[Complete]At Vote:Condemn Cormac A Stark [Complete]

Abacathea

Abacathea

TNPer
Condemn Cormac A Stark
A resolution to express shock and dismay at a nation or region.


Category: Condemnation

Nominee: Cormac A Stark

Proposed by: Abacathea​

Description: The Security Council;

Convinced that the work of this esteemed council continues to serve as a beacon to the international community in terms of both illuminating those who have contributed to its betterment and warning against those who would serve a detriment to it;

Troubled that The Smash the Security Council of Cormac A Stark has been overlooked by this esteemed body despite the odious impact it has levied upon the international community;

Noting that Cormac A Stark is the former prince regent of the imperialist region Exshaw, a region which on the orders of Durkadurkiranistan II dispatched itself to The North Pacific in an attempt to invade upon the region and inflict havoc during the period of governmental changeover occurring at that time;

Aware that in addition to their association with Exshaw Cormac A Stark was also the founder of Asgard, an Imperialist region well known within this assembly for the destruction and chaos it inflicted on the region of Christmas, ultimately requiring this very council to step in and liberate said region;

Dismayed that Cormac A Stark has repeatedly shifted allegiances, being at various times a defender, raider, or imperialist, using whatever identity and label suits their nefarious purposes, and aware that through this practice, Cormac A Stark has repeatedly shown the international community their duplicitous nature;

Aware that when not destroying innocent regions and displacing their natives, Cormac A Stark enjoys politically motivated destruction, having sparked a coup of their home region Osiris after signing a treaty with Gatesville inc which they immediately proceeded to break the conditions of leading to the purging of the region by Cormac's own hand only to resign the post to Detective Figs, the end result being the further breach and dissolving of the constitution of the region, of which Cormac supported;

Further aware that Cormac A Stark is currently the occupying point of St Abbaddon alongside the Brotherhood of Malice, an operation which not only saw the region targeted and fall to Cormac and their ilk with expert precision and execution but saw the Security Council itself brought to shame by the antics of Cormac and associates;

Believing that at this present time, Cormac A Stark is politically one of the most dangerous nations at large within the international community;

Hereby
Condemns The Smash the Security Council of Cormac A Stark.
 
mowa-seal.png

MINISTERS REVIEW​


For obvious reasons, ie: The author. There will be no suggested vote on this. However, we did decide we'd try and objectively review this piece nonetheless.

The authors agenda here is to continue on the project "Sierra Charlie" which was designed to recognize contributors to the NS realm by virtue of how much impact they make to the game overall. It can't be disputed that Cormac has played a sizeable role internationally and is a well known and divisive figure (albeit quite likeable) across the NS realms.

The author has admitted there is a flaw in the draft specifically the point regarding St Abbaddon, namely:

[/u]
Further aware that Cormac A Stark is currently the occupying point of St Abbaddon alongside the Brotherhood of Malice, an operation which not only saw the region targeted and fall to Cormac and their ilk with expert precision and execution but saw the Security Council itself brought to shame by the antics of Cormac and associates;
Click to expand...

The issue here being that Cormac is no longer point as the operation has since finished. While the author has considered that to be a flaw that was rectified and yet evidently wasn't, they have deemed it, (in their opinion) not to be a fatal flaw as at the time of writing this piece it was valid.

Beyond that the piece does the usual factual presentation of evidence on the candidate and outlines some good points.

As always though the choice on any Condemn or Commend usually falls to the individual perspective of members assessing the candidate. Nothing here aside from the above flaw seems contradictory or incorrect and there's no surprising revelations (as was the case with Commend Blackbird) that seem ready to come out of the closet at a moments notice that this Minister is aware of.

MINISTERS SUGGESTION​

Due to a conflict of interests the minister will not be suggesting a vote here.

PLEASE VOTE FOR, AGAINST OR ABSTAIN AS DESIRED BELOW.
 
I have decided I do not participate in SC arguments unless some entity or someone with past affiliations to my feederite home region is mentioned. I dont like the idea of a WA SC per my Nat Sov ideals. To tell others how they should or shouldnot play the game.

I have only commented on 2 SC resolutions that both conerning St. Abbadon since our very own NPA was mentioned in those resolutions specifically. I felt it in my intrest to vote.
(Though my nation creation walked right in the middle of all of that on going)

With that said I make the vote of Abstain only because I do not have enough information. A lot of this was before my time and I as a general rule only judge people on thier current actions not on past misgivings. Cormac was in the RA and an election commish. Before his departure what I saw in the RA threads and such is all I have to base a person. And in that limited role I never saw cause to feel he was acting with any malicious intent. And unfortunatly that is all I have to judge a person on. So I Abstain but I reserve the right to change my vote if I find out more information.

Is the point of a SC condemnation to point out every wrong doing someone has done? I'm just trying to learn more about them. I mean if this Osirus Coup was done in recent memory, fine and dandy, but if it has been in the past why bring it up now? Why not when it happened? Is there a statute of limitations for calling someone out? Could i be condemned a year from now for something I did yesterday? Or tomorrow? Or 6 1/2 weeks from now?

Like I said I wish to Abstain from this matter,as I am new and alot of this happened before my time here on NS, I feel I do not have a place or a right to pass judgement on someone for something I was not here for.
 
This sure came out of left field. This is the same Cormac who, until recently, was a contributing member here? I find it puzzling this came up almost immediately after his departure. At this point, I'll have to abstain. Not enough information to make a decision either way.
 
Some of the things that go up for condemnation are laughable to be honest. A failed invasion attempt and an unremarkable coup are the main facets of this argument if I am reading this correctly. Being duplicitous and wishy-washy is a character flaw, but not an inherently evil one. Signing a treaty with Gatesville may not be popular among some parties but it isn't really even that noteworthy overall.

Kids today.
 
Gracius Maximus:
Some of the things that go up for condemnation are laughable to be honest. A failed invasion attempt and an unremarkable coup are the main facets of this argument if I am reading this correctly. Being duplicitous and wishy-washy is a character flaw, but not an inherently evil one. Signing a treaty with Gatesville may not be popular among some parties but it isn't really even that noteworthy overall.

Kids today.
Click to expand...
indeed, minister. We are living in a time of lesser men. I is not their fault.
 
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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top