In my opinion, Democracy exist only when players are allow and encourage to exercise their right. In TSP, the forum inactivity which is the home to her government and fall under her responsibility clearly discourage new nation participation thus lead to undemocratic system which can't be challenge. It should also be noted that it is entirely possible that SB deliberately leave the forum inactive as to discourage other from interesting in her delegacy. After all, if Sedge is as evil as everyone claim then it is entirely possible for SB not to be the good gal she claimed to be.

Has The North Pacific ever legally elected a nation delegate that has been a member of the region less than three months? *waits* Shame on you, too, then.

I think we haven't, but I am not sure if you count a nation that was elected after coming back for less then three months. (NK and Ermarian comes to mind.) I am sure though that we allow new nation to participate in our government as quickly as within month as evident from Villnoia1.

If the Martial Law / Law of Succession is a plot to keep SB in power I would think she'd respond differently to my challenge. As of now, she's really not made any argument as to why we should re-elect her... She certainly isn't the squash-the-opposition type, I assure you.

I mean no disrespect to SB, but it is obvious her time as TSP delegate is over. Sedge action have painted her as incompetence and undemocratic to many NSer and had achieved one of his main target to ensure that TSP must become active or risk losing interregional support. However, I view the law before this event as a discouraging tool for any TSPer thinking about trying their hand on the position.

Finally, Bellz inactivity did not lead to the coup. Admittedly, she might have been able to stop it before he took over by banning Sedge had she noticed him, but, had she been active Sedge still would have couped her. It was never about the activity it was about stirring up discussion in the Gameplay forum on NS which Sedge and CG have been trying to do for some time. That's how little the feeders mean to them.

I disagreed. The coup would never have happen if she remains vigilant over her endorsement level; the simple endo-exchange campaign combined with her level of influence would have ensure the safety of her delegacy. Sedge could never get enough endorsements without raising suspicious first as she would have notice his attempt of endo-tarting before any attempt of coup actually happen.

Personally, I would encourage the region to abstain. I am far more concerned that this region shouldn't be view as either pro-SB or pro-Sedge so that TNP wouldn't be drag into the conflict like the FRA. I change my vote to Abstain and will call for Abstain on all TSP-Deno related vote.

 

[unibot]

Ha, yeah, if the North Pacific is 'dragged' into the conflict like the FRA -- Sedgistan may try to spite us like he did to the FRA. So therefore we should throw away our principles and do what will anger Sedgistan the least. Good plan Fel, Good plan.

Ultimately the World Assembly does not abstain, this vote will be decided whether or not you want it to be, and we can either let it take its course (probably in a direction many of us disagree with) or let our voice be heard regardless of whether or not it's a voice that Sedgistan wants to be heard (seeing as how he suppressed anything that he didn't like in TSP, and bans players from his IRC channels if they don't shut up about his coup -- I would say he doesn't like dissent). With a vote that is filled with lies and deception, for the North Pacific to avoid entering the 'conflict' (liars and the misled vs. the honest), is an evil through inaction. Not every player can be contacted about the lies that undermine this resolution's flimsey rhetoric, and therefore the game is counting on our better informed delegacies to sway the vote to the honest and genuine side.

 

[Felasia]

Ha, yeah, if the North Pacific is 'dragged' into the conflict like the FRA -- Sedgistan may try to spite us like he did to the FRA. So therefore we should throw away our principles and do what will anger Sedgistan the least. Good plan Fel, Good plan.

Ultimately the World Assembly does not abstain, this vote will be decided whether or not you want it to be, and we can either let it take its course (probably in a direction many of us disagree with) or let our voice be heard regardless of whether or not it's a voice that Sedgistan wants to be heard (seeing as how he suppressed anything that he didn't like in TSP, and bans players from his IRC channels if they don't shut up about his coup -- I would say he doesn't like dissent). With a vote that is filled with lies and deception, for the North Pacific to avoid entering the 'conflict' (liars and the misled vs. the honest), is an evil through inaction. Not every player can be contacted about the lies that undermine this resolution's flimsey rhetoric, and therefore the game is counting on our better informed delegacies to sway the vote to the honest and genuine side.

I would like to respectfully remind you that the principle on WA voting here is that the Delegate decides how he is going to cast the vote. In this instance, Blackshear allow each TNP's members an opportunity to voice their opinion and their reasoning. We would only be throwing away our principle if we allow outsider opinion to sway us in anyway. TNP had no position during the entire conflict, it wouldn't be strange if we also have no position in any of this vote.

And why should TNP or me be worried about angering Sedgistan? He seems to be able to separate action taken from individual that did them unlike number of players who fail to do so during this crisis. I am far more afraid of a vindictive player who is set on revenge.

The World Assembly may not abstain, but I believe that we can. My personal feeling is still that SB deserved condemnation for her dubious negligence of her region which led to a dictatorship and her suppression of an election attempt, but I will not object if the delegate vote against this resolution based on the voice of it's citizen on this forum or if the delegate feel that it is in TNP best interest to stand firm behind a group that is likely going to win. However, I hope that he will not vote on it just because WA Resolution Expert who have personal interest in this resolution demand that he vote on it.

 

[Eluvatar]

I think it's entirely in TNP's interest to vote against this. It is an attack on feeder sovereignty.

 

[unibot]

And why should TNP or me be worried about angering Sedgistan? He seems to be able to separate action taken from individual that did them unlike number of players who fail to do so during this crisis. I am far more afraid of a vindictive player who is set on revenge.

Oh, vindictive, unlike Sedgistan. I see the suggestions of your implicatures -- demean my advice as a vindictive player who is bent on revenge and you may be able to spin this resolution as something different than simply a lie perpetuated by those who have been misled by Sedgistan whilst in the process of attempting to save his reputation.

However, I hope that he will not vote on it just because WA Resolution Expert who have personal interest in this resolution demand that he vote on it.

And I hope that he won't abstain on it just because TRR's ambassador to the FRA whose political career is partially tied to the public approval of Sedgistan's coup, demands that he abstains on it. Especially when the rest of the Regional Assembly has voiced their concerns against this resolution.

 

[Eluvatar]

Uh guys, this is the first time I'm doing this in TNP but ah, make sure not to flame each other okay?

O_O

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

Topic moved to archival.

 

[r3naissanc3r]

Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.