[ON HOLD] Office of the World Assembly Archivist

[Morover]

The lead editor of the Morovian Department on the World Assembly's authorship sect.

"I suggest replacing all periods at the ends of the operative clauses with semicolons."

“It should be fixed now, my honorable friends, our own resident grammarians have advised us to revise this to read more like one of our native laws. We have complied with this request. Hopefully too we have fixed the gripe many had of this violating the rules of this venerable establishment.”

The same editor.

"I'd recommend changed 'hereby' to 'hereby enacts the following' or some similar variation; as stands, it is not the best wording."

[Hulldom]

“It should be fixed now, my honorable friends, our own resident grammarians have advised us to revise this to read more like one of our native laws. We have complied with this request. Hopefully too we have fixed the gripe many had of this violating the rules of this venerable establishment.”

The same editor.

"I'd recommend changed 'hereby' to 'hereby enacts the following' or some similar variation; as stands, it is not the best wording."

“Adopted.”

[Hulldom]

Bump

[Hulldom]

This has been sitting around for about 20 days. I'm still waiting for someone who had concern over the legality of this proposal to chime in and see if it's been fixed just yet. Consider this a bump with a "I plan to take action in the near term if no one has any major concerns."

[Tinfect]

To this end, member states must make readily available freedom of information processes which allow workers to view the content of archives of their own national archives.

OOC:
For the record, you can strike this clause; it's already done by prior legislation, and in better detail.

[Hulldom]

To this end, member states must make readily available freedom of information processes which allow workers to view the content of archives of their own national archives.

OOC:
For the record, you can strike this clause; it's already done by prior legislation, and in better detail.

Ah, alright then. I thought there was something like that on the books, but wasn't certain.

[Hulldom]

Bump. I plan to submit this soon-ish should there be no further feedback or pushback.

[Imperium Anglorum]

ELSIE MORTIMER WELLESLEY. On this clause, I have a few comments:

The Office of the World Assembly Archivist, hereafter referred to as OWAA, shall be established, its goal it shall be to collect [any material, physical, digital, or otherwise, which is created in the carrying out of the functions of the World Assembly] with the express goal of cataloguing said materials for the World Assembly’s internal use and for researchers from all states, thus establishing an archive of World Assembly-related materials;

There is a substantial need in policymaking to have a frank discussion of various alternatives. Making those discussions public would make it difficult to have any such frank discussions, especially when they entail curtailing rights or privileges of any powerful interest group. Requiring them to be opened would make it very difficult to insulate WA civil servants from special interest groups.

This is extended, naturally, to the judicial sphere as well for the same reasons. The World Assembly also contains various courts and prosecutors, which provide information at times under expectations of anonymity or that the information will be sealed. World Assembly review of privacy regulations may at times include sensitive national security information which should not be released. And provision of that information may be necessary for a member nation to secure approval from a WA court. Similarly, other reasons for sealing cases exist: defamatory materials, trade secrets, or expungement of criminal records. By releasing or cataloguing this data, which must be provided to secure a favourable verdict, this archive would abet the exact harms which sealing such cases attempts to avoid.

Work-products associated with the World Assembly Solicitors Office and other respondent advocates for the Assembly also would be included in these archives. Release of them would undermine the ability for the Solicitors Office or WA respondent counsel to make an effective case before the Impartial Mediation Foundation. While keeping those records is necessary, they should not be released unless an actual need emerges, rather than idle curiosity. Naturally related is Compliance Commission reports or tips: opening them could expose whistleblowers or informants – or the descendants thereof – to retaliation.

Of course, I am imputing that data would be eventually taken out of the archive, unless you are really suggesting that we can spend 20 million pounds to put information into a machine and never use it. Very frankly, you need safeguards to protect information and to treat sensitive information with the gravity that its sensitivity requires.

[Hulldom]

"The suggestion from the Honorable Ambassador from Imperium Anglorum has been well taken. We shall produce draft language regarding safeguarding classified information in the archive in due course."

[Shazbotdom]

"Query," Antonie started, standing up after reading over the proposal. "Wouldn't this be something that the Gnomes would be doing, regardless of if there is an official 'Office' or not?"

[Hulldom]

"Query," Antonie started, standing up after reading over the proposal. "Wouldn't this be something that the Gnomes would be doing, regardless of if there is an official 'Office' or not?"

“There’s nothing suggesting that in the corpus of World Assembly law, no.”

OOC: Hence why this proposal is hopelessly meta.

[Abacathea]

Recognizing the value of data archives to the work of professionals whose work takes place in a variety of fields,

There's something about the structure of this sentence that makes me brain hurt. In my mind it's akin to saying "recognizing the importance of petrol to a vehicles which drive on a variety of terrains". It just... I can't formulate my exact irritation with it. Perhaps someone else will see this and either shut me down or express the words adequately for me.

Noticing that, to date, no centralized collection of data on all of the World Assembly’s functions by the various offices of said organization yet exist, hereby enacts the following:

Just me, others might disagree, it feels like an awkward run on sentence, I'd but the hereby enacts... as a sentence on it's own, stylization if nothing else, but that's just me, my writing style irritates people all on its own so who am I to judge.

In this resolution, “data” is defined as any material, physical, digital, or otherwise, which is created in the carrying out of the functions of the World Assembly;

Any material? So a post it note about a phone call, a scribbled note about a meeting at 3?

The Office of the World Assembly Archivist, hereafter referred to as OWAA, shall be established, its goal it shall be to collect any material, physical, digital, or otherwise, which is created in the carrying out of the functions of the World Assembly with the express goal of cataloguing said materials for the World Assembly’s internal use and for researchers from all states, thus establishing an archive of World Assembly-related materials;

"it's goal it shall be" <-- Doesn't sound right.

Member states must regularly send any and all data concerning direct cooperation or contribution between the government of said member state and the World Assembly to OWAA.

Contradicts the previous, you've stated that the Archivist should collect the material, now you burden member states with additional duties.

This mandate does not require member states to send data created via Delegations in communications with their home governments, only data generated by the home government and delegation in their direct dealing with the World Assembly.

I would hope so, I would imagine there's a certain claim of privilege over that data.

Member states are also directed to create archives of data pertaining to the functions of their national government.

Fuck no. Your proposal is to create an archive of WA affairs, yet now you mandate how/if any nation chooses to archive or not archive their own data.

Nothing in this resolution requires a member state to turn over portions of private communications or sensitive archives that do not pertain to matters relating to the World Assembly to OWAA.

So what is the point of the previous requirement?

As it stands, my opinion is thus Ambassador;

I have always believed when it comes to proposal writing, to quote Mr Bigweld, "see a need, fill a need". This proposal feels more "see a gap, fill a gap". I recognise the potential in an Assembly Archive for future generations, but not like this, I will not be supporting sir. Good evening to you.

[Imperium Anglorum]

In this resolution, “data” is defined as any material, physical, digital, or otherwise, which is created in the carrying out of the functions of the World Assembly;

Any material? So a post it note about a phone call, a scribbled note about a meeting at 3?

ELSIE MORTIMER WELLESLEY. We concur as to objections to this definition. Archives ought only include material products and not miscellaneous work notes. "Data" (or rather, "records") of a transitory nature, ie not documenting things such as -- significant actions, business decisions, or rationales for such actions or decisions -- have no need to be wastefully stored as if they were the original paper copies of resolutions. Nor are copies of existing records elsewhere kept for reference or for convenience things that merit preservation.

Records of a personal nature tangentially related to the World Assembly should not be preserved without the consent of the creator. Nor should content be preserved merely because it was created by World Assembly employees or officers (a reminder about a phone call being an example). Nor should drafts or other materials be preserved indefinitely, especially if they were not circulated to committee members and do not contain substantive annotations or comments that add to understanding the formulation or execution of policy. And while it may be important to preserve calendars, appointment books, etc for officers, it is not so relevant for functionaries who are assigned policies to carry out.

While it is relatively clear that information substantively relevant to the committee decisions, actions, and rationales therefor ought to be preserved, how about other things such as calendars? Calendars for officers? Sure. Calendars for a functionary's secretary? Not so much. Business files? Yes. But what sort of business files? Staff manuals and circulars ought to be preserved, but drafts of fact-finding reports need are of little value. And files documenting medical, retirement, etc benefits for staff seem of little use for limited archivist time, beyond a violation of staff privacy. You ought to go into more detail than "save everything".

[Wallenburg]

I should also point out that the current language requires that member states relinquish all this data such that they no longer have it. I think it's rather important for member states to hold onto this information where it concerns them.

I'm beginning to think this is by design.

[Hulldom]

I should also point out that the current language requires that member states relinquish all this data such that they no longer have it. I think it's rather important for member states to hold onto this information where it concerns them.

I'm beginning to think this is by design.

It's rather not, but I haven't found the time (yet?) to look through the thing IA sent me on this subject so I'm holding off on doing any edits till then. It's not malicious, just merely me having a busy schedule.

[Wallenburg]

I'm beginning to think this is by design.

It's rather not, but I haven't found the time (yet?) to look through the thing IA sent me on this subject so I'm holding off on doing any edits till then. It's not malicious, just merely me having a busy schedule.

If that's the case, you shouldn't have said this:

Bump. I plan to submit this soon-ish should there be no further feedback or pushback.

This indicates that you are done dealing with previous feedback and consider your draft ready for submission.

[Hulldom]

It's rather not, but I haven't found the time (yet?) to look through the thing IA sent me on this subject so I'm holding off on doing any edits till then. It's not malicious, just merely me having a busy schedule.

If that's the case, you shouldn't have said this:

Bump. I plan to submit this soon-ish should there be no further feedback or pushback.

This indicates that you are done dealing with previous feedback and consider your draft ready for submission.

That was before I was given the stuff about NARA, Wally.

[Wallenburg]

If that's the case, you shouldn't have said this:

This indicates that you are done dealing with previous feedback and consider your draft ready for submission.

That was before I was given the stuff about NARA, Wally.

Whether you were pointed to NARA in July (as you were, which means that your post was well after you were pointed to NARA) or two minutes ago wouldn't change the fact that my own independent feedback was posted two months ago. It's okay if it was overlooked, that happens. I am, however, suspicious at the claim that you didn't get to it because you were busy with other edits when you said that this was ready for submission.

[Hulldom]

After some thought on this, I've decided I'm going to place this on hold until I have more time and can actually go about reviewing the NARA regulations. My hope is to pick this up after my Christmas break begins in early December.