[PASSED] Repeal "Protecting Personal Data"

[Marxist Germany]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

OOC:Spamming is against forum rules.

[Wallenburg]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

OOC:Trolling and spamming are against forum rules.

So is trollnaming.

[Jacquitaine]

Data is worth a hell of a lot of money and my corporations need some cash. Bring on the repeal!

[Barbariax]

I think that this new repeal resolution is indicative of many resolutions I have seen in the past: a resolution is approved, and then a few weeks later a new resolution comes up to repeal the previous resolution on some minor technicality, concluding that, until the initial resolution can be fixed, it must be repealed. However, I have yet to see a new version of the resolution appear with the changes included. So I am voting NO on this resolution because, while it contains many flaws, it is better than we keep what we have and fix that than to just scrap everything claiming that something better will come along, when history proves that it never does.

OOC: Replacement Draft thread

Does Marxist Germany support this repeal of their own prior resolution?

[Kenmoria]

OOC: Replacement Draft thread

Does Marxist Germany support this repeal of their own prior resolution?

(OOC: Yes, a repeal and redraft has been given support.)

[Thal Spyae]

I agree. Personal protection does not allow for state control and must be regulated by national standards.

[Barbariax]

Does Marxist Germany support this repeal of their own prior resolution?

(OOC: Yes, a repeal and redraft has been given support.)

Barbariax thanks Kenmoria for this assistance, however mildly neutral intent is not the same as clear positive affirmation, and Barbariax would further prefer clear communication from the original author itself.

[Marxist Germany]

(OOC: Yes, a repeal and redraft has been given support.)

Barbariax thanks Kenmoria for this assistance, however mildly neutral intent is not the same as clear positive affirmation, and Barbariax would further prefer clear communication from the original author itself.

OOC:I support this repeal and have voted in favour of it.

[Umpus]

The arguments made in this repeal are entirely unconvincing, and have little relevance to the actual effects of this resolution.

"Please,elaborate."

I vote agains the repeal as it preying on fear. We have criminal investigation and evidence collection for the reason of discovering the truth. We have laws for a reason. Protecting the privacy has nothing to do with it.

If that is the case, how we can be sure that our personal data cannot be manipulated, taken out of contest and used against us by the data holders.

I say “Nay”

"The hell does this even mean?"

[Wallenburg]

The arguments made in this repeal are entirely unconvincing, and have little relevance to the actual effects of this resolution.

"Please,elaborate."

The first pair of arguments is of no substantive relevance, since no resolution on the collection of personal data can fully handle such edge cases. In one case, it is impossible to distinguish between entities that do not have access to consumers' ages because they do not need those ages and entities that do not have such access because of some ulterior motive. In the other, child abuse is handled by child abuse legislation, and leveraging one danger to children against another in this manner is, quite frankly, disgusting.

The second pair of arguments simply does not convince me of having any value. Civil courts should not be able to access personal data belonging to a person who does not wish it to be made public.

[South World]

This is getting ludicrous. Pass a resolution by 4 to 1 ratio and a week later repeal it by a 4 to
1 ratio.

[Araraukar]

This is getting ludicrous. Pass a resolution by 4 to 1 ratio and a week later repeal it by a 4 to
1 ratio.

OOC: That wouldn't happen if people didn't vote to pass bad resolutions.

[Umpus]

The first pair of arguments is of no substantive relevance, since no resolution on the collection of personal data can fully handle such edge cases.

"That. is. why. there. is. a. fucking. repeal.''

In one case, it is impossible to distinguish between entities that do not have access to consumers' ages because they do not need those ages and entities that do not have such access because of some ulterior motive.

"See my last statement.''

In the other, child abuse is handled by child abuse legislation,

''we dont need police,crime is handled by the law."

The second pair of arguments simply does not convince me of having any value. Civil courts should not be able to access personal data belonging to a person who does not wish it to be made public.

"keeping verbal secrets from a judge is illegal,why not digital ones?"

[Empire of Krownz]

Can we all take into account one person for (Pallaith) has nearly the same number of votes as every non-delegate against

[Araraukar]

Can we all take into account one person for (Pallaith) has nearly the same number of votes as every non-delegate against

OOC: Not without radically changing the way delegate votes work, and unfortunately that kind of change would likely be voted down by the big regions (because it's too big a change to most likely get implemented without asking players' opinion).

[Kenmoria]

This is getting ludicrous. Pass a resolution by 4 to 1 ratio and a week later repeal it by a 4 to
1 ratio.

(OOC: This is the way the GA works. You pass, then repeal, then replace, then possibly repeal that. Luckily, I think there is a better, and hopefully more long-lived replacement drafting here.)

“I’m glad to see this is getting support, and hopefully it won’t take long before we have this legislation removed.”

[Chairman Cities]

Good Morning As The US-EU Governments Begin The Tuesday Morning Grind Not Before The President Made It Clear Of The Hick-Ups Goines On At The World Assembly There Needs To Be A More Standard Process Of Passing Resouloutions. The US-EU Governments Will Not Vote Again On The Same Issue

[Marxist Germany]

Good Morning As The US-EU Governments Begin The Tuesday Morning Grind Not Before The President Made It Clear Of The Hick-Ups Goines On At The World Assembly There Needs To Be A More Standard Process Of Passing Resouloutions. The US-EU Governments Will Not Vote Again On The Same Issue

OOC:Punctuation and grammar are missing.

[Dirty Americans]

This is getting ludicrous. Pass a resolution by 4 to 1 ratio and a week later repeal it by a 4 to
1 ratio.

It's been this way for years now. Actually it's always been this way.
It's practically tradition.
I hate tradition.

[Bananoonza]

Have any of you actually read the resolution and the repeal?

Ones the personal data is in the public domain... it can be manipulated by anyone for any agenda.

For example, the corporal punishment of naughty young baboons in Bananoonza school system is widely accepted and supported in Bananoonza. It help the youth Baboons to prepare for the adult life. After all, what is a 100 lashes with a wet noodle??? Many nations see that as a child abuse. To us, the Nobel Baboons, it is a right of passage. Tradition that we hold dear. Culminating in “the night of the great banana fight.” Many nations have tried to twist and slander our traditions as “Barbarian” and “Perverse,” in the court of public opinion. The evidence... “al-dante” noodles, were presented. We agree that, maybe a bit harsh... but compared to the limb cutting done by others.... to a hungry child, pushed to the brink by society, accused of stealing food to feed its siblings? Accused by a corporate profiling and data collection.... subsidized by the religious police.

I, say nay.

Is the resolution perfect, many ask? Well... it may not be. But is a step in the right direction. We should not Dismiss it lightly, just because it is “not perfect.” Let it see in action before we vote it out.

[Umpus]

Good Morning As The US-EU Governments Begin The Tuesday Morning Grind Not Before The President Made It Clear Of The Hick-Ups Goines On At The World Assembly There Needs To Be A More Standard Process Of Passing Resouloutions. The US-EU Governments Will Not Vote Again On The Same Issue

OOC:oldspeak,please.

[Kenmoria]

Have any of you actually read the resolution and the repeal?

Ones the personal data is in the public domain... it can be manipulated by anyone for any agenda.

For example, the corporal punishment of naughty young baboons in Bananoonza school system is widely accepted and supported in Bananoonza. It help the youth Baboons to prepare for the adult life. After all, what is a 100 lashes with a wet noodle??? Many nations see that as a child abuse. To us, the Nobel Baboons, it is a right of passage. Tradition that we hold dear. Culminating in “the night of the great banana fight.” Many nations have tried to twist and slander our traditions as “Barbarian” and “Perverse,” in the court of public opinion. The evidence... “al-dante” noodles, were presented. We agree that, maybe a bit harsh... but compared to the limb cutting done by others.... to a hungry child, pushed to the brink by society, accused of stealing food to feed its siblings? Accused by a corporate profiling and data collection.... subsidized by the religious police.

I, say nay.

Is the resolution perfect, many ask? Well... it may not be. But is a step in the right direction. We should not Dismiss it lightly, just because it is “not perfect.” Let it see in action before we vote it out.

“I’m afraid that I must disagree with your reasoning in this instance. Your primary argue,ent appears to be that the resolution is a step in the right direction, and does not need to be perfect to fulfill its role. However, it is also true that a non-perfect legislation blocks potentially flawing legislation from ever passing, so this prevents further steps to protect data.”

“Indeed, the authoring delegation are currently in the process of passing a hopefully more reasoned piece of law. The proposals addresses most, soon to be all, of the arguments presented within this repeal, and therefore should be able to withstand the test of time. The truth is, a flawed resolution will eventually be repealed; it’s just a matter of time, and I would rather have it be repealed sooner rather than later.”

[Separatist Peoples]

"Please,elaborate."

The first pair of arguments is of no substantive relevance, since no resolution on the collection of personal data can fully handle such edge cases. In one case, it is impossible to distinguish between entities that do not have access to consumers' ages because they do not need those ages and entities that do not have such access because of some ulterior motive. In the other, child abuse is handled by child abuse legislation, and leveraging one danger to children against another in this manner is, quite frankly, disgusting.

The second pair of arguments simply does not convince me of having any value. Civil courts should not be able to access personal data belonging to a person who does not wish it to be made public.

"So persons bearing evidence should not be required to disclose it during discovery? Comply with injunctions? Subpoenas? That is a concerning position, ambassador."

[Wallenburg]

The first pair of arguments is of no substantive relevance, since no resolution on the collection of personal data can fully handle such edge cases. In one case, it is impossible to distinguish between entities that do not have access to consumers' ages because they do not need those ages and entities that do not have such access because of some ulterior motive. In the other, child abuse is handled by child abuse legislation, and leveraging one danger to children against another in this manner is, quite frankly, disgusting.

The second pair of arguments simply does not convince me of having any value. Civil courts should not be able to access personal data belonging to a person who does not wish it to be made public.

"So persons bearing evidence should not be required to disclose it during discovery? Comply with injunctions? Subpoenas? That is a concerning position, ambassador."

"In civil cases, with regard to their own personal data? No, they should not."

[Wrapper]

Repeal "Protecting Personal Data" was passed 11,917 votes to 4,013.