General Assembly Q&A

[Gruenberg]

Whenever you feel you're reasonably confident it's not illegal*, and otherwise have reached a point where you don't think any further comments will lead you to making any changes. There are no hard rules here: some proposals are drafted for days, some for months.

* It is a 100% certainty there will be an attempt to rules lawyer it into being deleted if you do actually submit it, so it's worth thinking carefully about this.

[Wallenburg]

You would do well to wait more than 20 minutes for someone to respond to your draft.

Ok, but when should I submit it?

Never, it's illegal.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Ok, but when should I submit it?

Never, it's illegal.

Not that one, the other one.

[Tinfect]

Never, it's illegal.

Not that one, the other one.

Submit it when it's done, and the only objections to it are the ones that reject the core-concept.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Not that one, the other one.

Submit it when it's done, and the only objections to it are the ones that reject the core-concept.

How do I know "when it's done"?

[Tinfect]

Submit it when it's done, and the only objections to it are the ones that reject the core-concept.

How do I know "when it's done"?

[When] the only objections to it are the ones that reject the core-concept.

[Northern Greengot]

How do you vote on issues in the General Assembly?

[Tinfect]

How do you vote on issues in the General Assembly?

Hit the giant World Assembly button on the sidebar, it will take you to a page with the Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions. The one on the left is the GA resolution.

[Kaboomlandia]

I'm writing a proposal to ban attacks on ejecting parachutists, lifeboats, etc. (which currently appears to be an uncovered topic and is a real thing in the Geneva Convention for the parachutists part).

My working title is "Protecting Distressed Combatants", which is two characters too long. Any suggestions for paring it down to the limit?

[Imperium Anglorum]

I'm writing a proposal to ban attacks on ejecting parachutists, lifeboats, etc. (which currently appears to be an uncovered topic and is a real thing in the Geneva Convention for the parachutists part).

My working title is "Protecting Distressed Combatants", which is two characters too long. Any suggestions for paring it down to the limit?

I believed I considered something like this. Separatist Peoples informed me that there's a portion of his resolution on Rules of Surrender (if I recall correctly) which already covers this topic.

[Gruenberg]

So, the max* proposal title length seems to have changed. Used to be 30, now 52 characters. I wonder what prompted that change - thinking about it, nations can have 40 characters in their name, so Security Council resolutions would have already had to accommodate longer titles in case of "Commend 40 Character Nation Title".

I'm aware it was already possible to evade this using a simple bit of code, but that's not the point.

[WA Kitty Kops]

So, the max* proposal title length seems to have changed. Used to be 30, now 52 characters. I wonder what prompted that change - thinking about it, nations can have 40 characters in their name, so Security Council resolutions would have already had to accommodate longer titles in case of "Commend 40 Character Nation Title".

Does it work for GA proposals too or just SC ones? I mean, the repeals have already had the added "Repeal" tagged to the name by the system, haven't they? Otherwise you couldn't repeal resolutions by name if the name was 30 marks long.

EDIT: Bah at kitten nation being the active one. Imagine the flag being red-and-yellow striped.

[Gruenberg]

Does it work for GA proposals too

Yes. I was wondering why so many long titled proposals were turning up as most of them seemed to be from nations I doubt would know of the Js workaround for title length. I'm pretty sure it's 52 now - which, given the max length of an SC proposal would be about 50, makes sense.

[Tinfect]

So, the max* proposal title length seems to have changed. Used to be 30, now 52 characters. I wonder what prompted that change - thinking about it, nations can have 40 characters in their name, so Security Council resolutions would have already had to accommodate longer titles in case of "Commend 40 Character Nation Title".

Does it work for GA proposals too or just SC ones? I mean, the repeals have already had the added "Repeal" tagged to the name by the system, haven't they? Otherwise you couldn't repeal resolutions by name if the name was 30 marks long.

EDIT: Bah at kitten nation being the active one. Imagine the flag being red-and-yellow striped.

I'm not sure that helped.

[WA Kitty Kops]

I'm not sure that helped.

Oh I love that! Can I have that?

Totally need to use that in a siggy link or something (I'll save it in my Photobucket first)...

[Tinfect]

I'm not sure that helped.

Oh I love that! Can I have that?

Totally need to use that in a siggy link or something (I'll save it in my Photobucket first)...

You can use it for whatever you like, it was yours in the first place.
You can always right-click save-as the image, or just click here.

[Phrenics]

Presuming from passed resolutions, "Nazism" isn't a real life reference? Although Nazism is a specific ideology, I argue that it's spontaneous, as the term starts with a capital letter. Even if it's taken as "National Socialism", I am not sure that such an ideology existed before the German Nazi. Sorry if I was wrong...

[Araraukar]

Presuming from passed resolutions, "Nazism" isn't a real life reference? Although Nazism is a specific ideology, I argue that it's spontaneous, as the term starts with a capital letter. Even if it's taken as "National Socialism", I am not sure that such an ideology existed before the German Nazi. Sorry if I was wrong...

I myself would count Nazism 1) too flammable to put into a proposal and 2) a RL reference. I mean, we don't call Socialism "Zism". I'd go for NatSoc, if you need a shorthand for some reason.

[Phrenics]

Thank you. But I guess it's not illegal, for SC#199 uses the term "Nazi". I may have posted this on the wrong forum, but the classification of RL references are the not different between the two councils, so take this as a general question on the World Assembly.

[Aclion]

Thank you. But I guess it's not illegal, for SC#199 uses the term "Nazi". I may have posted this on the wrong forum, but the classification of RL references are the not different between the two councils, so take this as a general question on the World Assembly.

I wouldn't use security console resolutions as a precedent. The security counsel can reference game-play(it being what they're for) so they have some leniency regarding real-world references that we do not. SCR#199 for example only references Nazis as part of the name of the target region "Alliance Against Nazis" which would not be allowed in the GA.

[Araraukar]

Thank you. But I guess it's not illegal, for SC#199 uses the term "Nazi"¹. I may have posted this on the wrong forum, but the classification of RL references are the not different between the two councils², so take this as ^{a general question on the World Assembly}3.

¹What Aclion said: SC resolutions have nothing to do with GA resolutions. The proposal rules for each are very, very different.

²Then no, you can't use "Nazi", as using it would require you to use German (no Z in English "nationalism") and the resolutions must be written in English.

³Then you need to ask in Moderation subforum, not GA or SC.

[Whovian Tardisia]

What happened to the illegal proposals thread? Did GenSec kill that?

[Imperium Anglorum]

It has fallen to the second page. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=370075&p=30533789#p30533789

[The Cuatmono Regions]

Does anyone know if there are any bills that have been passed regarding to restricting abortion?

[Separatist Peoples]

Does anyone know if there are any bills that have been passed regarding to restricting abortion?

Here and here. Both expand, rather than reduce, the right to have an abortion.