[DRAFT] Cars Of The People Act.

[Tinfect]

One guy told me how to make it so that optionality willbe legal.

"Er, no, Ambassador, I assumed it was implied that the section allowing Member-States to simply decide not to comply should be removed, in addition to adding the language I specified. I apologize if that was unclear."

[Normlpeople]

OOC: I can tell we both love cars. Lets use a real world example here (as much as I hate doing so in these forums). You've already rightfully stated that these 'cheap cars' wouldn't be very good, and lack useful comfort options. Why would citizens purchase a new Soviet Lada, when they could take the same money to a used car lot, and purchase a good used car, with useful options, for the same money.

We all love top gear, but May, Clarkson and Hammond are not a good inspiration for international law. This is not worth perusing.

[Potted Plants United]

Jennifer chuckled toward the plant, noting an amusing point to herself. "To play Devil's Advocate, don't cars emit CO2, which would be beneficial for your nation? It would seem that while you don't have a direct need to drive, the sheer abundance of CO2 generated by cars being produced would be directly beneficial to your livelihood. It would stand to reason that the author could add a provision that member nations build, or trade of, such cars.

The plant used tentacle-like vines to manipulate the wheels on its plantpot to turn towards the Aranoffian ambassador.

"Under a dozen of our selves live outside the WAHQ as it is - and all of those selves reside in our large ally nation*, so no, it would not benefit us. We have found that the oxygen-breathers among the multitudous ambassadors and their staff are more than enough to supply us with enough CO₂ for out needs. Photosynthesizing to release oxygen into the ventilation shafts here is how we pay our electrical bills to the maintenance."

* OOC: Araraukar, there's a long RP'd history between my nations.

EDIT:

When she finished, Jennifer quickly doodled an amusing image of a potted plant behind bars with people gawking. Planetary warming could be resolved if we had a plant species that was sapient AND exploitable...

OOC: You don't need to exploit them, just strike up a profitable enough deal with them and they're happy to help.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Why would citizens purchase a new Soviet Lada,

OOC: Because the Soviet Lada will start up in -30C without pre-heating for hours. And I say this from personal experience, when I had to cold start said Lada to drive to the aid of my parents, whose more modern western car was having major issues. And no, I don't own a car, never have, but I have had the opportunity to drive one very reliable car in my life, and it was a Lada, whose nods to electric era were start-up, headlights, dashboard lights and wipers.

EDIT: Technically it also had ventilation, but that was only any good to defrost the windscreen.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: I chose the Lada for a reason. It was mechanically solid, but not comfortable to drive compared to western cars of the same era.

Much as these proposed 'cheap' vehicles.

[Wrapper]

OOC: Okay, the way I read it now it's veeeeeery close to a committee-only violation. The only mandate is this "project" which sounds suspiciously like an unnamed committee to me. There's "government support" but I don't know what that means, does that mean member nations have to be on this committee? Or pay for it? Or buy its cars?

Yeah, this one's going to crash and burn.

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: I chose the Lada for a reason. It was mechanically solid, but not comfortable to drive compared to western cars of the same era.

Much as these proposed 'cheap' vehicles.

OOC: I seem to recall that whenever I would drive to East Berlin we were told not to put gas in our cars there as the two stroke engines used there used an oil-gas mixture?

[Kryozerkia]

This proposal has received amble feedback, most of which appears to be ignored by Petrolheadia. It is clear the proposal was submitted prematurely and need more time in the incubator before a dry test run.

Firstly, category. Or rather, the strength. This doesn't appear to merit the current strength of "Strong" given it affects a very narrow area of policy, the automotive industry with a laser focus on affordability and licensing as opposed to production and distribution. So, a strength of "Mild" is better suited to it.

MANDATES starting a project destined to design popular cars as a cooperation of willing member nations in a research lab built in a place chosen by all participating nations,

Now for the finer details. This is the first line after the preamble. It seems that since the proposal was submitted, it underwent an edit. However, submitted proposals cannot be edited, so they are taken at face value. This line, although it opens with a "mandatory" requirement, it has optional language with regard to nation participation. It was worded in such a way that it allows "unwilling" member nations to opt-out. However, it has been changed since the removal.

The largest concern with the edits taken into consideration is the scope. With the focus on the research and licensing, it appears to offer little to justify the category of "Free Trade". Perhaps a revisit to the drawing board is in order.

[Aranoff]

EDIT:

When she finished, Jennifer quickly doodled an amusing image of a potted plant behind bars with people gawking. Planetary warming could be resolved if we had a plant species that was sapient AND exploitable...

OOC: You don't need to exploit them, just strike up a profitable enough deal with them and they're happy to help.

OOC: Aranoffians only sign deals that place developing nations into debt to them, and by conclusion, become forever intertwined with our Financial System!

[Stellonia]

"Opposed. The terms 'cheap', 'very cheap', and 'ultracheap' are ambiguous and are undefined by this proposal. Additionally, we do not believe that the development of affordable cars is a matter that should be regulated or enforced by this august Assembly."

[Petrolheadia]

"Opposed. The terms 'cheap', 'very cheap', and 'ultracheap' are ambiguous and are undefined by this proposal. Additionally, we do not believe that the development of affordable cars is a matter that should be regulated or enforced by this august Assembly."

I tried to use monetary values, but this is illegal.

[Petrolheadia]

This proposal has received amble feedback, most of which appears to be ignored by Petrolheadia. It is clear the proposal was submitted prematurely and need more time in the incubator before a dry test run.

Firstly, category. Or rather, the strength. This doesn't appear to merit the current strength of "Strong" given it affects a very narrow area of policy, the automotive industry with a laser focus on affordability and licensing as opposed to production and distribution. So, a strength of "Mild" is better suited to it.

MANDATES starting a project destined to design popular cars as a cooperation of willing member nations in a research lab built in a place chosen by all participating nations,

Now for the finer details. This is the first line after the preamble. It seems that since the proposal was submitted, it underwent an edit. However, submitted proposals cannot be edited, so they are taken at face value. This line, although it opens with a "mandatory" requirement, it has optional language with regard to nation participation. It was worded in such a way that it allows "unwilling" member nations to opt-out. However, it has been changed since the removal.

The largest concern with the edits taken into consideration is the scope. With the focus on the research and licensing, it appears to offer little to justify the category of "Free Trade". Perhaps a revisit to the drawing board is in order.

Well, I used "willing" because not all nations used cars. So I wrote it regarding them. And the act was more about starting the project than engaging everyone into it. And if you can't edit proposals, why do you give an option for that? It's like a supermarket where you could buy cocaine, but every time you try to, they call the police. OK, maybe Free Trade wasn't the best choice, but (OOC) I know cars designed to be for everyone (eg. Ford Model T, VW Beetle, Fiat 500) shaped history in a noticeable way.

And I'm going to make the wanted edits and post it again without the edits when it's posted.

[Araraukar]

And if you can't edit proposals, why do you give an option for that?

You can't edit proposals after they have been submitted. Hence the need to debate beforehand.

[Wrapper]

Anytime you are the ONLY person in a thread that thinks something is a good idea... it isn't a good idea.

And, I'm done here.

[Barapam]

OOC: Why would citizens purchase a new Soviet Lada,

OOC: Because the Soviet Lada will start up in -30C without pre-heating for hours. And I say this from personal experience, when I had to cold start said Lada to drive to the aid of my parents, whose more modern western car was having major issues. And no, I don't own a car, never have, but I have had the opportunity to drive one very reliable car in my life, and it was a Lada, whose nods to electric era were start-up, headlights, dashboard lights and wipers.

EDIT: Technically it also had ventilation, but that was only any good to defrost the windscreen.

OOC: I prefer an old reliable Volvo 240 from the early 90s, I bet it's more comfortable than a Lada, but still simple enough that you can fix most problems with it yourself.

[Petrolheadia]

Is this more Advancement of Industry (if yes, then what category), Free Trade or Social Justice?

[Kryozerkia]

Well, I used "willing" because not all nations used cars. So I wrote it regarding them. And the act was more about starting the project than engaging everyone into it. And if you can't edit proposals, why do you give an option for that? It's like a supermarket where you could buy cocaine, but every time you try to, they call the police. OK, maybe Free Trade wasn't the best choice, but (OOC) I know cars designed to be for everyone (eg. Ford Model T, VW Beetle, Fiat 500) shaped history in a noticeable way.

And I'm going to make the wanted edits and post it again without the edits when it's posted.

All righty then. I recommend you put on the brakes because "edits" don't necessarily equate to "legal". Edits are simply part of the refining process of proposal drafting. You're getting plenty of useful feedback from the players here. These are the folks whose votes you will need to win once you've run the proposal marathon. Sorry to say, it's not s sprint. It does take time, and those who hurry often get tripped up.

Proposals can be edited prior to submission. This is why players are encouraged to use the forums for their proposals. It's very easy to edit a post here and implement the necessary changes. The only time a proposal cannot be edited is when it's submitted to the approval queue.

[Petrolheadia]

Well, I used "willing" because not all nations used cars. So I wrote it regarding them. And the act was more about starting the project than engaging everyone into it. And if you can't edit proposals, why do you give an option for that? It's like a supermarket where you could buy cocaine, but every time you try to, they call the police. OK, maybe Free Trade wasn't the best choice, but (OOC) I know cars designed to be for everyone (eg. Ford Model T, VW Beetle, Fiat 500) shaped history in a noticeable way.

And I'm going to make the wanted edits and post it again without the edits when it's posted.

All righty then. I recommend you put on the brakes because "edits" don't necessarily equate to "legal". Edits are simply part of the refining process of proposal drafting. You're getting plenty of useful feedback from the players here. These are the folks whose votes you will need to win once you've run the proposal marathon. Sorry to say, it's not s sprint. It does take time, and those who hurry often get tripped up.

Proposals can be edited prior to submission. This is why players are encouraged to use the forums for their proposals. It's very easy to edit a post here and implement the necessary changes. The only time a proposal cannot be edited is when it's submitted to the approval queue.

OK. But is this more Free Trade, Advancement of Industry (if yes, then what category) or Social Justice?

[Stellonia]

"Opposed. The terms 'cheap', 'very cheap', and 'ultracheap' are ambiguous and are undefined by this proposal. Additionally, we do not believe that the development of affordable cars is a matter that should be regulated or enforced by this august Assembly."

I tried to use monetary values, but this is illegal.

"Then maybe you should define these terms relative to the average or median income of each member state's national population."

[Araraukar]

Is this more Advancement of Industry (if yes, then what category), Free Trade or Social Justice?

I honestly can't see it fitting any of those.

[Petrolheadia]

Is this more Advancement of Industry (if yes, then what category), Free Trade or Social Justice?

I honestly can't see it fitting any of those.

Advancement of Industry would have been good, if not for the fact that it has the subcategories. So either Free Trade or Social Justice.

[Separatist Peoples]

I honestly can't see it fitting any of those.

Advancement of Industry would have been good, if not for the fact that it has the subcategories. So either Free Trade or Social Justice.

"This limits free trade by forcing specific economic policies and limiting economies, so this is in no way Free Trade. Social Justice is so far Out it isn't worth bringing up."

[The Sheika]

I am going to be frank is saying that in regards to the big picture this program is a good idea. Theoretically you do not need legislation for it to be possible. I know that you want this to be a passable piece of legislation to help people, but you can help people without passing legislation. Have you considered running it as a start up operation through the private industry? Have you considered creating a general model that could be adopted by nations after having a consultation with you?

Going that route you could post actual prices as it would be tailored to each specific nation that you address. This would also be a means to sidestep the committee only rule. Just an idea.

[Araraukar]

Have you considered running it as a start up operation through the private industry? Have you considered creating a general model that could be adopted by nations after having a consultation with you?

Going that route you could post actual prices as it would be tailored to each specific nation that you address. This would also be a means to sidestep the committee only rule. Just an idea.

OOC: That sounds more like setting up a storefront on the GET forum, than anything for WA.

[The Sheika]

Have you considered running it as a start up operation through the private industry? Have you considered creating a general model that could be adopted by nations after having a consultation with you?

Going that route you could post actual prices as it would be tailored to each specific nation that you address. This would also be a means to sidestep the committee only rule. Just an idea.

OOC: That sounds more like setting up a storefront on the GET forum, than anything for WA.

OOC: Yeah, I realize that. I might be alone on this, but it made more sense going that route instead of trying to pass it through a WA resolution.