NATION

PASSWORD

[AT VOTE] Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

[AT VOTE] Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act

Postby Jedinsto » Wed May 26, 2021 12:05 pm

The World Assembly,

Noting the good intent of the Toxic Heavy Metals Act which aims to sensibly limit the use of toxic heavy metals,

Understanding that the definition of "Toxic Heavy Metals" is incredibly broad and problematic as the resolution does not require that toxic heavy metals actually be toxic, only "potentially toxic" (which may apply to far more metals than is intended), reasonably dense and noted as such by the World Assembly Scientific Programme,

Realizing that such an incredibly broad definition does the following:
  • bans member states from discharging these metals into the "natural environment," (which again, applies to more metals than intended),
  • forces member states to waste valuable resources and funding researching alternatives to the use of all these toxic heavy metals, which as noted above can include harmless metals and,
  • needlessly regulates the use of harmless metals,

Recognizing that the language used to actually reduce the use of toxic heavy metals is extremely weak, as the only mandate related to use requires member states "phase out the use of toxic heavy metals and their compounds" without any further elaboration which allows for extremely slow and negligible reduction of the use of toxic heavy metals,

Confused by the exemption of military use of toxic heavy metals, as military use is just as damaging to the environment as civilian use, when such use is actually damaging, and such an exemption also makes way for loopholes in the form of otherwise illegal disposal of toxic heavy metals in the name of military use,

Hereby repeals GA#371, the Toxic Heavy Metals Act.

Idea bred from discussion on the WA discord. It's been a long day, this is the best I could do, ok?

Anyways, leave feedback below.
Last edited by Goobergunchia on Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:01 pm, edited 16 times in total.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Wed May 26, 2021 12:05 pm

Reserved.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Thu May 27, 2021 4:39 am

What?
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Daarwyrth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Jul 05, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Daarwyrth » Thu May 27, 2021 4:50 am

OOC: Considering that Bobfily has been founded literally 20 minutes ago and isn't even a WA member, I would advise you to completely and utterly ignore their post.

Dame Maria vyn Nysen: "Our delegation agrees that the target resolution in question is indeed flawed. From what we see in the text of your repeal proposal at the moment, the basis is there, yet our advice would be to expand the existing arguments somewhat. Also, you should also anticipate that other delegations will demand a replacement for this resolution. I would advise you to either draft a replacement, or to find existing WA assembly legislation that already acts as a substitute. And as an alternative, you could also consider creating an argument why a replacement for this proposal is not necessary.

For now, our delegation supports the general idea of this repeal proposal, but we hope to see the argument in it expanded."
Last edited by Daarwyrth on Thu May 27, 2021 4:51 am, edited 3 times in total.
The Royal State of Daarwyrth

Current year: 2021 CE | Leader: Queen Demi Maria I | Capital: Daarsted | Government type: Unitary semi-constitutional monarchy | Technology level: Post-modern tech
List of Authored Writings | Factbook on Daarwyrth | Factbook on Queen Demi Maria I | Royal House of Zylkoven | WA Representatives | Political Parties | Diplomatic Programme
Played nations
  • Daarwyrth
  • Cape Blackcat
  • Summerforest
  • Arwadhyrt
Who am I?
  • 25 years old male
  • Dutch and Polish
  • English literature major
  • Gay leftist

User avatar
Outer Sparta
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11924
Founded: Dec 26, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Outer Sparta » Thu May 27, 2021 8:30 am

Ambassador Tav: We would also like to see a replacement resolution that effectively addresses the problems posed by heavy metals and agree to a repeal of the current resolution.
social democracy, environmental protection, universal healthcare, free college, social equality, LGBT, pro-choice,
GOP, corporate socialism, Trump, neoconservatism, white supremacy, extreme political views, corruption

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21467
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Thu May 27, 2021 11:13 am

I could write a whole essay on why the target is bad and needs to be repealed. This repeal seems adequate. I may make some suggestions to improve it but as it is now I'd probably support it.
In the meantime you are here, and it’s beautiful, and escaping isn’t always something bad.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Viceroy for The East Pacific

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Thu May 27, 2021 12:54 pm

Outer Sparta wrote:Ambassador Tav: We would also like to see a replacement resolution that effectively addresses the problems posed by heavy metals and agree to a repeal of the current resolution.

"Such a replacement is in the works."

OOC: I am hoping someone else will take care of that, but I will do it if no one else will I suppose.

Edit: On second thought, such a repeal is not in the works. (by me at least)

Wallenburg wrote:I could write a whole essay on why the target is bad and needs to be repealed. This repeal seems adequate. I may make some suggestions to improve it but as it is now I'd probably support it.

OOC: If you have suggestions, I am glad to hear them!
Last edited by Jedinsto on Thu May 27, 2021 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Waldenes
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 50
Founded: Mar 10, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Waldenes » Thu May 27, 2021 2:23 pm

“We will be withholding any decision on this until we see what the replacement draft could potentially look like.”

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Thu May 27, 2021 2:28 pm

I guess you didn't see because I edited it into a post instead of making a new one; I'm not writing a replacement. After screwing around with it for a bit I figured the definitions would get too weird. We'd be much better off with a general waste disposal resolution, and obviously we are better off without this resolution in general.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Wrapper
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 5945
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wrapper » Thu May 27, 2021 6:45 pm

(At the front of the debate hall, there is a momentary shimmering light. Within moments, a person appears. It's an old, balding, bearded gentleman dressed in a tuxedo with tails and a white tie, and carrying a top hat in one hand and a cane in the other. He dances a couple steps to the left as he sings, eyes half-closed.)

ARI: To breathe an atmosphere, that simply reeks with... with... SHIT!

(He drops the cane, which clatters on the ground. There is another shimmer, and, six feet to the right of the old man, a handsome middle-aged man appears. He is wearing nothing, save a very large towel around his torso, and a smaller towel around his head. He is very clean.)

AHUME: Oh. Erm. Hi, Ari.

ARI: No, no no no no no, this isn't happening, this isn't happening! I swore an oath I would never come here again.

AHUME: Unless our resolution was in danger of repeal.

ARI: Right, unless our-- wait. WHAT? But... but... who in their right mind is going to repeal child porn legislation? Have you all gone mad? What is wrong with you degenerates? Okay, okay, I know we spelled "discreet" wrong, and that was probably Wad Ahume's fault but-- (Ahume taps him on the shoulder and whispers.) WHAT? (Ahume hands him the draft.) What, this? Pffffffft. Go ahead and repeal it. I swear, I wasn't happy with the final product, especially that nonsensical exclusion for military uses, but that freakin' Kaboomlandian ambassador flatly refused to revise that. I warned him, that would be the downfall of this resolution, but did he listen to me, hoooo no, of course not--

AHUME: (mumbles) That's not how I remember it.

ARI: SHHH! Now where was I. Oh, yes, by all means, repeal this, so we can write our own. And properly this time.

AHUME: (mumbles) We're not members.

ARI: What?

AHUME: We're not WA members anymore.

ARI: I... but... that's besides the point! We'll find some patsy -- I mean, ahem, a collaborator, who can submit it for us. Ahume, go see if that stupid car is still around, what's his name.

AHUME: Her name.

ARI: Herby, that's it. Come now, let's get started on this. Oh, and go and put on some clothes before someone-- (sniffs the air) Oh my, what is that lovely scent you're wearing?

AHUME: (mumbles) Dandruff shampoo.

ARI: Ah. Well, don't just stand there, we need to find an office, pronto. Let's see if that old closet behind the boiler room is still empty.

(As the Wads leave, Ari shouts over his shoulder, waving his copy of the repeal draft in the air.)

ARI: Oh, for the record, FULL SUPPORT for this repeal!

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Thu May 27, 2021 6:52 pm

Wrapper wrote:snip

"Thank you for your support, ambassador!"

OOC: I must say that was a very entertaining RP post. Glad the co-author supports this :p
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Uan aa Boa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 933
Founded: Apr 23, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Uan aa Boa » Fri May 28, 2021 1:50 am

Undoubtedly there are flaws in the target, but I think more is needed here in the way of exposing them. I would support strengthening the "phasing out" part and removing the military exemption. I feel your lead clause on the broad definition of toxic heavy metals is a little inaccurate because the target resolution concerns substances identified by WASP. I think we can assume that WASP isn't going to order the phasing out of all metals on the basis that they can in certain circumstances be toxic.

Despite its flaws the target does include effective protections against contamination during disposal, and for this reason I would only support repeal once I'd seen a superior replacement.

User avatar
Island Girl Herby
Attaché
 
Posts: 84
Founded: Feb 28, 2019
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Island Girl Herby » Fri May 28, 2021 3:52 am

OOC as Wrapper said we’re already working on a replacement. Will be a few days before we put up a draft but the intent is to improve on the definition, ditch the military exemption, and keep essential parts like a phaseout plan, disposal requirements, containment, etc.

IC:

Wrapper wrote:snip

Actually you know goddam well the name is Ambassador 53 you stupid hey hey HEY where are you goin’ I’m right here ya silly Wads!

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Fri May 28, 2021 5:00 am

Uan aa Boa wrote:Undoubtedly there are flaws in the target, but I think more is needed here in the way of exposing them. I would support strengthening the "phasing out" part and removing the military exemption. I feel your lead clause on the broad definition of toxic heavy metals is a little inaccurate because the target resolution concerns substances identified by WASP. I think we can assume that WASP isn't going to order the phasing out of all metals on the basis that they can in certain circumstances be toxic.

Despite its flaws the target does include effective protections against contamination during disposal, and for this reason I would only support repeal once I'd seen a superior replacement.

I am not writing a replacement. I would support it if somebody else did it. What I'm trying to prove here is that we're better off with no replacement than with the current resolution. If that's the case, why not vote for the repeal anyways?

As for your concern with the first clause, yes, WASP would be obligated to note literally every single metal as being potentially toxic. Everything is potentially toxic.
WA committees & agencies are all automatically presumed to be honest, impartial, and efficient, so that proposals including them don’t need to use up part of the limited length available setting up ways to make them work properly. (This also means that Repeal attempts can’t legally suggest potential problems with a WA committee or agency’s actions as an argument for getting rid of the resolution which introduced that committee or agency…) You can assign new duties to an existing WA committee or agency, which would then remain in existence to carry out those new duties (despite losing its original role) if the resolution that established it gets repealed. They can interpret policy but can’t really be assigned to make it, because (apart from anything else) as no players are actually involved in running those bodies no players would have any genuine way of knowing what their decisions actually were…
Bears Armed's beginners' guide to writing proposals

Since they are forced to do their job properly, they have to mark every potentially toxic heavy metal (every reasonably dense metal) as potentially toxic, and we have some extreme negative side effects from this. Repeal first, we're better off without it. A replacement could come in the future, just not from me.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Uan aa Boa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 933
Founded: Apr 23, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Uan aa Boa » Fri May 28, 2021 5:24 am

I have to respectfully disagree. The target talks about "any relatively dense metal or metalloid, or any compound thereof, that is noted for its potential toxicity by the World Assembly Scientific Programme." So if a metal hasn't been noted then it isn't on the list. As per the other paragraph you quoted, WASP can interpret policy. It can therefore tell the difference between substances relevant to a piece of environmental legislation and substances that are not. It's not required to mechanically note every substance that can in any circumstance be toxic when that would clearly not be a reasonable interpretation of the policy. If the target directly defined toxic metals as all potentially toxic metal without the committee to act as a filter then I'd agree with you, but defining x to mean potentially x would be nonsensical.

To look at it another way, if I asked you to make a playlist containing any track you noted to be particularly funky you'd be unlikely to think I wanted you to put every single funky track ever recorded on the playlist.

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Fri May 28, 2021 5:38 am

Uan aa Boa wrote:I have to respectfully disagree. The target talks about "any relatively dense metal or metalloid, or any compound thereof, that is noted for its potential toxicity by the World Assembly Scientific Programme." So if a metal hasn't been noted then it isn't on the list. As per the other paragraph you quoted, WASP can interpret policy. It can therefore tell the difference between substances relevant to a piece of environmental legislation and substances that are not. It's not required to mechanically note every substance that can in any circumstance be toxic when that would clearly not be a reasonable interpretation of the policy.

WASP can interpret policy, and when the policy directly states that they are noting things for being potentially toxic, that is the only way they are physically allowed to interpret it. It doesn't matter the relevance to the resolution, they do their job as they are told to do it. No exceptions.
If the target directly defined toxic metals as all potentially toxic metal without the committee to act as a filter then I'd agree with you, but defining x to mean potentially x would be nonsensical.

To look at it another way, if I asked you to make a playlist containing any track you noted to be particularly funky you'd be unlikely to think I wanted you to put every single funky track ever recorded on the playlist.

The committee notes things for being potentially toxic. Not some things that are potentially toxic. And I agree that that would be nonsensical. The author overlooked that mistake in drafting and that's why I'm repealing this.

Then again I am not a robot who acts exactly as I am told. Regardless of your intent in asking me to do that, following the exact orders without a second thought would in fact command me to list every single particularly funky track.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Fri May 28, 2021 5:50 am

Elaborated on the military exemption part.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Sun May 30, 2021 6:44 am

Bump.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10537
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sun May 30, 2021 6:50 pm

Other than the military exemption, which is a poor argument (given that nations live in an anarchic world order and therefore care greatly about security), the entire repeal draft boils down to "it's not clear" and "there are no definitions". Perhaps more work would be best showing how a lack of definitions or clarity has actual impacts?

Author: 1 SC and 42 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Toxic villainous globalist kittehs
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley (EMW); OOC unless otherwise indicated
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Mon May 31, 2021 5:52 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Other than the military exemption, which is a poor argument (given that nations live in an anarchic world order and therefore care greatly about security), the entire repeal draft boils down to "it's not clear" and "there are no definitions". Perhaps more work would be best showing how a lack of definitions or clarity has actual impacts?

For sure, I will elaborate on all of that when I got home.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Mon May 31, 2021 12:22 pm

More elaborations made.
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Scalizagasti
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 177
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Scalizagasti » Mon May 31, 2021 8:20 pm

"While the definition in the original resolution is quite poor, I do not believe it would classify every metal and metal compound as a toxic heavy metal. For instance a piece of aluminum foil is 'relatively' not that dense compared to other metals, whereas mercury -- which is commonly accepted to be a toxic heavy metal -- is over five times denser. Now, this still poses a problem, as something like gold is still classified as a toxic heavy metal when it should not be. Basically, while the original resolution is incredibly problematic, it does not include every metal ever like this repeal claims. Regardless, this is a minor point in the grand scheme of things."
Scalizagasti | iiwiki page | he/him

Overseer of the Assembly in the United Regions Alliance (URA)
Senator in Mariner Trench
Former President of The Great Experiment

Don't let them tell you it can't be done - Jack Layton

User avatar
Jedinsto
Diplomat
 
Posts: 696
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Jedinsto » Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:47 am

Scalizagasti wrote:"While the definition in the original resolution is quite poor, I do not believe it would classify every metal and metal compound as a toxic heavy metal. For instance a piece of aluminum foil is 'relatively' not that dense compared to other metals, whereas mercury -- which is commonly accepted to be a toxic heavy metal -- is over five times denser. Now, this still poses a problem, as something like gold is still classified as a toxic heavy metal when it should not be. Basically, while the original resolution is incredibly problematic, it does not include every metal ever like this repeal claims. Regardless, this is a minor point in the grand scheme of things."

"I intentionally applied the 'which applies to all metals' to only the 'potentially toxic' part, because yes, the 'reasonably dense' part is up to interpretation by WASP."
James DuBois

Go vote! Repeal: Toxic Heavy Metals Act
Working on- Repeal: International Salvage Laws
Vice-Delegate and Regional Assembly member of Thalassia, WA Ministry staffer of TNP

My Singular Authorship

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21467
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Tue Jun 01, 2021 9:45 am

Scalizagasti wrote:"While the definition in the original resolution is quite poor, I do not believe it would classify every metal and metal compound as a toxic heavy metal. For instance a piece of aluminum foil is 'relatively' not that dense compared to other metals, whereas mercury -- which is commonly accepted to be a toxic heavy metal -- is over five times denser. Now, this still poses a problem, as something like gold is still classified as a toxic heavy metal when it should not be. Basically, while the original resolution is incredibly problematic, it does not include every metal ever like this repeal claims. Regardless, this is a minor point in the grand scheme of things."

You misunderstand how density works. Aluminum foil is not light because it is not dense, but because it has very little volume. You will observe the same properties with gold foil, which you agree classifies as a toxic heavy metal under the target.
In the meantime you are here, and it’s beautiful, and escaping isn’t always something bad.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Viceroy for The East Pacific

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15677
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:06 am

Wallenburg wrote:
Scalizagasti wrote:"While the definition in the original resolution is quite poor, I do not believe it would classify every metal and metal compound as a toxic heavy metal. For instance a piece of aluminum foil is 'relatively' not that dense compared to other metals, whereas mercury -- which is commonly accepted to be a toxic heavy metal -- is over five times denser. Now, this still poses a problem, as something like gold is still classified as a toxic heavy metal when it should not be. Basically, while the original resolution is incredibly problematic, it does not include every metal ever like this repeal claims. Regardless, this is a minor point in the grand scheme of things."

You misunderstand how density works. Aluminum foil is not light because it is not dense, but because it has very little volume. You will observe the same properties with gold foil, which you agree classifies as a toxic heavy metal under the target.

OOC: I mean, heck, the Mythbusters literally made a big helium balloon out of actual lead.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Coronavirus related. This too. And this. These are all jokes. This isn't. This is, again, but it's also the last one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads