[Legality Challenge] Compliance thingy

[Unibot III]

I'm encouraged by the clarity of the ruling and enjoyed reading the dissent too. We'll have to see where this takes us, I suppose.

[Tzorsland]

EP is right. Nobody has ever offered an explanation of mandatory compliance that did not rely on magical Metagaming to enforce it.

Frankly I never bothered to write one up. It should be fairly easy given the basic nature of treaty supremacy (although this is mostly a US concept) and the notion that WA legislation empowers committees to write up individual legislation in member states which because of the conditions of the treaty (odd how no one has ever seen a copy of this document) every nation signs when joining the WA, becomes automatically the law of the land of that member nation.

If you really want to get technical, this is sort of how the TPP was supposed to operate, at least in the United States given the supremacy clause.

[Sciongrad]

Even the Council overseeing the WA rules seems to equate mandatory compliance with magical compliance!

I've argued several times in the past that there is a difference between Mousebumples' magical compliance, where reality must comply exactly with the text of resolutions, and more "realistic" mandatory compliance - you might recall my participation in the repeal ICC thread. The difference is understood by a lot of us. I don't really see how it makes a difference in this case, though. The only relevant question is whether or not forcing roleplaying paradigms through the WA violates the metagaming rule. It doesn't, regardless of whether mandatory compliance is magical or not.

[Excidium Planetis]

EP is right. Nobody has ever offered an explanation of mandatory compliance that did not rely on magical Metagaming to enforce it.

Frankly I never bothered to write one up. It should be fairly easy given the basic nature of treaty supremacy (although this is mostly a US concept) and the notion that WA legislation empowers committees to write up individual legislation in member states which because of the conditions of the treaty (odd how no one has ever seen a copy of this document) every nation signs when joining the WA, becomes automatically the law of the land of that member nation.

If you really want to get technical, this is sort of how the TPP was supposed to operate, at least in the United States given the supremacy clause.

But non-compliance is still possible in that system. Nations can not only defy their own laws, but they can rewrite their laws each time a WA committee changes them.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

I've always felt that even stats-wise, the effect of any particular WA resolution on a nation should be multiplied by x/C (where C = that nation's corruption index, and x = a fudge factor to be determined by how forcibly this equation would interact with the existing code). Mandatory compliance is a thing that the WA must strive for IC, but it's not the end of the story and it can't be assumed to always and forever overcome IC iterations of real life obstacles (such as the aforementioned corruption; police overwork/underfunding; federalism/subsidiarity; and the like).

[Tzorsland]

But non-compliance is still possible in that system. Nations can not only defy their own laws, but they can rewrite their laws each time a WA committee changes them.

Absolutely, "Full Compliance" does not technically exist in the code. It is a convenient fiction that works as an oversimplification. Compliance on the game level only occurs at the moment of resolution approval. Frankly, any attempt to push it beyond that is borderline forced role play. Let's be honest, joining the WA does not cause your nation to go to hell in a hand basket in spite of the tons of resolutions that have been passed by this body.

Compliance to existing WA laws previously passed needs to be based on "good faith" efforts and reasonable nation theory which is never perfect. This results in a better relationship between role play and game mechanic and you no longer have to worry about the role play police complaining because you clicked the wrong choice (how did you know) on a daily issue. (Which is the only real problem with "compliance" in the first place since we really have no proper role play mechanisms save for that of the IGNORE cannons.)