NationStates

West Angola wrote:Been waiting for this submission for a long time. Proudly approved.

Thanks! The delay was partly unavoidable, but even my tantrums eventually die out.

Approved.

One delegate has indicated they'll vote against in the hopes that this will remind people about what NEF was meant to do. I wish it were that easy - but it's not proposal authors that are at fault! This is going to be tricky to communicate, but there was no legal way to acknowledge the actual cause in the proposal text.

The Dark Star Republic wrote:One delegate has indicated they'll vote against in the hopes that this will remind people about what NEF was meant to do. I wish it were that easy - but it's not proposal authors that are at fault! This is going to be tricky to communicate, but there was no legal way to acknowledge the actual cause in the proposal text.

We guess we're a little confused as to what this repeal is supposed to accomplish. It's true that NEF seems to have been honored more in the breach than in the observance, but why should that be a reason to repeal it? Are there plans for a (hopefully) stronger replacement? If not, then perhaps a better route would be to repeal the offending resolutions that are violating the spirit of the NEF, if not the letter.

That would be impractical, though, given the sheer number of resolutions that contradict NEF. Repealing all of them would take so long the WA wouldn't be able to do anything else in the interim - and even were the arduous task completed, which is highly unlikely, NEF still wouldn't be enforced and new resolutions contradicting it would be passed.

There is simply no point keeping a resolution that is no longer enforced on the books.

As for replacing it with something stronger, my problem there is that the precedent of NEF suggests that regardless of what kind of replacement is written, it would no longer be enforced anyway. So there's no real point trying to replace it, because any such resolution will suffer the same fate.

In other news, this has been gathering approvals very slowly. I hope it's just the weekend, or perhaps delegate burnout from the rash of recent proposals, but I can't help but be pessimistic about the repeal's chances.

There's also a point to be made that the World Assembly obviously approves of these resolutions that restrict commerce without showing that the restrictions are to protect populations from hazards. So in the grand scheme, it's really NEF that ought to be repealed, because it's the requirements of NEF that member states don't like or ignore in practice.

The Dark Star Republic wrote:In other news, this has been gathering approvals very slowly. I hope it's just the weekend, or perhaps delegate burnout from the rash of recent proposals, but I can't help but be pessimistic about the repeal's chances.

Eh. You're two thirds of the way there with nearly two days to go. You're doing fine.

I'm still panicking a little. Shows how many old campaign tricks I've forgotten. Don't submit on Saturdays, don't submit on Saturdays, don't submit on Saturdays...

Submits on a Saturday ¬_¬

It only needs 1 more appproval, now, with 7 hours still to go...

Bears Armed Mission wrote:It only needs 1 more appproval, now, with 7 hours still to go...

OOC: Qapla!

Hold off on the blood wine and bat'leth dancing, it still has to survive an update (I think; I've never had a proposal be this close, that I can remember).

The Dark Star Republic wrote:Hold off on the blood wine and bat'leth dancing, it still has to survive an update (I think; I've never had a proposal be this close, that I can remember).

I think that it has to survive two more updates while the current vote is still in progress, the one when that voting ends, and all of the ones while 'Convention on Fracking' is at vote -- unless that loses enough approvals to drop out of the queue -- as well. I'm fairly sure that if it's dropped out of quorum at any of those updates then [at least unless & until you re-submit] it's gone...

Bears Armed wrote:

The Dark Star Republic wrote:Hold off on the blood wine and bat'leth dancing, it still has to survive an update (I think; I've never had a proposal be this close, that I can remember).

I think that it has to survive two more updates while the current vote is still in progress, the one when that voting ends, and all of the ones while 'Convention on Fracking' is at vote -- unless that loses enough approvals to drop out of the queue -- as well. I'm fairly sure that if it's dropped out of quorum at any of those updates then [at least unless & until you re-submit] it's gone...

Yes, I'm sure of that: but what I meant, this update might see some of the 68 approvers lose their delegate status, in which case it would drop out right away. If it can survive that, then hopefully it would pick up enough stragglers to make it to morning.

I guess my point is I really am surprised at how poorly this has done, given it had a campaign. Does my TG suck, or my proposal, or just my timing?

The Dark Star Republic wrote:

Bears Armed wrote:I think that it has to survive two more updates while the current vote is still in progress, the one when that voting ends, and all of the ones while 'Convention on Fracking' is at vote -- unless that loses enough approvals to drop out of the queue -- as well. I'm fairly sure that if it's dropped out of quorum at any of those updates then [at least unless & until you re-submit] it's gone...

Yes, I'm sure of that: but what I meant, this update might see some of the 68 approvers lose their delegate status, in which case it would drop out right away. If it can survive that, then hopefully it would pick up enough stragglers to make it to morning.

Okay, got you.

I guess my point is I really am surprised at how poorly this has done, given it had a campaign. Does my TG suck, or my proposal, or just my timing?

Too many delegates not looking past the title?

The Dark Star Republic wrote:

Bears Armed wrote:I think that it has to survive two more updates while the current vote is still in progress, the one when that voting ends, and all of the ones while 'Convention on Fracking' is at vote -- unless that loses enough approvals to drop out of the queue -- as well. I'm fairly sure that if it's dropped out of quorum at any of those updates then [at least unless & until you re-submit] it's gone...

Yes, I'm sure of that: but what I meant, this update might see some of the 68 approvers lose their delegate status, in which case it would drop out right away. If it can survive that, then hopefully it would pick up enough stragglers to make it to morning.

I guess my point is I really am surprised at how poorly this has done, given it had a campaign. Does my TG suck, or my proposal, or just my timing?

I would place my money on either the timing or a counter-campaign. Sometimes, enterprising delegates or voters catch sight of a proposal they don't like and can easily stymie its progress with a script or with stamps. My Radiological Terrorism resolution was knocked from the queue a few times because of that, actually.

So, I was going to write a Dispatch to accompany this, to explain the things I couldn't legally put in the repeal. I asked Abacathea and Mousebumples which category to use, but unfortunately only Abacathea replied, and Mousebumples did not see fit to.

I'll probably plump for Bulletin>Policy, but if there any suggestions otherwise let me know.

President Alex Corvis approaches the podium to announce his success in casting the very first vote. Unfolding a prepared statement he reviews it carefully..

"PEW-PEW-PEW-PEW! Not my freedoms!

President Corvis makes his best attempt to hit an ambassador in support of the resolution with his wadded up statement, before being carried away.

Votes For: 6 (3%)

Votes Against: 166 (97%)

Getting crushed so far.

The divided wrote:Votes For: 6 (3%)

Votes Against: 166 (97%)

Getting crushed so far.

Half those votes are Mousebumples.
With any luck, people will get past the title to see what the author is trying to do.

I am voting against this bill. I believe that we should repeal the acts that do violate the NEF act.

Grand Republic of Freedonia wrote:I am voting against this bill. I believe that we should repeal the acts that do violate the NEF act.

I take it you did not read the proposal thoroughly enough? Repealing said resolutions would unreasonably remove a massive chunk of the WA's policies, which I know will definitely not be worth the WA's time.

The North Pacific has a treaty obligation to vote in favour but unfortunately hasn't been able to do so (their delegate, HMS Unicorn, is absent) and I'm reliably informed that "Mousebumples has convinced Europeia to vote against your resolution purely out of unadultered spite".

I don't mind too much if this fails, because it's only a procedural vote. And there's a chance that it will lead the moderators to reconsider their decision and start enforcing NEF again anyway.

The Dark Star Republic wrote:The North Pacific has a treaty obligation to vote in favour but unfortunately hasn't been able to do so (their delegate, HMS Unicorn, is absent) and I'm reliably informed that "Mousebumples has convinced Europeia to vote against your resolution purely out of unadultered spite".

I don't mind too much if this fails, because it's only a procedural vote. And there's a chance that it will lead the moderators to reconsider their decision and start enforcing NEF again anyway.

OOC: As much as I like literally and absolutely enforcing all resolutions on the books, this one kind of does block out a large swath of subjects in a landscape where legislatable topics are dwindling fast so I hope that does not occur.

Defwa wrote:OOC: As much as I like literally and absolutely enforcing all resolutions on the books, this one kind of does block out a large swath of subjects in a landscape where legislatable topics are dwindling fast so I hope that does not occur.

But it contains a workaround: so long as you can demonstrate an "extreme hazard to national populations", you can still legislate. Ardchoille provided an example ruling here.