NATION

PASSWORD

[Draft] Quality in Consumer Goods

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

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8885
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:16 pm

Wallenburg wrote:"I suppose so. If this proposal remains exclusively relevant to international exchanges, then I accept this increased bureaucracy."

OOC: Plus, it'd be a cool bonus upon which to build a secret and powerful new world order! Muhahaha!

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:56 am

"Final thoughts?"
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8885
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:57 am

Sciongrad wrote:"Final thoughts?"

Mandate the free movement of labour and capital in all member nations.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14398
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:00 am

Sciongrad wrote:"Final thoughts?"

"Do penguins have knees?"

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:03 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Sciongrad wrote:"Final thoughts?"

Mandate the free movement of labour and capital in all member nations.

"Your wish is my command."
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8885
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:08 am

Sciongrad wrote:"Your wish is my command."

Arise, go forth and conquer as of old.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:23 pm

Fairburn: Clause One, as currently written, is a steaming pile of nonsense.

Neville: Um...I think what Ambassador Fairburn is trying to say is that the grammar in Clause One is rather...flawed. Also, we'd recommend making the definition of 'negligence' apply only to this proposal lest future authors who wish to use the term are backed into a corner.
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:39 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:Fairburn: Clause One, as currently written, is a steaming pile of nonsense.

Neville: Um...I think what Ambassador Fairburn is trying to say is that the grammar in Clause One is rather...flawed. Also, we'd recommend making the definition of 'negligence' apply only to this proposal lest future authors who wish to use the term are backed into a corner.

"Huh? Defining a word in one resolution is not binding in future resolution."
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:42 pm

Sciongrad wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Fairburn: Clause One, as currently written, is a steaming pile of nonsense.

Neville: Um...I think what Ambassador Fairburn is trying to say is that the grammar in Clause One is rather...flawed. Also, we'd recommend making the definition of 'negligence' apply only to this proposal lest future authors who wish to use the term are backed into a corner.

"Huh? Defining a word in one resolution is not binding in future resolution."

Neville: Why, then, do multiple authors use the phrase 'for the purposes of this resolution' in their definitions?
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:45 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Sciongrad wrote:"Huh? Defining a word in one resolution is not binding in future resolution."

Neville: Why, then, do multiple authors use the phrase 'for the purposes of this resolution' in their definitions?

"Why, then, do multiple authors not use that phrase? GAR#2 does not and still defines war. Are all other resolutions bound by that definition of war? If you are correct, then there are several resolutions that contradict each other on account of varying definitions."
Last edited by Sciongrad on Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8885
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:46 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: Why, then, do multiple authors use the phrase 'for the purposes of this resolution' in their definitions?

OOC: Presumably, this is because of the same thing that occurs with 'all nations'. There is an implicit assumption vis-à-vis the defining scope, which can be made explicit if desired.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:48 pm

Sciongrad wrote:"If you are correct, then there are several resolutions that contradict each other on account of varying definitions."

Neville: Such as?

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
States of Glory WA Office wrote:Neville: Why, then, do multiple authors use the phrase 'for the purposes of this resolution' in their definitions?

OOC: Presumably, this is because of the same thing that occurs with 'all nations'. There is an implicit assumption vis-à-vis the defining scope, which can be made explicit if desired.

OOC: All other active clauses restrict future legislation to some extent. Why are definitions the exception?
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:50 pm

OOC: Sorry, not getting caught up in this. I absolutely cannot stand arguments over definitions. If you disagree with me, file a challenge. I'm proceeding anyway.
Last edited by Sciongrad on Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8885
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:51 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:OOC: All other active clauses restrict future legislation to some extent. Why are definitions the exception?

OOC: One could argue here that they are not active clauses. Defining words has been done in preambles and in what is considered the 'operative' body. Definitions do not have effects on member nations, but rather, act in a removed secondary manner. I happen to believe that definitions should apply over different resolutions and have a global scope over the statutory body, but that does not seem to currently be in vogue.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
States of Glory WA Office
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1921
Founded: Jul 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby States of Glory WA Office » Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:52 pm

Sciongrad wrote:OOC: If you disagree with me, file a challenge.

OOC: I never made any allegation of illegality. :eyebrow:

Neville: Now that Clause One is fixed, we are happy to extend our support.
Ambassador: Bartholomew Harper Fairburn Rowan Flowerhaze Souldream Bartholomew Harper Fairburn
Assistant: Neville Lynn Robert
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain

Other ambassadorial staff include but are not limited to Barbera Warner and Harold "The Clown" Johnson.

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 4015
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:12 pm

States of Glory WA Office wrote:
Sciongrad wrote:OOC: If you disagree with me, file a challenge.

OOC: I never made any allegation of illegality. :eyebrow:

Neville: Now that Clause One is fixed, we are happy to extend our support.
OoC: Mighta been talking to IA
Don’t pick a fight with me, I am proficient with the weapon to which all shall fall in NationStates... inactivity.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:26 pm

"Submitting this soon. Last comments?"
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
United Massachusetts
Minister
 
Posts: 2447
Founded: Jan 17, 2016
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby United Massachusetts » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:44 pm

Sciongrad wrote:"Submitting this soon. Last comments?"

"Viva Mexico."

You have my support.
United Massachusetts
World Assembly Mission

Pro-Life Social Democratic Catholic
Ambassador: Bishop Alexander Pierce

Deputy Outreach Minister, The Rejected Realms
Assistant: Father Carl Sullivan

President, Right to Life
Author/Co-author: 7 GA, 2 SC resolutions

Queen Yuno wrote:You have a very contradictory rep yourself, [UM].
Sanctaria wrote:We get it. You're pro-life.
Davelands wrote:(UM tries to slip another one by)
Wallenburg wrote:You've got to be the most ignorant person on this Discord.
Davelands wrote:Remember that United Mass is extremely on the religious right side. Look for hidden gotcha's for later. He is playing a long game with proposals...
Stat Crux dum volvitur orbis
The Cross stands steady, though the Earth is turning


User avatar
Aclion
Senator
 
Posts: 4326
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Aclion » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:38 pm

I'm a bit concerned with cases where responsibility lies in a third party. Suppose for example that a worker is using a forklift in an unsafe manner and injures a bystander. A forklift would fall under the definition of a hazardous product and it is the construction worker was the negligent party, not the manufacturer. Yet if the injured party chose to sue the manufacture the CIC would still award damages to the plaintiff.
Last edited by Aclion on Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A free society rests on four boxes: The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO Knight
TEP: WA Executive Staff member
Forest: Cartographer
Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer

It is the citizen's duty to understand which box to use, and when.

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3368
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:18 pm

Aclion wrote:I'm a bit concerned with cases where responsibility lies in a third party. Suppose for example that a worker is using a forklift in an unsafe manner and injures a bystander. A forklift would fall under the definition of a hazardous product and it is the construction worker was the negligent party, not the manufacturer. Yet if the injured party chose to sue the manufacture the CIC would still award damages to the plaintiff.


"I'm not quite sure how a forklift would be a 'hazardous product' if the worker is using it in an unsafe manner, and the very definition of 'hazardous product' is contingent on the hazard being present even 'while used properly.' If the hazard is contingent on the operator being a jackass (rather than an actual product shortcoming) not only is the manufacturer by definition not at fault, but this resolution's provisions wouldn't even come into play in the first place."
Principal-Agent, Anarchy; Squadron Admiral, The Red Fleet
Stephanie Athena Zakalwe
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ideological Deviant, MT Army stooge, & "red [who] do[es]n't read" (various)
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279



User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14398
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:25 am

"Some issues."

Sciongrad wrote:
3. Further defines "negligence" as a failure to exercise reasonable care or to follow relevant national or subnational product safety laws on hazardous products;

"You've included intentional or reckless disregard for statutes in with negligence. Negligence has no intent element, the others do. You're setting up odd precedent for negligence suits."
4. Establishes the Court of International Claims (CIC), which shall consist of a Trial Division and an Appellate Division, and grants it exclusive jurisdiction over all torts that may occur involving hazardous products in international commerce;

"Most nations simply try the injury in the jurisdiction that the actual injury occurs."

5. Declares that any person (natural or legal) who suffers harm or loss due to a hazardous product in international commerce has the right to sue the person (natural or legal) responsible for said product in the CIC Trial Division;

"Perhaps allow them to sue any defendant who engages in business of manufacturing, distributing, and selling a product, so as to ensure that all possible sources of defect are captured."
  1. If the plaintiff was negligent and if the defendant was not negligent, no damages shall be awarded to the plaintiff, and the defendant shall be awarded attorney fees for the inconvenience that the plaintiff has caused,

"Attorney fees are an extraordinary measure, but generally in tort law, the winner can ask for attorneys fees. Your first clause refers to 'contributory negligence', which is a complete defense to a negligence claim. Perhaps use that terminology for precision."

  • If neither the plaintiff nor the defendant was negligent or if the plaintiff and the defendant were both negligent, compensatory damages shall be awarded to the plaintiff based on the standard of strict liability,

  • "So, if a plaintiff was 75% responsible, and the defendant merely 25% responsible, the defendant's compensation is 100%? Why not reduce the amount to the comparative amount of negligence? Products liability is, of course, a matter of strict liability, so the manufacturer or distributor is responsible for injuries regardless of their own fault, but they should not be responsible for the fault of consumers."
  • If the plaintiff was not negligent and if the defendant was negligent, treble damages and attorney fees shall be awarded to the plaintiff, thus compensating the plaintiff and discouraging the defendant from committing future negligence;

  • "Trebel damages are appropriate for punitive action. One does not apply punitive damages to negligence, but intentional or reckless action. Punitive damages seek as a deterrent, and one cannot easily deter an accidental error, as those are likely to happen regardless of the deterrence involved. That is the nature of an accident.

    "I think you need to restructure your liability approach."
    Last edited by Separatist Peoples on Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:26 am, edited 2 times in total.

    His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
    Authority on All Existence,
    Globalist Dog,
    Dark Psychic Vampire, and
    Chief Populist Elitist!


    User avatar
    Xmara
    Minister
     
    Posts: 2297
    Founded: Mar 31, 2014
    Civil Rights Lovefest

    Postby Xmara » Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:08 pm

    “I would definitely approve this. I have read it and I keep looking for something to critique but I honestly can’t find anything.”
    /ˈzmaːrʌ/
    Info
    Our Leader
    Status- Code Green- All clear
    I mostly use NS stats, except for population and tax rates.
    We are not Estonia.
    A 16.8 civilization, according to this index.
    Flag Waver
    Respect the science!


    About Me | Great Quotes from NS | Side note: I’m female.

    Copy and paste this into your sig if you think we should colonize other planets

    User avatar
    Aclion
    Senator
     
    Posts: 4326
    Founded: Apr 12, 2016
    Civil Rights Lovefest

    Postby Aclion » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:28 pm

    Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
    Aclion wrote:I'm a bit concerned with cases where responsibility lies in a third party. Suppose for example that a worker is using a forklift in an unsafe manner and injures a bystander. A forklift would fall under the definition of a hazardous product and it is the construction worker was the negligent party, not the manufacturer. Yet if the injured party chose to sue the manufacture the CIC would still award damages to the plaintiff.


    "I'm not quite sure how a forklift would be a 'hazardous product' if the worker is using it in an unsafe manner, and the very definition of 'hazardous product' is contingent on the hazard being present even 'while used properly.' If the hazard is contingent on the operator being a jackass (rather than an actual product shortcoming) not only is the manufacturer by definition not at fault, but this resolution's provisions wouldn't even come into play in the first place."

    I'm not sure why a forklift wouldn't be considered hazardous. Forklifts are hazardous even when used properly. That's why people who operate them, and people who work around them need to be trained to do so safely and use extreme care. It's why retail warehouses close off departments when they need to operate them in that area."

    I chose forklifts because i'm most familiar with them but you would run into similar problems with firearms, as they are designed to kill when used properly, or with euthanasia devices which are only safe when they've malfunctioned. The issue isn't the definition of hazardous goods imo. It's the way liability is determined.
    A free society rests on four boxes: The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box.
    XKI: Recruiter, TITO Knight
    TEP: WA Executive Staff member
    Forest: Cartographer
    Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer

    It is the citizen's duty to understand which box to use, and when.

    User avatar
    Separatist Peoples
    GA Secretariat
     
    Posts: 14398
    Founded: Feb 17, 2011
    Civil Rights Lovefest

    Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:45 pm

    Aclion wrote:
    Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
    "I'm not quite sure how a forklift would be a 'hazardous product' if the worker is using it in an unsafe manner, and the very definition of 'hazardous product' is contingent on the hazard being present even 'while used properly.' If the hazard is contingent on the operator being a jackass (rather than an actual product shortcoming) not only is the manufacturer by definition not at fault, but this resolution's provisions wouldn't even come into play in the first place."

    I'm not sure why a forklift wouldn't be considered hazardous. Forklifts are hazardous even when used properly. That's why people who operate them, and people who work around them need to be trained to do so safely and use extreme care. It's why retail warehouses close off departments when they need to operate them in that area."

    I chose forklifts because i'm most familiar with them but you would run into similar problems with firearms, as they are designed to kill when used properly, or with euthanasia devices which are only safe when they've malfunctioned. The issue isn't the definition of hazardous goods imo. It's the way liability is determined.

    OOC: The problem here is that there is no difference between a manufacturing defect, a failure to warn, a design defect, or non-manufacturing negligence, like reckless driving of the forklift, which is why this needs to be revisited.

    His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
    Authority on All Existence,
    Globalist Dog,
    Dark Psychic Vampire, and
    Chief Populist Elitist!


    User avatar
    Sciongrad
    GA Secretariat
     
    Posts: 2996
    Founded: Mar 11, 2012
    Left-wing Utopia

    Postby Sciongrad » Wed Jul 04, 2018 6:10 am

    Separatist Peoples wrote:"Some issues."

    Sciongrad wrote:
    3. Further defines "negligence" as a failure to exercise reasonable care or to follow relevant national or subnational product safety laws on hazardous products;

    "You've included intentional or reckless disregard for statutes in with negligence. Negligence has no intent element, the others do. You're setting up odd precedent for negligence suits."
    4. Establishes the Court of International Claims (CIC), which shall consist of a Trial Division and an Appellate Division, and grants it exclusive jurisdiction over all torts that may occur involving hazardous products in international commerce;

    "Most nations simply try the injury in the jurisdiction that the actual injury occurs."

    5. Declares that any person (natural or legal) who suffers harm or loss due to a hazardous product in international commerce has the right to sue the person (natural or legal) responsible for said product in the CIC Trial Division;

    "Perhaps allow them to sue any defendant who engages in business of manufacturing, distributing, and selling a product, so as to ensure that all possible sources of defect are captured."
    1. If the plaintiff was negligent and if the defendant was not negligent, no damages shall be awarded to the plaintiff, and the defendant shall be awarded attorney fees for the inconvenience that the plaintiff has caused,

    "Attorney fees are an extraordinary measure, but generally in tort law, the winner can ask for attorneys fees. Your first clause refers to 'contributory negligence', which is a complete defense to a negligence claim. Perhaps use that terminology for precision."

  • If neither the plaintiff nor the defendant was negligent or if the plaintiff and the defendant were both negligent, compensatory damages shall be awarded to the plaintiff based on the standard of strict liability,

  • "So, if a plaintiff was 75% responsible, and the defendant merely 25% responsible, the defendant's compensation is 100%? Why not reduce the amount to the comparative amount of negligence? Products liability is, of course, a matter of strict liability, so the manufacturer or distributor is responsible for injuries regardless of their own fault, but they should not be responsible for the fault of consumers."
  • If the plaintiff was not negligent and if the defendant was negligent, treble damages and attorney fees shall be awarded to the plaintiff, thus compensating the plaintiff and discouraging the defendant from committing future negligence;

  • "Trebel damages are appropriate for punitive action. One does not apply punitive damages to negligence, but intentional or reckless action. Punitive damages seek as a deterrent, and one cannot easily deter an accidental error, as those are likely to happen regardless of the deterrence involved. That is the nature of an accident.

    "I think you need to restructure your liability approach."

    "Sciongrad is reviving this effort and will begin by considering these comments."
    Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


    Ideological Bulwark #271


    PreviousNext

    Advertisement

    Remove ads

    Return to General Assembly

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users

    Advertisement

    Remove ads