NationStates

Posted: **Thu May 13, 2021 8:49 am**

CURRENT DRAFT:

[Title] A Rat Of A Treaty

[Validity] Chose 560.1

[Description] A previously tripartitioned country named Rodland has recently reappeared on the map, and as it falls within your nation's sphere of influence Rodland and @@NAME@@ negotiated a number of treaties. Yet with the recent abolition of the upper house - which previously had the exclusive right to ratify treaties with foreign powers - everyone has begun to bicker about who should be responsible for the process of treaty ratification in @@NAME@@.

[Option 1] "Obviously it falls to us now," says the parliament's Speaker with a smug grin, while fellow parliamentarians make faces at each other in the background. "What happens in parliament stays in parliament, regardless of the number of chambers it has. A quick two thirds majority vote, no questions asked, and we'll ratify all the treaties you need, baby... eh, I mean, @@LEADER@@."

[Effect 1] it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

[Option 2] "Of course, it's again those rats from parliament that get all the fun in ratifying stuff," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, a known face in the Direct Democracy Now! movement, while @@HIS@@ followers make rude hand gestures towards the parliamentarians. "We got rid of one corrupt chamber in the legislature, and now we gleefully hand everything to the other? No! Treaty ratification needs to happen by the people of this country. Nationwide referendums with binding outcomes, that's the only way forward here!"

[Effect 2] questions like 'where's X' spike every time citizens get to ratify a treaty

[Option 3] The ambassador from Rodland rolls @@HIS@@ eyes and sighs impatiently. "You is head of this country, yes?" @@HE@@ asks with a heavy accent. "Why not you ratify these treaties? Or all treaties in future? It simple, it quick, it no trouble," @@HE@@ leans closer and slides a thick envelope into your pocket. "It profitable for @@LEADER@@, yes?"

[Effect 3] foreign diplomats always know to pack something extra for @@LEADER@@

[Option 4] "@@NAME@@ first, okay?" states Edward Rump, a controversial figurehead notorious for wanting to build a wall around the country. "I know this guy. He's a super guy, very friendly, totally fine. This guy, I know him very well, he's a great friend of mine, he told me: "Edward, real @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ don't want any treaties ratified anymore", you know? So I say to him, to this really great guy, who is a very close friend of mine: "@@NAME@@ first, okay?", and he totally supported it. He totally loved it, okay? So that's what you gotta do, because this guy, great guy, great friend of mine, he loves it, okay? @@NAME@@ first, @@NAME@@ first."

[Effect 4] the first shall be last and the last first in international trade rankings

Posted: **Mon May 17, 2021 3:50 am**

DRAFT 3:

[Title] Rats Treating Treaties To Ratification

[Validity] Chose 560.1

[Description] A previously tripartitioned country named Rodland has recently reappeared on the map, and as it falls within your nation's sphere of influence Rodland and @@NAME@@ negotiated a number of treaties. Yet with the recent abolition of the upper house - which previously had the exclusive right to ratify treaties with foreign powers - everyone has begun to bicker about who should be responsible for the process of treaty ratification in @@NAME@@.

[Option 1] "Obviously it falls to us now," says the parliament's Speaker with a smug grin, while fellow parliamentarians make faces at each other in the background. "What happens in parliament stays in parliament, regardless of the number of chambers it has. A quick two thirds majority vote, no questions asked, and we'll ratify all the treaties you need, baby... eh, I mean, @@LEADER@@."

[Effect 1] it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

[Option 2] "Of course, it's again those rats from parliament that get all the fun in ratifying stuff," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, a known face in the Direct Democracy Now! movement, while @@HIS@@ followers make rude hand gestures towards the parliamentarians. "We got rid of one corrupt chamber in the legislature, and now we gleefully hand everything to the other? No! Treaty ratification needs to happen by the people of this country. Nationwide referendums with binding outcomes, that's the only way forward here!"

[Effect 2] questions like 'where's X' spike every time citizens get to ratify a treaty

[Option 3] The ambassador from Rodland rolls @@HIS@@ eyes and sighs impatiently. "You is head of this country, yes?" @@HE@@ asks with a heavy accent. "Why not you ratify these treaties? Or all treaties in future? It simple, it quick, it no trouble," @@HE@@ leans closer and slides a thick envelope into your pocket. "It profitable for @@LEADER@@, yes?"

[Effect 3] foreign diplomats always know to pack something extra for @@LEADER@@

[Option 4] "@@NAME@@ first, okay?" states Edward Rump, a controversial figurehead notorious for wanting to build a wall around the country. "I know this guy. He's a super guy, very friendly, totally fine. This guy, I know him very well, he's a great friend of mine, he told me: "Ronald, real @@DEMONYMPLURALS@@ don't want any treaties ratified anymore", you know? So I say to him, to this really great guy, who is a very close friend of mine: "@@NAME@@ first, okay?", and he totally supported it. He totally loved it, okay? So that's what you gotta do, because this guy, great guy, great friend of mine, he loves it, okay? @@NAME@@ first, @@NAME@@ first."

[Effect 4] in wanting to be first @@NAME@@ often ends up last in international trade rankings

DRAFT 2:

[Title] Rats Treating Treaties To Ratification

[Validity] Chose 560.1

[Description] A previously tripartitioned country named Rodland has recently reappeared on the map again, and as it falls within your nation's sphere of influence it has negotiated a number of treaties with you. Yet with the recent abolishment of the upper house - which previously had the exclusive right to ratify treaties with foreign powers - everyone started bickering about who should get to ratify the treaties from @@NAME@@'s side.

[Option 1] "Obviously it falls to us now," says the parliament's Speaker with a smug grin, while fellow parliamentarians are making faces at the others claiming the same. "What happens in parliament, stays in parliament, regardless of the number of chambers it has. A quick two thirds majority vote, no questions asked, and we'll ratify all the treaties you need, baby... eh, I mean, @@LEADER@@."

[Effect 1] it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

[Option 2] "Of course, it's again those rats from parliament that get all the fun in ratifying stuff," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, a known face in the Direct Democracy Now! movement, while @@HIS@@ followers make expletive hand gestures towards the parliamentarians. "We got rid of one corrupt chamber in the legislature, and now we gleefully hand everything to the other? No! Treaty ratification needs to happen by the people of this country. Nationwide referendums with binding outcomes, that's the only way forward here!"

[Effect 2] questions like 'where lies X' spike everytime citizens get to ratify a treaty

[Option 3] The ambassador from Rodland rolls @@HIS@@ eyes and sighs impatiently. "You is head of this country, yes?" @@HE@@ asks with a heavy accent. "Why not you ratify these treaties? Or all treaties in future? It simple, it quick, it no trouble," @@HE@@ leans closer and slides a thick envelope into your pocket. "It profitable for @@LEADER@@, yes?"

[Effect 3] foreign diplomats always know to pack something extra for @@LEADER@@

[Option 4] "@@NAME@@ first, okay?" states Ronald Trumpet, a controversial figurehead notorious for wanting to build a wall around the country. "I know this guy. He's a super guy, very friendly, totally fine. This guy, I know him very well, he's a great friend of mine, he told me: "Ronald, real @@DEMONYMPLURALS@@ don't want any treaties ratified anymore", you know? So I say to him, to this really great guy, who is a very close friend of mine: "@@NAME@@ first, okay?", and he totally supported it. He totally loved it, okay? So that's what you gotta do, because this guy, great guy, great friend of mine, he loves it, okay? @@NAME@@ first, @@NAME@@ first."

[Effect 4] in wanting to be first @@NAME@@ often ends up last in international trade rankings

DRAFT 1:

[Title] Rats Treating Treaties To Ratification

[Validity] Has Unicameralism

[Description] A previously tripartitioned country named Rodland has recently reappeared on the map again, and as it falls within your nation's sphere of influence it has negotiated a number of treaties with you. Yet with the abolishment of the upper house - which previously had the exclusive right to ratify treaties with foreign powers - everyone started bickering about who should get to ratify the treaties from @@NAME@@'s side.

[Option 1] "Obviously it falls to us now," says the parliament's Speaker with a smug grin, while fellow parliamentarians are making faces at the others claiming the same. "What happens in parliament, stays in parliament, regardless of the number of chambers it has. A quick two thirds majority vote, no questions asked, and we'll ratify all the treaties you need, baby... eh, I mean, @@LEADER@@."

[Effect 1] it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

[Option 2] "Of course, it's again those rats from parliament that get all the fun in ratifying stuff," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, a known face in the Direct Democracy Now! movement, while @@HIS@@ followers make expletive hand gestures towards the parliamentarians. "We got rid of one corrupt chamber in the legislature, and now we gleefully hand everything to the other? No! Treaty ratification needs to happen by the people of this country. Nationwide referendums with binding outcomes, that's the only way forward here!"

[Effect 2] questions like 'where lies X' spike everytime citizens get to ratify a treaty

[Option 3] The ambassador from Rodland rolls @@HIS@@ eyes and sighs impatiently. "You is head of this country, yes?" @@HE@@ asks with a heavy accent. "Why not you ratify these treaties? Or all treaties in future? It simple, it quick, it no trouble," @@HE@@ leans closer and slides a thick envelope into your pocket. "It profitable for @@LEADER@@, yes?"

[Effect 3] foreign diplomats always know to pack something extra for @@LEADER@@

[Option 4] "@@NAME@@ first, okay?" states Ronald Trumpet, a controversial figurehead notorious for wanting to build a wall around the country. "I know this guy. He's a super guy, very friendly, totally fine. This guy, I know him very well, he's a great friend of mine, he told me: "Ronald, real @@DEMONYMPLURALS@@ don't want any treaties ratified anymore", you know? So I say to him, to this really great guy, who is a very close friend of mine: "@@NAME@@ first, okay?", and he totally supported it. He totally loved it, okay? So that's what you gotta do, because this guy, great guy, great friend of mine, he loves it, okay? @@NAME@@ first, @@NAME@@ first."

[Effect 4] in wanting to be first @@NAME@@ often ends up last in international trade rankings

Posted: **Wed May 19, 2021 8:49 am**

My main concern is that this issue seems somewhat forced.

To me, this issue makes more sense if it occurs before the Upper House is abolished, not after. I don't think a government would wait until after the elimination of the upper house to determine who picks up their responsibilities.

Perhaps @@NAME@@ has made the decision to abolish the upper house (in a previous issue), but it hasn't occurred yet, and this issue would be a more natural power struggle determining who gains authority before the abolishment is effective?

Posted: **Wed May 19, 2021 9:44 am**

Candensia wrote:My main concern is that this issue seems somewhat forced.

To me, this issue makes more sense if it occurs before the Upper House is abolished, not after. I don't think a government would wait until after the elimination of the upper house to determine who picks up their responsibilities.

Perhaps @@NAME@@ has made the decision to abolish the upper house (in a previous issue), but it hasn't occurred yet, and this issue would be a more natural power struggle determining who gains authority before the abolishment is effective?

A valid concern, yeah. Would the suggestion be plausible, however? I always thought that when an issue option is chosen, it is effective immediately.

If that means the issue premise won't work, then that is completely understandable!

Posted: **Wed May 19, 2021 10:51 am**

Daarwyrth wrote:
Candensia wrote:My main concern is that this issue seems somewhat forced.

To me, this issue makes more sense if it occurs before the Upper House is abolished, not after. I don't think a government would wait until after the elimination of the upper house to determine who picks up their responsibilities.

Perhaps @@NAME@@ has made the decision to abolish the upper house (in a previous issue), but it hasn't occurred yet, and this issue would be a more natural power struggle determining who gains authority before the abolishment is effective?

A valid concern, yeah. Would the suggestion be plausible, however? I always thought that when an issue option is chosen, it is effective immediately.

If that means the issue premise won't work, then that is completely understandable!

It's a tricky minefield to navigate, but I do think this premise holds potential as a follow up. Perhaps all that's needed is to indicate the decision to abolish the upper house was a recent one, as to not rock the boat too much.

...it has negotiated a number of treaties with you. Yet with the recent abolishment of the upper house...

Posted: **Wed May 19, 2021 10:57 am**

Candensia wrote:
Daarwyrth wrote:A valid concern, yeah. Would the suggestion be plausible, however? I always thought that when an issue option is chosen, it is effective immediately.

If that means the issue premise won't work, then that is completely understandable!

It's a tricky minefield to navigate, but I do think this premise holds potential as a follow up. Perhaps all that's needed is to indicate the decision to abolish the upper house was a recent one, as to not rock the boat too much.

...it has negotiated a number of treaties with you. Yet with the recent abolishment of the upper house...

Good point, and the validity could then be the issue option that abolishes the upper house. I'll work it into a new draft!

Posted: **Wed May 19, 2021 12:56 pm**

New draft is up with Candensia's suggestions worked into it!

Posted: **Thu May 20, 2021 3:27 pm**

Hey Daarwyrth! Pretty good draft. Let's get into it.

Daarwyrth wrote:[Description] A previously tripartitioned country named Rodland has recently reappeared on the map again,

Nice, reappeared again

Daarwyrth wrote:and as it falls within your nation's sphere of influence it has negotiated a number of treaties with you.

Not a huge fan of the passive voice here. This makes it seem like @@LEADER@@ had no power in it. Also, since we haven't discussed the negotiation via issues, I might leave @@LEADER@@ out of it altogether and switch it with @@NAME@@.

Daarwyrth wrote:Yet with the recent abolishment

Technically a word, but not the preferred one generally in the English language, and for me, personally. I'd like it more if you switched it to "abolition".

Daarwyrth wrote:everyone started bickering about who should get to ratify the treaties from @@NAME@@'s side.

I think this would read better in the perfect tense. "Everyone has begun to bicker about the process of treaty ratification in @@NAME@@" or something.

Daarwyrth wrote:[Option 1] "Obviously it falls to us now," says the parliament's Speaker with a smug grin, while fellow parliamentarians are making faces at the others claiming the same.

You switched tense here. It's kinda sorta allowed since they are both present, but really you should change "are making" to just "make". I find the jump to "claiming the same" a little odd as well. We get the gist of it, I think you can just say "fellow parliamentarians make faces at each other in the background".

Daarwyrth wrote:"What happens in parliament, stays in parliament,

Get rid of that first comma.

Daarwyrth wrote:[Option 2] "Of course, it's again those rats from parliament that get all the fun in ratifying stuff," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, a known face in the Direct Democracy Now! movement, while @@HIS@@ followers make expletive hand gestures towards the parliamentarians.

I'm really nitpicking here (but be grateful, I rarely go this in depth these days), but using "expletive" in the adjectival form is rather rare, and to me sounds a little off. Personally, I'd consider changing it to "vulgar" or "rude" or something, but up to you, again, it's a nitpick.

Daarwyrth wrote:[Effect 2] questions like 'where lies X' spike everytime citizens get to ratify a treaty

Again, small thing, but that is not the way the ignorant citizenry is likely to speak. Just "where is X" would suffice.

Daarwyrth wrote:[Option 4] "@@NAME@@ first, okay?" states Ronald Trumpet

Edward Rump is the established Trump riff.

This is very good, and you're probably only a step or two away with this one, which is why I went so in-depth. Still a bit to do to make it sharper, though. Good luck, Daarwyrth!

Posted: **Thu May 20, 2021 4:02 pm**

Fauxia wrote:This is very good, and you're probably only a step or two away with this one, which is why I went so in-depth. Still a bit to do to make it sharper, though. Good luck, Daarwyrth!

Thank you so much for all the feedback, I really appreciate it! I have taken over all your suggestions and worked them into the newest draft. I hope it looks a lot more polished up now

Fauxia wrote:Nice, reappeared again

Oh, then you should have seen my "and also... as well" during a presentation because I was nervous xD

Posted: **Fri May 21, 2021 7:24 am**

Looks much better, Daarwyrth

Posted: **Fri May 21, 2021 10:35 am**

Fauxia wrote:Looks much better, Daarwyrth

Thanks to your comments!

Posted: **Fri May 21, 2021 11:02 am**

Let's look at the structure of effect 4.

in wanting to be first @@NAME@@ often ends up last in international trade rankings

This turns into, if Candensia receives this effect...

Following new legislation in Candensia, in wanting to be first Candensia often ends up last in international trade rankings.

Does it work? Yes. Is it somewhat repetitive? I'd say so. I'd try to trim it, if possible.

Posted: **Fri May 21, 2021 11:33 am**

Candensia wrote:Let's look at the structure of effect 4.

in wanting to be first @@NAME@@ often ends up last in international trade rankings

This turns into, if Candensia receives this effect...

Following new legislation in Candensia, in wanting to be first Candensia often ends up last in international trade rankings.

Does it work? Yes. Is it somewhat repetitive? I'd say so. I'd try to trim it, if possible.

A very valid point! I have changed the effect line to a different allusion that hopefully works better

Posted: **Sat May 29, 2021 3:46 am**

Ha? Why would we assume that this is the first time that issue of treaty rectification has come up since dissolving the upper house?

Posted: **Sat May 29, 2021 3:51 am**

Australian rePublic wrote:Ha? Why would we assume that this is the first time that issue of treaty rectification has come up since dissolving the upper house?

Because the upper house has been just abolished, as described in the premise: "Yet with the recent abolition". And the validity is specifically set to occur as a result of having chosen option 1 of Issue 560. Candensia pointed this out earlier as well, and suggested to add in "recent abolition" to solve the issue. I believe in its current form it does explain why this hasn't popped up before

Posted: **Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:47 pm**

Moving this to last call! Final comments and remarks would be grand

Posted: **Fri Jun 11, 2021 9:12 am**

real @@DEMONYMPLURALS@@ don't want

You've an extra "s" there.

Unless there's some reference I'm not seeing, I'd try and sharpen the title.

Posted: **Fri Jun 11, 2021 9:17 am**

Candensia wrote:You've an extra "s" there.

Fixed! Thanks for catching it

Candensia wrote:Unless there's some reference I'm not seeing, I'd try and sharpen the title.

It was my attempt at a word play. "Rat", "Ratification", "Treating", "Treaty", but I admit it may be a little weak. I'll try to come up with something wittier!

EDIT: How about "These Treaties Are Not For Your!" with a play on "treats" as "treaties"?

or "Don't Eat My Treaties!"/"Those Are My Treaties!"?

Posted: **Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:59 am**

Candensia wrote:Unless there's some reference I'm not seeing, I'd try and sharpen the title.

Came up with a new title, how does this sound?

Posted: **Sun Jun 13, 2021 6:59 am**

Daarwyrth wrote:
Candensia wrote:Unless there's some reference I'm not seeing, I'd try and sharpen the title.

Came up with a new title, how does this sound?

It's not bad. I tend to keep my titles shorter when possible.

Might be lame, but how about "Right of Passage"

Posted: **Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:33 am**

Candensia wrote:It's not bad. I tend to keep my titles shorter when possible.

Might be lame, but how about "Right of Passage"

Hmm, not bad! I'll keep it in mind as a candidate unless something else sounds better, but this one is pretty good!

And what about "Ratty Treatment"? As in "ratification" and "treaty"? Or Ratatouification?

Oh! Or "A Rat of a Treaty"? It sounds a little "Ratify Treaty" if you say it aloud

(EDIT: I went for that one, for now)

Posted: **Sun Jun 13, 2021 4:27 pm**

it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

what does this mean

Posted: **Sun Jun 13, 2021 4:43 pm**

Lamenia wrote:
it's no longer just kids who go trick or treatin' during Maxoween

what does this mean

It's a joking reference to treaties (treatin'), and that the parliamentarians ratify them.

Posted: **Thu Jun 17, 2021 8:18 am**

This issue has been submitted (not as my contest entry though)! Thank you everyone for your commentary and feedback, I appreciate it tremendously!

NationStates

[SUBMITTED] A Rat Of A Treaty

[SUBMITTED] A Rat Of A Treaty