MUNSCM - Abandoned

[shadyforce]

Chile? CHILE??? For f's sake.

Still, it's better than the Phillipines, I suppose...

[shadyforce]

Is the resolution proposed by the chair actually on the agenda or is it just a sample resolution that will not be discussed/voted on.

[shadyforce]

MUNSCM 001: MABM Utilization

Noting

that defenses left unused are a waste of resources;

Acknowledging

the randomness of night doc protection early in the game;

Noting

that most decisions are made on a first come first serve basis;

1.

Requires

that the United Nations Mobile Anti-Ballistic missiles be placed in Chile until further notice

[shadyforce]

Please add me to the speakers' list. Assuming that's allowed? Yes? Good!

[shadyforce]

Doing fine so far . Anyway, you may now speak in favour of the motion immediately without queuing in the speakers' list.

[shadyforce]

Thank you honourable chair, Ladies and Gentlemen, delegates from the many countries present, I would like to stand firmly behind my proposal for 3 main reasons, as mentioned in the proposal itself: We need to use the defenses, it doesn't matter where at this moment, and I got here first and why it's hassle to change it now.

1. Firstly I don't think anyone here will disagree that the right action i to move the mobile anti-ballistic missiles into some country. It certainly doesn't do any harm, and does protect that partiular member from being nuked. *Waits to hear objections to that point*

[shadyforce]

2. Secondly: Where the MABM is placed this early in the game is completely random. It doesn't make a difference. It just means that one player gets doc protection and the rest don't. We are all equally innocent or guilty at this time so noone deserves it more or less.
*Waits for any objections there*

[shadyforce]

If we were do actually do it with randomizer.org or something like that, there would be accountability issues. Who would do it, might they lie, etc.

What I'm saying is by random I mean it

doesn't matter who

gets it, as long as someone (with a small s) get's it.


Anything else before I proceed?

[shadyforce]

Yes, I understand they are different, but their

effects

will be the same, ie. somebody will end up with the MABM in their country, and does it really matter who?

[shadyforce]

@DP: Are you threatening the nation of Chile sir?

@Mathcam, yes I see your point. Hang on a sec...

[shadyforce]

Point of Order directed towards the Chair:

In light of the suggestions from our friends the delegation from Germany, I wish to amend the motion replacing '

Chile

' with '

a nation selected randomly by the Chair

'. The motion should now read:

• MUNSCM 001: MABM Utilization
  
  

  Noting

  that defenses left unused are a waste of resources;
  
  

  Acknowledging

  the randomness of night doc protection early in the game;
  
  

  Noting

  that most decisions are made on a first come first serve basis;
  
  1. Requires that the United Nations Mobile Anti-Ballistic missiles be placed in a nation selected randomly by the chair until further notice

I did not think it possible for the chair to be involved with placing the MABM, but now that you alerted me of the possibility, cam, I think it's worth checking out.

[shadyforce]

Vote: against

as I believe

a simple amendment

rather than

a completely new motion

proposed by someone yet to speak will change the motion into what is possibly the best option.

[shadyforce]

*someone propose the amendment now*

[shadyforce]

[Heckle]Well what do yuo expect Cuban, it's a complicated game [/Heckle]

[shadyforce]

(Thread doubles in size in next 2 days)

Anyway, the delegate from Chile votes in favour of the motion.

[shadyforce]

*nods in agreement*

[shadyforce]

I mean... shouts: "Here, Here!"

[shadyforce]

I hope I'm not out of order (again) by doing this...

Point of order directed towards the chair:

I proposed an amendment to the wording of the resolution replacing "China" with "a nation with Veto powers randomly selected by the game mod and not investigated on a previous occassion".

[shadyforce]

*Steps up to the podium*

Thank you Mr. Chair. I would like to propose an amendment to the wording of the resolution. I would like "

China

" to be replaced by "

a nation with veto power (if possible) randomly chosen by the Chair, and not investigated on a previous night, the results of which should be revealed if and only if it is guilty or innocent and the nation in question has a motion targeted at him for a sanctioned nuclear strike.

"

My reasons for this amendment are simple:

1. Like the honourable delegate from the UK or the Phillipines, I agree that the nations with veto powers should be investigated first because if an evil nation(s) is/are the sole nations with veto power then the United Nations' Security Council is in a very vulnerable state.

2. If a nation is publically targeted for investigation and is innocent, then they wil likely be nuked the following night.

3. This amendment will protect the innocent nations while still exposing the guilty nations.

[shadyforce]

*Steps down from podium*

[shadyforce]

Don't oppose! Don't oppose! Don't oppose! Don't oppose!

[shadyforce]

Vote: YES!

[shadyforce]

POI to Germany:

Could you please explain why if the amendment was superior, you chose to vote no instead of just voting yes and dealing with PBs suggestions after the amendment?

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile votes

in favour

of closing the debate.

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile votes

opposed

to the motion.

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile would like to clarify that he is opposed to

Munscum 002

, and would like to ask the chair if voting is currently permitted on moving to caucus.

[shadyforce]

Oh, Vote

in favour

of Caucus.

[shadyforce]

Vote: Against

changing the agenda

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile requests to be added to the speakers' list.

Noting an absense of other names on the list and in anticipation of recognition from the chair, and for the purposes of peeding up the discussion, the delegate from Chile will begin speaking immediately.

I do not see a problem with line 4 and feel it should remain. I strongly feel that there is every possibility of their being corrupt nations having a veto vote and these nations should be dealt with first as they have more power than other nations without the power of veto.

One problem I have is with line 3.

Is it not possible for the results of the investigation to be announced to everyone? If so then surely it would be better if all the nations know who is innocent in case they are nuked at the end of the meeting. If we feel they will be in danger of being attaked at night, then surely the following would be better suited:

3. Requires that inspection report be kept by the chair and only revealed publicly if the nation discovered was guilty or if the nation is under threat to being nuked by agreement from the member nations.

Perhaps someone could point out something I may be missing in a POI.

[shadyforce]

@mel: I meant being nuked in subsequent nights due to their confirmed innocence.

@EnPace: Yes, I agree that is a tricky issue. However, I feel it is worth it to have only good nations with Veto powers as they will have tremendous power over the remaining corrupt nations without veto power and from such a situation, I believe victory is nearly ensured.

*Awaits the chair's response to PB's POI*

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile votes

in favour

of closing the deabte. Further, the delegate from Chile wonders why his previous reply dissappeared.

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile votes

in favour

of the resolution.

The delegate from Chile would also like to point out to ZONEACE that he currently is the delegate representing Romania, and not the Phillipines, according to the manifesto provided by the chair (on the front page).

[shadyforce]

Vote: In favour

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile would like to oppose the above point of order on the following grounds:

1. The speaker should be in control of his/her speech, and not dictated by the points of information he/she receives. In formal debating, the speaker has the final say whether to even accept POIs so as to control his/her own sppeech. With that POO passed, the speaker could be drowned out by 3 quick POIs, be forced to immediately answer tham, and then have to step down, possibly before making his argument or developing it after subsequent POIs.

2. Despite the usual rush to join the speaking list, the fact is most of those have only minor points to raise and those could simply be introduced in a POI and let the speaker deal with them, instead of waiting for a subsequent speaker to come up and deal with them. I feel if more people followed this, then the extended time speaking would be countered by a reduction in unnecessary additional speeches.

[shadyforce]

Chile

votes against

the Point of Order. Naturally.

[shadyforce]

Chile votes

in favour

of the amendment.

[shadyforce]

Nay

to closing the debate.

[shadyforce]

Votes: In favour

also.

[shadyforce]

Chile votes

in favour

of the amendment.

[shadyforce]

Votes: Yes

to closing Debate on MUNSCUM 009.

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile

votes in favour

of the motion, and sniggers at those who omit the 'u'.

[shadyforce]

[Heckle]

SCUM!

[/Heckle]

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile

votes strongly in favour

of reopening this motion, while scowling at China's rather pathetic attempt to justify his veto.

[shadyforce]

Chile

votes in favour

of the motion to Caucus.

[shadyforce]

[Hehe, the power of Veto has realyl gone to his head, just like in real life LOL!]

[shadyforce]

Chile

votes: against

closing the debate.

[shadyforce]

Assuming this motion is in order, Chile

votes in favour

of it, again unless he rejoins the speakers' list.

[shadyforce]

Who are we praising, why, and what song age we singing now?

[shadyforce]

Chile

Votes in favour

.

[shadyforce]

Well, I'd like to

vote in favour

of the motion for roll-call. Also, I'd like to apologise for not being present for the last page or 2. I've been distracted with a lot of stuff happening at once elsewhere. I'll read up and post my opinions and stuff.

~Chile.

[shadyforce]

Bah, playing this game while eating gets me down. I was Hungary for Turkey but the mod game me Chile instead.

*Starts packing*

[shadyforce]

Pakistan is here!

that wasnt witty

China agrees.

So does Chile.

[shadyforce]

Vote: In Favour

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile

votes in favour

of the above resolution.

[shadyforce]

Vote: In favour

of motion to caucus.

[shadyforce]

Yeah, and taking away the transparacy of voting and discussion gives away one of the town's biggest weapons for identifying scum.

[shadyforce]

Vote: YES

[shadyforce]

The delegate from Chile

votes in favour

.

[shadyforce]

POI:

Delegate from the United States... you have stated your desire to avoid a 'careless execution' and also have asked for the Romanian delegate to explain his actions. I put it to you that after several months of discussion, over 900 comments from various delegates, countless agruments, proposed, shelved, and tabled resolutions, periods of Caucus with heated discussion and now yet another resoltuion, that the delegate from Romania has had ample time to explain or refuse to explain his actions, that his defenders have had ample time to back him up, and that his rivals have had ample time to lay out the evidence.

Do you not feel that the time for asking for further clarifications are over, and the time to make your mind up and take a side is at hand?

~Delegate from Chile.

[shadyforce]

You said:

we are voting on whether or not to nuke you. we are voting on whether or not to vote on whether or not to nuke you

You meant:

we are

not

voting on whether or not to nuke you. we are voting on whether or not to vote on whether or not to nuke you

Just for clarification.

Ok,

Vote: In Favour

of the current motion.

[shadyforce]

Not before Chile is on the menu.