[DEFEATED](GA#130 Complement) Universal Suffrage Act

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Can we get a ruling on this, please? This is going to vote tomorrow.

OOC: Did anybody submit a GHR yet?

[Sciongrad]

OOC: Can we get a ruling on this, please? This is going to vote tomorrow.

OOC: Did anybody submit a GHR yet?

OOC: I did, last week.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Did anybody submit a GHR yet?

OOC: I did, last week.

OOC: Yikes. I bet the mods are busy, but they're gonna get much busier at this rate. Poor guys.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: Can we get a ruling on this, please? :unsure: This is going to vote tomorrow.

OOC: Did anybody submit a GHR yet?

OOC: Yes. No response.

If Kryozerkia's revisionist interpretation of the CoCR stands, we need to repeal it. No point having an anti-discrimination resolution that doesn't ban discrimination.

[Ardchoille]

OOC: I don't care about your views, for your views carry no weight. As I've said - I've personally asked Ard to get somehow a check on legality. Ard or any other mod's ruling is the only one I can give a flying flute for.

For the record, the Mods have repeatedly said they don't like this attitude. They much prefer for authors to listen to their peers and experienced authors on legality etc. They only believe the Mods should be asked for a check in extreme and final circumstances.

E&E, Sanctaria is entirely correct. Experienced players can save you (and the mods) time and embarrassment. Accept that they are trying to help and you will receive much less aggressive replies. This, in turn, will help you frame your own responses more politely.

In regard to the bolded phrase: I don't moderate by personal TG. I told E&E that I would get up to speed on the situation and post in the thread. I think it particularly important that WA mods should not give "secret" answers on legality, as all players need to know what decisions are based on. I have no problem with players quoting Voice of Mod TGs on legality issues. If any of this troubles you, please submit a GHR asking admins to check my conduct (or, indeed, any mod's). It will go straight to admin, who will be able to read the TGs, which are still in my inbox.

OK, as to the queries, here's a summary of points that Kryo and I discussed:

On category: Probably already answered, but to get it on the record: we felt the switch to Furtherment of Democracy eliminated the objections. It's now dealing with political rights.

On duplication of CoCR: Resolution #35, Charter of Civil Rights, protects inhabitants of WA member nations from discrimination based on reductive categories such as age, sex, religion, creed etc. But democratic rights have been refused on other grounds that were not "arbitrarily assigned and reductive", or for categories that authorities believed were for a "compelling practical purpose", eg, land ownership, literacy. This proposal attempts to deal with that.

Strength: Given the tendency of even the most officially democratic governments to find legal ways to exclude people from voting, we think that the strength is justifed.

Re "citizens", "covers all elections", loopholes, etcetera: these are arguments for the floor debate, not grounds for ruling a proposal illegal. It's up to the author to refute them.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: I think that's a reasonable ruling, overall. Your explanation of the lack of conflict with CoCR - which starkly differs from the author's own interpretation - is appreciated.

I don't intend to pursue any other legality challenges, personally, though I can't speak for anyone else.

[Elke and Elba]

For the record, the Mods have repeatedly said they don't like this attitude. They much prefer for authors to listen to their peers and experienced authors on legality etc. They only believe the Mods should be asked for a check in extreme and final circumstances.

E&E, Sanctaria is entirely correct. Experienced players can save you (and the mods) time and embarrassment. Accept that they are trying to help and you will receive much less aggressive replies. This, in turn, will help you frame your own responses more politely.

In regard to the bolded phrase: I don't moderate by personal TG. I told E&E that I would get up to speed on the situation and post in the thread. I think it particularly important that WA mods should not give "secret" answers on legality, as all players need to know what decisions are based on. I have no problem with players quoting Voice of Mod TGs on legality issues. If any of this troubles you, please submit a GHR asking admins to check my conduct (or, indeed, any mod's). It will go straight to admin, who will be able to read the TGs, which are still in my inbox.

OK, as to the queries, here's a summary of points that Kryo and I discussed:

On category: Probably already answered, but to get it on the record: we felt the switch to Furtherment of Democracy eliminated the objections. It's now dealing with political rights.

On duplication of CoCR: Resolution #35, Charter of Civil Rights, protects inhabitants of WA member nations from discrimination based on reductive categories such as age, sex, religion, creed etc. But democratic rights have been refused on other grounds that were not "arbitrarily assigned and reductive", or for categories that authorities believed were for a "compelling practical purpose", eg, land ownership, literacy. This proposal attempts to deal with that.

Strength: Given the tendency of even the most officially democratic governments to find legal ways to exclude people from voting, we think that the strength is justifed.

Re "citizens", "covers all elections", loopholes, etcetera: these are arguments for the floor debate, not grounds for ruling a proposal illegal. It's up to the author to refute them.

Yep, I did that then thinking that filing a GHR against myself would be somewhat foolish.

As for listening to advice - would appreciate that people was less acrimonious to start with, and the fact DSR and Scion filed a GHR seems like any chance for discussion is essentially moot.

I do remember dealing with the "compelling practical purpose" portion - I think it got overran by the rest, making the presumption it covers "compelling practical purpose" for whatever reasons I cannot recall of, now.

[Societatis Frigidus]

We will not be supporting this proposal as our government strongly believes in the right to restrict some elections and referenda to certain population groups, based upon qualification, merit and/or geographic location. We do not feel that it is necessary to demand that every citizen be granted the same elective power without respecting their expertise or contributions.

[Bezombia]

Surprised this wasn't deleted.

[Draica]

Different from the regular Ambassador, Edward Tung, it appeared as if he was on break so ambassador Lonai Love decided to fill in for him. She pounces over to her podium ,she looked like she weighed atleast 290 pounds.

So my people down in Draica hate this. We don't think criminals should be kept from voting, espescially fat criminals. We fat people need to stick together and fry ourselves some turkies and some chickens. Fat people unite."

[Moshitopia]

The Community of Moshitopia proudly voted against this legislation. Frankly, this act is contradictory. It basically states that all member nations must allow elections for all citizens, unless they do not allow elections in general or restrict the voting rights of certain citizens. Even in its first incarnation in which universal suffrage was mandated, we would have voted against the law.

[Alicorn Princess Twilight Sparkle]

Guys, you are looking at this wrong. Any country can get around this by making anyone they don't want to vote a criminal. That would prevent them from voting. Say, for example, you only want landed gentry to vote: Make it a crime to not hold land, and now only landed gentry can vote. Problem Solved. Aristocracy for the win!

[Defwa]

Guys, you are looking at this wrong. Any country can get around this by making anyone they don't want to vote a criminal. That would prevent them from voting. Say, for example, you only want landed gentry to vote: Make it a crime to not hold land, and now only landed gentry can vote. Problem Solved. Aristocracy for the win!

Many one party systems operate like this. Its illegal to be a part of an opposing political group

[Three Lands]

How is this even legal in the Assembly? This is clearly an illicit push for democracy in member nations. This resolution would negatively impact my nation, in which our religion mandates that the divine elections be only open to the greater nobility. The idea of their inferiors, and the barbarous commons, being permitted to vote is blasphemous and unthinkable. We strongly urge all to vote against this evil resolution.


OOC:

Category: Human Rights/(Significant or Strong)

I just realised Elections and Assistance Act didn't force universal suffrage!

[...]

EDIT: YAY. NO ELECTIONS FORCED ON But wait - if you want to hold them, you have to let EVERYONE vote. A nice complement to GA#130.

This is clearly an ideology ban.

[Tantricia]

Tantricia fully believes that most all citizens of voting age are equally as competent in deciding which ineffective governmental figurehead to elect as the other. We shall be voting for this proposal.

[Talonis]

Oh boy! Why don't we send people baskets of chocolates with a "Pweese Disawm Yore Nukes!" card on it? Or, we introduce a bill that makes feather dusters compulsory? Because these, like this bill are a MASSIVE WASTE OF TIME. We should be removing the grime from existing bills over passing the sentimental worthlessness.

[Separatist Peoples]

Yep, I did that then thinking that filing a GHR against myself would be somewhat foolish.

As for listening to advice - would appreciate that people was less acrimonious to start with, and the fact DSR and Scion filed a GHR seems like any chance for discussion is essentially moot.

I do remember dealing with the "compelling practical purpose" portion - I think it got overran by the rest, making the presumption it covers "compelling practical purpose" for whatever reasons I cannot recall of, now.

OOC: Don't take the submission of a GHR on one of your proposals as a personal attack or insult. Its just a way of tapping the mods' on the shoulder. Given the serious issues we've had surrounding illegal or bad proposals getting to vote, you shouldn't blame the regulars for being jumpy. We all, you included, would appreciate not having to deal with potentially illegal proposals being passed, and this is the most effective way of preventing that. You can always submit it again later, after a ruling has been offered.

[Rotwood]

Jericho steps up to address the assembly "The Rotan position is Against. This is way too broad, allowing people to vote in elections that they have no right to, such as provincial/state elections, local government elections, even down to private member's clubs. Your intentions are well, but the execution is very poor. We mean this as no offence, Ambassadors for Elke and Elba, but we suggest you take a break from your rapid-fire drafts and focus on one thing at a time, rather than spreading yourselves across many as you are at the moment."

[Magna civilis]

I support this resolution.

[Texan Hotrodders]

Fellow nations of the world, resplendent demagogues, and travelers on the road to a world of peace...

I would like to share with you the story of my people.

We held a nationwide referendum as we always do for major policy decisions which affect the entire nation. We invited every resident of voting age to attend, set up polling stations all over the place, set up polling websites for those who cannot physically attend, and (by means of a generous donation from a pro-democracy group) provided refreshments at each of these polling stations.

As usual, almost no one showed up to vote on what we should do regarding a WA resolution which accomplishes either nothing or almost nothing. The lemon twist cookies, however, were very popular indeed.

After tallying the votes, we found that the 6.8% of our population which bothered to vote has chosen overwhelmingly (98.3%) to vote AGAINST the proposed resolution, many of them on the grounds that, "You can't tell me what to do!" Others expressed befuddlement that, "We already have referendums for everything and the WA is as democratic as our guns are automatic. How much more democratized can we get?"

I cordially invite residents of any nations who wish to enjoy the robust exercise of democracy to move to the Fuel-Injected Federation. We have all the democracy one could possibly want, and we have excellent lemon twist cookies as well.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tlaloc Blackstone

[Starkmoor]

We are firmly opposed. As a nation still struggling with the lingering pain of capitalist tyranny we find this anti-freedom proposal nothing less than appalling. This could be used as a ban on Marxist-Leninist states and several ideologies.

[Dirt Roads]

The Supreme Army of the Dirt Roads has long supported universal suffrage, as all of our citizens are considered soldiers under our leadership. All eight states of the Dirt Roads are guaranteed democratic republics. (The governments of the four territories vary.)

Mental competency is not currently a requirement to vote. However, given the nature of our government, the Supreme Army reserves the right to discard votes and ignore election results.

For more info on the Dirt Roads: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=dirt ... l=factbook

[Wise Old Men]

The language of this resolution is simply way too vague and non-specific. We can get behind the sentiment of a resolution on universal suffrage, if it were more properly worded (meaning completely re-written), but for now we must vote against.

[Anindyatuava]

If this act or resolution as I should call it is passed, then it will help in the functioning of democracy over most of the nations... however, sometimes the people may themselves not want democracy... they would have preferred other kinds such as dictatorship, monarchy and socialism/communism, therefore we must let these countries decide their own type of government and not stamp democracy on them...

[Empire of Vlissingen]

The Empire of Vlissingen votes for this act but wants an option when elections endanger national security