[SUBMITTED] Space Junk Is Bad

[Mundiferrum]

KSP? Is that, like, Kentucky Steamed Pork? Kan't Spell Properly? Kenny Sucks...

Ari devilishly smiles at the Secretariat.

Popsicles? Seriously, not getting the joke.

OOC: Kerbal Space Program? That does seem to fit the joke better.... EDIT: Woops, l'auteur already addressed that. https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/

[Applebania]

Claire enters the debating hall, standing in for the ill Joshua.

"We support this resolution- Applebania used to have a huge problem with space junk constantly flying into our colonies- but isn't the committee, you know, overstretching itself a bit?"

She takes a seat.

[Defwa]

Claire enters the debating hall, standing in for the ill Joshua.

"We support this resolution- Applebania used to have a huge problem with space junk constantly flying into our colonies- but isn't the committee, you know, overstretching itself a bit?"

She takes a seat.

How do you think? I tried to give it only the minimum duties possible to fulfill its purpose. Track objects, contract out the removal of objects, collect on the cost of operations.
Tracking may seem like a big deal, and maybe I can change the language there a bit, but its a job that should be effectively done with modern sensor equipment like radar. [RL space agencies do it themselves. Ita how the ISS knows it needs to jump because its about to collide with a volleyball sized chunk of junk]

@ Chester, don't get hung up on the ksp thing. Its a video game that taught me a lot of what I know about space travel. Its not a very good joke. I am just absolute shit at naming things.

[Nulono]

Has someone already brought up that "Kessler" might be an RL violation?

I'm unconvinced. If it's the technical term, it should fall under "the word for that thing"; we don't invent an entirely new a priori language for WA discussions. What about "Orwellian"? "Draconian"? "Philistine"? "Barbaric"? "Americium"? "Taser"?

Every single word in the English language comes from "real world" roots, so I don't see that as a tenable position to hold.

[Defwa]

Adjustments have been made to the first post. Change log is present in the second.
And we're over the character limit according to Word. Curse my long windedness.
EDIT: Mostly fixed. I'll wait to post it until this draft gets some remarks.

[Lalaki]

The Community of Lalaki, having recently decided to establish a space program, is ready to vote in favor of this resolution should it come to the floor.

[Defwa]

The Community of Lalaki, having recently decided to establish a space program, is ready to vote in favor of this resolution should it come to the floor.

That is appreciated. Tell your friends!

[Ardchoille]

Has someone already brought up that "Kessler" might be an RL violation?

I'm unconvinced. If it's the technical term, it should fall under "the word for that thing"; we don't invent an entirely new a priori language for WA discussions. What about "Orwellian"? "Draconian"? "Philistine"? "Barbaric"? "Americium"? "Taser"?

Every single word in the English language comes from "real world" roots, so I don't see that as a tenable position to hold.

Sorry, but Donald Kessler is a real-life person, just like you, me and Max Barry but, in at least one case, smarter. And don't anyone tell me that the Kessler Syndrome was theorised by Davinia Kessler of Defwa in 2209CE, either, because we had that debate way back when, when Albertina Edwina Einstein of Iforgetthenameistan and her siblings, not to mention Newton Isaacs, the apple guy, kept turning up in proposals.

One way to get out of it is to take the scientific law/theory/postulate as a given, eg, GIVEN that ..., RECOGNISING that ... (statement of law/theory/postulate), etc. This also gets you around people going "what the hell is the Kessler Syndrome?" and voting it down on title alone.

Nulono, for the things you quoted, a rough guide is, if it's a word old enough or familiar enough to have lost its capital letter, it's usable. If it's an element or a chemical name, the WA translators will turn it into whatever term your language uses. If it's even slightly obscure, the best bet is to refer in the text only to what it is or does. You can give credit to its RW creator OOCly in the drafting thread.

[Defwa]

I'm unconvinced. If it's the technical term, it should fall under "the word for that thing"; we don't invent an entirely new a priori language for WA discussions. What about "Orwellian"? "Draconian"? "Philistine"? "Barbaric"? "Americium"? "Taser"?

Every single word in the English language comes from "real world" roots, so I don't see that as a tenable position to hold.

Sorry, but Donald Kessler is a real-life person, just like you, me and Max Barry but, in at least one case, smarter. And don't anyone tell me that the Kessler Syndrome was theorised by Davinia Kessler of Defwa in 2209CE, either, because we had that debate way back when, when Albertina Edwina Einstein of Iforgetthenameistan and her siblings, not to mention Newton Isaacs, the apple guy, kept turning up in proposals.

One way to get out of it is to take the scientific law/theory/postulate as a given, eg, GIVEN that ..., RECOGNISING that ... (statement of law/theory/postulate), etc. This also gets you around people going "what the hell is the Kessler Syndrome?" and voting it down on title alone.

Nulono, for the things you quoted, a rough guide is, if it's a word old enough or familiar enough to have lost its capital letter, it's usable. If it's an element or a chemical name, the WA translators will turn it into whatever term your language uses. If it's even slightly obscure, the best bet is to refer in the text only to what it is or does. You can give credit to its RW creator OOCly in the drafting thread.

Fair enough. A new temporary title will be placed shortly. Reference to Kessler Syndrome has been removed from the next draft.

[Separatist Peoples]

"I swear to Odin I will campaign against this if you change that title. It's perfect."

[Mundiferrum]

That new title....it's perfect!

[Blorbs]

Pretty good draft, but you definantly need to change the name before you propose it. Lol

[Bears Armed]

'Orbital Hardware Safety Act' ?

[Separatist Peoples]

'Orbital Hardware Safety Act' ?

"Quit it, you! That title is beyond reproach. Although, Orbital Debris Safety Act would probably be more accurate."

[Clynstia]

Hmm. Is creating "Starfleet" legal, or does it fall under the "NO militarized WA!!" category? Aside from that, I can't see any blaring problems. I would back this.

EDIT: Opps. Posted with a puppet. This is The Nation of Ceneria.

[The Dark Star Republic]

"A quick look at a highly reputable and undoubtedly accurate source suggests 'Kessler syndrome' (presumably named after the late 90s Dark Star synth-pop sensations Barry Kessler And The Modestly Funkastic If Surprisingly Racially Intolerant Sweet Time Band) has some generic names: 'collision cascading' or 'ablation cascade'. Perhaps one of those could be incorporated for the title or definition," suggests Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater while thumbing a copy of Playhutt featuring Kobba The Hutt and her alluring slime trails, having tired of his Kryozerkian pornography.

[Wrapper]

Hmm. Is creating "Starfleet" legal, or does it fall under the "NO militarized WA!!" category?

How so? Seems like it's just a committee, doing just committee-type things and nothing military-related at all.

OOC: Unlike that "other" Starfleet....

[The Pacifican Islands]

As the Defwaen Federation prepares to feed the spirit of curiosity and enter space, we see challenges in the enterprise that we alone cannot solve and endeavor to utilize the combined strength of this assembly to aid in every nation's progress in space on our shared journey of discovery.

Kessler Syndrome Prevention

Category: Environmental
Industry: All Businesses

DISTRESSED by the threat of Kessler Syndrome in which the addition of debris in orbit occurs faster than said debris naturally deorbits

RECOGNIZING that prolonged accumulation of debris in orbit can impede space travel and orbital operations

RESOLVING to reduce the amount of debris in orbit

PROVIDES the following for all World Assembly member nations, entities, and citizens operating in orbit:

Article – Objects in Orbit [OiOs]

OiOs must be capable of completing more than one revolution around a celestial body without propulsion and performing maneuvers to avoid collision or the OiO shall be considered debris.

The launch of objects into orbit must be done in a fashion that minimizes potential debris.

Creating debris with the intent of disrupting orbital operations is strictly prohibited.

Article – Deorbiting Protocol

OiOs must be capable of deorbiting in a controlled fashion, moving completely into a graveyard orbit, or otherwise removing themselves in a fashion that does not endanger other OiOs that are not considered as debris or the OiO shall be considered debris.

Deorbiting of OiOs must be done in a fashion that does not damage populated or developed areas or impact the territory of another nation without permission.

Article – Debris

Debris that contains no life forms shall be subject to unwarned removal.

Debris that poses immediate danger to OiOs in compliance with this resolution or are likely to damage populated or developed areas on the surface of a celestial body are subject to unwarned destruction.

Debris shall be open to salvage by any party without recourse.

Article - Rescue

Repair of debris or rescue of occupants will be attempted prior to destruction or removal or destruction of debris if it is believed that sapient life is present on the debris or at the request of the owner of the debris.

OiOs with the capability to conduct rescue operations without impeding their own ability to safely return home or resupply are required to do so when the debris is believed to contain sapient life.

Article – Starfleet

Forms Starfleet.

Starfleet shall have the duty of determining if an object is in orbit, the ownership and thus responsibility for an ownership, and the compliance of OiOs if such things are disputed.

Starfleet shall specify a graveyard orbit in the event that complete deorbiting proves too difficult.

Starfleet shall track all detectable OiOs around any celestial body with a World Assembly presence and maintain open records of the OiOs origins, owner, functional status, and course when available.

Starfleet shall contract out all duties of rescue, repair, removal, and destruction of debris to other parties within the World Assembly in the event that the OiO poses a danger to others.

Starfleet shall fine the owner of debris for any costs related to the rescue, repair, removal, and destruction of their property in orbit as well as for any damages caused by their failure to comply with this resolution. Funds obtained in this fashion will be used to compensate victims of damages and pay for costs incurred by Starfleet.

Article – Exceptions and Modifications

OiOs positioned prior to the passage of this resolution are excused from its provisions until the objects cease to be operational or when they pose a danger to OiOs that are in compliance with this resolution at which point the non-complying OiO will be considered debris.

OiOs manufactured and placed in orbit by parties not in the World Assembly shall be immune to the provisions of this resolution unless the object poses a danger to a complying object in orbit at which point the non-complying object will be considered debris and the owner of the debris will not be fined unless they opt for future interaction with Starfleet of their own will.

If the owner of an OiO cannot be determined, ownership shall fall to the nation from which the object was launched. If the source of the launch cannot be determined, the object shall be considered debris.

Damage done by OiOs shall not be fined if the damage was done as a declared act of war against the victim.

Starfleet? Copyrighted

EDIT: I'm FT and have a "Starfleet" so I'll vote against this until you change it to WASP or something. (World Assembly Space Patrol)

[Wrapper]

Starfleet? Copyrighted

Really? Really? Really?

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC:

Starfleet? Copyrighted

EDIT: I'm FT and have a "Starfleet" so I'll vote against this until you change it to WASP or something. (World Assembly Space Patrol)

You're confusing copyright and trademark. And I actually don't think Starfleet is a trademark of Paramount.

WASP already exists: the World Assembly Science Program. The World Assembly Space Committee (WASC, or SC for short) still seems the best name to me.

[Bears Armed Mission]

EDIT: I'm FT and have a "Starfleet" so I'll vote against this until you change it to WASP or something. (World Assembly Space Patrol)

We already have a 'WASP', namely the 'World Assembly Science Programme'... within which this proposed agency could probably be a new branch.

[Defwa]

Starfleet is a place holder. Ablation does sound quite nice.
Now that it's not dark outside, I'm going on a wiki and thesaurus dive for options.

Any comments on the content? I want to make sure this is not perceived to obstruct fledgling space programs or space militaries.

[The Dark Star Republic]

The Vice-Colonel is now quite taken with a particularly comely Hutt's oozing, so the intern, Daisy, has had to take over.

"Your proposal is about objects 'in orbit' - of what? It is not necessarily reasonable to treat objects in orbit of a moon or even asteroid, as those in orbit of a planet. Indeed, your current definition of an object in orbit seems to designate some celestial bodies as objects in orbit themselves."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
WA Intern

[Defwa]

The Vice-Colonel is now quite taken with a particularly comely Hutt's oozing, so the intern, Daisy, has had to take over.

"Your proposal is about objects 'in orbit' - of what? It is not necessarily reasonable to treat objects in orbit of a moon or even asteroid, as those in orbit of a planet. Indeed, your current definition of an object in orbit seems to designate some celestial bodies as objects in orbit themselves."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
WA Intern

Yes, I see what you mean. I didn't want to designate that OiOs were only artificial so that the committee would have authority to contract out removal of dangerous asteroids, but I don't want it being forced to destroy the moon because of an unfortunate satellite orbit.
I guess I may have to specify artificial OiOs here and then handle natural debris at another time.

[The Dark Star Republic]

"Definitely. Concentrate on artificial objects in this one, and on natural NEOs (or N_whateverplanetNSison_Os) is another proposal; otherwise you appear to be committing the WA to a particularly bold and daring international security strategy.

"Another technical matter concerns the presence of 'life forms'. Isn't that an excessively broad exception? It would seem to apply to even a derelict space station that has bacterial residue, to say nothing of the possibility of space-based extremophiles."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
WA Intern, Still not an expert in technobabble, however