NATION

PASSWORD

DRAFT: Intoxicating Substances Regulation Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Floofville
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Sep 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

DRAFT: Intoxicating Substances Regulation Act

Postby Floofville » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:04 pm

EDIT: Floofville has retracted this proposal, but will leave the thread for debate.
We apologize for wasting the Assembly's time, and hope other nations will not ostracize Floofville.

Current Draft
Intoxicating Substance Regulation
Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Significant


The World Assembly,

AWARE of the prevalence of intoxicating substances among the nations of the Assembly,

APPALLED by the results of excessive consumption of intoxicating substances, including but not limited to decreased attentiveness, reflexes, and reasoning,

SHOCKED that any individual would place himself at increased risk of these effects,

RECOGNIZING that the various species and races of the World Assembly have different tolerance levels of alcoholic or otherwise intoxicating substances,

DEFINING
1.) "depressant effect" as the diminishment of the normal function of the mind or body parts of a species,
2.) "intoxicating substance" as any consumed liquid which produces a depressant effect,
3.) "intoxicating substance dispensaries" as any establishment, individual, or organization which distributes intoxicating substances for the purpose of consumption,
4.) "intoxicating substance producers" as any establishment, individual, or organization which produces intoxicating substances for the purpose of consumption,
5.) "effects of intoxication" as any depressant effect resulting from the consumption of an intoxicating substance,
6.) "minor" as any individual who has not reached the legal minimum drinking age of his nation,
7.) "intoxication immunodeficient" as any individual who has a decreased tolerance toward intoxicating substances,
8.) "distribution" as the acceptance or purchase of any individual of any object or substance, in any quantity and in any number of subsequent purchases,

HEREBY

1.) ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Intoxicating Substance Regulation Committee (WAISRC) to regulate the production and distribution of intoxicating substances,

2.) DICTATES that WAISRC shall be funded by the World Assembly General Fund and by the donations of willing individuals, organizations, and nations,

3.) CHARGES WAISRC with the duties of:
a.) Determining the substances which produce intoxication in a species,
b.) Determining the amount of intoxicating substances which a species may consume before effects of intoxication result,
c.) Determining the time in which the effects of intoxication decrease from intoxication to normal levels for a species
e.) Cooperating with national governments for:
i.) Determining the legal minimum drinking age, considering what opportunity an individual of that age will have to harm himself or his surroundings, the normal physical immunity to intoxicating substances, and religious obligations of a nation and species,
ii.) Abolishing distribution of intoxicating substances in amounts which cause effects of intoxication to species to which the substance is intoxicating,
iii.) Prosecuting individuals or organizations for the distribution of intoxicating substances to minors and the intoxication immunodeficient of that species,

4.) REQUIRES:
a.) That governments in member nations to cooperate with WAISRC regarding the duties imposed upon WAISRC,
b.) That intoxicating substance dispensaries to refuse the sale of intoxicating substances to minors and the intoxication immunodeficient,

5.) ALLOWS any member nation to declare complete abolishment of intoxicating substance production, intoxicating substance distribution, or a combination of both, extending the same right to provinces, states, or other national subdivisions, provided the legislation does not conflict with national or international law


First Draft
Intoxicating Substance Regulation
Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong


The World Assembly,

AWARE of the prevalence of intoxicating substances among the nations of the Assembly,

APPALLED by the results of excessive consumption of intoxicating substances, including but not limited to decreased attentiveness, reflexes, and reasoning,

SHOCKED that any individual would place himself at increased risk of these effects,

RECOGNIZING that the various species and races of the World Assembly have different tolerance levels of alcoholic or otherwise intoxicating substances,

DEFINING
1.) "depressant effect" as the diminishment of the normal function of the mind or body parts of a species,
2.) "intoxicating substance" as any consumed liquid which produces a depressant effect,
3.) "intoxicating substance dispensaries" as any establishment, individual, or organization which distributes intoxicating substances for the purpose of consumption,
4.) "intoxicating substance producers" as any establishment, individual, or organization which produces intoxicating substances for the purpose of consumption,
5.) "effects of intoxication" as any depressant effect resulting from the consumption of an intoxicating substance,
6.) "minor" as any individual who has not reached physical maturity typical for that species,
7.) "intoxication immunodeficient" as any individual who has a decreased tolerance toward intoxicating substances,
8.) "distribution" as the acceptance or purchase of any individual of any object or substance, in any quantity and in any number of subsequent purchases

HEREBY

1.) ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Intoxicating Substance Regulation Committee (WAISRC) to regulate the production and distribution of intoxicating substances,
2.) DICTATES that WAISRC shall be funded by the World Assembly General Fund and by the donations of willing individuals, organizations, and nations,
3.) CHARGES WAISRC with the duties of:
a.) Determining the substances which produce intoxication in a species,
b.) Determining the amount of intoxicating substances which a species may consume before effects of intoxication result,
c.) Determining the time in which the effects of intoxication decrease from intoxication to normal levels for a species,
d.) Cooperating with national governments for:
i.) Abolishing distribution of intoxicating substances in amounts, either at once or in portions, which cause effects of intoxication to species to which the substance is intoxicating, until the time determined by WAISRC for intoxication to subside,
ii.) Prosecuting individuals or organizations for the distribution of intoxicating substances to minors and the intoxication immunodeficient of that species,

4.) REQUIRES:
a.) That governments in member states to cooperate with WAISRC regarding the duties imposed upon WAISRC,
b.) That intoxicating substance dispensaries to refuse the sale of intoxicating substances to minors and the intoxication immunodeficient,
Last edited by Floofville on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Indeed.

User avatar
Bazatia
Envoy
 
Posts: 272
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bazatia » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:24 pm

I think that this proposal infringes on the rights WA member nations too much. What if the legal drinking age is below the age where they have reached physical maturity? Also, is this bill making it illegal for people to get drunk, or am I reading this wrong?
Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: 7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

98% of all internet users would cry if facebook would break down, if you are part of that 2% who simply would sit back and laugh then copy and paste this into your sig.

User avatar
Floofville
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Sep 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Floofville » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:33 pm

Bazatia wrote:I think that this proposal infringes on the rights WA member nations too much. What if the legal drinking age is below the age where they have reached physical maturity? Also, is this bill making it illegal for people to get drunk, or am I reading this wrong?

Ideally it would prevent the sale of intoxicating substances in quantities which would make it possible for people to get drunk. However I will look into the wording to see if it can be clarified.

The WAISRC would cooperate with governments to establish a legal drinking age, but scientifically it would be most prudent to restrict the sale of intoxicating substances to those whose bodies were most suited to resist the effects. I shall note this also and improve the act.
Indeed.

User avatar
Bazatia
Envoy
 
Posts: 272
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bazatia » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:38 pm

Floofville wrote:
Bazatia wrote:I think that this proposal infringes on the rights WA member nations too much. What if the legal drinking age is below the age where they have reached physical maturity? Also, is this bill making it illegal for people to get drunk, or am I reading this wrong?

Ideally it would prevent the sale of intoxicating substances in quantities which would make it possible for people to get drunk. However I will look into the wording to see if it can be clarified.

The WAISRC would cooperate with governments to establish a legal drinking age, but scientifically it would be most prudent to restrict the sale of intoxicating substances to those whose bodies were most suited to resist the effects. I shall note this also and improve the act.


Still, it infringes on the sovereignty of nations. I cannot support this Resolution based on that fact.
Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: 7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

98% of all internet users would cry if facebook would break down, if you are part of that 2% who simply would sit back and laugh then copy and paste this into your sig.

User avatar
Floofville
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Sep 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Floofville » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:42 pm

Bazatia wrote:
Floofville wrote:
Bazatia wrote:I think that this proposal infringes on the rights WA member nations too much. What if the legal drinking age is below the age where they have reached physical maturity? Also, is this bill making it illegal for people to get drunk, or am I reading this wrong?

Ideally it would prevent the sale of intoxicating substances in quantities which would make it possible for people to get drunk. However I will look into the wording to see if it can be clarified.

The WAISRC would cooperate with governments to establish a legal drinking age, but scientifically it would be most prudent to restrict the sale of intoxicating substances to those whose bodies were most suited to resist the effects. I shall note this also and improve the act.


Still, it infringes on the sovereignty of nations. I cannot support this Resolution based on that fact.


May I inquire why you support the WA if you believe that international politics infringes on sovereignity? Is there a limit to sovereignity? I believe this thread is not the place to respond, so those questions can be hypothetical if you want.

However, if it is possible, what would make the act to your approval?
Indeed.

User avatar
Floofville
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Sep 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Floofville » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:44 pm

Definition 8 suddenly seems superfluous. Would it be best to remove it?
Indeed.

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

Postby Rutianas » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:28 pm

I'm in agreement, this just imposes too much on the rights of individuals in nations. Also, to make it where people cannot go to bars and truly enjoy themselves, by getting drunk if they so desire, is likely to cause a significant downfall in business, causing said bars to go out of business. Now, this may be exactly what you want to happen, but I assure you that others in the WA will not feel the same.

This kind of thing is best left to national government to regulate.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

User avatar
Bazatia
Envoy
 
Posts: 272
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bazatia » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:06 pm

Floofville wrote:
Bazatia wrote:
Floofville wrote:
Bazatia wrote:I think that this proposal infringes on the rights WA member nations too much. What if the legal drinking age is below the age where they have reached physical maturity? Also, is this bill making it illegal for people to get drunk, or am I reading this wrong?

Ideally it would prevent the sale of intoxicating substances in quantities which would make it possible for people to get drunk. However I will look into the wording to see if it can be clarified.

The WAISRC would cooperate with governments to establish a legal drinking age, but scientifically it would be most prudent to restrict the sale of intoxicating substances to those whose bodies were most suited to resist the effects. I shall note this also and improve the act.


Still, it infringes on the sovereignty of nations. I cannot support this Resolution based on that fact.


May I inquire why you support the WA if you believe that international politics infringes on sovereignity? Is there a limit to sovereignity? I believe this thread is not the place to respond, so those questions can be hypothetical if you want.

However, if it is possible, what would make the act to your approval?


Well, I support the WA in lightly, very lightly, imposing limits on nations, and International things, like Condemning and Commending, are good, but bills like this would be way too much interference. As for what I would change, get rid of the part that makes it illegal to get drunk. I also think Definition 8 is a little unnecessary. As far as the distribution to minors thing, every country has its own definition of "minor". And each has its own drinking age as well.
Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: 7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

98% of all internet users would cry if facebook would break down, if you are part of that 2% who simply would sit back and laugh then copy and paste this into your sig.

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

Postby Flibbleites » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:11 pm

What, is the Recreational Drug Use category too good for you?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

User avatar
Slaytesics
Minister
 
Posts: 2248
Founded: Aug 20, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Slaytesics » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:17 pm

AGREED SIR
All for this
My favorite quotes.

Ballotonia wrote:Total BS.
Wanna meet girls? Go play Farmville.
Ballotonia

Timurid Empire wrote:I do not understand people like this. How can you fear any human being or interaction with them? We are all Human, and we all bleed the same. Unless their a Hemophiliac.


Lunatic Goofballs wrote:(Image)


Ranbo wrote:Heey! I'm not perv!

You name it, you claim it. You were the one that thought of it in the first place. :p

User avatar
Enn
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1228
Founded: Jan 26, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Enn » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:28 pm

There is absolutely no way Enn can ever support a proposal that would cripple our major export industry. Also, what do you expect the Strangers' Bar is for?

Stephanie Fulton, of Enn

[edit] You also list intoxicating substances as having to be liquids. Well then, we'll just continue our good work on producing a sandwich-based Ennish Shandy.
Last edited by Enn on Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I know what gay science is.
Reploid Productions wrote:The World Assembly as a whole terrifies me!
Pythagosaurus wrote:You are seriously deluded about the technical competence of the average human.

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:54 pm

I don't think this resolution is in the right category. Might want to try the restricting recreational drug use or whatever it is.

EDIT: Oh, never mind, I see Flibbs already brought this up. Well, I'll remind you too.
Last edited by A mean old man on Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:56 pm

No. Just No. Never. We shall not be party to mandated WA wide prohibition.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Bazatia
Envoy
 
Posts: 272
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bazatia » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:03 pm

Grays Harbor wrote:No. Just No. Never. We shall not be party to mandated WA wide prohibition.


Its not prohibition, its just unenforceable legislation so that minors can't drink, and no one can get drunk.
Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: 7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

98% of all internet users would cry if facebook would break down, if you are part of that 2% who simply would sit back and laugh then copy and paste this into your sig.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:06 pm

Bazatia wrote:
Grays Harbor wrote:No. Just No. Never. We shall not be party to mandated WA wide prohibition.


Its not prohibition, its just unenforceable legislation so that minors can't drink, and no one can get drunk.


The we amend our statement to read "near-prohibition". Our stance remains the same, however, in that we shall never support any proposal of this sort, any more than we would support one either completely banning or completely legalizing recreational drugs WA wide. This is not an international issue, this is a domestic issue.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Bazatia
Envoy
 
Posts: 272
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bazatia » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:08 pm

Grays Harbor wrote:
Bazatia wrote:
Grays Harbor wrote:No. Just No. Never. We shall not be party to mandated WA wide prohibition.


Its not prohibition, its just unenforceable legislation so that minors can't drink, and no one can get drunk.


The we amend our statement to read "near-prohibition". Our stance remains the same, however, in that we shall never support any proposal of this sort, any more than we would support one either completely banning or completely legalizing recreational drugs WA wide. This is not an international issue, this is a domestic issue.


I don't support this bill for the same reasons, but just wanted to set the record straight
Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: 7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

98% of all internet users would cry if facebook would break down, if you are part of that 2% who simply would sit back and laugh then copy and paste this into your sig.

User avatar
The Great Pac-Man
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Dec 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Intoxicating Substances

Postby The Great Pac-Man » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:33 pm

I think that people are in different moods at different times, and sometimes need a good drink. Like, if you just got a divorce or something, you would want a drink. And everyone knows that a party is not that great without beer! :)

Lord Pac-Pac
Last edited by The Great Pac-Man on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Nordicus
Diplomat
 
Posts: 590
Founded: Nov 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Nordicus » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:33 pm

I fail to see how this is important enough of an issue that it needs to be addressed by the World Assembly, particularly when individual nations could do a better job of handling this issue themselves.

Now, let's get back to condemning whatever raider group it is that wants the publicity.
Note: I am an atheist. If I say something supportive of a religion, it's because I try to be fair and even-handed, not because I am a follower of that religion.
H N Fiddlebottoms VIII wrote:Engineers hate biology, because it has very few right angles. Everything is all curves and bumps and the only penis-shaped items are actual penises.

Dregruk wrote:
Kma2 wrote:How else could it be that they are so uneducated regarding what is going on in America.

Same as anyone else; I slaughter gibbons and frolic in their blood. Or just, y'know, disagree with you.

Tsaraine wrote:Somewhere in Philadelphia, one school administrator has just smacked another school administrator upside the head. "Damnit, Jenkins! I told you we should just have gone with chastity belts!"

Biblical Creation

User avatar
The Great Pac-Man
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Dec 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Great Pac-Man » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:37 pm

I agree, I think that the country's government should take care of the problem, not the WA. It is just too miniscule.

Lord Pac-Pac
Last edited by The Great Pac-Man on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Karawana
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Nov 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Karawana » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:41 pm

Naturally, this is an infringement of national rights.
Having a large superpower controlling distribution of "intoxicating substances" is terrifying and, frankly, impossible.
It is not something that would help nations (like the current "International Post Office" proposal) but rather harm them. What if there is a nation where it is culturally (and physiologically) acceptable to consume "intoxicating substances"? This nation may be in the WA just to improve foreign relations simply to have their cultural rights attacked due to a proposal that wouldn't necessarily even be plausible.

Having stated my beliefs, I can not support this proposal.

User avatar
Floofville
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Sep 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Floofville » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:47 pm

I see your point. This would be more a national issue than an international issue. Therefore I retract my drafts. However, this is not completely vain. We have just determined that international organizations should not have down-to-the-minute control of our lives.

I apologize if I wasted the Assembly's time, and hope this has not ended my international career.
Indeed.

User avatar
The Great Pac-Man
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Dec 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Great Pac-Man » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:47 pm

I agree with that statement, it wil just harm nations, not help them.

Lord Pac-Pac

User avatar
Nouvelle Rhodes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 730
Founded: Oct 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Nouvelle Rhodes » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:55 pm

Grays Harbor wrote:
Bazatia wrote:
Grays Harbor wrote:No. Just No. Never. We shall not be party to mandated WA wide prohibition.


Its not prohibition, its just unenforceable legislation so that minors can't drink, and no one can get drunk.


The we amend our statement to read "near-prohibition". Our stance remains the same, however, in that we shall never support any proposal of this sort, any more than we would support one either completely banning or completely legalizing recreational drugs WA wide. This is not an international issue, this is a domestic issue.

I, the Rhodian Representative to the World Assembly, also concur with my apt colleague from Grays Harbor that this will just upset nations. Each nation has their own legislation on 'intoxicating substances', and the WA does not need to tell its member countries what it can and can not do pertaining to alcohol, among other substances. In the name of HRH King Maximilien IX, the Kingdom of Nouvelle Rhodes opposes this bill.
EDIT: I now realize that my statement was totally unnecessary in relation to this bill.
Last edited by Nouvelle Rhodes on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4386
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby A mean old man » Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:38 pm

Floofville wrote:I apologize if I wasted the Assembly's time, and hope this has not ended my international career.


Don't worry, it hasn't. This is a miniscule mistake. The fact that you admitted you had made a mistake and apologized for it makes your image much more honorable and legitimate than if you had kept trying to argue for it and ignore or brush off any opposition, as many of the writers of unacceptable proposals are known to do.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia ← please forget

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:55 pm

Floofville wrote:I see your point. This would be more a national issue than an international issue. Therefore I retract my drafts. However, this is not completely vain. We have just determined that international organizations should not have down-to-the-minute control of our lives.

I apologize if I wasted the Assembly's time, and hope this has not ended my international career.


Just call it "a learning experience". Next time, pick something more international in scope is all.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads