[DRAFT] Recruiter's Bill of Right

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

Description: A document to provide a general agreement on the treatment of recruiters in each feeder and sinker regions. It shall be known as “The Recruiter's Bill of Rights.”

Argument: The General Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that each feeder and sinker regions are founderless, game-created regions that are fair game,

LAUDING the intent of feeder and sinker regional WA Delegates working to curb the recruitment messages left on the Regional Message Boards,

WHOLLY AGREEING that recruiters should not be hassled for working to make their founding region an attractive place to go,

APPALLED with the region of Lazarus for forcing recruiters to use Spanish and other alternative languages to English,

ACKNOWLEDGING the game is English based and the widely known use of other languages by member nations are not as dominate,

APPALLED with the region of The Pacific for suppressing recruitment messages on the Regional Message Boards
Due to these enumerated reasons,

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY THEREFORE (1) PROHIBITS THE HASSELLING OF RECRUITERS ON FEEDER AND SINKER REGIONS REGIONAL MESSAGE BOARD; (2) PROHIBITS THE FORCEFUL USE OF LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH BEING USED IN RECRUITMENT MESSAGES; and (3) THE BAN ON FEEDER AND SINKER REGIONAL WA DELEGATES FROM SURPRESSING RECRUITMENT MESSAGES.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

Any one want to go over it and fix any mistakes for me? Thank you.

[Mahaj]

The General Assembly does not address these issues.

[Syrkania]

Wow. Meta-gaming from start to finish.

If you have problems with how the Pacific and Lazarus are doing business, head on over to the Security Council and try to Condemn them. I can't see any other way of turning this into anything even remotely legal, since the very concept of 'recruiting' is meta-gaming, and not what the GA is about.

[Flibbleites]

This proposal is DOA, the very concept is illegal for Metagaming.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

The General Assembly does not address these issues.

Why not? World Assembly address a lot of pointless resolutions.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

This proposal is DOA, the very concept is illegal for Metagaming.

Well just like all World Assembly resolutions, it'll be some non binding resolution that no one follows in the first place. This will be just the same fun little thing that is just as non binding as all the other resolutions.

[Flibbleites]

The General Assembly does not address these issues.

Why not? World Assembly address a lot of pointless resolutions.

Here's why not, it's illegal. Here's what the Proposal Rules has to say on the subject of Metagaming.

MetaGaming

MetaGaming is a difficult to understand category at times, especially since it often shares jurisdiction with Game Mechanics violations. Essentially, a MetaGaming violation is one that breaks "the fourth wall", or attempts to force events outside of the WA itself. Proposals dealing with the Security Council, Regions, with other nations, Moderators, and requiring activities on the forums are examples. This also includes proposals that try to affect non-WA nations.

[Flibbleites]

This proposal is DOA, the very concept is illegal for Metagaming.

Well just like all World Assembly resolutions, it'll be some non binding resolution that no one follows in the first place. This will be just the same fun little thing that is just as non binding as all the other resolutions.

You really don't know anything about the way the WA works, do you? WA resolutions are binding, to quote the WAQ.

What's the World Assembly?

The World Assembly is the world's governing body. It's your chance to mold the world to your vision, by voting for resolutions you like and scuttling the rest. However, it's a double-edged sword, because your nation will be affected by any resolutions that pass. (Unfortunately you can't obey the resolutions you like and ignore the rest, like real nations.) In other words, it's a hot-bed of political intrigue and double-dealing.

If this gets submitted, it will be deleted because it's illegal. And if a nation submits too many illegal proposals, that nation will find themselves ejected from the WA.

[Heistrein]

I believe this is a game mechanics issue. You are trying to change how NS is run, and that is illegal. That is what the meta gaming statements are about.
Also, I wouldn't suggest stating the following:

Why not? World Assembly address a lot of pointless resolutions.

Or

Well just like all World Assembly resolutions, it'll be some non binding resolution that no one follows in the first place. This will be just the same fun little thing that is just as non binding as all the other resolutions.

It's disrespectful, in poor taste, gets no one on your side, and not really true.

[Connopolis]

This proposal is DOA, the very concept is illegal for Metagaming.

Well just like all World Assembly resolutions, it'll be some non binding resolution that no one follows in the first place. This will be just the same fun little thing that is just as non binding as all the other resolutions.

All World Assembly resolutions are binding, and by law, they all must have operative clauses. Therefore, all resolutions are binding, and everyone must follow them.

Yours wondering if giraffes make noise,

[Gladia]

If I can put a side for a moment the obvious violations of the games rules this draft makes, I would like to say that I feel this draft, if legal, would violate the sovereignty of regions and the rights of the WA Delegate. If the Delegate would like to set rules on recruiter messages, then it is his right to do so. If the people of the region disagree, then they may endorse somebody else for the office. In my view, this is not an issue that the World Assembly has jurisdiction over.

-Delegate Gladia
Delegate for The Democratic Union of Allied Nations

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

I don't see it as this meta-gaming. To me it is such an easy thing to understand. I get upset to see when members of these game regions working dilligently to whitewash recruitment messages. Althought just a funny tongue in cheek resolution, it should do what the WA does best and draw attention to the ills within the game much like the recent Repeal "Medical Blockade Restriction" .

WA resolutions are not binding. They are just as easily ignored in my message box as some unnamed region that I never heard of before but fail to look for.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

If I can put a side for a moment the obvious violations of the games rules this draft makes, I would like to say that I feel this draft, if legal, would violate the sovereignty of regions and the rights of the WA Delegate. If the Delegate would like to set rules on recruiter messages, then it is his right to do so. If the people of the region disagree, then they may endorse somebody else for the office. In my view, this is not an issue that the World Assembly has jurisdiction over.

-Delegate Gladia
Delegate for The Democratic Union of Allied Nations

You are suggesting that game created regions should be treated the same way in which a nation finds his/her own region. That should not be thought of in the same terms since the two are two different things. For instance, one I can actively recruite messages on...the other I absolutely can not.

[Connopolis]

I don't see it as this meta-gaming. To me it is such an easy thing to understand. I get upset to see when members of these game regions working dilligently to whitewash recruitment messages. Althought just a funny tongue in cheek resolution, it should do what the WA does best and draw attention to the ills within the game much like the recent Repeal "Medical Blockade Restriction" .

WA resolutions are not binding. They are just as easily ignored in my message box as some unnamed region that I never heard of before but fail to look for.

You are affecting the way that players engage in the game, and that is not within the WA's jurisdiction, as Mr. Flibble so kindly acknowledged. Furthermore, WA resolutions are binding; if you do not implement the resolution's provisions, compliance gnomes will do so for you.

Yours,

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

You are affecting the way that players engage in the game, and that is not within the WA's jurisdiction, as Mr. Flibble so kindly acknowledged. Furthermore, WA resolutions are binding; if you do not implement the resolution's provisions, compliance gnomes will do so for you.

Yours,

I am affecting the way nations engage in the game!!!???? Seriously? ARe you for real? The whole point of this resolution is to draw the attention to the delegate of these game created regions. That is what they are doing to how recruiters engage in the game!!!!!

[Connopolis]

You are affecting the way that players engage in the game, and that is not within the WA's jurisdiction, as Mr. Flibble so kindly acknowledged. Furthermore, WA resolutions are binding; if you do not implement the resolution's provisions, compliance gnomes will do so for you.

Yours,

I am affecting the way nations engage in the game!!!???? Seriously? ARe you for real? The whole point of this resolution is to draw the attention to the delegate of these game created regions. That is what they are doing to how recruiters engage in the game!!!!!

World Assembly =/= recruiters or delegates

The World Assembly has a clearly defined boundary that does not legally permit it to break the fourth wall; you cannot, under any circumstance, change how game mechanisms function or interact. The World Assembly is limited in its power, and this suggestion breaks that limit.

Yours in attempting to repair his gramophone,

[Heistrein]

...may I ask you something? Why did you make this proposal? If you feel it's useless, it's just a joke, and whatnot, why are getting mad for everyone shooting down your proposal? If you have such disrespect for WA rules and NS rules, why bother being upset by something that doesn't matter to you anyway?

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

My attempt is to make the World Assembly more relevant.

[Flibbleites]

I don't see it as this meta-gaming. To me it is such an easy thing to understand. I get upset to see when members of these game regions working dilligently to whitewash recruitment messages.

Let me put it this way, your proposal tries to affect how regions treat recruiters. The Metagaming rule actually uses proposals dealing with Regions as an example of Metagaming.

WA resolutions are not binding. They are just as easily ignored in my message box as some unnamed region that I never heard of before but fail to look for.

Actually, they are. Every time a resolution passes, the stats of all WA members change according to the Category & Strength of that resolution.

You are affecting the way that players engage in the game, and that is not within the WA's jurisdiction, as Mr. Flibble so kindly acknowledged. Furthermore, WA resolutions are binding; if you do not implement the resolution's provisions, compliance gnomes will do so for you.

Yours,[/quote]
Actually, since I haven't signed any of my posts in this thread, I'm actually speaking as a Mod here

[Connopolis]

I don't see it as this meta-gaming. To me it is such an easy thing to understand. I get upset to see when members of these game regions working dilligently to whitewash recruitment messages.

Let me put it this way, your proposal tries to affect how regions treat recruiters. The Metagaming rule actually uses proposals dealing with Regions as an example of Metagaming.

WA resolutions are not binding. They are just as easily ignored in my message box as some unnamed region that I never heard of before but fail to look for.

Actually, they are. Every time a resolution passes, the stats of all WA members change according to the Category & Strength of that resolution.

You are affecting the way that players engage in the game, and that is not within the WA's jurisdiction, as Mr. Flibble so kindly acknowledged. Furthermore, WA resolutions are binding; if you do not implement the resolution's provisions, compliance gnomes will do so for you.

Yours,

Actually, since I haven't signed any of my posts in this thread, I'm actually speaking as a Mod here

OOC: Sorry; habit, I guess.

[Heistrein]

My attempt is to make the World Assembly more relevant.

If you read and follow the rules for WA (I'd suggest you do), they would be relevant. The irrelevancy is your own doing.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

...may I ask you something? Why did you make this proposal? If you feel it's useless, it's just a joke, and whatnot, why are getting mad for everyone shooting down your proposal? If you have such disrespect for WA rules and NS rules, why bother being upset by something that doesn't matter to you anyway?

I am not getting mad. Don't confuse my success at backing up the merits on this bill with anything but that. Who cares if this matters to me or not. So long as there are nations out there finding their own regions, then the same thing will happen to them. We got to fight the hold that Big Regions have in NationStates. This resolution is for the little guy, the small business of region making who do not have the resources as Big Regions have in the game. Those regions who have been around since the very beginning.

[Nuevo Blluedevil]

My attempt is to make the World Assembly more relevant.

If you read and follow the rules for WA (I'd suggest you do), they would be relevant. The irrelevancy is your own doing.

Then the rules for WA is irrelevant. They need to be updated to 2012 standards.

[Heistrein]

Don't confuse my success at backing up the merits on this bill with anything but that.

EXCUSE ME? A moderator had to correct what you're saying! You call that success? I'm sorry, but you sir/madam, frankly have no idea what you are saying or doing. Just stop before you get kicked out of WA.