[ON HOLD] On Oil Spills
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:26 pmUNDER SIGNIFICANT REWRITES
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
[ON HOLD] On Oil Spills
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:26 pmPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:33 pmOOC: Not awake enough to go through this in detail, but just pointing out that GA #298, Reducing Spills and Leaks is still extant.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:38 pmAraraukar wrote:OOC: Not awake enough to go through this in detail, but just pointing out that GA #298, Reducing Spills and Leaks is still extant.
Araraukar,
I am aware of this but thank you for reminding me. One point that I believe this resolution addresses that GA #298 doesn't is the environmental side of things.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:08 pmFriday Freshman wrote:Araraukar wrote:OOC: Not awake enough to go through this in detail, but just pointing out that GA #298, Reducing Spills and Leaks is still extant.
Araraukar,
I am aware of this but thank you for reminding me. One point that I believe this resolution addresses that GA #298 doesn't is the environmental side of things.
OOC: It does. Don't submit.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:19 pmI would argue that it doesn't specifically in terms of the fact that it doesn't address wildlife. Additionally 298, does not apply during the extraction process of any material, only spills or leaks during material transport and storage.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:41 pmThe entirety of your section 5 is excessive micromanagement. You may as well put when the cleanup crews are allowed potty breaks, and delineate appropriate mealtimes, in order to maximize the cleanup crew effort.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:41 pmFriday Freshman wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: It does. Don't submit.
I would argue that it doesn't specifically in terms of the fact that it doesn't address wildlife. Additionally 298, does not apply during the extraction process of any material, only spills or leaks during material transport and storage.
OOC: You haven't so specified that you only apply to extraction. So long as your proposal overlaps, it contradicts.
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:08 pmGrays Harbor wrote:The entirety of your section 5 is excessive micromanagement. You may as well put when the cleanup crews are allowed potty breaks, and delineate appropriate mealtimes, in order to maximize the cleanup crew effort.
Would you say that section 6 falls into the same problem?
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:08 pmSeparatist Peoples wrote:Friday Freshman wrote:
I would argue that it doesn't specifically in terms of the fact that it doesn't address wildlife. Additionally 298, does not apply during the extraction process of any material, only spills or leaks during material transport and storage.
OOC: You haven't so specified that you only apply to extraction. So long as your proposal overlaps, it contradicts.
If I specify that would it no longer be contradictory?
Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:53 pmYou would have to remove all the contradictory parts. When your proposal doesn't conflict with the rules, it won't be ruled illegal. Simple as that. As far as I can read, GAR#95 and GAR#298 cover the overwhelming majority of this.
Posted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:25 pmFriday Freshman wrote:Grays Harbor wrote:The entirety of your section 5 is excessive micromanagement. You may as well put when the cleanup crews are allowed potty breaks, and delineate appropriate mealtimes, in order to maximize the cleanup crew effort.
Would you say that section 6 falls into the same problem?
Not to the same degree as 5. Five reads like a step-by-step instruction manual; “do this, and only this, because we say so”.
OOC: However, I do concur with my colleague; there is far too much contradiction in the whole thing to ever be legal by GA rules in its current form.
Posted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:33 pmIf this could be made legal, I’d still be against. Highly specifically prescriptive environmental resolutions reduce land manager’s flexibility ultimately resulting in actions that may not be optimal given the on-the-ground conditions and technology levels. This is covered adequately and better in other resolutions.
Posted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:01 pmI think I agree with Ransium. The other matter is, generally, overly strict regulations in an information-poor context are quite easy to evade.