[PASSED] Nuclear Arms Protocol

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

No, I am not. The conventional explosives would add no noticeable power to the explosion, which is different from adding no power.

OOC: The rules presume, and GA Resolution #2 requires, that member nations will follow a 'good faith' interpretation of the resolutions' wording. In my opinion your arguments go beyond "reasonable loophole" and into "not a 'good faith' interpretation"... and there have been official statements previously that we don't have to allow for such arguments.[/not-a-Mod]

I can't imagine what impact your mod status (or lack thereof) would have on the discussion, seeing as moderators do not rule on the validity of national interpretations of WA laws (except as they pertain to the legality of GA proposals).

[Chester Pearson]

OOC: The rules presume, and GA Resolution #2 requires, that member nations will follow a 'good faith' interpretation of the resolutions' wording. In my opinion your arguments go beyond "reasonable loophole" and into "not a 'good faith' interpretation"... and there have been official statements previously that we don't have to allow for such arguments.[/not-a-Mod]

I can't imagine what impact your mod status (or lack thereof) would have on the discussion, seeing as moderators do not rule on the validity of national interpretations of WA laws (except as they pertain to the legality of GA proposals).

I think Bears meant etiquette requires, that member nations will follow a 'good faith' interpretation of the resolutions' wording.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Still outside the jurisdiction of the mods.

And unless you can come up with a universally applicable, ironclad definition of "good faith" that will eclipse entirely any attempts on the part of nations to wriggle their way around the spirit (but not the letter) of the law, it's outside the jurisdiction of other players as well.

[Imperializt Russia]

Still outside the jurisdiction of the mods.

And unless you can come up with a universally applicable, ironclad definition of "good faith" that will eclipse entirely any attempts on the part of nations to wriggle their way around the spirit (but not the letter) of the law, it's outside the jurisdiction of other players as well.

Ineffectually modifying a nuclear device such as to claim it is not a nuclear device per the text of the resolution, then proceeding to use said nuclear device.

Can't see how that's anything but in poor faith.

[Bears Armed Mission]

And unless you can come up with a universally applicable, ironclad definition of "good faith" that will eclipse entirely any attempts on the part of nations to wriggle their way around the spirit (but not the letter) of the law, it's outside the jurisdiction of other players as well.

Which was one reason why I added the [not-a-Mod], to clarify that this was only an opinion and not an attempt at an actual ruling.