NationStates

Imperium Anglorum wrote:[*]Independence. Proposals cannot depend on prior legislation, as if that prior resolution is repealed, the centre of the proposal would be gutted. Proposals which cannot stand alone will be removed or discarded.

This metastasizes the House of Cards rule into something grotesque. According to this language, no proposal that utilizes a previously-existing committee for any reason can be legal. The current rule leaves that vital (to say nothing of more realistic!) legislative road open even while it bans the more serious misconstructions.

[*]Optionality. Because all resolutions apply to all nations, all proposals cannot be optional. Proposals which include optionality will be removed. All nations must heed all clauses of the resolution. For optional clauses, such as 'Urges' or 'Encourages' clauses, all nations must heed the World Assembly's recommendation, and therefore, these are not optional.

"Must heed" even "urge" clauses narrows authorial leeway to mention sidelong or tangential issues without imposing tyranny or micromanagement, unless by "heed" you just mean "listen to."

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:[*]Independence. Proposals cannot depend on prior legislation, as if that prior resolution is repealed, the centre of the proposal would be gutted. Proposals which cannot stand alone will be removed or discarded.

This metastasizes the House of Cards rule into something grotesque. According to this language, no proposal that utilizes a previously-existing committee for any reason can be legal. The current rule leaves that vital (to say nothing of more realistic!) legislative road open even while it bans the more serious misconstructions.

Committees exist outside of the rules set. I considered the fact that the rules spoke of committees as additions to proposals. This takes that to an extreme. Naturally, the initial draft will be taken to an extreme — basically, building the edifice of elegance before filling in the holes that have to deal with the problems of reality. Committees exist outside of proposals, so they don't apply in HoC. I've changed the wording.

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:

[*]Optionality. Because all resolutions apply to all nations, all proposals cannot be optional. Proposals which include optionality will be removed. All nations must heed all clauses of the resolution. For optional clauses, such as 'Urges' or 'Encourages' clauses, all nations must heed the World Assembly's recommendation, and therefore, these are not optional.

"Must heed" even "urge" clauses narrows authorial leeway to mention sidelong or tangential issues without imposing tyranny or micromanagement, unless by "heed" you just mean "listen to."

Yes, I mean listen to. That is what heed means: 'pay attention to'. I've changed the wording.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

Mallorea and Riva wrote:I disagree with your premise that both sides have fairly equal access to the people's eyes and ears. Depending on the issue and the size/strength of your voting bloc you may not have the funds to reach out to the public in an equal manner. At least in NS scripts and stamps level the playing field in that regard. Hell you can even do things manually.

I'm not Bitely, but if I had as much money as he does, I would be able to pass anything.

Except A ban on boobytrapped aid it seems. Glad to know you subscribe to the pay to win side IA. You know what Mall, do whatever the hell you guys want. It really doesn't matter anymore. The WA is no longer about passing decent resolutions by working together anymore. It is now about petty vendettas, who can try and get the most authorship badges, and who stab who deeper in the back. Why even have a ruleset any longer?

Rather than discuss this proposal, can the moderators just post an updated draft of the rules they've been promising for months?

The Silver Sentinel wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I'm not Bitely, but if I had as much money as he does, I would be able to pass anything.

Except A ban on boobytrapped aid it seems. Glad to know you subscribe to the pay to win side IA. You know what Mall, do whatever the hell you guys want. It really doesn't matter anymore. The WA is no longer about passing decent resolutions by working together anymore. It is now about petty vendettas, who can try and get the most authorship badges, and who stab who deeper in the back. Why even have a ruleset any longer?

Yeah, he was joking.

Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Yeah, he was joking.

Whilst you're here, are there any proposals you'd like to submit that walk around the ruleset?

Bump.

I like the format of your layout, IA. I'm going to use a variation of it in the current draft we're reviewing behind the scenes.