NationStates

Manticore Reborn wrote:First, why are only the weaknesses of a nation's infrastructure to be kept confidential? Whom is responsible for determining what is a weakness?

I'll change it to 'information about' rather than weakness.

Manticore Reborn wrote:Second, why is this clause stating the intent is only to keep this information from a nation's enemies? I know of several neutral, and friendly, nations who would not hesitate to forward information to companies within their nations who would then use that "insider" knowledge to submit bids.

It doesn't. It says it will be kept confidential period. That means from everyone. Then it explains why by saying 'to prevent it from being used by a nation's enemies.' (Not exact quote)

Manticore Reborn wrote:Other companies would not be privy to this information from their more honorable governments and would then be at a distinct disadvantage when negotiating. And in the world of international relations, my friend, or neutral, could easily be my enemy tomorrow.

Again, if it is confidential no one can see it, not just enemies.

Manticore Reborn wrote:We concede that the final clause concerning surrenderering of the data could be struck.

Okay.

The Kingdom of Manticore Reborn is please to see that the clause has been updated in a direction where we can begin to see our support being granted. However, it is not quite there.

Topid wrote:

Manticore Reborn wrote:Second, why is this clause stating the intent is only to keep this information from a nation's enemies? I know of several neutral, and friendly, nations who would not hesitate to forward information to companies within their nations who would then use that "insider" knowledge to submit bids.

It doesn't. It says it will be kept confidential period. That means from everyone. Then it explains why by saying 'to prevent it from being used by a nation's enemies.' (Not exact quote)

My government recommends that the phrase "to prevent this information from being used by a nations enemies," be adjusted to state "to prevent this information from being used in a manner not intended by the resolution,".

The representative from the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

That makes sense. Done.

Also, when I get back to town on the 18th I will either be submitting this resolution or Condemn Unknown. If I can I'll be submitting the latter first, however, I am waiting on something before I submit it, so I may move forward with this one then.

The Kingdom of Manticore Reborn thanks the honorable ambassador from Topid for agreeing to our compromise solution. We look forward to granting our approval to this legislation upon the noble ambassador's return.

Ambassadors, our nation will be submitting very soon... (LAST CALL!)

I think that that is all of our concerns addressed. It's much better now.

Submitted! Thank you to all the delegates that have and will approve this proposal.

The Republic of Quadrimmina will support this measure should it achieve quorum. We hope our one vote will come in handy.

The Kingdom of Manticore Reborn is pleased to announce its' approval of this measure.

Thank you all who have approved! We need one more approval... Who shall it be?

I must ask, why the noble ambassador from Topid withdrew from this august assembly when they had submitted such an important piece of legislation?

Manticore Reborn wrote:I must ask, why the noble ambassador from Topid withdrew from this august assembly when they had submitted such an important piece of legislation?

[even more ooc than normal] Being a defender it was hard enough for me to find time to keep my main nation in the WA long enough to get the two endorsements. As soon as I submitted I had to get my nation out of the WA to go on a mission.

Not sure I understand, you are talking about an RP thread?

Manticore Reborn wrote:Not sure I understand, you are talking about an RP thread?

[gonna go really ooc now] I'm a defender, as in I play the raider/defender dynamic which is part of 'gameplay'. Raiders enter a region with no founder (one that either was founded before founders were added to the game years ago, or a region whose founder has Ceased to Exist due to inactivity or moderator deletion) and all the raiders endorse one of themselves so that that raider becomes delegate and has control over the region. Defenders like me endorse the delegate when we see raiders invading in the hopes that we keep the native delegate with more endorsements than the raiders have, and so they don't get control of the region. If that failed we would try to move in and get a native back as delegate in a kind of 'counter-raid'.

And so, I cannot keep Topid in the WA because another nation of mine is on a defender mission to keep regions safe from raiders, and so that nation must be in the WA in order to endorse nations.

Topid wrote:

Manticore Reborn wrote:Not sure I understand, you are talking about an RP thread?

[gonna go really ooc now] I'm a defender, as in I play the raider/defender dynamic which is part of 'gameplay'. Raiders enter a region with no founder (one that either was founded before founders were added to the game years ago, or a region whose founder has Ceased to Exist due to inactivity or moderator deletion) and all the raiders endorse one of themselves so that that raider becomes delegate and has control over the region. Defenders like me endorse the delegate when we see raiders invading in the hopes that we keep the native delegate with more endorsements than the raiders have, and so they don't get control of the region. If that failed we would try to move in and get a native back as delegate in a kind of 'counter-raid'.

And so, I cannot keep Topid in the WA because another nation of mine is on a defender mission to keep regions safe from raiders, and so that nation must be in the WA in order to endorse nations.

-- to myself. Got it now.

First, lets see how we could give the honourable ambassador from Topid a good send off. I know what, we will see this resolution through to the end, noting that the text has clearly addressed our concerns set out in GA#85.

OOC:
When I submitted this my math was that voting would have just ended because the smuggling resolution didn't look likely to make quorum. I'm very busy today and tomorrow I'm going out of town and won't get back until sometime tuesday... So I'll miss most of this at vote.

Thanks for all who vote for though! It's going well so far.

Might want to fix the thread title. Your proposal hasn't passed yet. It's only at vote.

Intellect and the Arts wrote:Might want to fix the thread title. Your proposal hasn't passed yet. It's only at vote.

Huh?

Oh... Thought I changed Condemn Unknown's title, my mistake, I'll fix both threads.

II. Demands member states to regularly inspect structures such as dams, levees, nuclear facilities, and any other structures or vehicles which hold materials which, if the structure were to malfunction, could precipitate a disaster in the immediate area,

Wouldn't that apply to any tall building? How many structures are we talking about here? Thousands? Tens of thousands? More?

Yelda wrote:

II. Demands member states to regularly inspect structures such as dams, levees, nuclear facilities, and any other structures or vehicles which hold materials which, if the structure were to malfunction, could precipitate a disaster in the immediate area,

Wouldn't that apply to any tall building? How many structures are we talking about here? Thousands? Tens of thousands? More?

Any building tall enough to cause massive loss of life or property damage, according to the definition of 'disaster'.

I, the ambassador of the most esteemed Premier of the People's Republic of Stutenland, wish to voice our support for this act, and hope that it will pass through the WA.

The Sremski government has supported this legislation since it's founding and will continue to support it and resolutions like it.

I'z wouldz likez toz sayz thatz thez nationz ofz Zombz iz supportingz thiz issuez 100%z (Az longz az a Zombiez outbreakz doesntz countz az a disasterz)

Mike P the Zombie

Zomb wrote:I'z wouldz likez toz sayz thatz thez nationz ofz Zombz iz supportingz thiz issuez 100%z (Az longz az a Zombiez outbreakz doesntz countz az a disasterz)

Mike P the Zombie

Oh, god. My brain hurts..... ow ow ow.....
30 minutes later
Okay, now that I've recovered, I would like to state the official position of Austal on this resolution. As a proud member of the region of Gatesville, which stands against the World Assembly and its one world agenda, Austal hereby votes AGAINST this resolution.
Now, I need to get an ice pack.... ow, ow....
~Austal Delegate Jan Peter Wilders