MUNSCM - Abandoned

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Point of Information directed towards the speaker: Why do you believe we should put the MABM in Chile?

[EnPaceRequiescat]

sorry, i was detained by other businesses.

vote against

stopping debate.

Point of question directed towards algeria:
Why do yoou believe protecting a country with veto power is optimal?

I have some other questions on how Algeria wanted to go about his resolution, but I'm not sure if this is out of order

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Brazil votes in favor.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I support massive's motion for caucus discussion. that way I'll actually be able to post something relevant when I

can

log on . On the current issue, I have the same [/b]POI to the speaker:

if you voted no when you found the amendment better. was it because it wasn't good enough?

[EnPaceRequiescat]

POI to the united kingdom

: if you realized the flaw of the original resolution, what do you propose to fix it? As the random factor would minimize the chances of the axis of evil nuking the country targeted for inspection.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

The next resolution was to include a plan to counteract this inevetability by randomizing the receiver of the report and sending the MABM to the nation being investigated.

It is the firm belief of this delegate that this plan, or one similar to it, would minimize the potential for failure in ascertaining the placement of unsanctioned nuclear weapons.

This section is your proposal, then? In that case, I shall drop an anvil on my head. the verb tense ("the next resolution

was

to...") a bit confusing when I last read it. Sorry.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Brazil votes in favor, after missing a ton of sleep . can't think...

[EnPaceRequiescat]

vote: in favor

following the strict rules doesn't let me speak when I have something to say, and nothing left to speak when I

am

on mafiascum.net.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

You're all forgetting one thing: If we investigate an innocent veto power, and the MABM are deployed somewhere else, the investigated country is nuked that night, and we have one innocent veto country less. Oh yes, if we continue to do this, we probably end up with 2 veto powers alive, and one of them is likely to be scum!!!! I don't think finding 1 of the three evil members is worth losing all the veto countries.

But I've got a new idea (Unless you find a flaw I think i'll put it in my resolution): The investigated and result getting countries are known on the day, and the MABM will be placed randomly in one of these countries! The evil ones can try killing off one of them to avoid a confirmed innocent, but then they'll have a 50% chance of failing!

wait... do we get to know what a country was when they get nuked? I can't find it in cs's first two posts. And in Thoth's plan, the random country to be inspected isn't necessarily evil. However, my only problem with that is that we don't know. So I'm leaning on polarboy's MABM/inspection mechanism, with the countries being chosen using mathcam's plan, with the veto power countries. This might change if I can find whether we get "dead" countries' positions.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

vote: against changing the agenda

[EnPaceRequiescat]

POI to the speaker: if the investigation is random, wouldn't it be safe to randomly protect any nation (veto or non-veto)? Since by confining the protection to the veto country being inspected, we're leaving all the non-veto countries at risk.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I thought i had done this...

vote in favor of closing debate

[EnPaceRequiescat]

brazil

votes: in favor

[EnPaceRequiescat]

brazil

votes: in favor

cleaning time!

[EnPaceRequiescat]

POI to romania:

there was also an amendment/resolution a bit back that demonstrated a veto country's inability to veto an amendment with only their name in it. I'd like to as how you missed that if you were following the game.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

vote: against closing debate

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Sorry fellow delegates for my inactivity. but I need to gather some time to more accurately compile the current discussion, as it is a lot more complicated than the normal domestic problems I'm used to dealing with.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I've finished reading the thread. all I have left is to reread the section on procedures, etc. I do not know how to apologize for my previous lack of participation, as I should have let everybody know how previous school things had made following this interesting game harder than usual.

and as for now,

vote: in favor

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I'd assme you'd unvote by abstaining...

do we have to vote again?

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Brazil

votes: in favor of the motion

[EnPaceRequiescat]

POI to the speaker

As shown recently in the last attempt to pass MUNSCM 009, no matter how reasonable this proposal is, a nation with veto power still has the right to veto it. If MUNSCM 009 can't be passed, then the merits it holds will not be put into effect. How else, other than through persuasion, would you suggest to ensure the proposal's passing? Otherwise, I simply see a never ending chain of resolutions, unless we put a broad, overall, maybe even temporary solution into effect (for example, temporary removal of veto power, or to suggest nuclear striking a country that vetoed the amendment).

Or would you wish to hear from china first?

-Brazil

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I'll

vote against the motion

for now.

And sorry, fellow delegates, but I have some pressing matters (AP Bio test) to be exact that I need to take care of first. I expect to return after May 10th. Thank you for your understanding.

~Brazil

[EnPaceRequiescat]

i'll

vote: in favor

[EnPaceRequiescat]

I don't know portuguese...

Brazil says, "aye"

don't ask me what that means

[EnPaceRequiescat]

brazil votes

in favor

[EnPaceRequiescat]

My opinion as of now on the Phillipines vs. Romania argument is simple. It seems like a petty squabble on conflicting opinions. The Phillipines' original attack on Romania, if I remember correctly, was:

1. using its name
2. Having a different view regarding axis and one of the 5 countries w/ veto powers

And now, Romania is attacking Phillipines with:

1. Phillipines gaining too much influence (?)
2. Romania feels Phillipines had a weak argument against it.

It just doesn't seem to be one sided in anyway in terms of scumminess, other than that Romania's are a bit more off of emotions. Some further explanations would be useful, too.

[EnPaceRequiescat]

After a somewhat tedious night of review (which in this case means a long night filled with some entertaining speeches),

the delegate from Brazil asks to be put on the Speaker's list

The delegate from Brazil would also like to inform his fellow delegates that he will be away until the 21st

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Good day fellow delegates,

Through the course of events, Brazil just can not bring himself against Romania. Brazil simply feels many of the attacks against outdated, especially every single one in the current 007 resolution. I'll briefly go throught the points:

1 and 2: it was a different viewpoint/opinion that Romania had back then. Even if we were to prosecute Romania on past opinions, one can not really blame him for his idea. Back then, I believe, when Romania did not feel that there is an axis member with veto power, Romania had the argument that if we follow the "no axis member has veto power" belief, then we would have:

a) 3 out of 10 chances of getting scum if the belief is correct
b) 2 out of 10 chances (in other words 1 out of 5) if there is an axis country with veto power
c) 3 out of 15 chancees (still 1 out of 5) if there is an axis country with veto power

Next (forgive me if I'm saying something wrong, as I may not have been following the course of events as carefully as I should have), I'd like to note that if in fact there are no axis members with veto power, it may be beneficial for them to make arguments to inspect the permanent members first, which we are doing according to MUNSCM003. It seems like our current plan of action is similar to "putting our eggs in one basket", as the honorable delegate from Benin said (although he was speaking about Romania).

point 3:

I'd like to start off with (post 312):

In the interest of moving discussion along, the delegate from the Phillipines votes

in favour

of closing debate. And is curious how the Phillipines hired a second delegate. Although, hey, I shouldn't complain about two votes.

when Romania first committed the accident of "trying to pass himself as from the Phillippines", the delegate of the Phillipines obviously did not think much of it, nor harbor any ill thoughts about this happening. It seems and looks like the sudden change in mood by the delegate of the Phillipines was a futile attempt to put an innocent nation under attack.

Further, I'd like all the delegates to take a look at the first page of our discussion, where the chair has kindly posted what has happened throughout our discussion, and also a list of the current delegates. I find it quite interesting that Romania and Phillipines are right next to each other on the list, and subsequently, the names Zoneace and Massive. It seems plausible that the delegate from Romania was looking for which country he was representing (I know I have), and accidentally missalignged his line of sight and read instead, 'Phillipines'. And with the time span between when the delegate from Romania accidentally put his name as Phillipines to the actual proposal of Munscm007, the delegate of Romania may have forgot. Still, I do not personally find this most recent point that I brought out as significant (as I find it rather hard to misalign one's country by the name - country form the chair used [little space separating the two points], as opposed to something like the name ............................................. country [long distance separating the two points] form one may find on some table of contents), it may be of use to someone.

Off to the newer arguments:

1) Romania's brash actions:
As with Spain and France before me, I feel the delegate Zoneace's actions to be typical of him: actions taking root in frustration. Often has Zoneace committed similar actions (albeit not the wisest) due to frustration and anger. Spain and Romania have already touched on this subject thoroughly, so I will not go further on this, unless requested.

2) Romania stepping down suddenly:
My chronology here may be wrong, but prior to the event, Romania had already expressed his beliefs clearly, and his speech on Feb 9 was simply a derivation of his beliefs. Though it may not have been smart of him to step down so suddenly, it seems possible for the delegate of Romania to believe nothing much would be added other than just him restating his thoughts.

3) Benin's "egg in a basket theory":
I think I covered this back in the beginning where I was talking about points 1 and 2 of MUNSCM007. Though I'm certainly still here for clarification in the event that a delegate did not understand my potentially incoherent thoughts

In conclusion, I feel that Romania is not an axis member. However, I am not sure as to who I find to be scummy.
The delgate from the U.S. has been dodgy, and his masterful speeches have been about morale and striking down terrorism. Though I believe those to be good values, They do matter as much in our situation as there aren't citizens of our countries to become angry at and replace us.
The delegate from the Phillipines is the next potential target that I feel to be part of the axis, especially due to his baseless attacks on Romania. Of the newer points that the Phillipines brought out against Romania, I did not find any of them to be of a 'scummy' nature. Just observing and voting has been done by a great number of us. On the "miraculous shelving", please refer to the delegate from Benin's speech on post 504. I do not find his motion of shelving to be purposeless. The purpose of shelving was to prevent the possibility of an axis member with veto power to veto Romania's demise. This was of course followed up by MUNSCM 009, which brought good points. If nothing, I feel that shelving MUNSCM 007 as we had done was actually beneficial to the Phillipine's cause, as precautionary measures can't be bad for 'town'. On Romania "hoping the fervor against him would dissipate..." At that time, the majority of the council had supported the motion to discuss 008 and 009, and so we discussed 008 and 009. Several delegates (like the Phillipines) could have still harbored doubts about Romania, but if they felt so strongly, they can just bring back the arguments later (which is in fact what has happened).

The delegate from Brazil hopes that he has covered everything, but considering the gigantic numbers of posts of passing events, it would be a miracle to scour out all relevant points. Therefore, I will now stand for points of informations for clarification and additional corrections/arguments if I missed them.

Thank you for your time,

-Brazil

[EnPaceRequiescat]

vote: against

[EnPaceRequiescat]

back

[EnPaceRequiescat]

Brazil votes: in favor of the motion