OOC post.
Sorry I didn't get back to you in any kind of timely manner. Things happening in real life + combatting some kind of headcold or mild flu = not a lot of energy for something like NationStates. I technically shouldn't be online even now, but needing to be upright for a bit makes Internet tempting...
Kranostav wrote:Astronomical Data Repository Act
Could easily drop the "act" from it, without it suffering at all...
Intending to create a public database that will document and record unique astronomical data for the purpose of education and advancing astronomic study,
This whole thing should be started with "The World Assembly" or "The General Assembly", so that you have something that intends or is cognisant, and so on. Also, "document and record" sounds like the WA committee doing astronomical observations.
Cognisant of the need to compile astronomical information while not infringing on sovereign rights of nations to maintain secrecy in military and similar affairs,
What's the need? As in, why does astronomical information need to be collected in one place? Especially given that many WA nations don't exist in the same universes with one another.
This august World Assembly, in hopes of advancing education and astronomic study, hereby:
It's not "august", unless they've redefined "august" to mean "fighting dirty and being rude". And in any case you should start the whole thing with "The World Assembly". You could then replace this all with just "Hereby".
Why on earth would you make your main clauses into list points?
1. Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the sake of this proposal as information regarding celestial and planetary attributes, astronomical features, especially including extremely unique information/data, and the stellar coordinates containing these items,
I can't really get my mind to accept describing stars and planets as "items". Also, what's wrong with using "celestial bodies"? That would include stars, planets, dwarf planets, planetoids, asteroids, comets and indeed anything that's "up there" and noticeable enough to have some need to be recorded. It would also exclude artificial satellites, such as space stations (in RL the ISS) or spy satellites (that of course no-one will admit to having).
I would also like to ask what's the difference between "attributes" and "features"? If the latter refers to actual planetary surface formations, that's more geographical information, not astronomical. I understand that we use astronomical gadgetry to get such information, especially in RL, but would you call, say, the Alps an "astronomical feature"?
And what counts as "extremely unique information/data"?
2. Establishes an agency within the World Assembly Scientific Programme (WASP) named ‘Astronomic Science and Technical Research Organization’ (ASTRO) and tasks it with organizing collection for, administering over, and maintaining a database of astronomical data,
I think the word "information" is missing between the words "organizing collection". Also what's "over" doing there? It'd read more fluently as "...tasks it with administering, maintaining and organizing information collection for a database...". Though I'm still confused with what administering it's doing.
3. Urges nations to submit to ASTRO any relevant astronomical data they may posses involving various items defined above,
Why only
nations? If RL astronomical discoveries were only done by nation states, we'd still be living like it was year 1618 or so. Amateurs organizations, commercially sponsored professionals, various universities and just plain private citizens have contributed massive amounts of astronomical data to the common pool of science ever since people first looked up at the weird bright dots that come out at night (I know clause 4 mentions them, I'll get to that later). Also, think of something like ESA, which is a multinational space agency - would just one nation saying "nope" be enough to stop any of the data collected from being donated? And what if such an organization only had one WA nation involved, the others being non-WA nations, would the WA nation be allowed to submit the data even if the non-WA nations all said "no"?
a. Contributing nations may confidentially donate to ensure any identifying characteristics are not associated with donated information,
Except, you know, if said nation exists on a planet that circles a certain star and they share the info they've collected of the star, and are required to include "the stellar coordinates containing these items" as the definition says, of course everyone looking at the database will know that said nation exists on a planet that circles said star. Also, I would think that you'd get
more donors of data for an international databank, if you let the donators that are
not commercial ventures, to have their name(s) included in the data. Think of something like NASA in Real Life; they probably wouldn't want to give any of their data to this thing, unless the data carried the "information donated by NASA" notation.
b. Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,
So Nation A in Universe A has submitted information about their own sun's neighbouring star to the database. Nation B in Universe B has found that information useful enough since they have a similar star in their stellar neighbourhood, and have included a few lines of text about it in their elementary school level's science books, correctly crediting the database as the source of the info.
Then Nation A in Universe A discovers that the star in question has a planet with Nation C orbiting around it, and that Nation C is interstellar and known to attack planets capable of supporting global civilizations. So Nation A wants to ban all dissemination of the data in the database about the star, since such detailed observations and the stellar coordinates given would mean that Nation C could put two and two together and get that the home star of Nation A must have a planet around it that the observations were made from, thus compromising the safety of Nation A.
Does that then mean that Nation B in Universe B, completely uninvolved in anything to do with the possible conflict or, indeed, even the universe, should send Men In Black to keep students from reading the few sentences in their science books, and teachers from teaching that such a star exists somewhere? Or would WASP send the MIBs?
4. Permits non-governmental entities to contribute astronomical data to ASTRO and retain the right to negotiate for appropriate compensation,
...so does that mean that WA would pay them for the info?
a. Contributing non-governmental entities shall acquire approval from the national government, in which they acquired the data, before submission so as to prevent the release of sensitive or confidential data,
...so I wouldn't be allowed to share the photo I took all on my own (
and had it developed back in Finland), of the Solar Eclipse of 1999, in Bulgaria, with the database, without Bulgaria's permission? Why? They let me into the country knowing that I was there to see the solar eclipse in the first place. And yeah, it says "so as to prevent sensitive/confidential blah blah", but it doesn't actually say that the data needs to
be something that's sensitive or confidential.
Something that's televized around the world (
like the solar eclipse that was so exciting to USA peeps recently) or printed in newspapers and widely-spread magazines (
to the tune of National Geographic magazine) shouldn't count for this clause. If it's "data about an internationally known phenomenon", I wouldn't include it in this requirement. And in any case I'd exclude registered astronomical organizations from checking with the government, maybe only urge them to do so. I mean, their governments know that they exist, since they gave the permission for them to become a registered organization in the first place.
Maybe instead put it in a way that lets a nation withdraw submitted data from the database, when it was submitted by non-governmental source,
if and only if the nation can convince the WASP subcommittee that the data would hurt their secrets or security.
b. Notes that parent clause in no way forcibly requires private organizations to donate any data that they would otherwise use for monetary gain
So they can't do both? Like, say, someone uses a good quality Meade telescope (
and don't joke about "made in China", that's a fairly new event) on their own backyard to take a great picture about the Moon's terminator when it's almost but not completely full. They offer the pic to the local newspaper and get some money for it, and then have it printed in a series of posters they can sell. They would then want to contribute the picture to the database, but if they did, would that mean they had to stop selling the posters?
5. Maintains that this proposal in no manner allows or promotes trespassing on national property, specifically that of stellar coordinates in the data submitted,
"Not allowing" sounds like "intending to stop". So without a WA army, even space-based one, being possible, how's that going to work out? I'd drop the allow entirely. And also add a requirement about obeying the local international laws and conventions, so thatsome space aliens couldn't come and make the Moon into a commercial tourist attraction if it's under the local (Earth's) international "do not commercialize" outer space treaty, that all the Earth nations are bound to.
6. Forbids the sale and redistribution of data specifically taken from ASTRO in exchange for payment, excluding the original founder(s) of data.
Already asked about the "must they then stop selling posters" bit earlier. Consider it to refer to this clause as well.