[PASSED] Repeal "Nautical Pilotage Act"

[Mousebumples]

In the stead of Moronist Decisions: AT VOTE BUMP!

I think I can safely speak for The Lion when I encourage an AYE vote on this upcoming resolution.

[Ossitania]

We have lodged our vote in favour of the proposal.

[Delegate Vinage]

I, Lothar Prolark, World Assembly Delegate and Media Minister of Europeia will be voting AYE on this proposal after a 6/0 internal vote. After talking to the author and co-author we feel, as a region, ready to vote on this and see this proposal repealed as to remove the following:

1. Declares that a subsection of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC), the Universal Nautical Institute of Buoyage Oversight and Transportation shall design a set of buoyage and mark systems that shall be used in the pilotage of vessels at sea to warn travelers of hazards;

That bolded part equals U.N.I.B.O.T. which, I feel, is something that has managed to get around the branding rules for proposals. Impressive nobody picked up on it before but, well..... we've caught you now. Secondly the NOTES and QUESTIONS sections sway it for me.

[Sanctaria]

That bolded part equals U.N.I.B.O.T. which, I feel, is something that has managed to get around the branding rules for proposals. Impressive nobody picked up on it before but, well..... we've caught you now. Secondly the NOTES and QUESTIONS sections sway it for me.

Actually we've known it for a long time now. Since it was at vote actually. Annoying, isn't it.

[Opaloka]

Hmmm, it would appear that this should have been ruled illegal & that there are flaws. Unibots absence is noted, therefore in spite of the lack of a replacement on this occasion the W&SG votes FOR.

[Linux and the X]

That bolded part equals U.N.I.B.O.T. which, I feel, is something that has managed to get around the branding rules for proposals. Impressive nobody picked up on it before but, well..... we've caught you now. Secondly the NOTES and QUESTIONS sections sway it for me.

Actually we've known it for a long time now. Since it was at vote actually. Annoying, isn't it.

Actually, we find it quite amusing, and indeed that it is now illegal is why we cannot vote to repeal it. Although, then again, "Unibot" no longer exists, so it would technically not be branding. If we can get a Secretariat ruling agreeing to this we will be willing to vote in favour.

Hmmm, it would appear that this should have been ruled illegal

At the time, there was no rule against committees whose initialism happened to form a nation's name. That rule was, IIRC, created as a response to this resolution.

[Cowardly Pacifists]

We vote FOR the repeal of this convoluted, pointless resolution.

The first repeal argument was enough for us: the author of the Nautical Pilotage Act doesn't even understand the meaning of the term "pilotage:" using it to refer to vessels ("assure the protection of World Assembly pilotage from harm, vandalism or theft"), then an activity ("citizens of a member nation do not have the right or duty to pilotage an area that is within an Oversight-Zone") and finally to some sort of regulation ("Urges member nations to properly pilotage their own coastlines").

We find it despicable that the NPA author would work to enact such a bill without even understanding the activity on which he was legislating. We find it doubly despicable that Unibot seems to have pursued this legislation for the sole purpose of his own conceit and egotism.

This travesty should be repealed so that nations may learn for Unibot's bad example.

[Datavia]

Well, yes. Indeed the orginal resolution is in need of a bit of rewrite. Therefore, Datavia votes FOR this repeal.

[Discoveria]

Discoveria has examined the resolution and its target and is confident that the repeal deserves full support. We urge all WA nations to vote FOR the repeal.

(Discoveria is less convinced by some of the lesser arguments in the repeal but for the sake of brevity these are discussed in the SPOILER below.)

What we agree with:
1. The word "pilotage" is used incorrectly in the original resolution. A fatal error on the author's part.
2. No-one is responsible for placing buoys etc. in Oversight Zones. A fatal, um, oversight.

What we disagree with:
1. Discoveria does not necessarily see a problem with the ability of member nations to protect buoys etc. in Oversight Zones. A single frigate randomly patrolling international waters would be sufficient to meet the original resolution's requirement (which does not specify how well the buoys must be protected).
2. The business about having to use unregulated pilots or sail without pilots. 'Not having a right or duty' to do something, is not the same as being forbidden from doing it. (We blame sloppy wording on Unibot's part.)

[Soviet Argonia]

Soviet Argonia has a nagging question.

Who's responsibility is it to protect member nations from non-member nations ships? (Hostilities are not required. As we took it to mean that non-member ships will not be watched. How will this prevent wrecks, and such? Shouldn't all ships be monitored, much like the airways?)

[Flibbleites]

Actually we've known it for a long time now. Since it was at vote actually. Annoying, isn't it.

Actually, we find it quite amusing, and indeed that it is now illegal is why we cannot vote to repeal it. Although, then again, "Unibot" no longer exists, so it would technically not be branding. If we can get a Secretariat ruling agreeing to this we will be willing to vote in favour.

Hmmm, it would appear that this should have been ruled illegal

At the time, there was no rule against committees whose initialism happened to form a nation's name. That rule was, IIRC, created as a response to this resolution.

Actually, if I recall correctly, it would have been ruled as Branding had a mod spotted it before it came up for vote despite it not being expressly prohibited.

[Tibberiria]

A logical proposal. We vote for.

[ReVaQ]

We have lodged our vote in favour of the proposal.

[Novus Niciae]

It is in need of a rewrite I think.

[CalmDownistan]

Voting FOR; what could possibly go wrong?

[Retired WerePenguins]

Three small penguin enter the chamber and approach the podium. One of the three starts to adddress the assembly.

"Don't touch me! While the whole notion of bouys in the ocean can be a good thing, and believe me, I often like to go out with the bouys, the representative for Moronist Decisions, in their resolution repeal brings up many valid points about the many problems this resolution has. We therefore vote in favor of this repeal. We encourage others to do the same."

[Damanucus]

We have registered our vote for the repeal. But, just for the esteemed ambassador from Delegate Vinage:

1. Declares that a subsection of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC), the Universal Nautical Institute of Buoyage Oversight and Transportation shall design a set of buoyage and mark systems that shall be used in the pilotage of vessels at sea to warn travelers of hazards;

That bolded part equals U.N.I.B.O.T. which, I feel, is something that has managed to get around the branding rules for proposals. Impressive nobody picked up on it before but, well..... we've caught you now.

If what my predecessor Horgen Dush told me is correct, the delegation from Unibot were known, albeit by a small few, to do this type of thing with a good number of their resolutions, both here and in the previous Bureaucracy That Cannot Be Named. (I may, of course, be working off faulty information.)

Stephanie Orman
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

[Lemmingtopias]

The Atlantis delegacy is in favour of the resolution and has voted for, pending a last minute check on regional voting.

[Scientific Idealists]

The Federation of Scientific Idealists agrees that the absence of a clearly defined party responsible for installing/maintaining safeguards for vessels in international waters renders the original legislation unenforceable. Hence, we feel that repeal of the act is prudent at this time.

[Hewhay]

what could possibly go wrong?

Famous last words, my friend.

That being said, the Colony of Hewhay votes FOR.

[Pollepao]

The Republic of Pollepao has to agree with this repeals argument, and votes FOR.

[Philimbesi]

I rise to cast my vote FOR this repeal. It's high time we got rid of U.N.I.B.O.T as it would appear that U.N.I.B.O.T is simply made up of gnomes that incompetent, arrogant, and above all terrible dressers. The gnomes of U.N.I.B.O.T should be relocated away from each other so that they might be realigned to the non-U.N.I.B.O.T ideals and made more fashion forward.

Nigel S Youlkin
USP Ambassador

[Damanucus]

It's high time we got rid of U.N.I.B.O.T as it would appear that U.N.I.B.O.T is simply made up of gnomes that incompetent, arrogant, and above all terrible dressers.

(OOC: The intention never was to end the list on a high note, was it?)

[Sanctaria]

It's high time we got rid of U.N.I.B.O.T as it would appear that U.N.I.B.O.T is simply made up of gnomes that incompetent, arrogant, and above all terrible dressers.

(OOC: The intention never was to end the list on a high note, was it?)

Crimes against fashion is of the most heinous crimes of all.

[Damanucus]

(OOC: The intention never was to end the list on a high note, was it?)

Crimes against fashion is of the most heinous crimes of all.

(OOC: I sense another resolution currently in the works...

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.)