[SUBMITTED] Space Junk Is Bad

[Chester Pearson]

At least you got rid of that stupid Starfleet reference. That is a start....

It was a place holder Chesty. Calm down.

I was actually thanking you, but take it as you will....

*Slaps Landsfree on the ass again, this time while not drunk*

[Defwa]

It was a place holder Chesty. Calm down.

I was actually thanking you, but take it as you will....

*Slaps Landsfree on the ass again, this time while not drunk*

OOC: Sorry, I take any perceived attack on star trek very very seriously.

[Chester Pearson]

I was actually thanking you, but take it as you will....

*Slaps Landsfree on the ass again, this time while not drunk*

OOC: Sorry, I take any perceived attack on star trek very very seriously.

OOC: Hey I am as big of a Trekker as they come. I have even modeled my main nation after The Federation.... I just believe Star Trek has no real place in WA resolutions is all. I like to keep my fantasy worlds separate....

[Araraukar]

Draft three is up along with a title that means "space junk is bad".

Change it back to the actual words.

[Defwa]

As irresponsible as it may be, since things are quiet, I'm going to make a few minor mainly grammar adjustments here and then look towards submission in a few days.

Could someone advise me- I hear that weekends are not great times to submit proposals. When should it be done?

[Lexicor]

As irresponsible as it may be, since things are quiet, I'm going to make a few minor mainly grammar adjustments here and then look towards submission in a few days.

Could someone advise me- I hear that weekends are not great times to submit proposals. When should it be done?

Friday's at 7 PM are statistically when peoples are the most happy! Its normally at that time that Lexicor declares a war on a rebellious province

[Chester Pearson]

As irresponsible as it may be, since things are quiet, I'm going to make a few minor mainly grammar adjustments here and then look towards submission in a few days.

Could someone advise me- I hear that weekends are not great times to submit proposals. When should it be done?

If your running a campaign script, anytime after a minor update is fine.

[Ainocra]

We still have concerns with this portion

Creating debris with the intent of disrupting orbital operations is prohibited

Blockade is a vital aspect of interstellar warfare.
Other than that we see no issue. Should the objectionable bit be removed we could support this.

[Defwa]

We still have concerns with this portion

Creating debris with the intent of disrupting orbital operations is prohibited

Blockade is a vital aspect of interstellar warfare.
Other than that we see no issue. Should the objectionable bit be removed we could support this.

I am going to just get rid of that line as I cannot think of how to deal with it properly.

[Araraukar]

I still much prefer the previous title.

[Defwa]

A part of me wants a compliance mechanism for those that might fail to pay fines for the cost of their violations. Something more subtle than shooting them down.

Does anyone have suggestions for services that WASP can offer to complying nations. I've already added something that would withhold tracking data when nations fail to pay for damages. I might also add something that says the WASP will not seek to protect their property if its ever put in danger.

[Ainocra]

Thanks.

Charge them the cost of the cleanup?
Then double the cost for each successive offense?

[The Dark Star Republic]

Does anyone have suggestions for services that WASC can offer to complying nations.

"Collision warnings? Perhaps even creating a collision warning system which sends alerts to nations that comply.

"At the risk of harping on minor details, 'OiOs' makes me think of Old McDonald had a farm, OiOiO...

"I also dislike the automatic resort to 'fining' as a method of punishment. Fines are often ineffectual where the cost of the fine is less than the cost of the profit incurred for the fined action."

~ Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater

[Defwa]

Does anyone have suggestions for services that WASC can offer to complying nations.

"Collision warnings? Perhaps even creating a collision warning system which sends alerts to nations that comply.

"At the risk of harping on minor details, 'OiOs' makes me think of Old McDonald had a farm, OiOiO...

"I also dislike the automatic resort to 'fining' as a method of punishment. Fines are often ineffectual where the cost of the fine is less than the cost of the profit incurred for the fined action."

~ Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater

My intent with the language is that the fine will cover the cost of the service- which ought to be pretty costly. That is to say the cost of launching a satellite with deorbitting fuel should be less than the cost of sending a separate rocket as part of a separate mission with the extra fuel needed to manage a rendezvous and then accomplish a deorbit.
The additional cost should be a deterrent.

[Defwa]

How does this sound?

"Member nations are required to block any attempts to launch objects into orbit from within their territory if the party attempting launch has outstanding fines owed to WASP.
Nations that fail to effectively aid WASP in collection of fines will not receive OiO data from WASP nor will OiOs launched from their territory receive any assistance I collision avoidance."

I'm going to change the wording in WASPs OiO tracking duties to specify that the information is regularly supplied at request directly to complying nations.
This may take me over the character limit, though.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

OK, what is the problem with actually calling the proposal what it is, legislation on space junk. Inimical Debris is even worse and more confusing than the Kessler Syndrome thing.

edit: also, how are you doing on word count?

[Defwa]

OK, what is the problem with actually calling the proposal what it is, legislation on space junk. Inimical Debris is even worse and more confusing than the Kessler Syndrome thing.

edit: also, how are you doing on word count?

OOC: Oh, but it is such a perfect term. I'll look at changing it back

The draft I have open at home had a couple hundred characters left. I don't know once I add the new compliance portion

[Bears Armed Mission]

OK, what is the problem with actually calling the proposal what it is, legislation on space junk

OOC: extraterrestrial genitalia?

^_^

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Oh, but it is such a perfect term. I'll look at changing it back

The draft I have open at home had a couple hundred characters left. I don't know once I add the new compliance portion

OOC: Do forgive my replying to OOC with IC, but I hate OOC debate when it can be avoided.
IC:"I think the scope of your plan is too great, ambassador. There are too many facets to your current draft. I would suggest splitting off the Rescue section into a different proposal altogether. You can, potentially, create a proposal that requires careful classification and tracking of objects in orbit such as your WASP section does without gasping for space or delving into rescue or even debris removal. I recognize the need for such coverage, but your political capital is perhaps best spent on several incremental steps instead of one large one.

"Besides, it's harder to repeal two or three resolutions then just one, in case you acquire any hostile rivalries!"

[Defwa]

OOC: Oh, but it is such a perfect term. I'll look at changing it back

The draft I have open at home had a couple hundred characters left. I don't know once I add the new compliance portion

OOC: Do forgive my replying to OOC with IC, but I hate OOC debate when it can be avoided.
IC:"I think the scope of your plan is too great, ambassador. There are too many facets to your current draft. I would suggest splitting off the Rescue section into a different proposal altogether. You can, potentially, create a proposal that requires careful classification and tracking of objects in orbit such as your WASP section does without gasping for space or delving into rescue or even debris removal. I recognize the need for such coverage, but your political capital is perhaps best spent on several incremental steps instead of one large one.

"Besides, it's harder to repeal two or three resolutions then just one, in case you acquire any hostile rivalries!"

That seems doable. The first proposal may be a bit weak as a result- but it's an eventuality I've been expecting for some time.
I will break this down into Debris Prevention and another into Debris Removal

[Defwa]

OOC: Working on the dual drafts and some bits are up right now. Most of the original has been scrapped but it's a learning experience. How's the new stuff looking? Debris Prevention should be narrow enough to fit into Environmental/Manufacturing now and Debris Removal may fit in IntSec by the time I'm through with it. Not far enough along for that to be inflexible yet.

[Wrapper]

Well... we think this is a problem, at least the way we interpret the following lines:

REQUIRES nations to take all action necessary to prevent the launch of objects into orbit that have not been certified as compliant with this resolution, allowing exceptions only when loss of life would occur as a result of such actions

CLARIFIES that this resolution will not impede or restrict the rights of nations to do battle in space so long as all damage done is part of a declared act of war against the owner of the object, the nation the object was launched from, or if the object services or benefits the enemy

Now, we the Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper, as you may know, are a pacifist nation, with outer colonies stationed on other planets and in deep space. As pacifists, we have no weapons, aside from our Big Honking Ignore Cannons (BHICs), which only work on forces from other WA nations (OOC: thanks to GAR #2). At some of our more remote outposts, our entire defense system consists of.... Well, have you ever heard of submarines, and their anti-torpedo countermeasures? Basically, our outpost defenses are similar -- we launch a whole lot of, for lack of a better word, junk, which can shield the outpost from many different types of attacks in a similar way. Now, when we read these definitions... well, we don't think that launching these countermeasures fit into the exception in the first quoted clause, which to us really says, prevent the launches of these objects unless doing so (that is, the act of preventing the launch) will cause death. As for the second clause, the BHICs only work when war is declared on us by a WA nation, resulting in immediate peace, but BHICs do not always work on non-WA nations, so an unprovoked, undeclared attack would mean our outpost cannot launch its countermeasures.

Is our objection making sense?

[Defwa]

Well... we think this is a problem, at least the way we interpret the following lines:

REQUIRES nations to take all action necessary to prevent the launch of objects into orbit that have not been certified as compliant with this resolution, allowing exceptions only when loss of life would occur as a result of such actions

CLARIFIES that this resolution will not impede or restrict the rights of nations to do battle in space so long as all damage done is part of a declared act of war against the owner of the object, the nation the object was launched from, or if the object services or benefits the enemy

Now, we the Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper, as you may know, are a pacifist nation, with outer colonies stationed on other planets and in deep space. As pacifists, we have no weapons, aside from our Big Honking Ignore Cannons (BHICs), which only work on forces from other WA nations (OOC: thanks to GAR #2). At some of our more remote outposts, our entire defense system consists of.... Well, have you ever heard of submarines, and their anti-torpedo countermeasures? Basically, our outpost defenses are similar -- we launch a whole lot of, for lack of a better word, junk, which can shield the outpost from many different types of attacks in a similar way. Now, when we read these definitions... well, we don't think that launching these countermeasures fit into the exception in the first quoted clause, which to us really says, prevent the launches of these objects unless doing so (that is, the act of preventing the launch) will cause death. As for the second clause, the BHICs only work when war is declared on us by a WA nation, resulting in immediate peace, but BHICs do not always work on non-WA nations, so an unprovoked, undeclared attack would mean our outpost cannot launch its countermeasures.

Is our objection making sense?

I see- that exception was intended for blockade programs as Ainocra mentioned but I did not account for defensive use
Luckily those measures shouldn't run afoul of deorbitting protocols. Perhaps I can tweak the maneuvering requirements or open a defense exception.
My problem is I want to avoid giving license to create random debris or else this whole exercise is for nothing.

[Wrapper]

My problem is I want to avoid giving license to create random debris or else this whole exercise is for nothing.

Understood, and that's definitely an idea that has our support. We're sure you can work out the wording.

[Flamels Stone]

Well... we think this is a problem, at least the way we interpret the following lines:

REQUIRES nations to take all action necessary to prevent the launch of objects into orbit that have not been certified as compliant with this resolution, allowing exceptions only when loss of life would occur as a result of such actions

CLARIFIES that this resolution will not impede or restrict the rights of nations to do battle in space so long as all damage done is part of a declared act of war against the owner of the object, the nation the object was launched from, or if the object services or benefits the enemy

Now, we the Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper, as you may know, are a pacifist nation, with outer colonies stationed on other planets and in deep space. As pacifists, we have no weapons, aside from our Big Honking Ignore Cannons (BHICs), which only work on forces from other WA nations (OOC: thanks to GAR #2). At some of our more remote outposts, our entire defense system consists of.... Well, have you ever heard of submarines, and their anti-torpedo countermeasures? Basically, our outpost defenses are similar -- we launch a whole lot of, for lack of a better word, junk, which can shield the outpost from many different types of attacks in a similar way. Now, when we read these definitions... well, we don't think that launching these countermeasures fit into the exception in the first quoted clause, which to us really says, prevent the launches of these objects unless doing so (that is, the act of preventing the launch) will cause death. As for the second clause, the BHICs only work when war is declared on us by a WA nation, resulting in immediate peace, but BHICs do not always work on non-WA nations, so an unprovoked, undeclared attack would mean our outpost cannot launch its countermeasures.

Is our objection making sense?

Correct me if i'm wrong.But if you were to launch said ''junk'' into a graveryard orbit righ away ,it would complie with the first resolution.
And if you were to say it's purpose was national security and that the owner was the nation it wouldn't be clasified as debris and there would be no reason to be removed(complying with the second resolution).
Of course graveyard orbits are further away from the body it orbits so you would have more area to cover for full protection.