General Assembly Q&A

[Imperium Anglorum]

^ Apologies on the above. I misread the legislation.

Should we encourage a format for legislation?

[Ardchoille]

^ Apologies on the above. I misread the legislation.

No worries, I should have checked the source rather than take anybody's word for it.

Should we encourage a format for legislation?

Umm, not sure where you're going with this. GA authors already follow a proposal format of sorts -- non-executive/explanatory/prefatory clauses; definitions; active clauses -- but that's largely because it's practical and has become customary.

If you just want a Q&A answer, I'd say players already encourage newcomers to use it, and as a mod I find it makes my job easier. If you're wanting a discussion of whether it should be a strict requirement, or what alternative styles could be used, I think that's something for a new thread.

[The Dark Star Republic]

(Completely unofficial answer): So long as a proposal has a recognisable operative clause (which some proposals dismissed as "blogposal" actually do) and it isn't completely incomprehensible, then format should be up to the author. And a bit of variety can actually spice somethings up, like the Cyanbeard repeal, which generated a bit of fun.

FWIW, I interpreted this question as being asked with respect to using the Bookkeeping category, but that may not have been the intention.

[Ardchoille]

(Completely unofficial answer): ... format should be up to the author. And a bit of variety can actually spice some things up ...

Yeah, this. My main point: we don't have a rule on format.

[Imperium Anglorum]

A lot of early proposals are simply undifferentiated from the surrounding comment around them. I feel that it would be best to simply just post up a BB-code template for the proposals, which would be fantastic in killing the format issue and moving quickly to content.

I formatted a joke proposal using it, your thoughts?

Maxtopia Act
Category: Bookkeeping | Area of Effect: All

---

Present participle blah blah blah blah,

Present participle blah blah blah blah, and

Recalling the first World Assembly resolution and its landmark status,

The World Assembly hereby,

(1) Present tense verb blah blah blah,

(2) Defines Maxtopia Day as a day in which all nations can get together in peace to worship him,

(3) Establishes Maxtopia Day Centre to administer the rites of the day to all people of the World Assembly on the first day of every month,

(4) Urges all members to do the following,

(i) celebrate Maxtopia Day,

(ii) establish the best peaceful relations with its neighbours for Maxtopia Day, and

(iii) create a definition in member laws identical to (2);

(6) Mandates that all members equip their ambassadors to the World Assembly with robes and sacrifices for Maxtopia Day, and

(7) Declares that all ambassadors to the World Assembly are hereby priests of Maxtopia.

Code: Select all

[box][align=center][size=200]Maxtopia Act[/size]
[b]Category[/b]: Category | [b]Area of Effect[/b]: Relevant Ones[/align]
[hr][/hr]

[i]Present participle[/i] blah blah blah blah,

[i]Present participle[/i] blah blah blah blah, and

[i]Recalling[/i] the first World Assembly resolution and its landmark status,

The World Assembly hereby,

(1) [i]Present tense verb[/i] blah blah blah,

(2) [i]Defines[/i] Maxtopia Day as a day in which all nations can get together in peace to worship [i]him[/i],

(3) [i]Establishes[/i] Maxtopia Day Centre to administer the rites of the day to all people of the World Assembly on the first day of every month,

(4) [i]Urges[/i] all members to do the following,
[blocktext](i) celebrate Maxtopia Day,

(ii) establish the best peaceful relations with its neighbours for Maxtopia Day, and

(iii) create a definition in member laws identical to (2);[/blocktext]
(6) [i]Mandates[/i] that all members equip their ambassadors to the World Assembly with robes and sacrifices for Maxtopia Day, and

(7) [i]Declares[/i] that all ambassadors to the World Assembly are hereby priests of Maxtopia.[/box]

might be threadjacking. should i create a new thread?

[Kaboomlandia]

Writing this in the hopes I can get some help with my draft resolution.

House of Cards resolutions prohibit referencing previous resolutions in your work because, if they all get repealed, your resolution base is destroyed.

1. How strict are the moderators on that kind of stuff?
2. If a reference to a previous resolution is only in the preamble and doesn't reference the resolution by name or number, will it get caught?

[Separatist Peoples]

Writing this in the hopes I can get some help with my draft resolution.

House of Cards resolutions prohibit referencing previous resolutions in your work because, if they all get repealed, your resolution base is destroyed.

1. How strict are the moderators on that kind of stuff?
2. If a reference to a previous resolution is only in the preamble and doesn't reference the resolution by name or number, will it get caught?

First of all, you shouldn't phrase it as if you're trying to get away with rulebreaking. The moderators don't make exceptions or look the other way with rules.

That said, you can reference laws in the preamble. Its when you base your operative clauses off of another resolution directly. The preambulatory clauses aren't action clauses, so it makes little difference, but to be absolutely sure, you should avoid any heavy reference even there. Not mentioning the law by name or number would likely not be an issue.

[Kaboomlandia]

Writing this in the hopes I can get some help with my draft resolution.

House of Cards resolutions prohibit referencing previous resolutions in your work because, if they all get repealed, your resolution base is destroyed.

1. How strict are the moderators on that kind of stuff?
2. If a reference to a previous resolution is only in the preamble and doesn't reference the resolution by name or number, will it get caught?

First of all, you shouldn't phrase it as if you're trying to get away with rulebreaking. The moderators don't make exceptions or look the other way with rules.

That said, you can reference laws in the preamble. Its when you base your operative clauses off of another resolution directly. The preambulatory clauses aren't action clauses, so it makes little difference, but to be absolutely sure, you should avoid any heavy reference even there. Not mentioning the law by name or number would likely not be an issue.

Just to clarify, this was the exact phrasing:

"Acknowledging previous efforts by the World Assembly to prevent overfishing"

Hope that clears it up a bit.

[Ardchoille]

I don't see a problem with that. Even if the "previous efforts" were repealed, the GA would still have made them.

Note that this isn't a modly comment on the overall legality of your proposal. I haven't looked at it with legality in mind, I'm just helping flatten a minor bump in the road to its creation.

[Kaboomlandia]

I don't see a problem with that. Even if the "previous efforts" were repealed, the GA would still have made them.

Note that this isn't a modly comment on the overall legality of your proposal. I haven't looked at it with legality in mind, I'm just helping flatten a minor bump in the road to its creation.

I don't see any rules violations on the rest of it, so it should be fine.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Can I ask a question about operative clauses in repeals? People in Silly/Illegal like to cite repeals that have "no operative clause" as a rules violation. That's only a rule I've heard in the Security Council.* Repeals have an operative clause already built in to the resolution mechanism, so as long as the argument is germane and coherent and does not violate any other rules, do repeals necessarily require the "HEREBY REPEALS" line to be considered legal?

* (leaving aside conventional GA proposals, which obviously do require operative language.)

[Imperium Anglorum]

Do we have, as of yet, legislation on brainwashing?

[Defwa]

Prevention of torture bans a lot of traditional brainwashing techniques.
Freedom of expression bans punishment for expressing unpopular opinions.

[Ardchoille]

... do repeals necessarily require the "HEREBY REPEALS" line to be considered legal?

Yes. I don't know exactly when that began, but all the NS UN's repeals except the first, "Repeal 'Fight the Axis of Evil' ", have an active REPEALS clause. Since we left the Unmentionable site in 2009 it's been the norm.

It doesn't have to be exactly those words. In the Historics, I'd query Reformentia's 2005 IT IS PROPOSED: This resolution be repealed so that it may be replaced with a new, effective resolution because a WA Resolution doesn't just propose, it acts, and proposals should be written as if they were going to become Resolutions. Jey had the acceptable ... be it resolved that:/Resolution #5, “DVD region removal” is repealed, a phrasing you echoed in 2008: Be it therefore resolved: 1. UN Resolution #92: Humanitarian Intervention is hereby repealed. .... Sir ernest shackleton got a bit wordy in 2006 -- ... Therefore, we shall hereby strike "Definition of Marriage," knowing that the individual nations know best what is a marriage and what isn't. For sheer chutzpah, it's hard to go past Dashanzi's RIGHTEOUSLY PURIFIES the UN statute of this most disingenuous resolution by/REPEALING United Nations Resolution #30: Common Sense Act II (this was the "RAILS MOST FURIOUSLY" Resolution). Your own Randomly kicking ambassadors in the nuts for even thinking this proposal was a good idea,/Hereby repeals Resolution #223: Max Barry Day would certainly be a competitor, though. Personally, I favour Glog's succinct UN Law "Rights of Minorities and Women" BAD!!! UN repeal.

Since it's 3am here, I'll have to wait till tomorrow to edit in some more about why it's needed, which I think may be what you're actually asking.

EDIT: Much later than "tomorrow", but finally ...

The game supplies two lines to repeals. One is this:

• A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation. That's effectively a category description, like "A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights" or "A resolution to slash worldwide military spending". There's nothing in a category description to say that the player-supplied text that follows will actually achieve the category's effects.

The other is this:

• Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #000: Example Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void. That is what it says, a Description. This time it's a text description. When a proposal begins with "This is a proposal [or, preferably, 'a Resolution'] to do such-and-such", the author still has to make sure it does actually do such-and-such in the text. Such descriptions, like prefatory clauses, give an idea of what the aim of the proposal is, but they don't actually do it; they're non-executive.

Finally, both those lines are game-supplied. The governments and inhabitants of your imaginary nations, to whom the text of WA laws are addressed and who are supposed to put them into effect, don't know they're in a game. They can't "see" game-supplied text. They can only see what the WA says, does or orders through their ambassadors. If the author doesn't write an active "repeals"clause, then they're left with a string of arguments expressing dissatisfaction with a particular Resolution, but no guidance as to what they're supposed to do about its inadequacies. It's like the guy in the pub who tells you everything that's wrong with the world, and then ends up with an aimless, "They oughta do sumpin'."
To my mind, treating game-supplied text as "visible" is a form of metagaming akin to quoting the Proposal Rules in a proposal.

[Kaboomlandia]

If you become delegate, approve a proposal, and then leave (such as in a raid) does your approval get taken off?

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

If you become delegate, approve a proposal, and then leave (such as in a raid) does your approval get taken off?

Yes.

[Backatri]

Would it be legal to propose a measure to break up the black raiders?

[Kaboomlandia]

Would it be legal to propose a measure to break up the black raiders?

No. The WA can only affect individual nations.

[Frisbeeteria]

Would it be legal to propose a measure to break up the black raiders?

No. The WA can only affect individual nations.

Please stop giving advice. You're really bad at it, and more often than not your replies are flat out wrong.

The answer to their question is "No", but not because the WA only affects individual nations. GA proposals affect all WA member nations. SC proposals affect targeted nations or regions with specific effects. None of those effects include "breaking up" a region or group. Even if you targetted the region The Black Riders with a Condemnation or Liberation (the only two legal approaches), nothing would stop a group of players from calling themselves "The Black Riders" and continuing to do exactly what they do.

[Backatri]

No. The WA can only affect individual nations.

Please stop giving advice. You're really bad at it, and more often than not your replies are flat out wrong.

The answer to their question is "No", but not because the WA only affects individual nations. GA proposals affect all WA member nations. SC proposals affect targeted nations or regions with specific effects. None of those effects include "breaking up" a region or group. Even if you targetted the region The Black Riders with a Condemnation or Liberation (the only two legal approaches), nothing would stop a group of players from calling themselves "The Black Riders" and continuing to do exactly what they do.

Thanks.

[Kaboomlandia]

Out of curiosity, in the impossibly slim chance that a resolution came out tied, would it pass or fail?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Hack says it would pass, though I cannot locate the post.

[The Dark Star Republic]

He said he thought it would pass.

[Schalovaihoff]

I have tried to write a repeal three times I need help how to exactly write one what I'm supposed to do cause I went by the rules and they don't seem to work can someone tell me advice or something

[Mousebumples]

I have tried to write a repeal three times I need help how to exactly write one what I'm supposed to do cause I went by the rules and they don't seem to work can someone tell me advice or something

Post your draft on the forums (in a new thread) for some time to allow knowledgeable players to offer suggestions, advice, and the like. If we don't see the draft, it's hard to tell you what's wrong with it.