[DEFEATED] Repeal: Recognition of the General Assembly

[Goobergunchia]

Approvals go here!

Old Thread.

Hello, everybody. After a long break, I decided to try my luck again.
I believe this resolution is much clearer and more thoughtful than the last one, with better and more obvious arguments.

The World Assembly Security Council,

Believing in the noble intentions of this resolution in explicitly recognizing the General Assembly through the lens of this council,

However reasoning there are a few fatal flaws within this resolution that make it nonviable, such as:

• Finding that a plethora of resolutions in the Security Council already recognize the General Assembly chamber through the form of acknowledging past GA resolutions, the most recent of such resolutions to date being [resolution=SC#414]SC#414 “Commend Refuge Isle”[/resolution] and [resolution=SC#394]SC#394 “Commend Cretox State”[/resolution],
  
• Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC during the time span they had to do so, making the premise of the resolution laughable,
• Noting that some GA ambassadors have been downright hostile to the Security Council chamber since its inception, and recognizing them and the GA itself will only bring more pain to this very council,

Discovering certain problems with the clauses of the resolution, including but not limited to:

• The 2nd clause of the resolution, which is impractical to the purpose of the resolution, as all it does is just repeat the General Assembly's mission statement, giving nothing that nations cannot already find out themselves,
  
• In clause 5, "Full Consequences" is vague, as it does not tell us anything about what those consequences are or how they will be given out,
  
• The burdensome claim that a disavowment of one chamber is a disavowment of both, which prevents perfectly fine nations from getting a commend just because they were in "non-compliance" with the GA,

Recognizing that the whole resolution is pretty much redundant and does almost nothing to benefit the SC chambers, instead mainly just stating obvious facts,

Resolving that the resolution [resolution=SC#359]”Recognition of the General Assembly”[/resolution] shall no longer stand among others inside this august body due to its flaws, so;

Hereby Repeals SC#359 “Recognition of the General Assembly”.

As always, welcome to feedback. I am leaving the old draft behind and hopefully this one is better, I think it is definitely more thoughtful.

[Comfed]

Your draft ignores the existence of the last two clauses of its target in proclaiming its redundance.

iv. In the joining of either World Assembly chamber, membership to both chambers is granted and the rights and duties thereof are expected to be adhered to in their entirety;

v. An active disavowment of either chamber of the World Assembly should be considered a disavowment of both, with the full consequences being incurred upon the offender.

[RemiorKami]

Your draft ignores the existence of the last to clauses of its target in proclaiming its redundance.

iv. In the joining of either World Assembly chamber, membership to both chambers is granted and the rights and duties thereof are expected to be adhered to in their entirety;

v. An active disavowment of either chamber of the World Assembly should be considered a disavowment of both, with the full consequences being incurred upon the offender.

It's not like these last clauses of the target are exactly strong either. But the wording has been changed to reflect that it's not completely just stating basic facts. I still don't think this is a problematic clause at all. Again, I would like to know if you have any issues with the 2 main arguments in this proposal. This is a closer clause; and while it is an argument that has been tweaked a little, I don't agree that it should be terminated.

For example, this clause:

Recognizing that the whole resolution is pretty much redundant and does nothing to benefit the SC chambers, instead just stating obvious facts,

has been changed to:

Recognizing that the whole resolution is pretty much redundant and does almost nothing to benefit the SC chambers, instead mainly just stating obvious facts,

[The Orwell Society]

As before, I support this.

[RemiorKami]

As before, I support this.

Thanks again for the support. I do however believe this is a much stronger proposal than the last.

[Hulldom]

This is not making an argument beyond "well, we ALREADY recognized it", which, to be clear SC#359 goes beyond.

I am actually willing to see this repealed, but not from this draft.

[RemiorKami]

This is not making an argument beyond "well, we ALREADY recognized it", which, to be clear SC#359 goes beyond.

Yes, and I think that is a valid argument for repeal.
Also, care to read the second argument?
This is a rough draft. I intend to add arguments against what you call the "beyond".

Draft Update:
the following below has been updated, from my ideas doc, which has a ton of clauses and ideas. I have found these to be perfect.

Discovering certain problems with the clauses of the resolution, including but not limited to:

• The 2nd clause of the resolution, which is impractical to the purpose of the resolution, as all it does is just repeat the General Assembly's mission statement, giving nothing that nations cannot already find out themselves,
• In clause 5, "Full Consequences" is vague, as it does not tell us anything about what those consequences are or how they will be given out,

[Astrobolt]

No support to any repeal of the target without a replacement.

[RemiorKami]

No support to any repeal of the target without a replacement.

Interesting... would you mind telling me what sort of replacement you have in mind?

[Heidgaudr]

No support to any repeal of the target without a replacement.

Interesting... would you mind telling me what sort of replacement you have in mind?

While I can't speak for Astrobolt, I think a replacement that could be fun would be making a more condemnatory declaration playing into the roleplay that the GA and SC don't like each other IC'ly. It should also have a lot of references and in-jokes about the WA that only a long-time regular would be able to provide.

[RemiorKami]

Interesting... would you mind telling me what sort of replacement you have in mind?

While I can't speak for Astrobolt, I think a replacement that could be fun would be making a more condemnatory declaration playing into the roleplay that the GA and SC don't like each other IC'ly. It should also have a lot of references and in-jokes about the WA that only a long-time regular would be able to provide.

Ok. That honestly seems like a pretty interesting idea. I might try to start drafting that once this proposal is in a more stable condition, but I don't think I'm necessarily the fittest for that though.

[Excidium Planetis]

Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC, making the premise of the resolution laughable,

Unfair criticism, in my opinion. The GA hasn't recognized the SC because we can't. The General Assembly Secretariat has ruled that references to the SC are illegal.

[RemiorKami]

Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC, making the premise of the resolution laughable,

Unfair criticism, in my opinion. The GA hasn't recognized the SC because we can't. The General Assembly Secretariat has ruled that references to the SC are illegal.

The GA used to be able to recognize the SC.

[Heidgaudr]

Unfair criticism, in my opinion. The GA hasn't recognized the SC because we can't. The General Assembly Secretariat has ruled that references to the SC are illegal.

The GA used to be able to recognize the SC.

Your point being...what exactly?

[Kavagrad]

Full support, opposed to replacement.

[RemiorKami]

The GA used to be able to recognize the SC.

Your point being...what exactly?

My point is that they didn't, I'll clarify that.

For example:

Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC, making the premise of the resolution laughable,

has been changed to:

Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC during the time span they had to do so, making the premise of the resolution laughable,

[Astrobolt]

It doesn’t make any logical sense for the GA to “recognize” the SC. The GA is concerned with crafting international law, and recognizing the SC is not at all related to (and would subtract from) that goal.

In terms of a replacement, I mean a replacement that more strongly recognizes the GA. As in, a declaration fully supporting the goals of the GA, and vowing to take action against those who attempt to subvert it.

[RemiorKami]

It doesn’t make any logical sense for the GA to “recognize” the SC. The GA is concerned with crafting international law, and recognizing the SC is not at all related to (and would subtract from) that goal.

When I review the draft later today, I will look at this.

[Free Algerstonia]

adta, the habit of OPs controlling multiple accounts in a single thread is confusing and annoying

[Unibot III]

Understanding that recognizing the other chamber has always been a one-sided affair, as the SC has always recognized the GA, but the GA has never recognized the SC, making the premise of the resolution laughable,

Unfair criticism, in my opinion. The GA hasn't recognized the SC because we can't. The General Assembly Secretariat has ruled that references to the SC are illegal.

The GA has agency — it has the capacity to amend its rules via the Secretariat. The GA has chosen not to modify its rules to allow references to the SC.

I see no reason why the SC should go out of its way to recognize the GA if the GA is not prepared to recognize the SC.

If the GA can discuss changing rules regarding Ideological Bans, Honest Mistakes etc. and all of the other archaic rules it’s been slow to purge, it can discuss changing rules for the SC.

It doesn’t make any logical sense for the GA to “recognize” the SC. The GA is concerned with crafting international law, and recognizing the SC is not at all related to (and would subtract from) that goal.

In terms of a replacement, I mean a replacement that more strongly recognizes the GA. As in, a declaration fully supporting the goals of the GA, and vowing to take action against those who attempt to subvert it.

The most obvious reason why the GA should recognize the SC in practical terms is to allow the GA to encourage the SC to condemn non-compliant member-nations on serious human rights problems.

[Pasybfic]

Unfair criticism, in my opinion. The GA hasn't recognized the SC because we can't. The General Assembly Secretariat has ruled that references to the SC are illegal.

The GA has agency — it has the capacity to amend its rules via the Secretariat. The GA has chosen not to modify its rules to allow references to the SC.

I see no reason why the SC should go out of its way to recognize the GA if the GA is not prepared to recognize the SC.

If the GA can discuss changing rules regarding Ideological Bans, Honest Mistakes etc. and all of the other archaic rules it’s been slow to purge, it can discuss changing rules for the SC.

It doesn’t make any logical sense for the GA to “recognize” the SC. The GA is concerned with crafting international law, and recognizing the SC is not at all related to (and would subtract from) that goal.

In terms of a replacement, I mean a replacement that more strongly recognizes the GA. As in, a declaration fully supporting the goals of the GA, and vowing to take action against those who attempt to subvert it.

The most obvious reason why the GA should recognize the SC in practical terms is to allow the GA to encourage the SC to condemn non-compliant member-nations on serious human rights problems.

I agree here - the GA recognizing the SC would allow for a substantial amount of cross-play and adaptation towards a well-written and well-played set of chambers, instead of simply two totally different styles of gameplay sharing a web page, mechanics, and subforum.

[Unibot III]

The GA has agency — it has the capacity to amend its rules via the Secretariat. The GA has chosen not to modify its rules to allow references to the SC.

I see no reason why the SC should go out of its way to recognize the GA if the GA is not prepared to recognize the SC.

If the GA can discuss changing rules regarding Ideological Bans, Honest Mistakes etc. and all of the other archaic rules it’s been slow to purge, it can discuss changing rules for the SC.



The most obvious reason why the GA should recognize the SC in practical terms is to allow the GA to encourage the SC to condemn non-compliant member-nations on serious human rights problems.

I agree here - the GA recognizing the SC would allow for a substantial amount of cross-play and adaptation towards a well-written and well-played set of chambers, instead of simply two totally different styles of gameplay sharing a web page, mechanics, and subforum.

That sounds like fun!

[Excidium Planetis]

The GA has agency — it has the capacity to amend its rules via the Secretariat. The GA has chosen not to modify its rules to allow references to the SC.

I see no reason why the SC should go out of its way to recognize the GA if the GA is not prepared to recognize the SC.

If the GA can discuss changing rules regarding Ideological Bans, Honest Mistakes etc. and all of the other archaic rules it’s been slow to purge, it can discuss changing rules for the SC.

The original GenSec was appointed by the Mods, and since then vacancies have been filled by the appointment of GenSec. They are not democratically elected (though I am not arguing they should be), and so to say that the players in the GA have agency and the capacity to change the rules of the GA is misleading. At best 5 players at the time of writing have the agency to do that.

For the record, I was one of the players who argued that mentioning the Security Council should be legal in proposals. GenSec did not agree with my arguments.

[RemiorKami]

The GA has agency — it has the capacity to amend its rules via the Secretariat. The GA has chosen not to modify its rules to allow references to the SC.

I see no reason why the SC should go out of its way to recognize the GA if the GA is not prepared to recognize the SC.

If the GA can discuss changing rules regarding Ideological Bans, Honest Mistakes etc. and all of the other archaic rules it’s been slow to purge, it can discuss changing rules for the SC.



The most obvious reason why the GA should recognize the SC in practical terms is to allow the GA to encourage the SC to condemn non-compliant member-nations on serious human rights problems.

I agree here - the GA recognizing the SC would allow for a substantial amount of cross-play and adaptation towards a well-written and well-played set of chambers, instead of simply two totally different styles of gameplay sharing a web page, mechanics, and subforum.

I happen to agree as well.

[Wallenburg]

"As the junior chamber, the Security Council inherently recognizes the existence of the General Assembly, a practice reinforced explicitly in references to General Assembly resolutions, activities, and concerns. Our office fully supports a repeal that reflects this truth."