[Passed] Extinction Preparation Act

[Teshuva]

Minister Omar Khumain laid back on his chair as the telegram to the World Assembly was sent. "It's a Shame. The ambassador of The Coyote Coalition sounds more prepared and offers solid arguments debating this issue. Perhaps Coyote had little participation on authoring this proposal, as it seems that it would be better structured if written solely by his nation", he said to fellow minister Adalberto Habaquc, of Justice and and Juridical Order. "It really is a shame that such a rude debater and weak legislator will take credit for this admirable proposal, even with the legal and social flaws it presents", Habacuq answered. They both kept watching closely as the voting resumed.

[St George of England]

Minister Omar Khumain laid back on his chair as the telegram to the World Assembly was sent. "It's a Shame. The ambassador of The Coyote Coalition sounds more prepared and offers solid arguments debating this issue. Perhaps Coyote had little participation on authoring this proposal, as it seems that it would be better structured if written solely by his nation", he said to fellow minister Adalberto Habaquc, of Justice and and Juridical Order. "It really is a shame that such a rude debater and weak legislator will take credit for this admirable proposal, even with the legal and social flaws it presents", Habacuq answered. They both kept watching closely as the voting resumed.

Princess Sarah rose. "It seems that we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black. You, yourself Mr Ambassador, have been rude, and have not even acknowledged the responses both authors of this bill, which will pass, have made to your questions."

OOC: Trolling=bad, m'kay?

[Nulono]

Is there a "protected species" resolution already on the books?

[The Associated Peoples]

Official Communication

In face of the unnecessarily aggressive and disrespectful way the ambassador of The People's Republic of Teshuvá for the World Assembly has been repeatedly adressed by fellow ambassador of The Associated Peoples, the People's Power minister for Foreign Affairs, Omar Khumain, personally comes to public to regret such posture from the representative of said nation.

We should remember that during voting sessions of the WA, one is not speaking only for himself, but for the state, government and population of his country -- which certainly requires an ambassador prepared for a position of such importance and resposability. It seems, by the latest event, that this is not the case, for we are certain that The Associated Peoples population and government is made of intelligent, polite and sensible men and women.

Finally, running the risk of pointing the obvious (yet indispensable), Teshuvá believes that respect and comprehension for the opinion of others, and also acceptable manners and education when dealing with equals, is the least to expect to be part of an organ of great relevance and such noble goals as discussing matters that affect the whole known world. We hope such values keep being part of the daily work at the WA.

Respectfully,

Omar Khumain,
People's Power minister for Foreign Affairs

- The government of Teshuvá believes this clause provides multinational pharmaceutical industries the chance to take advantage of a world bank of natural raw material to create it's own products and take huge amounts of profit -- without sharing the formulas with the member states who provided the specimens and could have interest in producing it's own medication. This is not only severe undermining of national sovereignty, but also the path to infinite legal battles over patents and rights of distribution of derivatives of those specimens.

It is not fair that this new patrimony of humanity, saved by the cordinated effort of the member-states of the WA, could fall in the hands of private enterprises that could (and would) make it a monopoly.

specially on what concerns how the territories for the facilities will be chosen and occuppied and who will be able to exploit the results of the researches (we are certainly not confortable with the implications of a world bank of natural resources fully avaiable to the greedy private sector for free).

Also because of the following clause: a.) All discoveries shall be made available to any establishment showing legitimate interest. It is not clear what exactly is defined by "establishment". What we see here is a breach that could benefit private enterprises by providing full access to world bank of natural resources absolutely for free -- no fee is firmed by this article, while I.c) clearly establishes payment for non-members of the WA to have access to the facility. We believe this is not to be taken lightly. Imagine a nation with rare, unexplored natural richness of plants that could be used to refine renewable energy sources or to produce medication. Samples are taken to the EPRF and an interested company develops this potential and registers the final product under an international patent. The country that originally owned this resource will be unable to explore it's own richness without having to pay royalties or buy it's own national product from a foreign company.

A full nation losing an historical opportunitty of social and economic development for the sake of private profit simply doesn't sound right to Teshuvá, nor should the WA create an agency that allows and facilitates such scenario.

You say that I am rude I say that I am honest and honesty only comes in one form and that would be brutal honesty.Any other kind of honesty only sidesteps the issue in flowery prose that is unnecessary.I say what I mean I mean what I say no more no less.As you can see from the comments of your previous arguments when placed in a row do look rather paranoid.All this talk of private corporations being given a back-door for profitable ventures at the expense of the world is ludicrous and quite unfounded.I do not pretty that fact up.I call it what it is.Given a sensible argument I give a sensible reply.Your arguments have not displayed this quality.

[Teshuva]

Princess Sarah rose. "It seems that we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black. You, yourself Mr Ambassador, have been rude, and have not even acknowledged the responses both authors of this bill, which will pass, have made to your questions."

OOC: Trolling=bad, m'kay?

OOC: My bad. Since personal aggression have been running lose, i really thought it was part of the game (in real life debate, it's a valid weapon. Not an admirable one, indeed, but valid). I apologize to all and specificaly to The Associated Peoplesif any rule was broken or if any personal ofense was taken.

[The Associated Peoples]

Is there a "protected species" resolution already on the books?

Yes there definitely is.That is not the point of this proposal.It is not to protect species.That would be a duplication.It is to preserve and study genetic materials in order to prepare for any major catastrophes that would have the potential of wiping species out on a large scale.The study of these materials and sharing of information with the relevant parties could potentially bring back species on an acceptable level to insure that they are not lost to posterity due to unforeseen circumstance.

[The Associated Peoples]

Princess Sarah rose. "It seems that we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black. You, yourself Mr Ambassador, have been rude, and have not even acknowledged the responses both authors of this bill, which will pass, have made to your questions."

OOC: Trolling=bad, m'kay?

OOC: My bad. Since personal aggression have been running lose, i really thought it was part of the game (in real life debate, it's a valid weapon. Not an admirable one, indeed, but valid). I apologize to all and specificaly to The Associated Peoplesif any rule was broken or if any personal ofense was taken.

(OOC)No offence taken I did not take it as a personal attack.In fact I'm having quite a bit of fun playing my character as I hope you are too.Without opposition this would be quite boring don't you think?

[Warzone Codger]

Well this is surely an interesting voting spilt.

You've beaten all 5 Feeders, XKI, Region Inc, Capitalist Paradise, (and edit: Gatesville) (the latter 4 being user regions who have more endos than one feeder) ALL voting against.

[Jedi Utopians]

The part of Cavnessia's argument that I was addressing has been underlined for you benefit.Once again you have grossly misunderstood the argument that was being put forth.If you notice I went on to state that what is being proposed would be considered aid.The part that you highlighted has nothing to do with my comment.I hope this serves to clear up your misconceptions.

I see where you're coming from. These mistakes happen, I suppose, when quoting a larger passage than just the phrase being addressed! I am still troubled, however, by your question, "Why must the WA be limited...?" which, in terms of national sovereignty, should be self-explanatory. The Jedi Utopians have no interest in letting powerful entities like the WA become a de facto world government that trumps our own laws and those of others; rather, we view the WA as a place where bridges can be forged between states with differing philosophies and morals and agreements reached on matters of universal importance.

As your argument relates to coordination of aid, I'm sure you are familiar with Resolution 33, Repealing the Coordination of Aid act. I won't repeat the arguments here, for brevity, but it is clear from that resolution that this resolution, without a mechanism to activate the biological samples, yet remains flawed by the same logic used there.

[The Coyote Coalition]

To: Minister Omar Khumain
From: Eustace Levi, Managing Director

Official Communication

In face of the unnecessarily aggressive and disrespectful way the ambassador of The People's Republic of Teshuvá for the World Assembly has been repeatedly adressed by fellow ambassador of The Associated Peoples, the People's Power minister for Foreign Affairs, Omar Khumain, personally comes to public to regret such posture from the representative of said nation.

We should remember that during voting sessions of the WA, one is not speaking only for himself, but for the state, government and population of his country -- which certainly requires an ambassador prepared for a position of such importance and resposability. It seems, by the latest event, that this is not the case, for we are certain that The Associated Peoples population and government is made of intelligent, polite and sensible men and women.

Finally, running the risk of pointing the obvious (yet indispensable), Teshuvá believes that respect and comprehension for the opinion of others, and also acceptable manners and education when dealing with equals, is the least to expect to be part of an organ of great relevance and such noble goals as discussing matters that affect the whole known world. We hope such values keep being part of the daily work at the WA.

Respectfully,

Omar Khumain,
People's Power minister for Foreign Affairs

Respect is a two way street, Minister Khumain. One can hardly fault Dr. Roosevelt for losing patience with the continual attacks (which often seem to hinge on a willful lack of comprehension as is the case with the Representative from Jedi Utopians, among others) and frequent attacks of a disrespectful nature.

Minister Omar Khumain laid back on his chair as the telegram to the World Assembly was sent. "It's a Shame. The ambassador of The Coyote Coalition sounds more prepared and offers solid arguments debating this issue. Perhaps Coyote had little participation on authoring this proposal, as it seems that it would be better structured if written solely by his nation", he said to fellow minister Adalberto Habaquc, of Justice and and Juridical Order. "It really is a shame that such a rude debater and weak legislator will take credit for this admirable proposal, even with the legal and social flaws it presents", Habacuq answered. They both kept watching closely as the voting resumed.

While I appreciate the kind acknowledgements of my debating skills, I would like to point out that this proposal wouldn't have existed without the far more substantial contributions of Premier Randolphs. I would go further by indicating such compliments hold little meaning when used as a tool to insult a colleague.

I've noticed that, throughout this debate, questions of Dr. Roosevelts' tact have continually arisen without regard for the arguments he chose to address. While many of his comments may have been less than polite, one should consider the overly aggressive stance taken by his opposition. Is it so wrong for an individual to defend themselves through less than polite methods when such methods are implemented against them?

[Teshuva]

You say that I am rude I say that I am honest and honesty only comes in one form and that would be brutal honesty.Any other kind of honesty only sidesteps the issue in flowery prose that is unnecessary.I say what I mean I mean what I say no more no less.As you can see from the comments of your previous arguments when placed in a row do look rather paranoid.All this talk of private corporations being given a back-door for profitable ventures at the expense of the world is ludicrous and quite unfounded.I do not pretty that fact up.I call it what it is.Given a sensible argument I give a sensible reply.Your arguments have not displayed this quality.

Fellow ambassador, first of all, there's nothing on the bill to stop private enterprises from adopting the exact behaviour described in my last example. It could be done, and legally done, because there's a distinct pattern on the actions of public and private enterprises: the government and it's agencies can only do what they're allowed to. The private enterprise can do anything it's not proihibited from doing. Anything. So we believe laws and regulations should cover most, if not all possibilities of it's application. Freely opening the results of public research, conducted with the taxpayer money, to the private enterprises so they can take profit of it is against the ideology of both our people and government. That's what we have been defending. Your sole point against such argumentation has been "you are paranoid". That's not enough to change our vote, I'm terribly sorry.

As for the personal agressions, I'm glad you have quoted my own asserts on your message. It shows Teshuvá has been conducting this debate on the higher level possible, respectfully and with no personal agression.

OOC: Except for one little peace of roleplay that apparently crossed the line . Sorry again for that one, pal.

[The Associated Peoples]

Well this is surely an interesting voting spilt.

You've beaten all 5 Feeders, XKI, Region Inc, Capitalist Paradise (the latter 4 being user regions who have more endos than one feeder) ALL voting against.

Maybe it's because I'm a tenacious bastard.

[Jedi Utopians]

Is there a "protected species" resolution already on the books?

Yes there definitely is.That is not the point of this proposal.It is not to protect species.That would be a duplication.It is to preserve and study genetic materials in order to prepare for any major catastrophes that would have the potential of wiping species out on a large scale.The study of these materials and sharing of information with the relevant parties could potentially bring back species on an acceptable level to insure that they are not lost to posterity due to unforeseen circumstance.

Well, actually, I'll add that to my list of arguments against. This is a clear duplication of resolution 66, specifically, this is covered under Clause 5 of that resolution:

5) Should a species come so near extinction that saving them in the wild is not feasible, the WAESC is responsible for capturing remaining members of the species, and attempting to repopulate the species enough to be released back into the wild.

This resolution tasks the same effort (post-extinction) to the WASP, when the WAESC would have already dealt with the issue, presumably using similar or even more "biologically natural" techniques.

[The Associated Peoples]

OOC: Except for one little peace of roleplay that apparently crossed the line . Sorry again for that one, pal.

(OOC)In all the rapid fire post you may have missed this so I'm reposting it.

(OOC)No offence taken I did not take it as a personal attack.In fact I'm having quite a bit of fun playing my character as I hope you are too.Without opposition this would be quite boring don't you think?

[The Associated Peoples]

Yes there definitely is.That is not the point of this proposal.It is not to protect species.That would be a duplication.It is to preserve and study genetic materials in order to prepare for any major catastrophes that would have the potential of wiping species out on a large scale.The study of these materials and sharing of information with the relevant parties could potentially bring back species on an acceptable level to insure that they are not lost to posterity due to unforeseen circumstance.

Well, actually, I'll add that to my list of arguments against. This is a clear duplication of resolution 66, specifically, this is covered under Clause 5 of that resolution:

5) Should a species come so near extinction that saving them in the wild is not feasible, the WAESC is responsible for capturing remaining members of the species, and attempting to repopulate the species enough to be released back into the wild.

This resolution tasks the same effort (post-extinction) to the WASP, when the WAESC would have already dealt with the issue, presumably using similar or even more "biologically natural" techniques.

Resolution#66 is tasked with collecting the species not the genetic materials.This proposal is tasked with collecting genetic materials not the species.Of course The WAESC would be considered a legitimately interested party so any findings would be passed along to them under the clauses of this proposal.No duplication is present.Also this proposal is more beneficial towards a sudden and drastic depopulation of a species due to unforeseen events not a gradual decrease over time.

[Jedi Utopians]

The Coyote Coalition
I've noticed that, throughout this debate, questions of Dr. Roosevelts' tact have continually arisen without regard for the arguments he chose to address. While many of his comments may have been less than polite, one should consider the overly aggressive stance taken by his opposition. Is it so wrong for an individual to defend themselves through less than polite methods when such methods are implemented against them?

I have respectfully apologized for clear and honest misunderstandings, honorable representative. Nevertheless, my reservations, as those of my colleague here, are unaddressed, regarding the lack of specificity in this resolution. Teshuga and the Jedi Utopians agree that where private industry, through "donations" (which I read as "investments") of resources are involved, a healthy desire for stringent oversight is called for. Our purpose here is not to repeal Resolution 17, but to work for clarity within its framework. This resolution fails to provide that clarity to our satisfaction.

Not having been involved in floor debates of the General Assembly before, I could not tell whether my logical arguments were too many, too fast, or too strenuous. The representative from the Associated Peoples seemed to indicate that strenuous advocacy was desired, and I endeavoured to identify, if I could, any loopholes, inconsistencies, and errors in either the text, logic behind it, or arguments for it. Having found some, I brought them to the attention of this body and have tried to resolve them, with limited success. Sadly, because that success is limited, we have regretfully voted no on this resolution, in the hopes that it may come back another time with these issues better addressed.

The Associated Peoples
Resolution#66 is tasked with collecting the species not the genetic materials.This proposal is tasked with collecting genetic materials not the species.Of course The WAESC would be considered a legitimately interested party so any findings would be passed along to them under the clauses of this proposal.No duplication is present.Also this proposal is more beneficial towards a sudden and drastic depopulation of a species due to unforeseen events not a gradual decrease over time.

Oh, I SO wish I had been on board for the drafting of this resolution to prevent this kind of nonsense. "Genetic materials" and "species," in this context are the same. The collection methods are, presumably, the same, as you would need members of the original species to donate, in one form or another, their genetic material. Let's not get into a "chicken or the egg" fiasco!

I do respect, however, the intent of the resolution regarding rapid vs. prolonged extinction events. I do not, however, believe that such a distinction is so necessary as to warrant further taxation of our peoples and, yes, duplication of efforts, or, at the least, increased bureaucracy between WA organizations.


OOC: Way more fun than just clicking a button once a week! But oh, do I have RL work to do!

[The Rich Port]

I wonder why the voter turnout was so thorough...

This has gotta be the most I've seen people vote on the WA

[The Coyote Coalition]

The Coyote Coalition
I've noticed that, throughout this debate, questions of Dr. Roosevelts' tact have continually arisen without regard for the arguments he chose to address. While many of his comments may have been less than polite, one should consider the overly aggressive stance taken by his opposition. Is it so wrong for an individual to defend themselves through less than polite methods when such methods are implemented against them?

I have respectfully apologized for clear and honest misunderstandings, honorable representative. Nevertheless, my reservations, as those of my colleague here, are unaddressed, regarding the lack of specificity in this resolution. Teshuga and the Jedi Utopians agree that where private industry, through "donations" (which I read as "investments") of resources are involved, a healthy desire for stringent oversight is called for. Our purpose here is not to repeal Resolution 17, but to work for clarity within its framework. This resolution fails to provide that clarity to our satisfaction.

Not having been involved in floor debates of the General Assembly before, I could not tell whether my logical arguments were too many, too fast, or too strenuous. The representative from the Associated Peoples seemed to indicate that strenuous advocacy was desired, and I endeavoured to identify, if I could, any loopholes, inconsistencies, and errors in either the text, logic behind it, or arguments for it. Having found some, I brought them to the attention of this body and have tried to resolve them, with limited success. Sadly, because that success is limited, we have regretfully voted no on this resolution, in the hopes that it may come back another time with these issues better addressed.

This comment was directed towards complaints about Dr. Roosevelt's allegedly unfair and disrespectful behavior. Regardless of your concerns about the framework of World Assembly Resolution #17, there is enough clarity for the sake of the numerous arguments concerning funding that have come up throughout this debate. I will elaborate on this below.

The Associated Peoples
Resolution#66 is tasked with collecting the species not the genetic materials.This proposal is tasked with collecting genetic materials not the species.Of course The WAESC would be considered a legitimately interested party so any findings would be passed along to them under the clauses of this proposal.No duplication is present.Also this proposal is more beneficial towards a sudden and drastic depopulation of a species due to unforeseen events not a gradual decrease over time.

Oh, I SO wish I had been on board for the drafting of this resolution to prevent this kind of nonsense. "Genetic materials" and "species," in this context are the same. The collection methods are, presumably, the same, as you would need members of the original species to donate, in one form or another, their genetic material. Let's not get into a "chicken or the egg" fiasco!

I do respect, however, the intent of the resolution regarding rapid vs. prolonged extinction events. I do not, however, believe that such a distinction is so necessary as to warrant further taxation of our peoples and, yes, duplication of efforts, or, at the least, increased bureaucracy between WA organizations.


OOC: Way more fun than just clicking a button once a week! But oh, do I have RL work to do!

I'm curious as to why you feel genetic materials and species function as the same thing within the context of your arguments. Concerning the collection methods, this proposal sets out to collect the genetic materials well before any danger to a given species arises. Additionally, much of this proposal focuses on sharing research, education being the primary concern contained herein.

Additionally, though it's been addressed before, the concept of warranting further taxation is faulty, as stated here:

3) Paying for this bill: Non members may pay a fee, but those of us apart of the World Assembly are void?
-This sounds like an incentive for others whom are not apart of the Assembly to acquire membership. You will also see no evidence that shows this will come close to breaking even financially...

It's been stated a few times throughout this argument but, for the sake of clarification, I felt that I'd invite the Representative from America Liberty to read World Assembly Resolution #17, the WA General Fund. The World Assembly funds it's operations through charitable donations. Your national coffers will remain untouched by the creation, maintenance and operation of the EPRF.

While you feel that there may be some kind of flaw contained within this resolution, for the purposes of this proposal it should dissuade any further debate over funding as it clarifies that all World Assembly endeavors are funded through charitable donation and prevents any deficit spending. Squabbles over any other issues within this resolution have no relevance upon the this particular proposal.

[Layze]

We, the people of Layze, think that we should leave nature sort out things. We should not try to dictate nature how to evolve by reintroducing extinct species.
Therefore we voted against this resolution.

Honored ambassador I understand your position but answer me this.What about extinction events that have nothing to do with nature such as massive warfare or nuclear devastation?These I believe would not fall under the category of nature "sorting itself out".These types of things would be completely manufactured forms of species decimation.These are examples of things that are completely unnatural.I might also add that this facility I am proposing could also be used to store genetic materials from sentient species as well as non-sentient.If the technology can be developed to halt the complete loss of a nations rich genetic diversity in the face of disaster why not use it?

Honoured Ambassador,
We excuse our long absence in the matter but we had to do some more research.
We understand your approach very well.

But we also consider humans as part of nature, and human-made catastrophes can easily be compared with nature-made catastrophes. Nature did - and will - always find a way. If a species is extinct another species will pretty fast catch up and jump into the new hole. This can go so far, that a new species will be created by adaptation of another species to the new circumstances.

Therefore if we humans bring back an extinct species we will be driving away the newly and probably better suited species, maybe even extinct this new species.

This especially applies to nuclear devastation catastrophes. Any animal extinct by such an event will probably not survive there, but new species who adopt to the new surrounding might evolve. But if we would decide to let an animal who was extinct by such an event let go wild in another region of the world we maybe would see happen Australia again.

In conclusion we stand firm in our decision against this in this form.

[Jedi Utopians]

Honored delegates, our time for debate on this resolution has come to an end. It is my hope that the discussion here presented will inform your decisions regarding how to vote on this resolution. No resolution yet passed by this body has had as close a vote tally in recent memory--I do not know if that bodes well or ill. Regardless of the outcome of this vote, it is my hope, and my country's, that we can continue to work together, in the spirit of spirited friendship, to craft international laws we can all agree on.

If I have offended, my apologies. If I have enlightened, my thanks for your time.

[Nulono]

I wonder why the voter turnout was so thorough...

I don't think many people are huge fans of going extinct.

[Sintas]

I wonder why the voter turnout was so thorough...

I don't think many people are huge fans of going extinct.

I know. Let's just get this thing going so we can sit back and enjoy a day of peace while we are happy that we won't go extinct. Let the facility put human DNA in, just to be safe.

[Cavnessia]

Like so many recent proposals, we must reject this on the grounds that it will cause the World Assembly to overstep what we feel to be its purpose -- maintaining peace, coordinating charity and aid, and advocating for human rights.

Why must the WA be limited to such a limited scope?

That is an excellent question, sir! Our position is simple: the World Assembly is made up of an absolutely mind-boggling array of cultures and governments, and it is Cavnessia's position that if the WA's scope is not limited as we set forth above, then we risk alienating fringe members of the coalition. Additionally, our people firmly resist the Law of Unintended Consequences when applied on a global scale; the best-intended resolutions can result in some quite shocking results. Some have been mentioned here, though you scoffed at them.

In the case of eminent extinction, the people of Cavnessia will be the first on the line, even possibly asking for emergency resolutions to have the WA coordinate the effort. Indeed, were a resolution to appear that granted this emergency power and nothing more, our nation would be among the first to sign. Unfortunately, our position is that the proposal overextends the WA into areas that we, as a nation, do not feel comfortable with.

Would this not be considered a coordination of aid?

Actually, as I have read it, it is meant to PREVENT extinction in the future, which is a dodo of a different color.


Cavnessia would be delighted to entertain any education and research-sharing alliances from individual nations or groups of nations. We feel that our need to limit the World Assembly's reach, however, prevents us from wanting to use this body as the forum for such things.

[Naivetry]

I'd like to thank my fellow members of the WA for an enlightening debate. In particular, Jedi Utopians and Teshuva have helped to clarify some of the points that vaguely bothered me.

With The Rejected Realms' vote, the delegates of all of the largest game-created regions besides Lazarus (currently abstaining) have now lodged votes against. So has every other delegate with over 60 endorsements (out of those currently voting) besides two (Alsted and Lethen)... who says there's no such thing as democracy in the WA?

[The Associated Peoples]

I'd like to thank my fellow members of the WA for an enlightening debate. In particular, Jedi Utopians and Teshuva have helped to clarify some of the points that vaguely bothered me.

With The Rejected Realms' vote, the delegates of all of the largest game-created regions besides Lazarus (currently abstaining) have now lodged votes against. So has every other delegate with over 60 endorsements (out of those currently voting) besides two (Alsted and Lethen)... who says there's no such thing as democracy in the WA?

(OOC)Democracy is definitely alive and well.I must say this has been pretty exciting for me.Allot of good points were brought up especially in the last few hours and I tried my best to answer what I could.Now all I can do is wait the next four hours to see what happens.Either way the next time I see someone crying about newbie bashing I'll be sure to tell them they are incorrect seeing as being only a few months old I do not feel bashed in the slightest.Thank you all for participating and either way this turns out I had a blast.I was able to develop my character quite a bit thanks for that also.Dr.Nigel Roosevelt can be quite an arse it seems