NATION

PASSWORD

DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Far-Tortuga
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: May 04, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Far-Tortuga » Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:47 pm

The most commonly accepted answer to the "many earths" dilemma is that the universe as we perceive it is, in fact, a multiverse. Any given point common to every universe can and most likely has been divvied up between any number of reality perceptions. It is our experience that nations, states, and individuals moving through a point in space-time will or will not meet another nation, state, or individual moving and existing in that same space-time point more or less randomly. For whatever reason, Earth and the Sol System at large is a particularly intense intersection of a multitude of realities.

The exact mechanics of these reality "intersections" are unknown or, at best, guessed at and theorized about. Common governmental procedure seems to be to ignore the philosophical implications and merely exploit the situation to the best of that government's (or corporation's, or individual's) ability.

This dilemma is not of course unique to spacefaring civilizations, although our intersections commonly occur on a much larger scale. We frequently observe the dilemma playing out on the XX Century Earth most commonly found in all timelines, where two nations may find themselves occupying the same geographical space. An accommodation is either reached, or through some sort of metaphysical philosophical group think, both nations "ignore" the existence of the other.

User avatar
Rutianas
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 479
Founded: Aug 23, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:29 am

Far-Tortuga wrote:The most commonly accepted answer to the "many earths" dilemma is that the universe as we perceive it is, in fact, a multiverse. Any given point common to every universe can and most likely has been divvied up between any number of reality perceptions. It is our experience that nations, states, and individuals moving through a point in space-time will or will not meet another nation, state, or individual moving and existing in that same space-time point more or less randomly. For whatever reason, Earth and the Sol System at large is a particularly intense intersection of a multitude of realities.

The exact mechanics of these reality "intersections" are unknown or, at best, guessed at and theorized about. Common governmental procedure seems to be to ignore the philosophical implications and merely exploit the situation to the best of that government's (or corporation's, or individual's) ability.

This dilemma is not of course unique to spacefaring civilizations, although our intersections commonly occur on a much larger scale. We frequently observe the dilemma playing out on the XX Century Earth most commonly found in all timelines, where two nations may find themselves occupying the same geographical space. An accommodation is either reached, or through some sort of metaphysical philosophical group think, both nations "ignore" the existence of the other.


OOC: Precisely why I say that the space Rutianas holds is not contested. For all I know a Star Wars or Star Trek based nation has set up home in the same territory. I'd refuse to acknowledge it, therefore, I'm ignoring what they're doing and ICly acting as if they don't exist in my IC space. They could cry all they want about it. I'm not in their IC universe.

User avatar
Remenant America
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 137
Founded: Jun 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Remenant America » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:30 am

My nation is in the air and space buisness. We have devoloped space planes such as the B-2C F-26 and F-26A the JJ-247A and a new protype the B-3. They are capable of launching payload from space docking with spacestations and traveling around the sorld faster than any other plane to date.The F-26A for say can carry a team of special ops around the world in four hours into a hostile country do their job and have them back in less than ten hours. Also the F-26 and the B-2C are capable of carrying surrveilance tech and weapons such as nuclear missiles bunker busters and other large and small capable re entry devices cappable of hitting a red dot on a 2x4. This allows the easy deployment of forces and most likely the most capable defence force in nation states. These planes would require either WA authorization to be allowed to fly in space. (which wont happen) or that we spend millions of dollars devoloping new bomb casings to protect the bomb IF it is still attached to the vehicle but if it were to be fired it would burn up in re entry. This also leave the question would the F-26 and B-2C be allowed to fly inro space for quick deployment of forces. Also the JJ-247A has the ability to enter space and dock with a space station should the need arise.The JJ-247A is simply a more superior version of airforce one. It does not carry weapons however does carry the commander and cheif of some nations. Then if the JJ-247A peer say had to dock with a space station IN AN EMERGENCY would we be violationg the proposal by protecting our leader or would it be excused. If we could develop this bomb casing described earlier would the ASRA still be allowed to operate its space planes?

Please see my forum in trade for a thourough description of planes and payload capabilites

User avatar
Rutianas
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 479
Founded: Aug 23, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:19 am

Remenant America wrote:My nation is in the air and space buisness. We have devoloped space planes such as the B-2C F-26 and F-26A the JJ-247A and a new protype the B-3. They are capable of launching payload from space docking with spacestations and traveling around the sorld faster than any other plane to date.The F-26A for say can carry a team of special ops around the world in four hours into a hostile country do their job and have them back in less than ten hours. Also the F-26 and the B-2C are capable of carrying surrveilance tech and weapons such as nuclear missiles bunker busters and other large and small capable re entry devices cappable of hitting a red dot on a 2x4. This allows the easy deployment of forces and most likely the most capable defence force in nation states. These planes would require either WA authorization to be allowed to fly in space. (which wont happen) or that we spend millions of dollars devoloping new bomb casings to protect the bomb IF it is still attached to the vehicle but if it were to be fired it would burn up in re entry. This also leave the question would the F-26 and B-2C be allowed to fly inro space for quick deployment of forces. Also the JJ-247A has the ability to enter space and dock with a space station should the need arise.The JJ-247A is simply a more superior version of airforce one. It does not carry weapons however does carry the commander and cheif of some nations. Then if the JJ-247A peer say had to dock with a space station IN AN EMERGENCY would we be violationg the proposal by protecting our leader or would it be excused. If we could develop this bomb casing described earlier would the ASRA still be allowed to operate its space planes?

Please see my forum in trade for a thourough description of planes and payload capabilites


I would say that if you had to dock with a space station in an emergency, because it's not covered here, then it's up to the nation who owns the space station. The Imperial Republic would not deny anyone in an emergency situation access to one of our stations, however, there are some nations who may.

User avatar
Allied Governments
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5457
Founded: Oct 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Allied Governments » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:05 am

Rutianas wrote:
I would say that if you had to dock with a space station in an emergency, because it's not covered here, then it's up to the nation who owns the space station. The Imperial Republic would not deny anyone in an emergency situation access to one of our stations, however, there are some nations who may.


Namely, my space stations. Unless you are willing to have said shuttles/fighters boarded, then be prepared to have Federation Point-Defense guns ready, willing, and able to fire at you.
[SHOCKING] Woman dragged by coffee cup into the MANDRILL MAZE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdllAAHq-WA

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Flibbleites » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:08 am

Serbian_Soviet_Union wrote:
Flibbleites wrote:
Serbian_Soviet_Union wrote:He`s right this has been going on for weeks on end and everybody still hates it and isn`t there some kind of time limit for a draft to become a proposal or something?

No you can draft a proposal for as long as you want, in fact, it's my opinion that the longer a proposal is drafted for, the better it tends to be.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative


If your a future tech nation and want to give uo 10,000km of your space area away cause of some proposal, go right ahead, but no nation is silly enough to give up it's own space area or land. The people have spoken, it's time to put this proposal to an end.

And when did I give the impression that I supported this idea? I was simply answering your question about a time limit for drafting a proposal.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative
Last edited by Flibbleites on Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gaytania
Secretary
 
Posts: 38
Founded: Mar 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Gaytania » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:25 pm

OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.
Last edited by Gaytania on Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rutianas
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 479
Founded: Aug 23, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Rutianas » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:36 pm

Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.


OOC: Problem with using the 'Laws of Physics' argument is that everyone can RP their nation the way they want. Now, I'm not sure exactly which argument you're pointing out as being 'made up', but all of them have looked valid to me. If I wanted to RP a bunch of rabbits in space with laser pistols and no planet to call home, I'd be allowed to do so. The discussion has stayed on topic as our own personal nation's situation have been discussed and related to for this resolution. There's no 'filibustering' going on here.

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:47 pm

And when did I give the impression that I supported this idea? I was simply answering your question about a time limit for drafting a proposal.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative


This proposal has been resubmitted over itleast 10-15 times and all of it's resubmission has been strongly opposed and rejected by most of it's delegates and member states, if the majority of the delegates and the member states seriously wanted a space proposal such as Gaytania's one, then don't you think it would of been approved and passed through the WA by now?? Don't you think it's time to respect the democratic will of all of it's WA delegates and member states and move on??

OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.


Your resolution has been rejected each time, how many times did you even resubmitted your proposal?? Has been a time that you had your proposal submitted multiple times at once and by far, all of it has been rejected, speaking of obeying the laws of physics in RPing, isn't it time that you started obbeying it and started to think maybe the WA and most of it's 10,500 member states are just not ready for this kind of resolution just yet?? You cannot keep blaiming us because your proposal keeps getting rejected, it is time that you started respecting the democracy of WA and the democratic will of all of it's member states and delegates.
Last edited by Serbian_Soviet_Union on Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Otagia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1168
Founded: Nov 16, 2004
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Otagia » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:49 pm

Rutianas wrote:
Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.


OOC: Problem with using the 'Laws of Physics' argument is that everyone can RP their nation the way they want. Now, I'm not sure exactly which argument you're pointing out as being 'made up', but all of them have looked valid to me. If I wanted to RP a bunch of rabbits in space with laser pistols and no planet to call home, I'd be allowed to do so. The discussion has stayed on topic as our own personal nation's situation have been discussed and related to for this resolution. There's no 'filibustering' going on here.

Indeed, given the lack of a floor for any one person to monopolize, filibusters aren't even possible. After all, it's not like you can't submit the proposal for a vote. It's just that, you know, nobody likes it.

Of course, that's not to say we don't like it. Not being a WA nation, Otagia will quite happily take all that territory that its members no longer use, free of charge. Note that we will be enforcing steep tolls for the use of our spaceways. Thanks, and have a nice day.
Last edited by Otagia on Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:12 pm

Otagia wrote:
Rutianas wrote:
Gaytania wrote:OCC: I have been observing the debate over this proposal for a while now, and while I respect your criticisms and comments. I do believe that some players are using the topic discussed in this proposal as a means to use your role playing to allow you to make stuff up in order to stall this legislation. As far as I know there is now rule against filibustering in the WA, but could everyone just everyone try to use rational arguments here. The least you can do is obey the Laws of Physics in your RPing.


OOC: Problem with using the 'Laws of Physics' argument is that everyone can RP their nation the way they want. Now, I'm not sure exactly which argument you're pointing out as being 'made up', but all of them have looked valid to me. If I wanted to RP a bunch of rabbits in space with laser pistols and no planet to call home, I'd be allowed to do so. The discussion has stayed on topic as our own personal nation's situation have been discussed and related to for this resolution. There's no 'filibustering' going on here.

Indeed, given the lack of a floor for any one person to monopolize, filibusters aren't even possible. After all, it's not like you can't submit the proposal for a vote. It's just that, you know, nobody likes it.

Of course, that's not to say we don't like it. Not being a WA nation, Otagia will quite happily take all that territory that its members no longer use, free of charge. Note that we will be enforcing steep tolls for the use of our spaceways. Thanks, and have a nice day.



I believe if such a proposal was to pass, there would be no way of enforcing it since 95% or all of it's future tech nation member states would resign from the WA thus preventing the so called legislation piece of becomming effective in anyways, all it would do is nothing then and would only clutter up the WA and nothing else. Also Otagia, by this resolution forcing FT WA member states to give up that part of space area/land or what you call it and then charging tools to allow those to pass through that area is only asking for trouble, for war and an invasion occuring in your nation or planet.
Last edited by Serbian_Soviet_Union on Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Cobdenia
Envoy
 
Posts: 203
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Cobdenia » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:37 pm

I think the only way of doing it would be to spacify Law of the Sea somehow...

International Space = international waters. But even that will end up being bloody complicated
Sir Cyril MacLehose-Strangways-Jones, GCRC, LOG
Permanent Representative of the Raj of Cobdenia to the World Assembly
Proud member of the Green Ink Brigade

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:44 pm

Cobdenia wrote:I think the only way of doing it would be to spacify Law of the Sea somehow...

International Space = international waters. But even that will end up being bloody complicated


International Space is much better, to define international Space in the same way of definning international waters would be much more acceptable, however definning international space in under no circumstances should be allowed to define a space nation's border or in any circumstances allowing nations to give up parts of it's space area or land for it to become an international space.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Gaytania
Secretary
 
Posts: 38
Founded: Mar 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Gaytania » Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:49 pm

World Assembly,

RECOGNIZING the rapid advancements of technology in the aerospace industry and the increasing exploration of space by WA member nations

NOTING the need for securing the space exploration efforts of WA member nations

DECLARING that extraplanetary military conflicts inhibit the further exploration of the solar system, our galaxy, and the universe

HEREBY:

1)DECLARES that the aerospace that is a distance, measured in each nations appropriate units, to be highly comparable to that of 100,000 AU beyond an member nations sentiently inhabited celestial bodies surface is a trade neutral zone and is not subject to any nation's, regions, or international entity's trade restrictions
(a) RESERVES the right for nations to expand their territorial borders to beyond a distance equivalent to 100,000 AU up to a distance equivalent to 1,000,000 AU as an "Exclusive Economic Zone", within which gives a nation the exclusive right to harvest natural resources, but otherwise this zone will be considered Neutral Space;
(b) This includes all uninhabited celestial bodies within this zone

2)PROCLAIMS that space that is neither territorial nor within the exclusive economic zone be considered 'International Space'
a) National jurisdiction is to be extended to vessels registered in that nation traversing, and on offshore installations located in, international waters and the exclusive economic zone

3)ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Space Council which will function to monitor the safety and security of member nations space programs
(a)Hereby charges the newly established World Assembly Space Council with serving as mediator to review evidence of all border disputes and hostilities to establish an aggressor, where-upon the World Assembly Space Council will mediate an agreement between the member nations clearly defining the borders between them
(b) This agreement will be subject to the final terms defined by the oppressed nations leaders and will need the approval of the World Assembly Space Council


4) EMPHASIZING the right of WA member nations to claim, govern, and defend territory on uninhabited celestial bodies through said nations previously established processes used to annex and claim uninhabited territory on celestial bodies

5) REASSERTS the right of space faring WA member nations to protect their nations trade and merchant vessels from military or criminal attack

6) ALLOWS nations to conduct non-offensive experiments toward the advancement of any legal technology provided, with World Assembly Space Council's oversight, that the experiment will be safe to all neighboring civilizations and have no lasting effects on the local space

7) FURTHER NOTING that the trade and military restrictions contained within this legislation do not apply to a member nations interactions with non-member nations


Due to the positive response I received from my last draft. I have decided to edit and re-submit this proposal in light of some of the criticism I have received from my previous. Whether you agree or disagree with my proposal, I hope you all will respect the determination and perserverance that I have shown in my short time here in the World Assembly.

User avatar
Skeelzania
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 183
Founded: Feb 21, 2004
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Skeelzania » Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:51 pm

The Skeelzanian observer delegation commends the Gaytanian delegates for their fortitude in continuing the proposal process of this resolution, despite the opposition from what we can only assume are dangerous and warmongering WA members. In particular, Far-Tortuga is a den of thieves, xenos, and interstellar scum, and we look forward to the day when the WA Compliance Gnomes strip them of their weaponry and allow the Skeelzanian Sternreich to reimpose Order.

User avatar
The Emmerian Unions
Minister
 
Posts: 2407
Founded: Jan 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby The Emmerian Unions » Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:45 pm

Gaytania wrote:Due to the positive response I received from my last draft. I have decided to edit and re-submit this proposal in light of some of the criticism I have received from my previous. Whether you agree or disagree with my proposal, I hope you all will respect the determination and perserverance that I have shown in my short time here in the World Assembly.


And what about the other arguments against this that you have recieved? This proposal has failed to reach quorum SEVERAL times, and yet you still seek to have it go through. Please, stop. I highly doubt that5 given it's history, it will actually reach quorum, so again, please end this, and let it die peacefully.
Last edited by The Emmerian Unions on Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Cake is a lie!
<<Peace through Fear and Superior Firepower>>

STOP AMERICAN IMPERIALISM? America is ANTI-IMPERIAL!
Ifreann wrote:"And in world news, the United States has recently elected Bill Gates as God Emperor For All Time. Foreign commentators believe that Gates' personal fortune may have played a role in his victory, but criticism from the United States of Gates(as it is now known) has been sparse and brief."
For good Russian Rock Radio, go here.
Please note, I rarely go into NSG. If I post there, please do not expect a response from me.
ALL HAIL THE GODDESS REPLOID PRODUCTIONS!

User avatar
Sionis Prioratus
Senator
 
Posts: 3537
Founded: Feb 07, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Sionis Prioratus » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:15 pm

Gaytania wrote:*snip*


Indeed I do respect very much Your Honor's perseverance. As a matter of fact, I very much believe you got what it takes to be someday a hall-of-fame Resolution writer.

But fact is, we cannot agree with the principle of this proposal, which would be to regulate Space, which, as we all know, can and often is an extremely weird place.

That said, I call upon fellow Delegates to grant this proposal quorum so it can be voted down once and for all, thus enabling the author to pursue with his obvious talents hopefully worthy and just other ideas.

Yours,
Cathérine Victoire de Saint-Clair
Haute Ambassadrice for the WA for
✡ The Jewish Kingdom of Sionis Prioratus
Daughter of The Late King Adrian the First
In the Name of
Sa Majesté Impériale Dagobert VI de Saint-Clair
A simple truth

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:57 pm

Due to the positive response I received from my last draft. I have decided to edit and re-submit this proposal in light of some of the criticism I have received from my previous. Whether you agree or disagree with my proposal, I hope you all will respect the determination and perserverance that I have shown in my short time here in the World Assembly.


OOC: All what you did was beg other delegates to approve your proposal to try and get it through and each time it has failed misserably, you keep insisting other delegates to approve and spamming your proposal and telegramming other nation's to approve your resolution, you resubmitted it itleast over 15-20 times and none of it worked, it's time that you took everyone's advice and left it to die in peace already or itleast wait a few weeks or upto a month and then work on redrafting it and try and resubmit it, like this if you keep on spamming and whoring your proposal, it is never going to be taken seriously and it will end up being rejected each and everysingle time.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:17 am

OOC: Also noticing the fact that his proposal seems to be getting larger and larger each time he seems to be redrafting.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:50 pm

This proposal was just recently removed from being voted by the delegates whether to approve or not to approve the proposal to go though the quoroum and put to vote.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Serbian_Soviet_Union
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1764
Founded: Feb 11, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Serbian_Soviet_Union » Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:00 am

The proposal is resubmitted again, Gaytania what is the point of resubmitting when the majority have already spoken that they do not support such a resolution, plus it is also illegal and in the wrong category.
Zastava Arms Inc Cheap Military Hardware: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6443
Zastava Energy Inc & Zastava Oil Corporation: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7806
Full member of: AMNAT, CIN, SCUTUM, CA, VA, PSUS
Observer Member of: GIA, EA, CI

Defcon: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) State of War/State of Emergency || Preparation for a possible war
Military size 5% Active || 2.5% Reserves
Government Type: Capitalist, Conservative, Right Wing, Democratic
FSSU Nations Factbook: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=9558
Serbian Broadcasting News: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9733
Baxtell Heavy Engineering Droid Works

User avatar
Cobdenia
Envoy
 
Posts: 203
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Cobdenia » Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:36 am

Urm...100,000 AU? That's a bit far...that would mean that (RL) Earth's Territorial Space would encompass the entire solar system as far as the outer Oort cloud - perhaps a bit much, especially where their is the possibility of two inhabited planets in the same system. 1,000,000 AU would encompass proxima centauri, Barnard's Star, Sirius A & B, Epsilon Eridani, Procyon, Epsilon Indi, Teegarden's star, Van Maanen's star...hell, quite a lot of other systems.
Sir Cyril MacLehose-Strangways-Jones, GCRC, LOG
Permanent Representative of the Raj of Cobdenia to the World Assembly
Proud member of the Green Ink Brigade

User avatar
Deschenek
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 140
Founded: Jun 07, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Deschenek » Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:46 am

Seriously people are still talking about this and gaytania is still promoting it?! This is getting old and stupid :palm: I have to admire the stubborness of him and his supporters even though tis bill is basicly dead and done.

Hopefully soon a pandimensional being will come along and erase all memeory and existence of it thats what probably happens to a lot of bills.
Endorse Deschenek for the greater peace and goodwill torwards flies ( we`re looking into comments for extending that policy torwards humans too)

Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.05

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:33 am

The honoured delegate cannot support the regulation of space because the world cannot control space. Okay, maybe airspace but certainly not deep space.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Re: DRAFT: Space Neutrality Act

Postby Ardchoille » Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:06 pm

This proposal is officially DEAD. Gaytania, do not submit it in this form again. You have come very close to having your nation expelled from the WA for repeatedly submitting an illegal proposal. The only reason Gaytania is still a WA member is that you seem to have been trying to reword your proposal to take account of some criticisms and thus make it legal.

You have not succeeded because you have too many concepts in the one proposal. Some of these concepts belong in different categories. Therefore, every time you submit the proposal it is illegal because of category violations. I repeat: take one idea and work on that single idea.

To the space nations that have been objecting to it on the grounds that their borders cannot be defined: true as that may be, it doesn't render the proposal illegal by itself. It may be possible, even in the WA multiverse, to write a legal border-defining proposal so broad it could cover even the "two nations in one physical space" problem. (I dunno how, but I put nothing beyond the collective genius of NS proposal writers; possibly, as Cobdenia suggested, an "International Waters" variant.)

But to say you'd leave the WA over it before it's even reached quorum is missing the point of having a WA. Proposals go on display to let Delegates decide if they're even worth voting on. If you see one that's spectacularly bad for your nation, you start TGing Delegates to say "don't endorse". If it makes quorum and goes to vote, you TG some more to say "vote against" and argue in the debate thread. If, despite your efforts, it passes, you go for a Repeal. To say youll withdraw before it even goes to vote makes it look as if you don't understand how the WA works.

Gaytania, the proposal came within six votes of quorum while I was too sick to delete any proposals. The fact that a proposal reaches quorum does not mean it's legal. There are Delegates who endorse proposals because of RP or gameplay obligations (alliances, diplomatic manoeuvres); others who don't know what's legal and what's not; some who automatically endorse everything; and eccentrics like my own region's Delegate, whose system I still haven't figured out (though it may be based on the day of the week).

Oh, and whoever suggested that the old NSUN probably didn't think of there being space-based nations: nobody who'd endured a certain departed nation's frequent references to its "frikkin' Death Star" would believe that one. ;)
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads