How would you have voted on famous past resolutions?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

I believe we had one of these topics way back during the old days (UN/Jolt), but I figured we could give "newer" nations (if you want to call five- or six-year players "new") the opportunity to voice how they would have voted on famous past WA resolutions, had they been playing NS/in the WA at the time. Feel free to go through the list of resolutions and add any more you wish to comment on -- hell, tell us how you would have voted on all the ones you missed, if you want -- but the ones below are provided as examples of some of the more famous resolutions that are still widely discussed today. (Mostly because so many people are always trying to repeal them...but whatever.)

So go on, give us your thoughts and tell us if you would have voted for or against any of these historic WA documents:

• (#1) The World Assembly -- voted the UN and all its resolutions out of existence; controversial because all Historic Resolution authors had their work invalidated, and -- as it erased the tyrannical UN yet at the same time created a new tyrannical organization to bow down to -- NatSovers weren't sure which side to root against!
  
  
• (#2) Rights and Duties of WA States -- basic meta-rules for all WA member states to follow; created tension among NatSovers because it required all states to obey all resolutions...has caused more recent division over a couple controversial repeal attempts, and the fact that it would be illegal nowadays for so many MetaGaming violations.
  
  
• (#8) World Assembly Headquarters -- created a lavish new HQ for the WA following the tragic arson incident that destroyed the old building; still causes problems today because some players don't like all the inside jokes it references.
  
  
• (#10) Nuclear Arms Possession Act (NAPA) -- allows nations to stockpile (without actually using) nuclear weapons; controversial because of the elastic "wrong hands" clause -- also because nukes are harmful to children and other living things.
  
  
• (#15) Freedom of Marriage Act (FOMA) -- requires all nations to recognize any marital union between two people; controversial because gays are evil and their very existence infringes on straight couples' freedom to procreate...also because of somewhat loopy language (is that religious exemption an out for theocracies and privatized states or am I just seeing things?).
  
  
• (#16) Sexual Privacy Act -- requires all nations to decriminalize private, consensual sex acts between adults; also controversial because gays are evil and their very existence infringes on straight couples' freedom to get it on.
  
  
• (#17) WA General Fund (WAGF) -- creates a fund for member nations to pay into to support WA operations; causes problems because it is essentially a blank check for the WA to create all sorts of wasteful spending projects, and because people apparently have no idea what the words "donation" and "assessment" mean.
  
  
• (#26) World Assembly Economic Union -- created a free-trade zone between all WA member states; controversial because it created a free-trade zone between all WA member states. (Repealed ages ago.)
  
  
• (#29) Patient's Rights Act (PRA) -- makes legal for patients to undergo any medical procedure that is legal within the member state they're in; creates trouble for all the "intactivists" who regularly rail against Permit Male Circumcision and fail to read the fine print in PRA giving nations the right to recognize parental consent.
  
  
• (#30) Freedom of Expression -- affirms the right to free expression for an individuals within member states; controversial because it is frequently read as one giant "elastic clause" to solve any speech-related problem in the NS world -- including parents' right to instill religious instruction in youngsters; also allows nations to outlaw porn.
  
  
• (#32) Veterans Reform Act -- essentially created a VA for the World Assembly; controversial because of wasteful spending. ("Insta-repealed" weeks later.)
  
  
• (#35) The Charter of Civil Rights (COCR) -- affirms the right of member-state "inhabitants" to nondiscrimination; controversial because it's often cited as yet another catch-all to solve all the world's problems vis a vis discrimination.
  
  
• (#44) Reduction of Abortion Act -- provided greater access to family-planning services in WA nations; was not very controversial until a repeal author (allegedly) misread it and had it stricken out on suspect grounds. Has not been replaced to this day.
  
  
• (#47) Law of the Sea -- created international standards regulating member nations' access to national, foreign and international waters; controversial because it errantly said "United Nations" instead of "World Assembly" (and basically repealed on those same grounds). Replaced with a virtually identical resolution (correctly naming the body that adopted it) weeks later.
  
  
• (#67) Habeas Corpus -- required nations to give all arrested persons a public hearing to review the charges against them; its repeal in 2012 (on the grounds that it allowed double jeopardy) set off a months-long repeal/replace firestorm, with at least five or six replacement resolutions coming to vote (some passing, some failing, some repealed themselves) before the repeal author finally gave up.
  
  
• (#79) Ban on Ex Post Facto Laws -- itself an ex post facto law, requiring nations to void any sentences against offenders who committed a crime before it was legally a crime.
  
  
• (#94) A Convention on Gender -- requires nations not to allow "sex-assignment" operations until the recipient is mature enough to make an informed decision themselves; controversial because most of the freedoms it entails are already established under PRA and COCR, and because it negates parental consent for sex-assignment surgeries.
  
  
• (#102) International Criminal Court (ICC) -- created a world court to try war criminals and culprits of other crimes against humanity; created substantial division because of defiant nations refusing to allow the WA to usurp their internal judicial processes, and because its recent repeal (with no replacement) opened a legislative gap on prosecuting war crimes.
  
  
• (#115) Space Research Station Program -- created a research space station operated by the WA. Not only was it repealed in 2011, the space station was promptly blown up by the Death Star.
  
  
• (#118) Ethics in International Trade (EIT/EiIT) -- allowed to WA to levy taxes on traded goods produced under unethical labor/environmental practices; controversial because numerous past WA laws already require nations to practice certain ethics in labor and environmental policies. Repealed on those grounds; never replaced.
  
  
• (#122) Read the Resolution Act -- requires member nations to appoint an officer to read resolutions coming to vote before the GA; sparked controversy because requiring ambassadors to read resolutions is a violation of their civil rights...or something.
  
  
• (#128) On Abortion -- compels member states to legalize abortion in the cases of rape, severe fetal abnormalities, or if the life of the mother is in danger; also permitted the WA to expand abortion freedoms in future legislation. Several repeal attempts lodged against it; none of them stuck.
  
  
• (#141) Permit Male Circumcision -- requires nations to allow circumcision as a medical procedure, also allows nations to regulate the practice; controversial because it is so insensitive to ambassadors to who still have traumatic memories of that fateful snip on their privates when they were eight hours old.

Please, don't just list a bunch of resolutions and type "for" or "against" after each one; give at least a quick explanation for your votes (as many or as few as you want to discuss).

[Bananaistan]

Excellent topic. I'll do a proper reply when I have time and am not on the phone. I hope there will be discussion though and it won't be a fact book type thread full of replies to only the first post and no replies to each other.

[Lexicor]

"Permit Male Circumcision'" boggles my mind, especially given the social libertarian and liberal stances most players have in the World Assembly, and is made even more mind boggling by the fact that the Assembly later banned female genital mutilation. Basically everyone gave a middle finger to moral consistency. I would have voted against. Hell... a repeal might be something I might try one day. Other than that I would have abstained from most of these as in my previous NS experiences I really didn't give a damn

[The Dark Star Republic]

I've almost always done my voting in character, but given QoD and DSR are fairly similar in their positions other than abortion, nuclear energy and sapient rights, it's not a big deal. FTR I was around for the earliest resolutions (up to about #52, returning at about #267) but my votes went with my region so I wasn't casting my own conscience vote, and I can't really remember my position anyway.

Past regrets
• Rights & Duties: Obviously, I've done an about face on this from being a dogmatic supporter to a dogmatic opponent. I don't remember ever knowing that it was plagiarised, and I hadn't properly considered the definition of war.
• NAPA: Another in hindsight vote, and only saying this because Flib isn't around anymore, but Against. There's no real risk of the WA passing legislation actually banning nuclear weapons, and the "out of the hands" bit arguably makes passing real non-proliferation legislation a bit tougher.
• Ban on Slavery and Trafficking: Against. Rushed to submission, reached quorum by accident. But I was so tired by that point I couldn't be bothered to do it properly. And of course it is illegal for the egregious violation of referencing "all nations", so can't have that kind of vote on my record.
• Freedom of Marriage Act: Would have voted against it, then voted for the Sexual Privacy Act, then maybe considered voting for a resubmission of the FoMA. But legalising gay marriage before legalising actually being gay seemed crazy.
  • Basically these represent the fact that in hindsight, we can see we were in too much of a damn hurry when the UN>WA switch took place. We could have taken much more time and done things all over properly instead of trying to rush the exact same laws into place. Six? years on, we're still here discussing this stuff.
  I hate branding
• Nautical Pilotage Act and Repeal "Nautical Pilotage Act": Against both. The latter was a missed opportunity to take advantage of the former's branding.
• Similar reasons for voting against Standardised Passport Act. It was completely unnecessary to brand it that way, wasn't remotely funny, and yet the resolution is basically good and important enough that it will be extremely difficult to repeal and replace it.
  • Plus any other stupid branding I may have missed.
  Embarrassing admissions
• Veterans Reform Act: Appallingly, I remember supporting this despite it now being considered one of the worst resolutions ever. So, I'd go back and change that vote to a quiet Against.
• WA Counterterrorism Act: It appears I would have to reverse my vote on this, too, as I didn't understand until recently that it conflated non-state and state terrorism, something it and the previous antiterrorism resolutions had expressly tried to avoid.
• National Economic Freedoms: This didn't have anything like the effect intended, so in hindsight, Against, but possibly for a differently drafted version if I had any confidence that it would be more faithfully enforced.
• The Landmine Convention: Against, would have saved me having to bloody repeal it. But also, the WA conception of war has changed so much this now seems like a relic. Banning landmines but not chemical weapons? Please.
  Resolutions I just absolute despise
• Read the Resolution Act: This forum doesn't have enough eye-roll smilies. Its only redeeming feature is that it doesn't do what it so regularly suggested to do. Maybe its supporters should try reading the resolution.
• Reducing Problem Gambling: The very definition of not an international issue.
• On Abortion: "We all know Charlotte Ryberg will never be able to pass this." My words at the time. Ouch.
  Do I like anything?
• ULC, WHA, Coordinating Science, maybe WAEC, maybe but probably not ICC: For. I like committees.
• All of Auralia's trade and IP legislation: For! Getting this kind of stuff passed in the NSUN was a bloody trek; it's one area (the only area?) where the WA has considerably improved on the NSUN.
• Institutional Psychiatry Act, A Ban on Forced Disappearances, Banning Extrajudicial Transfer, A Convention on Gender: I really like these types of resolution. They show a level of sophistication beyond that of most Human Rights/FoD laws the WA tries to pass.
  And finally
• I would have cast the most crushingly huge abstention on Permit Male Circumcision ever.

[Chester Pearson]

There's no real risk of the WA passing legislation actually banning nuclear weapons, and the "out of the hands" bit arguably makes passing real non-proliferation legislation a bit tougher.

Ahem..... Nuclear Security Convention.

[Ainocra]

• (#1) The World Assembly -- voted the UN and all its resolutions out of existence; controversial because all Historic Resolution authors had their work invalidated, and -- as it erased the tyrannical UN yet at the same time created a new tyrannical organization to bow down to -- NatSovers weren't sure which side to root against!
  

I'd have voted against just to be a D%^*

(#2) Rights and Duties of WA States -- basic meta-rules for all WA member states to follow; created tension among NatSovers because it required all states to obey all resolutions...has caused more recent division over a couple controversial repeal attempts, and the fact that it would be illegal nowadays for so many MetaGaming violations.

For, the no WA military/police clause is worth the rest of it for me.

(#8) World Assembly Headquarters -- created a lavish new HQ for the WA following the tragic arson incident that destroyed the old building; still causes problems today because some players don't like all the inside jokes it references.

No strong feelings either way, i'd have voted for if they offered me a shot of scotch

(#10) Nuclear Arms Possession Act (NAPA) -- allows nations to stockpile (without actually using) nuclear weapons; controversial because of the elastic "wrong hands" clause -- also because nukes are harmful to children and other living things.

For, the security of the Empire is built on the cornerstone of nuclear weaponry.

(#15) Freedom of Marriage Act (FOMA) -- requires all nations to recognize any marital union between two people; controversial because gays are evil and their very existence infringes on straight couples' freedom to procreate...also because of somewhat loopy language (is that religious exemption an out for theocracies and privatized states or am I just seeing things?).

For, Personal freedom is sacrosanct.

(#16) Sexual Privacy Act -- requires all nations to decriminalize private, consensual sex acts between adults; also controversial because gays are evil and their very existence infringes on straight couples' freedom to get it on.

For, Personal freedom is sacrosanct.

(#17) WA General Fund (WAGF) -- creates a fund for member nations to pay into to support WA operations; causes problems because it is essentially a blank check for the WA to create all sorts of wasteful spending projects, and because people apparently have no idea what the words "donation" and "assessment" mean.

I would say against, The assembly needs a better mandate in order to fund all those gnomes.

(#26) World Assembly Economic Union -- created a free-trade zone between all WA member states; controversial because it created a free-trade zone between all WA member states. (Repealed ages ago.)

Opposed, frankly national interest trumps the international in this instance. Nations need the ability to control and regulate their own trade policy.

(#29) Patient's Rights Act (PRA) -- makes legal for patients to undergo any medical procedure that is legal within the member state they're in; creates trouble for all the "intactivists" who regularly rail against Permit Male Circumcision and fail to read the fine print in PRA giving nations the right to recognize parental consent.

I say for, Healthcare should be available to any who need it and this goes a long way toward that.

(#30) Freedom of Expression -- affirms the right to free expression for an individuals within member states; controversial because it is frequently read as one giant "elastic clause" to solve any speech-related problem in the NS world -- including parents' right to instill religious instruction in youngsters; also allows nations to outlaw porn.

I like the idea, personal freedom should be preserved, but I feel the execution could have been better.

(#32) Veterans Reform Act -- essentially created a VA for the World Assembly; controversial because of wasteful spending. ("Insta-repealed" weeks later.)

Opposed, wasteful and unnecessary, and not an international issue.

(#35) The Charter of Civil Rights (COCR) -- affirms the right of member-state "inhabitants" to nondiscrimination; controversial because it's often cited as yet another catch-all to solve all the world's problems vis a vis discrimination.

I support the idea of personal liberty, but I again feel the execution was flawed. Repeal and Replace I say

(#44) Reduction of Abortion Act -- provided greater access to family-planning services in WA nations; was not very controversial until a repeal author (allegedly) misread it and had it stricken out on suspect grounds. Has not been replaced to this day.

Not being a woman I feel that I am unqualified to render a valid opinion on this issue.

(#47) Law of the Sea -- created international standards regulating member nations' access to national, foreign and international waters; controversial because it errantly said "United Nations" instead of "World Assembly" (and basically repealed on those same grounds). Replaced with a virtually identical resolution (correctly naming the body that adopted it) weeks later.

Ambivalent

(#67) Habeas Corpus -- required nations to give all arrested persons a public hearing to review the charges against them; its repeal in 2012 (on the grounds that it allowed double jeopardy) set off a months-long repeal/replace firestorm, with at least five or six replacement resolutions coming to vote (some passing, some failing, some repealed themselves) before the repeal author finally gave up.

As I recall I voted against this every time it came up.

(#79) Ban on Ex Post Facto Laws -- itself an ex post facto law, requiring nations to void any sentences against offenders who committed a crime before it was legally a crime.

I am pretty sure I voted against this one too, but I can't remember for sure.

(#94) A Convention on Gender -- requires nations not to allow "sex-assignment" operations until the recipient is mature enough to make an informed decision themselves; controversial because most of the freedoms it entails are already established under PRA and COCR, and because it negates parental consent for sex-assignment surgeries.

Opposed because I never felt this was an international issue, this is at best a personal issue and should be resolved by the individual and their doctor.

(#102) International Criminal Court (ICC) -- created a world court to try war criminals and culprits of other crimes against humanity; created substantial division because of defiant nations refusing to allow the WA to usurp their internal judicial processes, and because its recent repeal (with no replacement) opened a legislative gap on prosecuting war crimes.

Opposed, From hells heart I stab at thee! This Kangaroo court was a vast over reach, an ill conceived bureaucratic nightmare that never once successfully brought anyone to conviction. The Star Empire actually withdrew from the assembly rather than submit to the tyranny of this imposed judiciary. We only returned to work for it's repeal. Now that we have helped rid the international community of this blight we feel it should never be mentioned again.

(#115) Space Research Station Program -- created a research space station operated by the WA. Not only was it repealed in 2011, the space station was promptly blown up by the Death Star.

Blow things up? Awesome!

(#118) Ethics in International Trade (EIT/EiIT) -- allowed to WA to levy taxes on traded goods produced under unethical labor/environmental practices; controversial because numerous past WA laws already require nations to practice certain ethics in labor and environmental policies. Repealed on those grounds; never replaced.

Opposed, ethical standards vary widely from culture to culture. Supported the repeal.

(#122) Read the Resolution Act -- requires member nations to appoint an officer to read resolutions coming to vote before the GA; sparked controversy because requiring ambassadors to read resolutions is a violation of their civil rights...or something.

TL;DR

(#128) On Abortion -- compels member states to legalize abortion in the cases of rape, severe fetal abnormalities, or if the life of the mother is in danger; also permitted the WA to expand abortion freedoms in future legislation. Several repeal attempts lodged against it; none of them stuck.

Again as I am not a woman I do not feel that I am qualified to render an opinion on this issue.

(#141) Permit Male Circumcision -- requires nations to allow circumcision as a medical procedure, also allows nations to regulate the practice; controversial because it is so insensitive to ambassadors to who still have traumatic memories of that fateful snip on their privates when they were eight hours old.

Opposed, I cannot support the mutilation of infants.

[The Flood]

I need only to post here, and people will know my response, without me even having to make it.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Funny story, actually - I went back in my email a few days ago and found the Jolt registration notice for my very first country. Don't think I ever actually posted anything (or realized that these Undisclosed Nincompoopery resolutions were actually being crafted from the bottom up, not the top down...). But I quit playing just before the UN-pocalypse, and am sad I could not laugh at it in real time. My last telegram that's not a "Hi, refounded nation!" recruiting notice is informing me that "Laws have been enacted to bring the Walking Contradiction of Evolu Tanis into compliance with the United Nations resolution "Unnecessary Animal Cruelty"."

So.

#1 - I mean, if you don't have something here, what's the point? Was there an alternative Resolution #1 posted that would have (say) made the gnomes accountable to national immigration agencies or something?

#2 - Can't fund or arm guerrillas and rebels except really, really subtly; or if they're some kind of government-in-exile (which is way rarer than simple resistance/opposition movements). Opposed (but not to all of it).

#8 - Hell yes. Would probably have pushed for setting the roof aside for Assembly-sanctioned arson and debauchery, but it's acceptable as is.

#17 - Paragraph #5 is farcical, but hey. Gotta pay for shit somehow.

#128 - Would have been FOR at the time for reasons I hope are obvious; but now that #286 is in place, it's arguably harmful, for the reasons accurately and ably laid out in Christian Democrats' repeal attempt - which, if it had been submitted a month later, I would have campaigned for instead of arguing against.

#141 - Another funny story - when I was a kid I didn't know what a foreskin was, so I always thought they cut the whole front end off (! ! ! !) (a misconception which was in no way helped by the at-the-time stunning commercial for the bris-a-tine [etym: Heb. bris + Fr. guillotine]). This resolution? Eh, no biggie.



Note to the Flood: that's not exactly something for which to be proud. Both the game world and the real world have murky gray areas where subtlety, nuance, and humility are the only way to achieve justice. But that's a conversation for another time.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: Funny story, actually - I went back in my email a few days ago and found the Jolt registration notice for my very first country.

That name rings a bell. Were you the furry nation who voted against everything after Rights of Intelligent Beings failed?

Was there an alternative Resolution #1 posted that would have (say) made the gnomes accountable to national immigration agencies or something?

No.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Funny story, actually - I went back in my email a few days ago and found the Jolt registration notice for my very first country.

That name rings a bell. Were you the furry nation who voted against everything after Rights of Intelligent Beings failed?

'Fraid not. I don't seem to recall posting anything in the forums until my current main country (this one) had been established for several years and I moseyed on over to see what all the fuss was about. And certainly not as a furry nation of any sort.

[Separatist Peoples]

'Fraid not. I don't seem to recall posting anything in the forums until my current main country (this one) had been established for several years and I moseyed on over to see what all the fuss was about. And certainly not as a furry nation of any sort.

Seems to be a theme among GA regulars; I had a similar experience starting in 2009ish...

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

OOC: Funny story, actually - I went back in my email a few days ago and found the Jolt registration notice for my very first country.

That name rings a bell. Were you the furry nation who voted against everything after Rights of Intelligent Beings failed?

That was Tinis.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Tanis, Tinis, let's call the whole thing off.

Thanks.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

It's been so long I forget if we had this argument back in the old days, but your description of #79 is borderline misleading. Resolution #79 is actually an amnesty law which might be considered an ex post facto law but not as we normally think of such laws. In addition...

A law may have an ex post facto effect without being technically ex post facto. For example, when a law repeals a previous law, the repealed legislation is no longer applicable to situations to which it previously was, even if such situations arose before the law was repealed. The principle of prohibiting the continued application of such laws is called Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali, especially in European Continental systems.

[Wraland]

I'd vote against the first WA resolution, because i have an unfavourable view of the WA.

[Separatist Peoples]

I'd vote against the first WA resolution, because i have an unfavourable view of the WA.

That would require you to join an organization you find unfavorable in the first place.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

I guess I should go back and review some of my WA decisions too. I was around for most WA resolutions - some with SchutteGod, which for the most part voted the same way as Omigodtheykilledkenny would have, except that SG is more amenable to Human Rights. I forget a lot of my past votes, and have very few "regrets"; most instances I would have changed my mind were on not-terribly-interesting resolutions anyway so aren't worth bringing up.


The World Assembly - can't remember. I was pissed at first that everyone's resolutions were being invalidated but at the same time Kennyites would have been delighted at the violent destruction of the UN. Now? Meh.

Rights and Duties - voted for, still for. Eccentricities aside, the central doctrines of the supremacy of international law, the neutrality of the WA, and the ban on WA armies are paramount and I wouldn't sacrifice them for anything.

World Assembly Headquarters - (obviously) for. One of the more fun resolutions I was able to get passed, and it just kept on giving afterward, what with all the silly repeals lodged against it, even uni's attempts to Godmode it.

Prevention of Torture - voted against, still against. It outlaws even the most inane forms of torture, including swirlies, purple-nurples, Indian burns, noogies, Chinese water-torture, blasting Lady Gaga at 3 a.m., standing contests, and forcing detainees to be pieces in a life-size chess board -- all because the author apparently had something against Kennyites defending themselves against dangerous lunatics, like imams and door-to-door Xt'Tap missionaries.

Nuclear Arms Possession Act - voted for, still for. Our right to Nuke Norderia must not be infringed. (Though that tack-on clause at the end is kind of lame.)

Freedom of Marriage Act, Sexual Privacy Act - voted against both, still against the former. I found the author infuriating, he was obviously gay IRL and just taking out his RW frustrations on the WA, and rushed gay marriage to vote before even checking to see if gay was legal in the first place (it wasn't, hence SPA). Though IC I just claimed NatSov and said the WA shouldn't be troubling itself with marriage.

The Prisoners of War Accord, Ban on Slavery and Trafficking - a couple of the (very few) Human Rights resolutions Omigodtheykilledkenny was willing to support (although I think I voted for Convention Against Genocide too). Many others OMGTKK simply abstained on, retaining its derision for that category, yet not wanting to get in the way of necessary legislation.

Fairness in Criminal Trials - voted against, still against. The provision forbidding "prejudicial public discussion" during trials is a violation of Freedom of Expression, and well, an attack on the free press, really, something I couldn't abide at the time.

The Landmine Convention - voted against. Can't remember my scruples at the time; something to do with anti-personnel versus anti-tank landmines, and the resolution making no provisions for landmines that decommission automatically.

Standardised Passport Act, Nautical Pilotage Act - very much for the former, very much against the latter. The GESTAPO bit didn't bother me (and I actually did find it funny), but the branding in NPA was atrocious, and I didn't include it in the OP because I really don't think the author deserves any more attention than he already gets (and constantly seeks); I think there was another (repeal) resolution that included his name in acrostics...cannot remember if it passed.

A Convention on Gender - a horrible bit of excess on the WA's part; most of it already covered by other resolutions, but it also bans even parents from attaining sex-assignments for their children for some reason. Why can parents circumcise their kids, get hormone therapy for their kids, but not correct their kids' genital deformities?

Multilateral Prosecution Act, International Criminal Court, Ethics in International Trade - the three absolute worst resolutions in the history of the WA (prior to the adoption of Reproductive Freedoms); created de-facto WA police forces, affected non-WA nations, and overall gave the WA way too much power...the day(s) these resolutions were repealed the NS world became a much better place. Though the war-crimes gap created by the ICC repeal should probably be resolved at some point.

Read the Resolution Act - staunchly for, and vigorously oppose all repeals of. Because assholes who refuse to read get on my fucking nerves.

Permit Male Circumcision - same as previous. Because it really is satisfying telling all the "genital mutilation" freaks to fuck off already.

and last but certainly not least...

Weasel Stomping Day - indisputably FOR, for obvious reasons.

[Normlpeople]

I'm not sure, in many cases, it depends on the climate at the time. Taking NAPA as an example: I would have voted against likely, unless there was a real threat of a full on nuke ban in the WA, in which case, the blocker would have been required and preferred to the alternative (the recent 'individual working freedoms' as an example).

I do find many of these poorly written by today's standards, and theres a few I don't consider international issues at all (FoMA immediately comes to mind), however a repeal is impossible with the current climate in this place. I suppose i could do a list based on personal opinion, however i cannot guarantee that it would be accurate.

[The Dark Star Republic]

The Prisoners of War Accord

Forgot about this one. In hindsight, against. It's another of the early resolutions written in a panic and is way too broad. There was easily room for two or three separate proposals, treating PoWs, internees, and surrendered parties separately.

The GESTAPO bit didn't bother me (and I actually did find it funny)

I really don't get this joke, then or now. The Gestapo didn't even have anything to do with passports - pretty sure that would have been the SD. If it had been a proposal about grammar ("grammar Nazis"), or a WA version of the ICPIN, maybe, but otherwise it just seems like something that belongs in the "Joke" Proposals thread i.e. crushingly unfunny.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

The GESTAPO bit didn't bother me (and I actually did find it funny)

I really don't get this joke, then or now. The Gestapo didn't even have anything to do with passports - pretty sure that would have been the SD. If it had been a proposal about grammar ("grammar Nazis"), or a WA version of the ICPIN, maybe,...

Maybe Cob was poking fun at the tyranny of UN/WA bureaucracy? Or just the fact that "Papers, please" is an allusion to Nazi oppression? And on that note, who cares if the Gestapo wasn't technically responsible for passports? The Department of Homeland Security was not responsible for the NSA's widely reported domestic spying program; that didn't stop the game from satirizing them as the "Department of Homeworld Security" back in 2005. Obviously, Cob isn't here and I can't speak for him, but the fact of the matter is, the joke became much funnier than intended once a mass of protesters started voting against and accusing Cob of being a Nazi just because the resolution contained a hidden reference to the Gestapo -- just as a few of Max's not-terribly-funny April Fools' jokes instantly became priceless once players threatened to sue the game over them.

But as long as we are dwelling on hindsight, I may as well admit that I had no idea Rights and Duties had been lifted so liberally from an RL UN document, and if I had known this at the time, I probably wouldn't have supported it. Auralia's repeal, however, had always been linked to his and G-R's manic attempts at striking down the ban on WA armies, so I couldn't be expected to support that in any case.

[Auralia]

Auralia's repeal, however, had always been linked to his and G-R's manic attempts at striking down the ban on WA armies, so I couldn't be expected to support that in any case.

I think it's a bit much to claim that our attempts to repeal the no army rule were "manic." IIRC, I only started a single thread on the issue.

Furthermore, my attempted repeal of Rights and Duties wasn't just about the no army rule. "Creative compliance" and Rights and Duties's definition of war were equally important - if not more important - issues.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Auralia's repeal, however, had always been linked to his and G-R's manic attempts at striking down the ban on WA armies, so I couldn't be expected to support that in any case.

I think it's a bit much to claim that our attempts to repeal the no army rule were "manic." IIRC, I only started a single thread on the issue.

Furthermore, my attempted repeal of Rights and Duties wasn't just about the no army rule. "Creative compliance" and Rights and Duties's definition of war were equally important - if not more important - issues.

The mere fact that you thought you could "repeal" the rule suggests a slight mania in that regard. Also that clause in your proposed replacement implying the WA could enforce its dictates by "force if necessary" -- which is in direct contravention to existing rules, whether or not Rights and Duties exists.

Oh, and bump.

[The Flood]

I would have totally supported Weasel Stomping Day.

[Glen-Rhodes]

WAR#1 - Definitely for, because I always like the idea of starting fresh.

WAR#2 - Against, obviously, but probably not for the "OOC" reasons I am today. It would be about how it deals with war.

WAR#8 - For, because why not?

WAR#10 - Against, because nonproliferation.

I'm pretty sure I started playing at around this point, and I stand by most of what I think my votes were. Except for one, I think. If I traveled back in time and was then who I am now, I would vote for the World Assembly Economic Union.

[Unibot III]

GA#1: Aye
GA#2: Nay. It's an absolute mess - a bag of tea-leaves that we've been left to decipher. It also limits the breadth of topics we can pursue as an institution.
GA#8: Aye. Hilarious.
GA#10: Nay. I don't disagree with its aims for the most part, but it is wholly insufficient as a piece of international law.
GA#15: Aye
GA#16: Aye
GA#17: Aye Very clever wording here.
GA#26: Nay. Free trade would been very damaging for many of our member-nations.
GA#29: Aye. One of the better WA Resolutions of all time.
GA#30. Abstain. I like most of the resolution, but the end clause is one big cop-out - I'd love to see a newer WAer try to do a better one.
GA#32. Nay. It's a good topic - one authors should return to, I think.
GA#35. Nay. It has some instrumental flaws that I've found along the way - how it deals with disease was one of the issues we've found. I forget all of the problems that have arisen.
GA#44. Aye. Always liked this one - well written piece.
GA#47. Aye.
GA#67. Nay. This was just a shit fest.
GA#79. Legendary.
GA#94. Aye.
GA#102. Aye.
GA#115. Aye. Awful, in a good way.
GA#118. Aye. This was tight-as-a-drum - NatSov's be damn! Hah.
GA#122. Nay. What a trite, patronising little resolution.
GA#128. Aye.
GA#141. Aye.