NATION

PASSWORD

Committees, split from [DRAFT] Ban on Leaded Fuel

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54792
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Corporate Police State

Committees, split from [DRAFT] Ban on Leaded Fuel

Postby Imperializt Russia » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:24 am

Is there a list of active WA committees at all? Sounds like something that could be very useful.

I think I remember someone saying that committees aren't killed by repeals like the legislature itself is, so can committees of repealed legislation be "revived" for new purposes if it's deemed within oversight?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
The Dark Star Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Oct 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dark Star Republic » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:33 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:Is there a list of active WA committees at all? Sounds like something that could be very useful.

Here.

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54792
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Corporate Police State

Postby Imperializt Russia » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:37 am

The Dark Star Republic wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:Is there a list of active WA committees at all? Sounds like something that could be very useful.

Here.

Only two of those are struck out.
So is it true that committees are usually considered to survive repeals?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:39 am

Sciongrad's Committees List. It's under Helpful Links in the Rules thread.

Also in the Rules thread, under House of Cards:
A Proposal must be able to stand on its own even if all referenced Resolutions were struck from existence; however, you may assign duties to an existing committee. Should the Resolution that creates the committee be Repealed, the committee will continue to exist, but in a reduced capacity.

I'm taking that as meaning that, if a committee has been used in another proposal, it continues to exist; but if it has no life other than in the repealed Resolution, I'd think it dies with the Resolution that established it.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
The Dark Star Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Oct 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dark Star Republic » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:47 am

(Unofficial interpretation): But in terms of the original question, there wouldn't be anything stopping someone from "reviving" it for a future resolution. If The Landmine Convention were repealed, the WA Demining Agency would cease to exist, but someone could easily write Landmine Convention II: Return of the Crippled Orphans, and "revive" the WA Demining Agency.

Edit: I knew I remembered this argument from somewhere before. I brought this up before with regards to Abacathea trying to "reinstate" the WAEC; he claimed in response:
Abacathea wrote:as it stands what it's doing is legal, it has been done, and we've done it.

But looking through his resolutions I can't see that any of them have done that, in fact.
Last edited by The Dark Star Republic on Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:57 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:17 am

Well, we don't seem to have anything definite on the issue, so have at it, citizens: should the committees that died when a Resolution was repealed be revivable?

I'd particularly like to hear from authors of committees here: are you so sold on your committee name that you'd regard any re-use of it as plagiarism, or have you gifted it to the WA s a whole?

My own feeling is that it's silly to revive a committee, when you can just as easily come up with a new name for something that does a similar job. Plus, specifying the areas a committee covers seems to me to help firm up a proposal in the author's and the voters' minds. However, I can see the appeal from a character-count point of view.

EDIT: After discussion here, an "OK, go ahead, revive dead committees" note had been posted in the Committees section of the Rules.

Tasks: Don't copy the original author's description of a committee's tasks; if necessary, paraphrase.

Names: You can re-use alphabet-soup, bland committee names, but please don't pinch somebody else's unique name. For example, you don't have to paraphrase Potato Committee into Committee for Potatoes, but SPUD (Special Protection for Underground Delectables) would be reserved for the original.
Last edited by Ardchoille on Mon Aug 18, 2014 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
Defwa
Minister
 
Posts: 2598
Founded: Feb 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Defwa » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:29 am

Ardchoille wrote:Well, we don't seem to have anything definite on the issue, so have at it, citizens: should the committees that died when a Resolution was repealed be revivable?

I'd particularly like to hear from authors of committees here: are you so sold on your committee name that you'd regard any re-use of it as plagiarism, or have you gifted it to the WA s a whole?

My own feeling is that it's silly to revive a committee, when you can just as easily come up with a new name for something that does a similar job. Plus, specifying the areas a committee covers seems to me to help firm up a proposal in the author's and the voters' minds. However, I can see the appeal from a character-count point of view.

OOC: If reviving dead committees is plagiarism than reusing live committees should be too- and that's simply not efficient, speaking realistically. In role play its as if the committee was suspended and returned to duty later. I personally like the feeling of reusing committees and think it should be encouraged.
__________Federated City States of ____________________Defwa__________
Federation Head High Wizard of Dal Angela Landfree
Ambassadorial Delegate Maestre Wizard Mikyal la Vert

President and World Assembly Delegate of the Democratic Socialist Assembly
Defwa offers assistance with humanitarian aid, civilian evacuation, arbitration, negotiation, and human rights violation monitoring.

User avatar
The Dark Star Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Oct 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dark Star Republic » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:36 am

Ardchoille wrote:Well, we don't seem to have anything definite on the issue, so have at it, citizens: should the committees that died when a Resolution was repealed be revivable?

Yes, but not using language like "reinstate". That's repealing a repeal. I would expect to be in the tiny minority of people who could give a shit about this point, though.

The only exception should be for committees that would now be illegal, like UNIBOT (and, perhaps, GESTAPO?).
Ardchoille wrote:I'd particularly like to hear from authors of committees here: are you so sold on your committee name that you'd regard any re-use of it as plagiarism, or have you gifted it to the WA s a whole?

By putting something into the game, you're letting other people use it. People can roleplay committees, can use committees that haven't been repealed - there's no reason why they shouldn't revive them.

If The Landmine Convention were repealed, I would have no problem with people someone else reviving the WA Demining Agency: in fact, my current repeal text is "heartened" at the prospect of that. I would have felt the same way about my various UN-era committees, UNDA, UNEAF, UNRC...and whatever other alphabet soup I served up at the time.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2974
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:03 am

OOC: I personally have no issue with committees being reestablished and wouldn't consider it plagiarism if one of mine was later used after its original resolution was repealed. To be perfectly honest, I think it depends on the purpose of the committee in the new resolution and its purpose in the old resolution. If the new resolution's committee pursues a policy goal similar to the one established by the old resolution, then I think it makes logical sense from an IC perspective to re-establish the old committee to carry on its previous work and to send the message that the World Assembly approves of the old resolution's policy goal. I think it all depends on the purpose of the new committee. Although I do see Ard's point - it really isn't that hard to come up with a new committee.

Imperializt Russia wrote:
The Dark Star Republic wrote:Here.

Only two of those are struck out.
So is it true that committees are usually considered to survive repeals?


I haven't actually included committees in resolutions repealed before the list was compiled yet (I will in the near future), but there are obviously more than only two committees that have been repealed.
Last edited by Sciongrad on Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2140
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:50 am

Ardchoille wrote:Well, we don't seem to have anything definite on the issue, so have at it, citizens: should the committees that died when a Resolution was repealed be revivable?

I'd particularly like to hear from authors of committees here: are you so sold on your committee name that you'd regard any re-use of it as plagiarism, or have you gifted it to the WA s a whole?

My own feeling is that it's silly to revive a committee, when you can just as easily come up with a new name for something that does a similar job. Plus, specifying the areas a committee covers seems to me to help firm up a proposal in the author's and the voters' minds. However, I can see the appeal from a character-count point of view.


Absolutely yes. The status of a resolution (IE whether or not it has or has not been repealed) should not become an issue at all as to whether a committee can be used. But then that is coming from someone who thinks that all passed resolutions, whether or not repealed, should be considered to be the IP of the whole WA and phrases from current resolutions, particularly definitions, could be used in future drafts while repealed resolutions could be used to a significant extent with only the repeal reasons being changed. I am sure I have been told, or I saw a comment somewhere saying that what I have outlined is against the rules but I cannot see anything about in the rules or the rulings, other than a "don't plagiarise in the RL rule and a ruling about plagiarising an unsubmitted draft.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:58 am

Bananaistan wrote: <snip>... I am sure I have been told, or I saw a comment somewhere saying that what I have outlined is against the rules but I cannot see anything about in the rules or the rulings, other than a "don't plagiarise in the RL rule and a ruling about plagiarising an unsubmitted draft.
"Plagiarism" covers taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own. So yes, a proposal copying someone else's text would be ruled illegal unless the original author had granted permission onsite. Details are in the Rules under Proposal Stealing.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2140
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:13 am

Ardchoille wrote:
Bananaistan wrote: <snip>... I am sure I have been told, or I saw a comment somewhere saying that what I have outlined is against the rules but I cannot see anything about in the rules or the rulings, other than a "don't plagiarise in the RL rule and a ruling about plagiarising an unsubmitted draft.
"Plagiarism" covers taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own. So yes, a proposal copying someone else's text would be ruled illegal unless the original author had granted permission onsite. Details are in the Rules under Proposal Stealing.

Thank you.

I note that the rule states "[don't just] copy and pasted somebody else's Proposal" (emphasis mine). Does this mean that quoting from a definition from a passed resolution, even if it has been repealed, IE in either case is it a document which is no longer a proposal, would be legal? It's rather similar to using a committee.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17975
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:26 am

Bananaistan wrote:
Ardchoille wrote:"Plagiarism" covers taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own. So yes, a proposal copying someone else's text would be ruled illegal unless the original author had granted permission onsite. Details are in the Rules under Proposal Stealing.

Thank you.

I note that the rule states "[don't just] copy and pasted somebody else's Proposal" (emphasis mine). Does this mean that quoting from a definition from a passed resolution, even if it has been repealed, IE in either case is it a document which is no longer a proposal, would be legal? It's rather similar to using a committee.

Past rulings have said that it isn't allowed.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54792
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Corporate Police State

Postby Imperializt Russia » Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:57 am

Bananaistan wrote:
Ardchoille wrote:"Plagiarism" covers taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own. So yes, a proposal copying someone else's text would be ruled illegal unless the original author had granted permission onsite. Details are in the Rules under Proposal Stealing.

Thank you.

I note that the rule states "[don't just] copy and pasted somebody else's Proposal" (emphasis mine). Does this mean that quoting from a definition from a passed resolution, even if it has been repealed, IE in either case is it a document which is no longer a proposal, would be legal? It's rather similar to using a committee.

Passages of the text are explicitly of the Proposal, so can individually be plagiarised.
When in doubt, ask a mod or refer to the definition of "plagiarism".
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:01 am

It just struck me that some authors may hope to ride on a previous author's work by quoting a committee's tasks straight from the old legislation. My view on that would be that, like copying a definition, it's plagiarism. Authors should describe what new tasks the committee has.

Example:
Repealed Resolution wrote:Establishes the Potato Committee, which shall
1. Monitor the growth, use and distribution of potatoes in member nations
2. Ensure that existing potato varieties are maintained.

New Resolution wrote:The WA further tasks the Potato Committee with
(a) developing new strains of potatoes
(b) researching cures for potato diseases.

Comments?
Last edited by Ardchoille on Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
Louisistan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 810
Founded: Sep 10, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Louisistan » Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:05 am

Comment?
My comment is: What you said.

Reusing committees from repealed resolutions: Yes
Plagarising the committee tasks: No (paraphrasing is okay, if it can't be avoided).
Knight of TITO, Senator of 10000 Islands

User avatar
Defwa
Minister
 
Posts: 2598
Founded: Feb 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Defwa » Thu Aug 14, 2014 9:34 am

Louisistan wrote:Comment?
My comment is: What you said.

Reusing committees from repealed resolutions: Yes
Plagarising the committee tasks: No (paraphrasing is okay, if it can't be avoided).

Right- giving it the same tasks can be necessary. What the point of bringing back the ICC if it can't try and punish war crimes?
Just have to do the usual language switch up.
__________Federated City States of ____________________Defwa__________
Federation Head High Wizard of Dal Angela Landfree
Ambassadorial Delegate Maestre Wizard Mikyal la Vert

President and World Assembly Delegate of the Democratic Socialist Assembly
Defwa offers assistance with humanitarian aid, civilian evacuation, arbitration, negotiation, and human rights violation monitoring.

User avatar
Omigodtheykilledkenny
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5614
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Capitalizt

Postby Omigodtheykilledkenny » Thu Aug 14, 2014 1:43 pm

My concern is committee names. If it's something generic, like World Assembly Sock Puppet Committee, then it should be fine. However, if it's an acronym* or something similarly clever that the original author had to make effort to think up, it should not be used again. It would be horridly unoriginal, and just plain lame, besides.



* absent illegal ones, like U.N.I.B.O.T.
Omigodtheykilledkenny FAQ | "The Biggest Sovereigntist IN THE WORLD" - Chester Pearson


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Servilis

Advertisement

Remove ads