NATION

PASSWORD

[WITHDRAWN] Condemn United Federation of Canada

A chamber dedicated to the dissemination of inter-regional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.
User avatar
Retired WerePenguins
Diplomat
 
Posts: 806
Founded: Apr 26, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

[WITHDRAWN] Condemn United Federation of Canada

Postby Retired WerePenguins » Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:49 pm

APPALLED that the nation of United Federation of Canada would submit as their own proposals resolutions plagiarized from the canon of resolutions of the previous institution;

GREATLY INSULTED that the nation did not seek to obtain the permission of the original nation who authored the resolution before proposing and getting the resolution to a vote on the floor;

OUTRAGED at the abuse of appropriate copyright laws and the abuse of the regulations of the World Assembly in regards to the writing and claiming of authorship of proposed resolutions;

HEREBY condemns the nation of United Federation of Canada


UN Resolution #151

Believing that the benefits of the peaceful application of nuclear technology should be available to all UN nations and convinced that all UN nations are entitled to participate in the exchange of scientific information for the further development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,

Disturbed by the possibility of widespread devastation that could occur as the result of a nuclear war and determined to reduce the danger of such a war,
Believing that the proliferation of nuclear weapons increases the danger of nuclear war,

Alarmed at the potential threat posed to international security by the acquisition of nuclear weaponry by rogue states,

Defining a nuclear weapon as a weapon that relies on nuclear fusion or fission for its destructive effect. Excluded from this definition shall be any integrated guidance, safety and security systems, or any other peripheral system not directly related to the explosive payload itself, or its detonation device(s).

The General Assembly of the United Nations hereby enacts the following:

ARTICLE I. UN member nations shall not: (1) Directly or indirectly transfer control or ownership of nuclear weapons to or from any nation. (2) Assist or induce any nation to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or control over such weapons. (3) Seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons, other than for the purpose of improving the safety of the weapon.

ARTICLE II: Nothing in this legislation shall be interpreted as affecting the right of all UN nations to develop nuclear arms using their own technology and manufacturing capabilities.

ARTICLE III: Nothing in this legislation shall be interpreted as affecting the right of all UN nations to share technology related to safety and security systems, guidance systems, delivery systems or any other peripheral systems not directly related to the design or manufacture of the nuclear weapon itself, provided such activities are in conformity with article I of this legislation.

ARTICLE IV: Nothing in this legislation shall be interpreted as affecting the right of all UN nations to research, produce and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, or their participation in the exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for peaceful purposes, provided such activities are in conformity with article I of this legislation.


Proposal of United Federation of Canada

Believing that the benefits of the peaceful application of nuclear technology should be available to all World Assembly member nations and convinced that all member nations are entitled to participate in the exchange of information for the further development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,

Disturbed by the possibility of widespread devastation that could occur as the result of a nuclear war and further believing that the proliferation of nuclear weapons increases the danger of nuclear war,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Alarmed at the potential threat posed to all nations in regards to the acquisition of nuclear weaponry by rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations,

For the purposes of this convention defines:

A. A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

B. Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Hereby declares member nations shall not:

1. Directly transfer ownership of nuclear weapons to any other nation,

2. Directly receive ownership of nuclear weapons from any other nation,

3. Assist any nation in the manufacturing or design of nuclear weapons or, gaining control over such weapons,

Further declares:

1. That nations may transfer weapons to other nations for the purpose of disarming, and decommissioning such weapons as long as all materials are transferred back to the originating nation,

2. May station nuclear armaments on territory of another nation, as long as such armaments remain under ownership and control of originating nation,

Nothing in this act shall be interpreted as:

1. Affecting the right of member nations to research, produce and/or use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, or their participation in the exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for peaceful purposes,

2. Affecting the right of member nations to develop nuclear arms using their own technology and manufacturing capabilities,

Requires member nations ensure nuclear weapon designs and specifications remain national secrets and further ensure that they be prevented from falling into possession of persons and/or nations who have the intent to contravene these accords.


This is a clear case of PLAGIARISM of the worst kind and this nation deserves a badge of shame for all eternity.
Last edited by Retired WerePenguins on Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Totally Naked
Tourist Eating
WA NS
___"That's the one thing I like about the WA; it allows me to shove my moral compass up your legislative branch, assuming a majority agrees." James Blonde
___"Even so, I see nothing in WA policy that requires that the resolution have a concrete basis in fact," Minister from Frenequesta
___"There are some things worse than death. I believe being Canadian Prime Minister is one of them." Brother Maynard.

User avatar
United Federation of Canada
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Federation of Canada » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:50 pm

This should explain it all

Did you happen to read that post before you decided to start spreading rumours?

User avatar
Franxico
Attaché
 
Posts: 93
Founded: Nov 24, 2004
Father Knows Best State

Postby Franxico » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:30 pm

United Federation of Canada wrote:This should explain it all

Did you happen to read that post before you decided to start spreading rumours?

I believe I was giving Douria permission to use it.
L'Estat Francès i Espanyol de Franxico

L'État Français et Espagnol de Franxico

El Estado Francés y Español de Franxico

User avatar
United Federation of Canada
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Federation of Canada » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:47 pm

Franxico wrote:
United Federation of Canada wrote:This should explain it all

Did you happen to read that post before you decided to start spreading rumours?

I believe I was giving Douria permission to use it.


Well then..... My apologies good sir. I meant no disrespect or insult. I may have made an incorrect assumption that you were giving universal permission.

If you would like, when it is finally deleted on the floor, which seems inevitable, I will cease using clauses from it, if you like.

Humbly,
Last edited by United Federation of Canada on Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aquafireland
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5905
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aquafireland » Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:10 pm

This proposal is nonsense. You should not condemn a nation due to the fact that they have done some errors in the World Assembly! If you want this proposal to reach quorum, I suggest you add more things to this, which I don't think Canada has done. From my eyes, he's a pretty nice nation.
abc|xyz

“Some people say you are going the wrong way, when it’s simply a way of your own.”
-Angelina Jolie

User avatar
Dellin
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 410
Founded: Jul 01, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Dellin » Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:48 pm

If the SC condemned every plagiarizer, no one would ever have time for anything else. Of course, you aren't condemning every plagiarizer are you? This is a blatantly political attempt to take down a nation you don't agree with. Dellin would be adamantly opposed to this if it should ever reach quorum, which is unlikely.
Last edited by Dellin on Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Interim WA Ambassador: Sarith Judea, Protector of Dellin

User avatar
Aquafireland
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5905
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aquafireland » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:55 am

Dellin wrote:If the SC condemned every plagiarizer, no one would ever have time for anything else. Of course, you aren't condemning every plagiarizer are you? This is a blatantly political attempt to take down a nation you don't agree with. Dellin would be adamantly opposed to this if it should ever reach quorum, which is unlikely.

I agree.
abc|xyz

“Some people say you are going the wrong way, when it’s simply a way of your own.”
-Angelina Jolie

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54864
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Corporate Police State

Postby Imperializt Russia » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:13 am

Dellin wrote:If the SC condemned every plagiarizer, no one would ever have time for anything else. Of course, you aren't condemning every plagiarizer are you? This is a blatantly political attempt to take down a nation you don't agree with. Dellin would be adamantly opposed to this if it should ever reach quorum, which is unlikely.

However, over a period of weeks, the UFC repeatedly submitted his allegedly plagiarised work, in multiple WA categories - reaching quorum three times and vote once.
It was his stated intent to push through the alleged plagiarised work as many times as was required to achieve a passed legislation.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Ainocra
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1430
Founded: Sep 20, 2009
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ainocra » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:56 am

The Star Empire of Ainocra Supports this condemnation. The UFC has engaged in deceit and fear mongering in the WA in general and the GA in particular.
Their actions have spoken for themselves.
Alcon Enta
Supreme Marshal of Ainocra

"From far, from eve and morning and yon twelve-winded sky, the stuff of life to knit blew hither: here am I. ...Now--for a breath I tarry nor yet disperse apart--take my hand quick and tell me, what have you in your heart." --Roger Zelazny

User avatar
Aquafireland
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5905
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aquafireland » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:07 am

Ainocra wrote:The Star Empire of Ainocra Supports this condemnation. The UFC has engaged in deceit and fear mongering in the WA in general and the GA in particular.
Their actions have spoken for themselves.

Unfortunately, you need more reasons on why the nation should be condemned.
abc|xyz

“Some people say you are going the wrong way, when it’s simply a way of your own.”
-Angelina Jolie

User avatar
Helltank
Diplomat
 
Posts: 838
Founded: Jun 23, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Helltank » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:04 am

UFC has already apologized for accidental plagiarism and given a reason why(thought Franxico was giving universal permission). This may deserve a stern "make sure you get your permissions right next time", but certainly not a condemnation. Are you seriously putting UFC in the same category as people who repeatedly invade and destroy respectable regions and people who set up gay reeducation camps?
Fear the wrath of:
Supreme Overlord Helltank (International Incidents)
Ivy Beliazrael, WA-Demon-Delegate (General Assembly)
The Conniver, Shady Salesman Extraordinaire (GE&T)
Lord Sage, High Scholar (Factbooks and National Information)

User avatar
Ainocra
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1430
Founded: Sep 20, 2009
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ainocra » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:05 am

On the contrary I need no reason at all to support any proposal save only my desire.
Perhaps you should address your contention to the author.
Alcon Enta
Supreme Marshal of Ainocra

"From far, from eve and morning and yon twelve-winded sky, the stuff of life to knit blew hither: here am I. ...Now--for a breath I tarry nor yet disperse apart--take my hand quick and tell me, what have you in your heart." --Roger Zelazny

User avatar
Retired WerePenguins
Diplomat
 
Posts: 806
Founded: Apr 26, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Retired WerePenguins » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:32 am

Dellin wrote:If the SC condemned every plagiarizer, no one would ever have time for anything else.


If the GA allowed every plagiarizer to get resolutions to vote, then they would never have time for anything else.

On second thought, what the *BEEP* is this time argument. The SC queue is empty most of the time in the Dog Days of Summer. I don't recall seeing a backlog of multiple resolutions "in the queue" for the SC.

Plagiarism is a serious violation of WA protocol. I mean it's not like "So and so got the category wrong." If you don't mind having your intellectual property stolen, well fine then.

And I don't see what my voting position (which is based on the unanimous vote of the region I represent) has to do with the problem at hand.
Totally Naked
Tourist Eating
WA NS
___"That's the one thing I like about the WA; it allows me to shove my moral compass up your legislative branch, assuming a majority agrees." James Blonde
___"Even so, I see nothing in WA policy that requires that the resolution have a concrete basis in fact," Minister from Frenequesta
___"There are some things worse than death. I believe being Canadian Prime Minister is one of them." Brother Maynard.

User avatar
Retired WerePenguins
Diplomat
 
Posts: 806
Founded: Apr 26, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Retired WerePenguins » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:34 am

I should point out that I'm not sure that the apology is sincere.
I also point out that this is [DRAFT] for a reason.
I will probably hold off another day before I decide to officially stop proceeding with this.
Totally Naked
Tourist Eating
WA NS
___"That's the one thing I like about the WA; it allows me to shove my moral compass up your legislative branch, assuming a majority agrees." James Blonde
___"Even so, I see nothing in WA policy that requires that the resolution have a concrete basis in fact," Minister from Frenequesta
___"There are some things worse than death. I believe being Canadian Prime Minister is one of them." Brother Maynard.

User avatar
Dellin
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 410
Founded: Jul 01, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Dellin » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:33 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:
Dellin wrote:If the SC condemned every plagiarizer, no one would ever have time for anything else. Of course, you aren't condemning every plagiarizer are you? This is a blatantly political attempt to take down a nation you don't agree with. Dellin would be adamantly opposed to this if it should ever reach quorum, which is unlikely.

However, over a period of weeks, the UFC repeatedly submitted his allegedly plagiarised work, in multiple WA categories - reaching quorum three times and vote once.
It was his stated intent to push through the alleged plagiarised work as many times as was required to achieve a passed legislation.


Oh my? They are trying to get their legislation passed? Man, who would want to do that? That's totally terrible.
Interim WA Ambassador: Sarith Judea, Protector of Dellin

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5744
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:52 am

The Federal Republic rises in support of this condemnation. We would like to point out to the representatives observing this discussion that this is not a simple matter of a political disagreement in the World Assembly; if it were, we would undoubtedly be opposed. Rather, it is an attempt to expose the duplicitous and dishonorable tactics employed by a zealot legislator who seems hellbent on advancing an extremist anti-nuclear agenda in the WA through fearmongering and dishonest means. We would also note that United Federation of Canada is not merely against the proliferation of nuclear weapons; they represent a particularly activist faction of the GA that desires above all else the unilateral disarmament of all WA members, even if it means thereby exposing them to additional threats from their non-WA enemies. They would rather risk annihilation of their neighbors rather than suffer them to utilize weapons that might quake their poor bleeding hearts. United Federation of Canada has a long history of proposing resolutions like these; this is just the latest, deceptive chapter of it.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Sciongrad
Minister
 
Posts: 3060
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Sciongrad » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:21 am

Dellin wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:However, over a period of weeks, the UFC repeatedly submitted his allegedly plagiarised work, in multiple WA categories - reaching quorum three times and vote once.
It was his stated intent to push through the alleged plagiarised work as many times as was required to achieve a passed legislation.


Oh my? They are trying to get their legislation passed? Man, who would want to do that? That's totally terrible.


If out of that, you got that they were trying to pass "their" legislation, then I'm afraid you're sorely mistaken. The issue here is that the legislation was not theirs to begin with. The fact that they've peddled the same proposal multiple times isn't inherently a bad thing - maybe a trifle annoying, but not immoral. The issue is that the legislation is 80% based off of the work of another author.
Last edited by Sciongrad on Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Dellin
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 410
Founded: Jul 01, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Dellin » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:30 am

Sciongrad wrote:
Dellin wrote:
Oh my? They are trying to get their legislation passed? Man, who would want to do that? That's totally terrible.


If out of that, you got that they were trying to pass "their" legislation, then I'm afraid you're sorely mistaken. The issue here is that the legislation was not theirs to begin with. The fact that they've peddled the same proposal multiple times isn't inherently a bad thing - maybe a trifle annoying, but not immoral. The issue is that the legislation is 80% based off of the work of another author.


I have seen plenty of people complain that they have tried to get it through the WA multiple times (and this was said /before/ the plagiarism allegations), so that is an underlying component of what is going on here.

Two, the plagiarism seems to have been a misunderstanding. And as I've said, how often is someone condemned in the SC just for plagiarizing? I'm not saying it's a time issue, I'm saying this is very selective and is obviously also for ideological and political reasons.

It's been said that "not every plagiarized resolution gets to a vote." So it's their fault that they plagiarized AND got to a vote? No one noticed the plagiarism before; and since it seems to be a misunderstanding and drummed up charges, it's all a bit ridiculous.

So I stand behind what I said. This is in no way just about "plagiarism."
Interim WA Ambassador: Sarith Judea, Protector of Dellin

User avatar
United Federation of Canada
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Federation of Canada » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:39 am

I would also like to point out it was not direct plsgarism.. Yes the idea is the same, but the clauses were changed.

If it is plagarism to use a clause similar to someone elses, then I say we condemn everyone that starts out their proposal with "The World Assembly". As that clause was used by someone else.

May I also point out we still have not heard Franxico's rebuttal?

This is politics plain and simple. Damn me to hell if you wish, I don't care anymore.

User avatar
Cowardly Pacifists
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1457
Founded: Dec 12, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Cowardly Pacifists » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:42 am

Plagiarism in the World Assembly has its own sanction: the proposal is deemed illegal and the author officially warned by the Secretariat. In serious or repeat cases, a permanent ban from the World Assembly is imposed.

I agree with others who have said that plagiarism is not a crime worthy of a Security Counsel Condemnation. General Assembly sanctions for plagiarism can and should be imposed internally by the Secretariat. There is no good reason for the Security Counsel to become involved in this matter.

Best Regards,
The We Already Surrender of Cowardly Pacifists

Warning: Sometimes uses puppets.
Another Warning: Posts from this nation are always OOC.

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5744
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:22 pm

United Federation of Canada wrote:I would also like to point out it was not direct plsgarism.. Yes the idea is the same, but the clauses were changed.

If it is plagarism to use a clause similar to someone elses, then I say we condemn everyone that starts out their proposal with "The World Assembly". As that clause was used by someone else.

What about someone who uses the exact same preamble of a previous author, and then just slightly paraphrases the operative section, just so they could say that they didn't really steal someone else's proposal? Because that's what you did.

May I also point out we still have not heard Franxico's rebuttal?

We did. He said he did not give you permission. And on the AO boards, he said to "crucify" you. That does not sound like someone who's willing to be flexible on this.

This is politics plain and simple.

Yes, the politics of stealing a NatSov's proposal and passing it off as your own so you can continue pushing your fluffy anti-nuke, pro-appeasement agenda in the World Assembly. They are your politics that are serially inundating the GA queue, not ours.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54864
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Corporate Police State

Postby Imperializt Russia » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:24 pm

Completely irrelevant, but what's the AO board?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5744
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:27 pm

Cowardly Pacifists wrote:Plagiarism in the World Assembly has its own sanction: the proposal is deemed illegal and the author officially warned by the Secretariat. In serious or repeat cases, a permanent ban from the World Assembly is imposed.

I agree with others who have said that plagiarism is not a crime worthy of a Security Counsel Condemnation. General Assembly sanctions for plagiarism can and should be imposed internally by the Secretariat. There is no good reason for the Security Counsel to become involved in this matter.

Yeah, I'm willing to concede that this may be a Rule 2 violation. It's just that this author's actions on this have been particularly risible. Stealing the work of a political opponent to push an agenda completely at odds with said opponent's beliefs is beyond the pale, even for your typical IntFed.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5744
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:27 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:Completely irrelevant, but what's the AO board?

AO = Antarctic Oasis
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9027
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:42 pm

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Yeah, I'm willing to concede that this may be a Rule 2 violation. It's just that this author's actions on this have been particularly risible. Stealing the work of a political opponent to push an agenda completely at odds with said opponent's beliefs is beyond the pale, even for your typical IntFed.

On the one hand, you accuse a person of plagiarism. On the other hand, you accuse them of using that plagiarized work in the opposite of its original intent.

I don't understand how that's possible, but I'm pretty sure it's not.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Security Council

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Auditor, Camtropia, Notanam

Advertisement

Remove ads