Bears Armed wrote:
They might not be written 'IC' in the context of being written in the first person by characters from within the nations, but they are all required to be 'IC' in the context of only including details that such characters could understand... Hence the ban on references to RL matters, or to the game's underlying mechanics.
That depends entirely on what kind of characters or nation one RPs. Plenty of member and non-member states are peopled by characters who would find a number of existing GA resolutions utterly nonsensical. The point is that the GA uses a language which is congruent with what it is described as being, RL and Game Mechanics are excluded as part of that. The rules aren't tailored so that all and any RPd characters can make sense of GA resolutions, rather they create GA resolutions which make sense within the context of what the WA is supposed to be, if RP'd characters can interpret them properly is kind of secondary. That is at least part of the reason why a significant number of RPers choose to ignore the WA completely. The WA doesn't make IC sense to a lot of RPers, hence they ignore it. Instead the WA makes sense according to what it is described as being, and RPers who choose to recognise the WA implicitly incorporate the kinds of RP "realities" the WA would then require in to how they RP their nation. That's what makes WA RP or RP which explicitly recognises the WA different from other kinds of NS RP.