General Assembly Q&A

[Knootoss]

Someone should write a polite blocker proposal on missing/abducted children. Something that does something constructive yet leaves it the responsibility of member states and (importantly) costs nothing or virtually nothing.

[Darenjo]

For a repeal, is it legal to mention what nations have RP'd? I know it's legal in the SC but I wasn't sure for the GA.

[Ardchoille]

Not if you're saying "caused the revolution in Badtasteistan" or any specific nation reference.

Do you mean a "recognising that XXX has seriously affected (some) member nations' economies/civil order/spiritual welfare, by ..." sort of thing?

It'd get by legally, if sufficiently generalised. But it'd be more open to debate than "can/could/will seriously affect". One is saying "It's had bad effects", which can be met with "Well, it might at first, but in the long run everything's better." Whereas "can have" means it will continue to do so into the indefinite future; you're giving a reason it should not stand.

You are certainly allowed to point out negative effects of the original wording. If this is a resolution-specific query, could you please link to the thread?

[Darenjo]

Oh I mean how Yohannes gave its air force permission to attack the WA Space Station.
and I would give you a link but I'm on my iPod

[Ardchoille]

If you mention the nation by name, no go.

If you say the resolution contains a loophole in (Clause A) that allows member nations to (do X) -- especially if (doing X) is contrary to the evident intent of the resolution -- you're on safer ground.

[Darenjo]

Totally unrelated, can I make a thread that tells the n00bs what certain things, like "for the purposes of this resolution", mean? I know I'll probably be wasting my time, but I'm really tired of the noobies strutting around like idiots.

[Mousebumples]

Co-author credit tagging question:

I know that [.nation] tags are a no-go (in theory) as they are too long and would likely result in a deletion per the branding "rule."

However, the Rules for GA Proposals are unclear as to what tags are or are not allowed. (Further, they don't specifically mention that the [nation] tag isn't allowed, for whatever that's worth.)

I'd personally tend to prefer to [nation=short] versus the [nation=short+noflag], but I can understand that the inclusion of a flag for co-author credit could be construed as unnecessary and branding. (Still ... I like flags.)

Would it be possible to have an "official" Secretariat ruling on the matter of what nation tags (if any) are allowed in GA resolutions? Looking though the archives, I can located some straight [nation] tags, the [nation=short+noflag], and some that are without nation-tagging at all.

Many thanks!

[Flibbleites]

Co-author credit tagging question:

I know that [.nation] tags are a no-go (in theory) as they are too long and would likely result in a deletion per the branding "rule."

However, the Rules for GA Proposals are unclear as to what tags are or are not allowed. (Further, they don't specifically mention that the [nation] tag isn't allowed, for whatever that's worth.)

That's because when that rule was written the [nation] tag didn't exist.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

viewtopic.php?p=3195130#p3195130 <- nothing in there about whether the flags are OK, but absent a formal ruling against it, I doubt it's something the mods would actually delete something over.

[Sedgistan]

There's a flag next to the name of the nation that proposed the resolution, so I don't think there'd be a problem with allowing it when listing a co-author.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

There's a flag next to the name of the nation that proposed the resolution, so I don't think there'd be a problem with allowing it when listing a co-author.

Neither do I, but the game is allowed to do a lot of things we as common players aren't. I think that's what mousey was after.

[Mousebumples]

There's a flag next to the name of the nation that proposed the resolution, so I don't think there'd be a problem with allowing it when listing a co-author.

Neither do I, but the game is allowed to do a lot of things we as common players aren't. I think that's what mousey was after.

Pretty much, yes. If a theoretical someone ( *whistles innocently* ) was considering submission of a proposal on a theoretically controversial subject, said theoretical someone would like to have all of her ducks in a row and now have to worry about a filed GHR resulting in the removal of said proposal from the queue.

No rush. I'm nowhere near submission at this point, but I figured while I'm sorting out details with my super-seekrit co-author, it wouldn't hurt to have a definitive answer on the subject - if you all would be so kind.

Cheers!

[Spiele II]

What are some websites I can use to host my images so I can post images on the forum?

[Mousebumples]

What are some websites I can use to host my images so I can post images on the forum?

This question belongs more in the Tech forum, and your question is answered in the Technical FAQ.

[Sedgistan]

No rush. I'm nowhere near submission at this point, but I figured while I'm sorting out details with my super-seekrit co-author, it wouldn't hurt to have a definitive answer on the subject - if you all would be so kind.

The definitive answer is yes, it is OK to display the flag ([nation=short]), but not to have the pre-title.

[nation] = Illegal (it displays the pre-title)
[nation=noflag] = Illegal (as above)
[nation=short] = OK
[nation=short+noflag] = OK

[Mousebumples]

The definitive answer is yes, it is OK to display the flag ([nation=short]), but not to have the pre-title.

[nation] = Illegal (it displays the pre-title)
[nation=noflag] = Illegal (as above)
[nation=short] = OK
[nation=short+noflag] = OK

Excellent. That's about what I thought, but - as stated before - I enjoy having the confirmation.

Thanks so much, Sedge!

[Christian Democrats]

[I]t is OK to display the flag ([nation=short]), but not to have the pre-title.

[nation] = Illegal (it displays the pre-title)
[nation=noflag] = Illegal (as above)
[nation=short] = OK
[nation=short+noflag] = OK

Can this be posted in the Rules for GA Proposals thread because this has been confusing in the past?

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

It's already in the FAQ.

[Christian Democrats]

It's already in the FAQ.

The FAQ tells you about tags but doesn't tell you which ones are acceptable for WA proposals.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Sedge only said they were OK, not that their use should be encouraged in an official moderation resource.

[Beldonia]

Evening, all. Quick question:
Copying and pasting repealed WA resolutions is plagerism and illegal. What if we take an old UN resolution and submit that. Still illegal?

[Sedgistan]

Evening, all. Quick question:
Copying and pasting repealed WA resolutions is plagerism and illegal. What if we take an old UN resolution and submit that. Still illegal?

Yes.

[Beldonia]

Evening, all. Quick question:
Copying and pasting repealed WA resolutions is plagerism and illegal. What if we take an old UN resolution and submit that. Still illegal?

Yes.

Thanks.

[Soviet Socialist Texas]

Just out of curiosity, why exactly can old resolutions not be amended? Is it something to do with the game mechanics?

[Flibbleites]

Just out of curiosity, why exactly can old resolutions not be amended? Is it something to do with the game mechanics?

Read this.