[PASSED] Repeal "A Model World Assembly"

[Connopolis]

Noting that oftentimes resolutions are brought to the floor which are intended to further the betterment of mankind,

"Yes, yes..."

Believing that such resolutions are noble in nature, but not always necessary or effective,

"Hear, hear!"

Recognizes the following flaws in GAR 165

• The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national affairs, meaning students are already taught about the "Festering Snakepit",

With all due respect, this seem silly. Unless this repeal attempt is satirical in nature, I'd recommend removing it.

The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,

A red bell went off as Dr. Forshaw's aides began scrambling in a panic, his deputy ambassador taking refuge under her desk. Dr. Forshaw's face turned a bright shade of red as his forehead began pulsating, and through an arched eyebrow, he hollered "I should hope you aren't subliminally mentioning how a member-state's educational philosophy supersedes the decision of the WA, because such arguments have no place in any repeal."

A resolution based around introducing a simulated conference into school districts is simply not worth the time and cost to enforce on both the national and international level,

"Wah, wah, wah, I don't want to enforce this because it takes time. Wah, wah, wah."

The clause which requires the transporting of children to the WAHQ assumes that the WAHQ will not be legislated out of existence,

OOC: I'm not sure if it's legal to repeal the resolution constructing the WAHQ, and even if it was...

GAR#X creates committee A.
GAR#Y uses committee A.
Repeal X repeals GAR#X.
Committee A remains to serve its purpose under GAR#Y.

Further believing that the WA has suffered from a distinct lack of common sense, thereby showing that simulating it is not necessarily a good learning method,

Due to these enumerated reasons,

The World Assembly hereby repeals GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly'

I'm all for it - however, none of the arguments in this repeal are valid.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Noting that oftentimes resolutions are brought to the floor which are intended to further the betterment of mankind,

"Yes, yes..."

Believing that such resolutions are noble in nature, but not always necessary or effective,

"Hear, hear!"

Recognizes the following flaws in GAR 165

• The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national affairs, meaning students are already taught about the "Festering Snakepit",

With all due respect, this seem silly. Unless this repeal attempt is satirical in nature, I'd recommend removing it.

The reason the line is in there is valid. It is not satirical, it counters the resolutions power to teach about the WA.

The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,

A red bell went off as Dr. Forshaw's aides began scrambling in a panic, his deputy ambassador taking refuge under her desk. Dr. Forshaw's face turned a bright shade of red as his forehead began pulsating, and through an arched eyebrow, he hollered "I should hope you aren't subliminally mentioning how a member-state's educational philosophy supersedes the decision of the WA, because such arguments have no place in any repeal."

The decisions of the WA have already dictated educational philosophy, so another resolution designed to teach about the WA is completely pointless.

A resolution based around introducing a simulated conference into school districts is simply not worth the time and cost to enforce on both the national and international level,

"Wah, wah, wah, I don't want to enforce this because it takes time. Wah, wah, wah."

I don't want to enforce this because it is absolutely pointless and a waste of funds. The time aspect just adds to the ludicrous nature of the resolution.

The clause which requires the transporting of children to the WAHQ assumes that the WAHQ will not be legislated out of existence,

OOC: I'm not sure if it's legal to repeal the resolution constructing the WAHQ, and even if it was...

GAR#X creates committee A.
GAR#Y uses committee A.
Repeal X repeals GAR#X.
Committee A remains to serve its purpose under GAR#Y.

It is legal to repeal. It is 100% legal to repeal. We are not talking about a committee which was made, it is a building. It is a direct reference to past resolutions, a HoC violation which should have made the original DOA.

Further believing that the WA has suffered from a distinct lack of common sense, thereby showing that simulating it is not necessarily a good learning method,

Due to these enumerated reasons,

The World Assembly hereby repeals GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly'[/box]

I'm all for it - however, none of the arguments in this repeal are valid.[/quote]

Obviously we disagree.

[Connopolis]

The reason the line is in there is valid. It is not satirical, it counters the resolutions power to teach about the WA.

It is satirical, as it implies that teaching about the WA is inherently bad, which it's not.

The decisions of the WA have already dictated educational philosophy, so another resolution designed to teach about the WA is completely pointless.

That's not a reason to repeal it. If Rights of Sapient Beings had passed (written by the delegation of Bears Armed), then I hardly doubt it would be a compelling argument to repeal it due to the fact that "[S]apient equality has been covered in prior resolutions..." The argument is a non-sequitur, and has no place in a serious repeal.

I don't want to enforce this because it is absolutely pointless and a waste of funds. The time aspect just adds to the ludicrous nature of the resolution.

OOC: My school participates in the national MUN, and the price the school itself must pay is under $350 for over 40 high school kids. The majority of the cost comes from the students, and as such, that arguments totally false.

It is legal to repeal. It is 100% legal to repeal. We are not talking about a committee which was made, it is a building. It is a direct reference to past resolutions, a HoC violation which should have made the original DOA.

That's wholly incorrect. If that was true at all, then the original MWA would be illegal, and would never have been allowed to pass. Even if it was legal to repeal the WAHQ, it would still remain to serve its purpose under other legislation.

Obviously we disagree.

Yours in duh,

[Mallorea and Riva]

The reason the line is in there is valid. It is not satirical, it counters the resolutions power to teach about the WA.

It is satirical, as it implies that teaching about the WA is inherently bad, which it's not.

While others have made that argument, the wording of my argument is different. My argument is that past legislation has already covered this issue sufficiently.

The decisions of the WA have already dictated educational philosophy, so another resolution designed to teach about the WA is completely pointless.

That's not a reason to repeal it. If Rights of Sapient Beings had passed (written by the delegation of Bears Armed), then I hardly doubt it would be a compelling argument to repeal it due to the fact that "[S]apient equality has been covered in prior resolutions..." The argument is a non-sequitur, and has no place in a serious repeal.

It has every place in a serious repeal. This is frivolous legislation.

I don't want to enforce this because it is absolutely pointless and a waste of funds. The time aspect just adds to the ludicrous nature of the resolution.

OOC: My school participates in the national MUN, and the price the school itself must pay is under $350 for over 40 high school kids. The majority of the cost comes from the students, and as such, that arguments totally false.

OOC: You could have probably done this IC. But when the school or students cannot afford the cost, and when you multiply your school by a factor of ten or ten thousand, you begin to see the problem.

It is legal to repeal. It is 100% legal to repeal. We are not talking about a committee which was made, it is a building. It is a direct reference to past resolutions, a HoC violation which should have made the original DOA.

That's wholly incorrect. If that was true at all, then the original MWA would be illegal, and would never have been allowed to pass. Even if it was legal to repeal the WAHQ, it would still remain to serve its purpose under other legislation.

It was still a HoC. And it makes no sense to say that the WAHQ no longer exists, but the building is still being used in an official function.

Further believing that the WA has suffered from a distinct lack of common sense, thereby showing that simulating it is not necessarily a good learning method,

Yours in duh,

Yours in the inevitability of my eventual success,

[Murray the Evil Skull]

"You have my support mortal! As soon as this stupid resolution is off the books the better!"

[Mallorea and Riva]

"You have my support mortal! As soon as this stupid resolution is off the books the better!"

Your support is much appreciated.

[Darenjo]

Anything with this title gets Darenjo's support.

[Goobergunchia]

Due to the passage of time, we withdraw our objection to this proposal on the grounds that it is not timely. We have not yet come to a position on its merits.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador
Citizen of the Rejected Realms

[Mallorea and Riva]

Due to the passage of time, we withdraw our objection to this proposal on the grounds that it is not timely. We have not yet come to a position on its merits.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador
Citizen of the Rejected Realms

Any and all input will be carefully considered Honored Ambassador.

[Mahaj]

YOU AGAIN

Hehehehe yes me again

Good to see you around.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Hehehehe yes me again

Good to see you around.

It's good to be back. All you intfeds have been far too prosperous in my absence. Time to start trimming the fat.

[Antarctic Connopolis]

Repeal GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly"

The World Assembly,

Noting that oftentimes resolutions are brought to the floor which are intended to further the betterment of mankind,

Believing that such resolutions are noble in nature, but not always necessary or effective,

Recognizes the following flaws in GAR 165

• The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
  affairs, meaning students are already taught about the "Festering Snakepit",
• The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,
• A resolution based around introducing a simulated conference into school districts is simply not worth the time and cost to enforce on both the national and international level,
• The clause which requires the transporting of children to the WAHQ assumes that the WAHQ will not be legislated out of existence,

Concerned that GAR#165 states, in relevant part:
"REQUIRES member nations to educate people about the role and doings of the World Assembly,"

Convinced that this clause alone provides the potential for gross misuse due to the lack of clarity regarding the term "people"; GAR#165 does not specify whether "people" refers to the populace, or a select group of individuals - as such, member-states are not required to teach the entirety of their constituents about the World Assembly, should the member-state's administration define people as the latter of the aforementioned definitions.

Adamant that the lack of clarity effectively negates the initial purpose of the resolution - "[T]o improve the world..." - and instead, creates a layer of bureaucracy, the function which is quite unclear,

Hoping to legislate upon the issue in the future in the form of a stronger, more specific resolution,

Further believing that the WA has suffered from a distinct lack of common sense, thereby showing that simulating it is not necessarily a good learning method,

Due to these enumerated reasons,

The World Assembly hereby repeals GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly'

Co-authored by [nation=short]Connopolis[/nation]

[Mallorea and Riva]

Repeal GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly"

The World Assembly,

Noting that oftentimes resolutions are brought to the floor which are intended to further the betterment of mankind,

Believing that such resolutions are noble in nature, but not always necessary or effective,

Recognizes the following flaws in GAR 165

• The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
  affairs, meaning students are already taught about the "Festering Snakepit",
• The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,
• A resolution based around introducing a simulated conference into school districts is simply not worth the time and cost to enforce on both the national and international level,
• The clause which requires the transporting of children to the WAHQ assumes that the WAHQ will not be legislated out of existence,
• The clause which dictates who must be taught about the WA is so vague that it does not specify whether "people" refers to the populace, or a select group of individuals - as such, member-states are not required to teach the entirety of their constituents about the World Assembly, should the member-state's administration define people as the latter of the aforementioned definitions.

Adamant that the lack of clarity effectively negates the initial purpose of the resolution - "[T]o improve the world..." - and instead, creates a layer of bureaucracy, the function which is quite unclear,

Hoping that future legislation upon the issue will be in the future in the form of a more specific resolution,

Further believing that the WA has suffered from a distinct lack of common sense, thereby showing that simulating it is not necessarily a good learning method,

Due to these enumerated reasons,

The World Assembly hereby repeals GAR 165, 'A Model World Assembly'

Co-authored by [nation=short]Connopolis[/nation]

[Mallorea and Riva]

Connopolis and I have combined our drafts to make a single run at this resolution. As such he is listed as a co-author, and obviously I was given permission to use the excerpts from his resolution.

[Moronist Decisions]

The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,

Would this be challenged as being a "category/strength failure" and thus implying that the original resolution is illegal (and hence make this proposal illegal for mentioning illegalities)?

Not that this stops me from agreeing with this. The Lion in Council will approve this without a doubt.

Jane Crick
Alternate Member of the Council of Morons
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Chief Representative to the World Assembly

[Mallorea and Riva]

The resolution does not effect any significant or even mild level of change upon educational systems by encouraging them to partake in a "simulation", although it may cause significant problems when nations' educational philosophies are based around other methods of learning,

Would this be challenged as being a "category/strength failure" and thus implying that the original resolution is illegal (and hence make this proposal illegal for mentioning illegalities)?

Not that this stops me from agreeing with this. The Lion in Council will approve this without a doubt.

Jane Crick
Alternate Member of the Council of Morons
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Chief Representative to the World Assembly

It is not blatant enough to warrant illegality, and is more meant to point out the fact that this resolution is pointless. Your support is much appreciated.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Any suggestions before a submission?

[Astro-Malsitari WA Seat]

I feel like this:
"The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
affairs, meaning students are already taught about the "Festering Snakepit", "
will likely be one of those things that everybody takes issue with in the debate even when there's no issue.
Just a feeling.

Also, this:
"Hoping that future legislation upon the issue will be in the future in the form of a more specific resolution,"
is somewhat awkwardly worded.

[Mahaj]

The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
affairs, meaning students are already taught about the World Assembly,

This isn't actually true.

[Mallorea and Riva]

The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
affairs, meaning students are already taught about the World Assembly,

This isn't actually true.

1. Declares that all citizens have the right to be educated, and thus be provided with the following capabilities through some sort of variation of edification:
• A familiarity with their nation’s governmental policies, processes, civics, rights and freedoms;
• A fair and impartial recollection of historical national and international events, politics and society;

Oh but it is.

[Mahaj]

The General Assembly already dictates that nations must teach their students about international and national
affairs, meaning students are already taught about the World Assembly,

This isn't actually true.

1. Declares that all citizens have the right to be educated, and thus be provided with the following capabilities through some sort of variation of edification:
• A familiarity with their nation’s governmental policies, processes, civics, rights and freedoms;
• A fair and impartial recollection of historical national and international events, politics and society;

Oh but it is.

The key word is HISTORICAL. That means not current events.

[Mallorea and Riva]

1. Declares that all citizens have the right to be educated, and thus be provided with the following capabilities through some sort of variation of edification:
• A familiarity with their nation’s governmental policies, processes, civics, rights and freedoms;
• A fair and impartial recollection of historical national and international events, politics and society;

Oh but it is.

The key word is HISTORICAL. That means not current events.

Your Model World Assembly does not teach students anything about current events within the WA. It merely is "HOPING that with the creation of MWA, more children will be interested in the WA and more educated about the WA." The students are already educated about the WA.

[Mahaj]

The key word is HISTORICAL. That means not current events.

Your Model World Assembly does not teach students anything about current events within the WA. It merely is "HOPING that with the creation of MWA, more children will be interested in the WA and more educated about the WA." The students are already educated about the WA.

Admittedly that might be a flaw. But that doesn't mean current events of the WA are covered elsewhere.

[Moronist Decisions]

• A familiarity with their nation’s governmental policies, processes, civics, rights and freedoms;

should cover the WA adequately, I suspect.

Joe Smyslow
Director of International Mayhem
Charges d'Affaires ad Interim

[Mahaj]

• A familiarity with their nation’s governmental policies, processes, civics, rights and freedoms;

should cover the WA adequately, I suspect.

Joe Smyslow
Director of International Mayhem
Charges d'Affaires ad Interim

I believe Ard already stated it wouldn't necessarily cover it.