[Passed]Repeal and Replace GA#92

[The Dark Star Republic]

"While we are generally supportive of repealing and replacing Resolution #92, the replacement offered here is so fundamentally terrible, and its author so stubbornly insistent on going ahead with it regardless of argument to the contrary, that we have come to the conclusion we will have to oppose this repeal. That's regrettable, because it would have been a good opportunity, but the risk of the repeal leading to the abject morass of delusional crap, totally devoid of common sense and written with what is becoming increasingly apparent as a total lack of understanding of how science publishing actually works, passing in its stead is too great to justify supporting the repeal.

"We look forward to future repeal/replace efforts that might gain our support."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Ainocra]

Considering I've gone to great lengths to address your concerns I fail to understand your opposition.
But it is what it is.

[Sciongrad]

Considering I've gone to great lengths to address your concerns I fail to understand your opposition.
But it is what it is.

OOC: I'm sorry, but you have a history of failing to respond to criticism of your proposals in any way more meaningful than "I disagree with your interpretation" and then being confused when you're criticized for not properly responding to the concerns of others. Now I don't mean to be harsh, but no one will take you seriously unless you decide to actually engage in some form of intellectual discussion with critics, because as it stands, your replacement is not excellent and the way you've responded to detractors is actually so ridiculous that I'd assume it was a joke if I hadn't known your tendency of behaving this way. I totally think you'd be capable of accomplishing so much more if only you were a little more receptive to opposing suggestions.

[Ainocra]

Considering I've gone to great lengths to address your concerns I fail to understand your opposition.
But it is what it is.

OOC: I'm sorry, but you have a history of failing to respond to criticism of your proposals in any way more meaningful than "I disagree with your interpretation" and then being confused you're criticized for not properly responding to the concerns of others. Now I don't mean to be harsh, but no one will take you seriously unless you decide to actually engage in some form of intellectual discussion with critics, because as it stands, your replacement is not excellent and the way you've responded to detractors is actually so ridiculous that I'd assume it was a joke if I hadn't known your tendency of behaving this way. I totally think you'd be capable of accomplishing so much more if only you were a little more receptive to opposing suggestions.

OOC:

Do you have any actual suggestion or would you prefer to flame bait at me some more? I don't mind either way.

[Imperium Anglorum]

(c) In order to provide an international forum for the free circulation of ideas any new theorems and experimental data submitted to WASP shall be disseminated to all member nations for the purpose of unbiased peer review in order to facilitate the most up to date scientific record possible.

There is an error in parallel structure in this clause. All the other clauses start with infinitives, this one starts with an 'in [x]' statement. Also, I am pretty sure it should not be 'theorems', as that is for maths, but 'theories'.

OOC: Will spend time to dissect this thing later. Out here, it is quite late.

[Ainocra]

(c) In order to provide an international forum for the free circulation of ideas any new theorems and experimental data submitted to WASP shall be disseminated to all member nations for the purpose of unbiased peer review in order to facilitate the most up to date scientific record possible.

There is an error in parallel structure in this clause. All the other clauses start with infinitives, this one starts with an 'in [x]' statement. Also, I am pretty sure it should not be 'theorems', as that is for maths, but 'theories'.

OOC: Will spend time to dissect this thing later. Out here, it is quite late.

yeah I am not really happy with that bit myself either, I am open to suggestions on how to rephrase it so it fits better with the overall proposal.
Theorems can be used for either context that's why I went with it there. Math and science are inescapably bound once you start getting into the theoretical end so I felt it went well.

Thanks for the feedback, I look forward to seeing your thoughts on it later.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: I'm sorry, but you have a history of failing to respond to criticism of your proposals in any way more meaningful than "I disagree with your interpretation" and then being confused you're criticized for not properly responding to the concerns of others. Now I don't mean to be harsh, but no one will take you seriously unless you decide to actually engage in some form of intellectual discussion with critics, because as it stands, your replacement is not excellent and the way you've responded to detractors is actually so ridiculous that I'd assume it was a joke if I hadn't known your tendency of behaving this way. I totally think you'd be capable of accomplishing so much more if only you were a little more receptive to opposing suggestions.

OOC:

Do you have any actual suggestion or would you prefer to flame bait at me some more? I don't mind either way.

OOC: You do understand that his point - which is entirely accurate - is that when we make "actual suggestions" you completely ignore them by feigning ignorance? For example, I've brought up open-access publishing several times, and instead of either attempting an accommodation, or making an argument against it - which would be equally intellectually respectable - you've simply flailed around repeatedly saying that you don't know what I'm saying.

I'll also point out that when I asked you whether you were willing to rewrite the resolution, you said no: so to claim we should be providing substantive suggestions is at least a little duplicitous on your part.

[Ainocra]

ooc:

I'll say it again

I have asked for input repeatedly, If you have an issue with something in the replacement then put forth some language that fixes it.
If I can't find fault with it I'll be happy to add it in.

At this point i feel that you are being disingenuous considering that I have taken steps to alleviate your concerns repeatedly .

There is still plenty of time at this point, the repeal won't go to vote until tomorrow's minor update.

[The Dark Star Republic]

I have asked for input repeatedly

OOC: And I have repeatedly said that WASP projects should be open-access.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade

Having looked at the resolution and the resolution to repeal the resolution, we do not believe that the repeals arguments are strong enough to actually warrant a repeal of the resolution.

The goal of coordination is ... uh coordination. I'm not sure this is either brain surgery or rocket science.

WASP doesn't fund research at all. It funds collection and dissemination as well as cooperation of groups across international borders. I don't see how funding groups can use WASP as a leverage to stop particular research projects. Voluntary funding is a cornerstone of all WA agencies. To quote that newly abused saying, "it's what they do."

You realize that you can always add new functionality to an existing agency.

Given this, we are declined to support this repeal at this or at any other time.

Even though we personally feel stung by the particular committee.

Respectfully submitted

Friar John

[The Sotoan Union]

What is the WAGF?

[Ainocra]

([url=http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o18/tzor/th_imageedit_71_8516110628_zps4jvothrn.gif]Image)[/url]

(Image)

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade

Having looked at the resolution and the resolution to repeal the resolution, we do not believe that the repeals arguments are strong enough to actually warrant a repeal of the resolution.

The goal of coordination is ... uh coordination. I'm not sure this is either brain surgery or rocket science.

WASP doesn't fund research at all. It funds collection and dissemination as well as cooperation of groups across international borders. I don't see how funding groups can use WASP as a leverage to stop particular research projects. Voluntary funding is a cornerstone of all WA agencies. To quote that newly abused saying, "it's what they do."

You realize that you can always add new functionality to an existing agency.

Given this, we are declined to support this repeal at this or at any other time.

Even though we personally feel stung by the particular committee.

Respectfully submitted

Friar John

Adding new duties to it is not the same as fixing it's flawed model. It should be noted that if the repeal does pass that the WASP will continue to function as it is referenced by several other resolutions that have done precisely as you suggested. The thrust of this is to improve WASP with a new and somewhat better written resolution. The replacement draft regrettably cannot be submitted until the original is repealed.

What is the WAGF?

WA General Fund

[Ainocra]

I have asked for input repeatedly

OOC: And I have repeatedly said that WASP projects should be open-access.

ooc:

They are open access, if you want to assist in or review them under the replacement all you have to do is say so.

[LeaveAlone]

Replacement Draft

World Assembly Science Program

Category: Education and Creativity
Area of Effect: Educational
Proposed by: Ainocra

We the collected nations of this assembly,
Understand that science is the pursuit of knowledge, and declaring that this knowledge should be used for the collective good of all sapient species. Noting that through the applied use of scientific knowledge we can shape a better existence for ourselves and our posterity. Believing that such knowledge should be freely shared so that all benefit from it, we do hereby establish the World Assembly Science Program. (Hereafter known as WASP)

Defines for the purposes of this act:
Scientific literature as comprising scientific publications such as journals or books that report or review original empirical and theoretical work or research in the natural and social sciences or within a given scientific field.

1) Hereby tasks the WASP with the following mandate;

(a) To collect and archive copies of any and all publicly available scientific literature with the aim of preserving and protecting it for use now and in the future excepting only that which is illegal under extant WA law.
(b) To disseminate to any citizen of any member nation of this assembly any of this literature upon request excepting only that which is illegal under extant national or sub national law.
(c) In order to provide an international forum for the free circulation of ideas any new theorems and experimental data submitted to WASP shall be disseminated to all member nations for the purpose of unbiased peer review in order to facilitate the most up to date scientific record possible.
(e) To coordinate with the ULC in order to maintain multiple and redundant backup copies of this archive at various locations to prevent loss due to a disaster or other calamity.
(f) To work with the ULC to ensure that only relevant data necessary to the scientific process makes its way into the archive in order to prevent confusion and excess.

2) Directs the WASP to upon request; coordinate research activities between any national, sub national, corporate or individual entities within the WA by facilitating the establishment of a joint program to encourage, develop and assist in cooperative research and development activities in science and technology including but not limited to

(a) Coordinated joint research/development projects, studies, and investigations;
(b) Joint scientific courses, workshops, conferences and symposia;
(c) The free exchange of science, technology, information, and documentation;
(d) The free exchange of scientists, specialists, and researchers;
(e) The free exchanges or sharing of equipment, materials and facilities;
(f) All in the context of cooperative research activities in order to expand the boundaries of knowledge for all concerned.

3) Directs the GAO to provide the WASP with whatever resources are needed to accomplish these goals.

4) Forbids the utilization of the WASP for the deliberate bypassing of intellectual property laws.

Looking over the original, which I believe deserves full mention in this debate, and have distributed to all involved parties; -

Cooperation in Science Act
A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts.

Category: Education and Creativity
Area of Effect: Educational
Proposed by: Gotham Network

Description: BE IT RESOLVED THAT THESE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLED

CONSIDERING scientific research and advancement to be vital to the well-being, progress and development of sapientkind,

ASTONISHED that no provisions have been made for the international sharing and coordination of scientific research,

I. HEREBY task the WA Scientific Programme with the following responsibilities:

1) To collect, disseminate, and review such research as the governments and scientists of its member nations choose to release to public scrutiny, in compliance with all appropriate national and international laws regarding intellectual property and national security;

2) To coordinate scientific studies and research projects of international scope, which scientists from many WA nations may choose to participate in under the auspices of the WASP and in concert with their nations of origin or residence, such projects to be funded directly by grants from the governments, public research institutions, privately owned foundations, corporations, or other concerned entities, and donations from concerned individuals, at the discretion of these individuals and organizations;

3) To provide a public forum for free and unhindered debate on scientific research and issues which scientists from all member nations may participate in.

II. STRONGLY URGE all member states to contribute to scientific research and advancement, to the best of their ability, and to release any and all scientific research conducted under the auspices of their governments and public bodies for consideration by the WASP, save only for studies deemed directly related to national security and similar considerations.

Votes For: 5,033
Votes Against: 997

Implemented Sun May 2 2010

[WAR92 on NS] [WAR92 on NSwiki] [Official Debate Topic]

- I am concerned with your draft policy and cannot cast my vote for or against the repeal at this time.

The proposed replacement places the responsibility of funding, nay requirement, entirely upon the GAO. This is a concern to me, as it forces all nations to participate, and some of our smaller ones, such as my own, already have a struggling economy they need to focus on first and foremost. I propose funding be left up to the individual nations, as it is already, but all funding be provided to the WASP as a whole, which is then tasked with distributing those funds at it's own discretion, with the clause that it be directed solely towards the funding of scientific research, and the involved scientists/researchers pay checks... can't have them going hungry.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: And I have repeatedly said that WASP projects should be open-access.

ooc:

They are open access, if you want to assist in or review them under the replacement all you have to do is say so.

OOC: No, they're not. There's no requirement of any sort relating to publication!

[Ainocra]

Replacement Draft

Looking over the original, which I believe deserves full mention in this debate, and have distributed to all involved parties; -

Cooperation in Science Act
A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts.

Category: Education and Creativity
Area of Effect: Educational
Proposed by: Gotham Network

Description: BE IT RESOLVED THAT THESE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLED

CONSIDERING scientific research and advancement to be vital to the well-being, progress and development of sapientkind,

ASTONISHED that no provisions have been made for the international sharing and coordination of scientific research,

I. HEREBY task the WA Scientific Programme with the following responsibilities:

1) To collect, disseminate, and review such research as the governments and scientists of its member nations choose to release to public scrutiny, in compliance with all appropriate national and international laws regarding intellectual property and national security;

2) To coordinate scientific studies and research projects of international scope, which scientists from many WA nations may choose to participate in under the auspices of the WASP and in concert with their nations of origin or residence, such projects to be funded directly by grants from the governments, public research institutions, privately owned foundations, corporations, or other concerned entities, and donations from concerned individuals, at the discretion of these individuals and organizations;

3) To provide a public forum for free and unhindered debate on scientific research and issues which scientists from all member nations may participate in.

II. STRONGLY URGE all member states to contribute to scientific research and advancement, to the best of their ability, and to release any and all scientific research conducted under the auspices of their governments and public bodies for consideration by the WASP, save only for studies deemed directly related to national security and similar considerations.

Votes For: 5,033
Votes Against: 997

Implemented Sun May 2 2010

[WAR92 on NS] [WAR92 on NSwiki] [Official Debate Topic]

- I am concerned with your draft policy and cannot cast my vote for or against the repeal at this time.

The proposed replacement places the responsibility of funding, nay requirement, entirely upon the GAO. This is a concern to me, as it forces all nations to participate, and some of our smaller ones, such as my own, already have a struggling economy they need to focus on first and foremost. I propose funding be left up to the individual nations, as it is already, but all funding be provided to the WASP as a whole, which is then tasked with distributing those funds at it's own discretion, with the clause that it be directed solely towards the funding of scientific research, and the involved scientists/researchers pay checks... can't have them going hungry.

Nations are not required to fund the GAO, it is entirely voluntary.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Nations are not required to fund the GAO, it is entirely voluntary.

OOC: No, contributions are mandatory.

4. Provides that national donations to the General Fund shall be assessed annually by the GAO, according to donors' national wealth and ability to give;

[Ainocra]

No they aren't

1. Declares that the World Assembly shall be funded by donations from member states; the WA will not levy taxes directly upon the citizens or residents of any nation;

[The Dark Star Republic]

No they aren't

At the risk of turning this into a panto, oh yes they are.

If you read the resolution, the "donations" are actually mandatory

[Ainocra]

Even if they are, them this replacement will have no effect on the donations that a nation makes to the fund due to the portion to cited initially.







ooc:

must resist urge to bug bunny......

[LeaveAlone]

Even if they are, them this replacement will have no effect on the donations that a nation makes to the fund due to the portion to cited initially.







ooc:

must resist urge to bug bunny......

I'm sorry, but my concerns stand. I had assumed it would be a minor change... Forcing a commitment from the GAO could trickle down and force an increase to the required 'donation' amount. What is wrong with making the WASP responsible for the distribution of funds? would such an implementation not eliminate concerns regarding funding for personal gains entirely?

[Ainocra]

The current funding model allows Nations or corporate entities to cut off funding and therefore the research itself. The new model would effectively take that out of the equation while allowing cooperative research to proceed unimpeded. Furthermore the old model makes no guarantee of funding to the WASP so it could conceivably be shut down entirely by a lack of funding.

I wouldn't be against the idea of nations or entities donating to WASP if they desire to do so, but I feel that leaving it's funding based entirely on the largesse of others could hinder it in the future.

[Defwa]

The current funding model allows Nations or corporate entities to cut off funding and therefore the research itself. The new model would effectively take that out of the equation while allowing cooperative research to proceed unimpeded. Furthermore the old model makes no guarantee of funding to the WASP so it could conceivably be shut down entirely by a lack of funding.

I wouldn't be against the idea of nations or entities donating to WASP if they desire to do so, but I feel that leaving it's funding based entirely on the largesse of others could hinder it in the future.

We've had it declared multiple times by the secretariat that the WAGF is not optional and wince WASP is funded by the WAGF, nations cannot choose to deprive it of funding nor do nations have any control of what is done with their money once it is forcibly donated.

[Ainocra]

Currently WASP is not funded by the WAGF. Under the proposed replacement it would be, which we feel would be superior.

such projects to be funded directly by grants from the governments, public research institutions, privately owned foundations, corporations, or other concerned entities, and donations from concerned individuals, at the discretion of these individuals and organizations;

[LeaveAlone]

As it would appear The Star Empire of of Ainocra is unwilling to consider a fair and considerate approach to funding, the Principality of LeaveAlone is left with little choice but to vote against the initial repeal.

We are still open to change however, and will monitor this issue closely.