[Submitted] Escort Health Act & Escort Education Act

[Attempted Socialism]

OOC: And improving healthcare and opportunity of education (Even if poorly written) is not, generally, Social Justice. It would be either Healthcare or Education, which is why I completely get CD's ruling here.
Apart from category, I would vote against because of the poor language and shit drafting. The attacks on drafting process that proponents pile on doesn't make me more inclined to vote for. The subject itself is probably fine, though I don't quite get the international part of the issue.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

"I'm sure you are aware that prostitution regulation proposals aren't illegal by their nature," Lord Valentin Naharis said, in his usual soft, almost whispering voice. "Different lands have different laws, my friend."

The turtle was interested at the thought.

"Ah, so this is a regulation for nations that allow prostitution, without forcin' it?"

He thought about this suggestion for a moment.

"If that's the case, then any objection we'd have to this here Resolution is moot."

He smiled to the soft-spoken gentleman from behind the grates of the ceiling vent.

"Thank you, and Merry Christmas."

[The New California Republic]

OOC: And improving healthcare and opportunity of education (Even if poorly written) is not, generally, Social Justice. It would be either Healthcare or Education, which is why I completely get CD's ruling here.

OOC: Exactly. This doesn't seem to fit into any category, hence the recommendation to redraft it to fit into one category or the other, instead of hovering awkwardly between categories.

I would vote against because of the poor language and shit drafting.

OOC: Before the category violation thing materialized, the language had been the biggest problem with this proposal so far. It just needs to be much more accurate, as it is vague in parts.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Couple things, folks:

1. CD did not issue a ruling. He did mark the proposal as illegal on the GenSec gameside control panel. This does not, lacking a ruling to back it up, constitute a ruling. It does, however, constitute an official opinion per the legality.

2. CD is correct. This really should have been in Health | Healthcare upon review. Last I had read this, it could have gone either way. Its possible it could be written to fit Education and Creativity. But, pursuant to precedent, a proposal that can fit better into one category does not belong in another.

3. If people have an issue with that, file a Challenge on the proposal arguing why it's legal. Cite precedent. Cite the rules. Make arguments and logical inferences based on that. GenSec does not exist to enforce policy. We exist to enforce the rules. Do not make policy arguments.

Get it? Got it? Good. Move along, folks. Nothin' to see.

EDIT: Oh, and 4. This went as late as it did because GenSec is composed of at least 3 higher education students who have final exams. I, myself, finished my last one two days ago. The balance of us have Christmas obligations with family. Our attention was justifiably elsewhere. I want to nip any suggestion that GenSec deliberately waited or any other unpleasant suggestion regarding our priorities.

[Araraukar]

The language of the proposal is something that you can address via your vote on the general assembly floor. The category violation, however, is not.

OOC: The category violation arises from the language of the proposal, and in the hopes that the proposal returns to drafting stage, feedback on how to make the proposal better is very much on topic and pretty much the reason this forum exists!

EDIT: Thank you to SP and Sciongrad for NS attention during Xmas as well.

[United Republic Empire]

This is the beginning of the challenge claim. I am told one post per proposal. [Only Members of GenSec to comment afterwards with Greater Vakolicci Haven]

I do not agree with Separatist peoples claim of: Oh, and 4. This went as late as it did because GenSec is composed of at least 3 higher education students who have final exams. I, myself, finished my last one two days ago. The balance of us have Christmas obligations with family. Our attention was justifiably elsewhere. I want to nip any suggestion that GenSec deliberately waited or any other unpleasant suggestion regarding our priorities.

Because of the fact that members of GenSec were able to make other proposals illegal over the 48 hour period that mine was never marked until it reached quorum. To say you were too busy was a bold faced lie. Apparently you weren't to busy for these other proposal rulings though

20 hours ago: Bears Armed: Illegal — No Operative Clause ("should" DOESN'T)... and if it did have one then almost certainly this would NOT be 'Mild'.

13 hours ago: Christian Democrats: Illegal — Category Rule
1 day 22 hours ago: Separatist Peoples: Illegal — No mandate placed on member states ("this act moves that..." is not a requirement placed by the WA on nations to ACT)
1 day 22 hours ago: Sierra Lyricalia: Illegal — No mandate placed on member states ("this act moves that..." is not a requirement placed by the WA on nations to ACT)

13 hours ago: Christian Democrats: Illegal — Real World References, Duplication Rule.
1 day 22 hours ago: Separatist Peoples: Illegal — Multiple RL references (some of which might be detailed enough to count as Plagiarism under GA rules: For future reference, Plagiarism can get your nation expelled from the WA!); Duplication of various existing resolutions.
1 day 22 hours ago: Sierra Lyricalia: Illegal — Multiple RL references (some of which might be detailed enough to count as Plagiarism under GA rules: For future reference, Plagiarism can get your nation expelled from the WA!); Duplication of various existing resolutions.

13 hours ago: Christian Democrats: Illegal — Duplication Rule.
1 day 22 hours ago: Separatist Peoples: Illegal — Tries to affect non-WA nations (goes from talking about "around the World" to "all women").
1 day 22 hours ago: Sierra Lyricalia: Illegal — Tries to affect non-WA nations (goes from talking about "around the World" to "all women").

But when you look at the time marks on my proposal you can clearly see that over the 48 hours you were online marking other proposals illegal.

9 hours ago: Separatist Peoples: Illegal — Category Rule: this proposal should be rewritten for the Education and Creativity - Educational subcategory or the Health - Healthcare subcategory. Social Justice is not appropriate.
9 hours ago: Sciongrad: Illegal — Category Rule: this proposal should be rewritten for the Education and Creativity - Educational subcategory or the Health - Healthcare subcategory. Social Justice is not appropriate.
13 hours ago: Christian Democrats: Illegal — Category Rule: this proposal should be rewritten for the Education and Creativity - Educational subcategory or the Health - Healthcare subcategory. Social Justice is not appropriate.

[United Republic Empire]

I'd like to know how a proposal that reduces income inequality and improves basic welfare doesn't reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare please.

Do correct me if I am wrong however I believe that increasing basic services to an under-privileged group, increases their welfare; mandating that such services be made available reduces the amount to which they may be subject to exploitation, therefore reducing income inequality.

Description: The intent of this act to ensure better healthcare and higher education opportunities for employees that work in the escort services.

Clarifying

• Better Healthcare standards as: Protecting health and preventing illnesses, Improving the quality of safety of care, Using resources efficiently to achieve the best possible quality and safety outcomes, and identifying health needs in order to provide treatment and prevention.
  
• Higher Education as: the opportunity to pursue and achieve high-quality education and training beyond previous levels of school.

By increasing the workers basic standards of their health, their basic welfare is increased. By offering the workers the opportunity to achieve a higher level of education it reduced income inequality to prevent them from being exploited - or does a college degree mean nothing.

This proposal does not change any aspect of how healthcare or education is done - it merely helps an underprivileged often marginalized group of workers. It provides them with opportunities.

[Oresland]

OOC: Maybe they thought that it was okay, but then realized it was category violation. Doesn't mean that they were waiting for the exact time to just mark it illegal just to screw with you.

[United Republic Empire]

OOC: Maybe they thought that it was okay, but then realized it was category violation. Doesn't mean that they were waiting for the exact time to just mark it illegal just to screw with you.

This is the beginning of the challenge claim. I am told one post per proposal. [Members of GenSec to comment afterwards with Greater Vakolicci Haven] Please do not comment on the challenge claim Gvh and I have with GenSec

[Oresland]

Alright, but all you did was repeat the same line you put in the post above mine. And I don't think you can prevent people from commenting on challenge threads.

[Oresland]

OOC: You need to make another thread and make it specifically for the legality challenge. From there, you can argue why the proposal is illegal (or in your case is legal) and the Gen. Sec will say their reasoning for their decision. All you're doing is changing the title from a draft to a challenge.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: You need to make another thread and make it specifically for the legality challenge. From there, you can argue why the proposal is illegal (or in your case is legal) and the Gen. Sec will say their reasoning for their decision. All you're doing is changing the title from a draft to a challenge.

OOC: Yes, please put the challenge in a separate thread, because otherwise it arbitrarily closes off this thread to further discussion and criticism of the proposal.

[United Republic Empire]

OOC: You need to make another thread and make it specifically for the legality challenge. From there, you can argue why the proposal is illegal (or in your case is legal) and the Gen. Sec will say their reasoning for their decision. All you're doing is changing the title from a draft to a challenge.

OOC: Yes, please put the challenge in a separate thread, because otherwise it arbitrarily closes off this thread to further discussion and criticism of the proposal.

OOC: You need to make another thread and make it specifically for the legality challenge. From there, you can argue why the proposal is illegal (or in your case is legal) and the Gen. Sec will say their reasoning for their decision. All you're doing is changing the title from a draft to a challenge.

This is the beginning of the challenge claim. I am told one post per proposal. [Only Members of GenSec to comment afterwards with Greater Vakolicci Haven]

You both have been asked to Stop. You're both cluttering up the challenge by butting in. Now please stop and not comment any further,

[Wrapper]

It's Christmas morning, and yet, here I am, trying to smooth things over. Must be one of those weird Christmas miracles.

United Republic Empire, if you want to make a formal challenge, it goes in a separate thread. That said, you do not own this thread nor would you own a challenge thread. Any other players may comment on either the proposal thread or the challenge thread, provided it's on topic.

OOC: Just because you doubt it, it doesn't mean that it hasn't happened that way. I sincerely feel like this was an unorthodox attempt to get the bill somehow down. I personally don't agree with Christian Democrat or his verdict as it is based not in facts but basically his personal wishes.

Then file a GHR.

No, don't. Only GenSec can determine whether proposals are illegal or not. Moderation will not get involved in the legality of GA proposals, unless it involves an OSRS violation like flaming, trolling, plagiarism, etc., or unless one of us is asked to step in because GenSec is temporarily shorthanded, as per GenSec's own rules. You disagree with what a GenSec member says, take it up with the rest of GenSec.

[United Republic Empire]

Fair enough

[Imperium Anglorum]

This is a drafting thread, is it not? It should not be tagged as if it were a challenge.

[Wrapper]

This is a drafting thread, is it not? It should not be tagged as if it were a challenge.

Fixed to avoid any confusion.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

It's Christmas morning, and yet, here I am, trying to smooth things over. Must be one of those weird Christmas miracles.

United Republic Empire, if you want to make a formal challenge, it goes in a separate thread. That said, you do not own this thread nor would you own a challenge thread. Any other players may comment on either the proposal thread or the challenge thread, provided it's on topic.

Then file a GHR.

No, don't. Only GenSec can determine whether proposals are illegal or not. Moderation will not get involved in the legality of GA proposals, unless it involves an OSRS violation like flaming, trolling, plagiarism, etc., or unless one of us is asked to step in because GenSec is temporarily shorthanded, as per GenSec's own rules. You disagree with what a GenSec member says, take it up with the rest of GenSec.

Thanks or the dedecation.

[Neo-Modig Ny Verden]

So why would it matter if the customer is pleasuring themselves during the phone call because the worker isn't physically touching the customer correct ? So since there is no physical contact there is also no illegal activities going on.

OOC: Except that's not what your proposal says. Your proposal says "not involving genitalia usage". It doesn't specify them using the genitalia on each other.

Some people may find the conversation alone with no physical stimulation to be enough for their enjoyment.

...you do realize that that's going to be a tiiiiiny portion of people who would call a sex line? Or log onto live video feed or sex chat or whatnot.

How inclusive

[The New California Republic]

OOC: Has this withered and died on the vine? The OP submitted a challenge to the proposal being deemed illegal by several GenSec members, and that challenge went very quiet without any replies from the OP. Then the OP changed the title of this thread to [Delete] Old (hinting that this thread wasn't going to be used to discuss this proposal anymore), then an attempt was made to make a new thread for a new draft, and that got swiftly locked. There hasn't been any activity for a while, and this is the only thread that I can really ask this question on. So, is this proposal coming back or not?

[Attempted Socialism]

OOC: Has this withered and died on the vine? The OP submitted a challenge to the proposal being deemed illegal by several GenSec members, and that challenge went very quiet without any replies from the OP. Then the OP changed the title of this thread to [Delete] Old (hinting that this thread wasn't going to be used to discuss this proposal anymore), then an attempt was made to make a new thread for a new draft, and that got swiftly locked. There hasn't been any activity for a while, and this is the only thread that I can really ask this question on. So, is this proposal coming back or not?

They're trying to have the mods undo the lock, after having edited this title at 7:25 AM, and posted the new (now locked) thread at 7:40 AM. It looks to me like the OP is very much trying to get their proposal revived, but not like they are much interested in learning what went wrong the first time.

[United Republic Empire]

OOC: Has this withered and died on the vine? The OP submitted a challenge to the proposal being deemed illegal by several GenSec members, and that challenge went very quiet without any replies from the OP. Then the OP changed the title of this thread to [Delete] Old (hinting that this thread wasn't going to be used to discuss this proposal anymore), then an attempt was made to make a new thread for a new draft, and that got swiftly locked. There hasn't been any activity for a while, and this is the only thread that I can really ask this question on. So, is this proposal coming back or not?

They're trying to have the mods undo the lock, after having edited this title at 7:25 AM, and posted the new (now locked) thread at 7:40 AM. It looks to me like the OP is very much trying to get their proposal revived, but not like they are much interested in learning what went wrong the first time.

you are correct Attempted Socialism - We have our thoughts of why. instead of bad mouthing the Supreme Overlords of Everything; we decided to start new. Didn't see the point in arguing with someone that controls the rules and bends them to their will.

[The New California Republic]

you are correct Attempted Socialism - We have our thoughts of why. instead of bad mouthing the Supreme Overlords of Everything; we decided to start new. Didn't see the point in arguing with someone that controls the rules and bends them to their will.

OOC: I wouldn't accuse the Mods or GenSec of abuse of power if I were you. That is a serious accusation, one that has serious consequences if such accusations are frivolous. I don't understand why you are desperately trying to get these discussion threads deleted or otherwise distanced from the new draft, what is the motivation behind that? Is it an intentional act to get rid of the criticism of the proposal? I would certainly hope not. Just post the new draft to this thread and be done with it, instead of back and forthing with the Mods ad infinitum. The rules clearly say that it is one thread per proposal, and all new drafts must be included in the same thread.

[Attempted Socialism]

They're trying to have the mods undo the lock, after having edited this title at 7:25 AM, and posted the new (now locked) thread at 7:40 AM. It looks to me like the OP is very much trying to get their proposal revived, but not like they are much interested in learning what went wrong the first time.

you are correct Attempted Socialism - We have our thoughts of why. instead of bad mouthing the Supreme Overlords of Everything; we decided to start new. Didn't see the point in arguing with someone that controls the rules and bends them to their will.

A word of advice: Rather than blaming GenSec or the mods (I can't quite tell who) for the failures of your draft, you ought to look at why your draft failed so you can improve it. There have been numerous suggestions here, but your attitude of blame avoidance and at times passive-aggressive or just plain aggressive way of arguing will not endear you to GenSec, Mods, or GA regulars. If you want a workable resolution, don't bite the hands that help you.
And, to reiterate NCR's point: Don't make frivolous accusations of abuse of power. AFAIK, neither GenSec nor Mods have bent or broken any rules in this, so this line of attack will only turn people away.

[United Republic Empire]

you are correct Attempted Socialism - We have our thoughts of why. instead of bad mouthing the Supreme Overlords of Everything; we decided to start new. Didn't see the point in arguing with someone that controls the rules and bends them to their will.

A word of advice: Rather than blaming GenSec or the mods (I can't quite tell who) for the failures of your draft, you ought to look at why your draft failed so you can improve it. There have been numerous suggestions here, but your attitude of blame avoidance and at times passive-aggressive or just plain aggressive way of arguing will not endear you to GenSec, Mods, or GA regulars. If you want a workable resolution, don't bite the hands that help you.
And, to reiterate NCR's point: Don't make frivolous accusations of abuse of power. AFAIK, neither GenSec nor Mods have bent or broken any rules in this, so this line of attack will only turn people away.

We don't typically bow down to the ruling elite.