Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Talk and plan things about the game with other players.

Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Corvo Attano » Sat Aug 26, 2017 8:27 am

So Auditorii made a very good comment on the security councils decisions.

Pretty much it boils down to "We shouldn't make treaties to enforce council decisions (like embargoes or diplomatic sanctions) because their too bothersome to go around nagging people to pass them"


I agree with the opinion I only made 1 treaty the sanctions against Kalopia and I am was annoyed as heck going around mass messaging the boards of every nation to pretty much ask them to follow the dictates of a organizations they (assuming their new or haven't been to the forum at all) don't even know it existed or what its function is.

So to preempt any stupid arguments lets hush outin OOC here whether treaties should be simulated or automatically assumed against otherwise stated in RP.


My vote is on automatically assumed against otherwise stated.
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Mbites » Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:02 pm

I think we should delete Malivia and turn it into a dorvish protectorate.
"It looked like a silly semi-cliquey thing between a few players to me. Following around a troll called Mbites like he was some sort of god... which wouldn't have mattered so much in the scale of things, except one of them was a Mod."
User avatar
Mbites
 
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 11:15 am

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Reddy » Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:17 pm

Well the thing is even if a treaty is ratified in real life, a political decision will still have to be made by the Government of the country on whether or not it will abide by the Treaty provisions and if so, in what exact manner. I think treaties should be drafted or perhaps even better, a country should declare whether it will abide by the provisions of the resolution. We can't have any kind of RP which automatically applies to every country, it would violate the core principle of roleplay as a voluntary decision for each country and its players and also rob those opposed eg isolationists or those countries who disagree with the decision from acting on such opposition.

What I think could be done (and I'm only expressing my personal views as a player here) is to draft a Treaty in which signatories agree to be bound by every Security Council decision. Still you would have countries reserving the option to make a decision not to abide but it would be too unreasonable to assume that all signatories would generally abide with most decisions by default and would have to actually register an objection before it's recognised as having being made.
To live outside the law, you must be honest.
Reddy
 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Auditorii » Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:18 pm

Mbites wrote:I think we should delete Malivia and turn it into a dorvish protectorate.


I concur.

But realistically, nation that are members of the World Congress (as I don't know if it's really an option to "leave" so to speak) should realistically take most things as an RP basis instead of a treaty basis, treaties are cumbersome and sometimes cannot be passed. Realistically most countries have to agree to United Nation's Security Council Resolutions unless they wanna face sanctions themselves for failing to do so, now I'm not saying that might not be a cool RP but at the end of the day the generally accepted RP principle should be that the country has agreed to what the Security Council says.
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Corvo Attano » Sat Aug 26, 2017 4:24 pm

Mbites wrote:I think we should delete Malivia and turn it into a dorvish protectorate.

What a coincidence I have the same thoughts on Hobrazia and Darnussia becoming Malivian Protectorates.

Realistically speaking I favor Reddys idea its the most enforceable and if somebody whines about something we can just turn around and say tough luck you signed this treaty that says otherwise.
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Mbites » Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:06 pm

Corvo Attano wrote:
Mbites wrote:I think we should delete Malivia and turn it into a dorvish protectorate.

What a coincidence I have the same thoughts on Hobrazia and Darnussia becoming Malivian Protectorates.


Impossible, in an ideal world Narikaton and Darnussia would be part of the greater dundorfian empire as a country, Malivia would only be a protectorate since its players have destroyed its culture and unique traits.
"It looked like a silly semi-cliquey thing between a few players to me. Following around a troll called Mbites like he was some sort of god... which wouldn't have mattered so much in the scale of things, except one of them was a Mod."
User avatar
Mbites
 
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 11:15 am

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Corvo Attano » Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:38 pm

Mbites wrote:
Corvo Attano wrote:
Mbites wrote:I think we should delete Malivia and turn it into a dorvish protectorate.

What a coincidence I have the same thoughts on Hobrazia and Darnussia becoming Malivian Protectorates.


Impossible, in an ideal world Narikaton and Darnussia would be part of the greater dundorfian empire as a country, Malivia would only be a protectorate since its players have destroyed its culture and unique traits.

I could disprove this but I will be (sorry for my vulgarity) a cheap fuck and redirect you to the purpose of the thread.

What is your opinion Mbites on thread you are typing in?
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby colonelvesica » Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:32 pm

Auditorii wrote:(as I don't know if it's really an option to "leave" so to speak)


The precedent exists; in the 4140s I RPed that Zardugal, under the Mozby Doctrine, had officially left the World Congress and thus wasn't bound by Security Council resolutions.

I'm not sure if the Mozby Doctrine was ever repealed or Zardugal ever officially or unofficially rejoined but it exists that a nation could officially leave the body.
The Last of his Name
User avatar
colonelvesica
 
Posts: 2194
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:57 pm
Location: The ether

Re: Serious RP question about the Security Council decisions.

Postby Corvo Attano » Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:47 pm

colonelvesica wrote:
Auditorii wrote:(as I don't know if it's really an option to "leave" so to speak)


The precedent exists; in the 4140s I RPed that Zardugal, under the Mozby Doctrine, had officially left the World Congress and thus wasn't bound by Security Council resolutions.

I'm not sure if the Mozby Doctrine was ever repealed or Zardugal ever officially or unofficially rejoined but it exists that a nation could officially leave the body.

Colonelvesica got an opinion on the problem with got on our hands?
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm


Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests