[PASSED] Astronomical Data Repository Act

[Kenmoria]

“I would move the definition clause to below the ‘Hereby’ line, since it is not a perambulatory clause. Also, 3a seems overly restrictive in cases of an authoritarian or tyrannical government interfering with the operations of legal persons. I would change it so that the clause can only apply when the information is directly impacting national security, whereas currently the clause allows it in all circumstances, though stating a different goal.”

[Kranostav]

“I would move the definition clause to below the ‘Hereby’ line, since it is not a perambulatory clause. Also, 3a seems overly restrictive in cases of an authoritarian or tyrannical government interfering with the operations of legal persons. I would change it so that the clause can only apply when the information is directly impacting national security, whereas currently the clause allows it in all circumstances, though stating a different goal.”

I would be concerned that expressly stating national security reasons would then implicitly give away the secrecy of that location, however then bringing it down to only "information is directly impacting national security" would have tyrannical/authoritarian nations citing that for everything.

(OOC: Edited the other part)

[Araraukar]

OOC post.

Sorry I didn't get back to you in any kind of timely manner. Things happening in real life + combatting some kind of headcold or mild flu = not a lot of energy for something like NationStates. I technically shouldn't be online even now, but needing to be upright for a bit makes Internet tempting...

Astronomical Data Repository Act

Could easily drop the "act" from it, without it suffering at all...

Intending to create a public database that will document and record unique astronomical data for the purpose of education and advancing astronomic study,

This whole thing should be started with "The World Assembly" or "The General Assembly", so that you have something that intends or is cognisant, and so on. Also, "document and record" sounds like the WA committee doing astronomical observations.

Cognisant of the need to compile astronomical information while not infringing on sovereign rights of nations to maintain secrecy in military and similar affairs,

What's the need? As in, why does astronomical information need to be collected in one place? Especially given that many WA nations don't exist in the same universes with one another.

This august World Assembly, in hopes of advancing education and astronomic study, hereby:

It's not "august", unless they've redefined "august" to mean "fighting dirty and being rude". And in any case you should start the whole thing with "The World Assembly". You could then replace this all with just "Hereby".

Why on earth would you make your main clauses into list points?

1. Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the sake of this proposal as information regarding celestial and planetary attributes, astronomical features, especially including extremely unique information/data, and the stellar coordinates containing these items,

I can't really get my mind to accept describing stars and planets as "items". Also, what's wrong with using "celestial bodies"? That would include stars, planets, dwarf planets, planetoids, asteroids, comets and indeed anything that's "up there" and noticeable enough to have some need to be recorded. It would also exclude artificial satellites, such as space stations (in RL the ISS) or spy satellites (that of course no-one will admit to having).

I would also like to ask what's the difference between "attributes" and "features"? If the latter refers to actual planetary surface formations, that's more geographical information, not astronomical. I understand that we use astronomical gadgetry to get such information, especially in RL, but would you call, say, the Alps an "astronomical feature"?

And what counts as "extremely unique information/data"?

2. Establishes an agency within the World Assembly Scientific Programme (WASP) named ‘Astronomic Science and Technical Research Organization’ (ASTRO) and tasks it with organizing collection for, administering over, and maintaining a database of astronomical data,

I think the word "information" is missing between the words "organizing collection". Also what's "over" doing there? It'd read more fluently as "...tasks it with administering, maintaining and organizing information collection for a database...". Though I'm still confused with what administering it's doing.

3. Urges nations to submit to ASTRO any relevant astronomical data they may posses involving various items defined above,

Why only nations? If RL astronomical discoveries were only done by nation states, we'd still be living like it was year 1618 or so. Amateurs organizations, commercially sponsored professionals, various universities and just plain private citizens have contributed massive amounts of astronomical data to the common pool of science ever since people first looked up at the weird bright dots that come out at night (I know clause 4 mentions them, I'll get to that later). Also, think of something like ESA, which is a multinational space agency - would just one nation saying "nope" be enough to stop any of the data collected from being donated? And what if such an organization only had one WA nation involved, the others being non-WA nations, would the WA nation be allowed to submit the data even if the non-WA nations all said "no"?

a. Contributing nations may confidentially donate to ensure any identifying characteristics are not associated with donated information,

Except, you know, if said nation exists on a planet that circles a certain star and they share the info they've collected of the star, and are required to include "the stellar coordinates containing these items" as the definition says, of course everyone looking at the database will know that said nation exists on a planet that circles said star. Also, I would think that you'd get more donors of data for an international databank, if you let the donators that are not commercial ventures, to have their name(s) included in the data. Think of something like NASA in Real Life; they probably wouldn't want to give any of their data to this thing, unless the data carried the "information donated by NASA" notation.

b. Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,

So Nation A in Universe A has submitted information about their own sun's neighbouring star to the database. Nation B in Universe B has found that information useful enough since they have a similar star in their stellar neighbourhood, and have included a few lines of text about it in their elementary school level's science books, correctly crediting the database as the source of the info.

Then Nation A in Universe A discovers that the star in question has a planet with Nation C orbiting around it, and that Nation C is interstellar and known to attack planets capable of supporting global civilizations. So Nation A wants to ban all dissemination of the data in the database about the star, since such detailed observations and the stellar coordinates given would mean that Nation C could put two and two together and get that the home star of Nation A must have a planet around it that the observations were made from, thus compromising the safety of Nation A.

Does that then mean that Nation B in Universe B, completely uninvolved in anything to do with the possible conflict or, indeed, even the universe, should send Men In Black to keep students from reading the few sentences in their science books, and teachers from teaching that such a star exists somewhere? Or would WASP send the MIBs?

4. Permits non-governmental entities to contribute astronomical data to ASTRO and retain the right to negotiate for appropriate compensation,

...so does that mean that WA would pay them for the info?

a. Contributing non-governmental entities shall acquire approval from the national government, in which they acquired the data, before submission so as to prevent the release of sensitive or confidential data,

...so I wouldn't be allowed to share the photo I took all on my own (and had it developed back in Finland), of the Solar Eclipse of 1999, in Bulgaria, with the database, without Bulgaria's permission? Why? They let me into the country knowing that I was there to see the solar eclipse in the first place. And yeah, it says "so as to prevent sensitive/confidential blah blah", but it doesn't actually say that the data needs to be something that's sensitive or confidential.

Something that's televized around the world (like the solar eclipse that was so exciting to USA peeps recently) or printed in newspapers and widely-spread magazines (to the tune of National Geographic magazine) shouldn't count for this clause. If it's "data about an internationally known phenomenon", I wouldn't include it in this requirement. And in any case I'd exclude registered astronomical organizations from checking with the government, maybe only urge them to do so. I mean, their governments know that they exist, since they gave the permission for them to become a registered organization in the first place.

Maybe instead put it in a way that lets a nation withdraw submitted data from the database, when it was submitted by non-governmental source, if and only if the nation can convince the WASP subcommittee that the data would hurt their secrets or security.

b. Notes that parent clause in no way forcibly requires private organizations to donate any data that they would otherwise use for monetary gain

So they can't do both? Like, say, someone uses a good quality Meade telescope (and don't joke about "made in China", that's a fairly new event) on their own backyard to take a great picture about the Moon's terminator when it's almost but not completely full. They offer the pic to the local newspaper and get some money for it, and then have it printed in a series of posters they can sell. They would then want to contribute the picture to the database, but if they did, would that mean they had to stop selling the posters?

5. Maintains that this proposal in no manner allows or promotes trespassing on national property, specifically that of stellar coordinates in the data submitted,

"Not allowing" sounds like "intending to stop". So without a WA army, even space-based one, being possible, how's that going to work out? I'd drop the allow entirely. And also add a requirement about obeying the local international laws and conventions, so thatsome space aliens couldn't come and make the Moon into a commercial tourist attraction if it's under the local (Earth's) international "do not commercialize" outer space treaty, that all the Earth nations are bound to.

6. Forbids the sale and redistribution of data specifically taken from ASTRO in exchange for payment, excluding the original founder(s) of data.

Already asked about the "must they then stop selling posters" bit earlier. Consider it to refer to this clause as well.

[Bears Armed]

OOC post.

5. Maintains that this proposal in no manner allows or promotes trespassing on national property, specifically that of stellar coordinates in the data submitted,

"Not allowing" sounds like "intending to stop". So without a WA army, even space-based one, being possible, how's that going to work out? I'd drop the allow entirely.

Replacing "allows" with "legalizes" would be a better way to convey what [I think] is intended to be the desired meaning.

[Kranostav]

OOC post.

Sorry I didn't get back to you in any kind of timely manner. Things happening in real life + combatting some kind of headcold or mild flu = not a lot of energy for something like NationStates. I technically shouldn't be online even now, but needing to be upright for a bit makes Internet tempting...

1.

Astronomical Data Repository Act

Could easily drop the "act" from it, without it suffering at all...

2.

Intending to create a public database that will document and record unique astronomical data for the purpose of education and advancing astronomic study,

This whole thing should be started with "The World Assembly" or "The General Assembly", so that you have something that intends or is cognisant, and so on. Also, "document and record" sounds like the WA committee doing astronomical observations.

3.

Cognisant of the need to compile astronomical information while not infringing on sovereign rights of nations to maintain secrecy in military and similar affairs,

What's the need? As in, why does astronomical information need to be collected in one place? Especially given that many WA nations don't exist in the same universes with one another.

4.

This august World Assembly, in hopes of advancing education and astronomic study, hereby:

It's not "august", unless they've redefined "august" to mean "fighting dirty and being rude". And in any case you should start the whole thing with "The World Assembly". You could then replace this all with just "Hereby".

5.

Why on earth would you make your main clauses into list points?

6.

1. Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the sake of this proposal as information regarding celestial and planetary attributes, astronomical features, especially including extremely unique information/data, and the stellar coordinates containing these items,

I can't really get my mind to accept describing stars and planets as "items". Also, what's wrong with using "celestial bodies"? That would include stars, planets, dwarf planets, planetoids, asteroids, comets and indeed anything that's "up there" and noticeable enough to have some need to be recorded. It would also exclude artificial satellites, such as space stations (in RL the ISS) or spy satellites (that of course no-one will admit to having).

I would also like to ask what's the difference between "attributes" and "features"? If the latter refers to actual planetary surface formations, that's more geographical information, not astronomical. I understand that we use astronomical gadgetry to get such information, especially in RL, but would you call, say, the Alps an "astronomical feature"?

And what counts as "extremely unique information/data"?

7.

2. Establishes an agency within the World Assembly Scientific Programme (WASP) named ‘Astronomic Science and Technical Research Organization’ (ASTRO) and tasks it with organizing collection for, administering over, and maintaining a database of astronomical data,

I think the word "information" is missing between the words "organizing collection". Also what's "over" doing there? It'd read more fluently as "...tasks it with administering, maintaining and organizing information collection for a database...". Though I'm still confused with what administering it's doing.

8.

3. Urges nations to submit to ASTRO any relevant astronomical data they may posses involving various items defined above,

Why only nations? If RL astronomical discoveries were only done by nation states, we'd still be living like it was year 1618 or so. Amateurs organizations, commercially sponsored professionals, various universities and just plain private citizens have contributed massive amounts of astronomical data to the common pool of science ever since people first looked up at the weird bright dots that come out at night (I know clause 4 mentions them, I'll get to that later). Also, think of something like ESA, which is a multinational space agency - would just one nation saying "nope" be enough to stop any of the data collected from being donated? And what if such an organization only had one WA nation involved, the others being non-WA nations, would the WA nation be allowed to submit the data even if the non-WA nations all said "no"?

9.

a. Contributing nations may confidentially donate to ensure any identifying characteristics are not associated with donated information,

Except, you know, if said nation exists on a planet that circles a certain star and they share the info they've collected of the star, and are required to include "the stellar coordinates containing these items" as the definition says, of course everyone looking at the database will know that said nation exists on a planet that circles said star. Also, I would think that you'd get more donors of data for an international databank, if you let the donators that are not commercial ventures, to have their name(s) included in the data. Think of something like NASA in Real Life; they probably wouldn't want to give any of their data to this thing, unless the data carried the "information donated by NASA" notation.

10.

b. Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,

So Nation A in Universe A has submitted information about their own sun's neighbouring star to the database. Nation B in Universe B has found that information useful enough since they have a similar star in their stellar neighbourhood, and have included a few lines of text about it in their elementary school level's science books, correctly crediting the database as the source of the info.

Then Nation A in Universe A discovers that the star in question has a planet with Nation C orbiting around it, and that Nation C is interstellar and known to attack planets capable of supporting global civilizations. So Nation A wants to ban all dissemination of the data in the database about the star, since such detailed observations and the stellar coordinates given would mean that Nation C could put two and two together and get that the home star of Nation A must have a planet around it that the observations were made from, thus compromising the safety of Nation A.

Does that then mean that Nation B in Universe B, completely uninvolved in anything to do with the possible conflict or, indeed, even the universe, should send Men In Black to keep students from reading the few sentences in their science books, and teachers from teaching that such a star exists somewhere? Or would WASP send the MIBs?

11.

4. Permits non-governmental entities to contribute astronomical data to ASTRO and retain the right to negotiate for appropriate compensation,

...so does that mean that WA would pay them for the info?

12.

a. Contributing non-governmental entities shall acquire approval from the national government, in which they acquired the data, before submission so as to prevent the release of sensitive or confidential data,

...so I wouldn't be allowed to share the photo I took all on my own (and had it developed back in Finland), of the Solar Eclipse of 1999, in Bulgaria, with the database, without Bulgaria's permission? Why? They let me into the country knowing that I was there to see the solar eclipse in the first place. And yeah, it says "so as to prevent sensitive/confidential blah blah", but it doesn't actually say that the data needs to be something that's sensitive or confidential.

Something that's televized around the world (like the solar eclipse that was so exciting to USA peeps recently) or printed in newspapers and widely-spread magazines (to the tune of National Geographic magazine) shouldn't count for this clause. If it's "data about an internationally known phenomenon", I wouldn't include it in this requirement. And in any case I'd exclude registered astronomical organizations from checking with the government, maybe only urge them to do so. I mean, their governments know that they exist, since they gave the permission for them to become a registered organization in the first place.

Maybe instead put it in a way that lets a nation withdraw submitted data from the database, when it was submitted by non-governmental source, if and only if the nation can convince the WASP subcommittee that the data would hurt their secrets or security.

13.

b. Notes that parent clause in no way forcibly requires private organizations to donate any data that they would otherwise use for monetary gain

So they can't do both? Like, say, someone uses a good quality Meade telescope (and don't joke about "made in China", that's a fairly new event) on their own backyard to take a great picture about the Moon's terminator when it's almost but not completely full. They offer the pic to the local newspaper and get some money for it, and then have it printed in a series of posters they can sell. They would then want to contribute the picture to the database, but if they did, would that mean they had to stop selling the posters?

14.

5. Maintains that this proposal in no manner allows or promotes trespassing on national property, specifically that of stellar coordinates in the data submitted,

"Not allowing" sounds like "intending to stop". So without a WA army, even space-based one, being possible, how's that going to work out? I'd drop the allow entirely. And also add a requirement about obeying the local international laws and conventions, so thatsome space aliens couldn't come and make the Moon into a commercial tourist attraction if it's under the local (Earth's) international "do not commercialize" outer space treaty, that all the Earth nations are bound to.

15.

6. Forbids the sale and redistribution of data specifically taken from ASTRO in exchange for payment, excluding the original founder(s) of data.

Already asked about the "must they then stop selling posters" bit earlier. Consider it to refer to this clause as well.

Your points are numbered in the spoiler for ease of response,

1. I don't necessarily see harm in having it there, however I can remove it if it becomes bothersome I suppose.

2 and 4. Fair, I'll switch the 'world assembly' part to the beginning, however 'august' still seems fairly appropriate. Perhaps a "This dirty and rude" assembly could work

3. I would argue that harvesting data from different universes would only make that data more valuable. I also argue that there are no nations alone in their own universe so this could serve them in some way.

5. I don't quite see the issue with the organization here, could you please expound?

6. 'Item' is used to represent the data reflecting the observation. Technically a more accurate word than 'celestial body' would be 'Astronomical Object' which is what I had in mind when splicing it into the 'attributes and features' part. I'll do some rewording to make that clearer (Also dropping extremely unique data as that wasn't supposed to make it into that edit, I removed it and then accidentally re-added it while editing.)

7. It is technically grammatically correct however it may read weird so Ill edit that.

8 and 11 (the entire issue of donation of nations and non-governmental entities) - Alrighty, The urges clause only applies to nations as they are the only ones relevant or otherwise required for the urges. As noted, "Contributing non-governmental entities shall acquire approval from the national government, in which they acquired the data, before submission so as to prevent the release of sensitive or confidential data,". This means that a multinational space agency would only have to be granted permission from the nation in which they found the data. For example, if they are present in nation A,B,C, and they collect data in all three. If B says they must hold the data or submit confidentially (externally confidential meaning that the committee will know who its coming from but when released and disseminated it wont be attached to any author until that hold or confidential listing is lifted), any data not collected in B is not impacted.
"...so does that mean that WA would pay them for the info?" Only if the contributing entity wishes to seek compensation. Any non-governmental entity can donate for the glory of donating that data, however if a private space agency comes along and wishes to contribute for a price, they can negotiate for compensation.

9. Two points here, first being - 'identifying characteristics' include stellar coordinates amoung other things, just to insure this point I'll add an 'and/or' to the definition. I'll add a crediting system to reward donations from anyone, unless of course they want to stay anonymous.

10. This seems like a highly unrealistic case of whataboutism, especially noting that an entity that can observe and collect data on their own sun would be able to observe other planets in their own system and certainly notice any life. Even more so that this killer civilization in nation C would have noticed this 'global civilization' if it was capable of interstellar flight and planet-destruction.

12. Okay I see your point, but yes you would still have to assuming the host nation doesn't just blanket approve all data taken on the event. I'll edit and get back to you as I do that.

13. and 15. That's not what the means at all. As it is outlined in clause 4. They retain the right to do whatever they want with the data. The subclause you are regarding simply addresses that the parent clause doesn't force member nations to donate data if they would want to seek monetary compensation. Clause 4 further notes that you cannot resell data specifically acquired from ASTRO distribution and includes that the contributors of the data maintain every right to do whatever they wish with the data.

14. Refer to BA's response, I plan to edit accordingly

[Kranostav]

OOC post.

"Not allowing" sounds like "intending to stop". So without a WA army, even space-based one, being possible, how's that going to work out? I'd drop the allow entirely.

Replacing "allows" with "legalizes" would be a better way to convey what [I think] is intended to be the desired meaning.

Editing shortly

[Araraukar]

OOC: I'll get back to replying your points more thoroughly, but for the "confidential informatiuon" thing, maybe there could instead be an option for any nation whose soil (does it only apply to land-based or also observations done in their airspace or even low orbits? if airspace counts, then a "weather balloon" that gets launched from Nation A, drifts through Nation B's airspace, while measuring cosmic rays, and lands in Nation C is going to cause issues) the observations were made on, to have a look at the data submitted before it goes public in the database?

Though even that won't remove the issue of "observer not wanting to go through bureaucracy submitting the data and saying they got it while in a different nation (that doesn't care about such submissions) instead". Like if I'd submitted the photo of the 1999 solar eclipse, all you could do was to say that it must've been somewhere that the full shadow passed over the surface of the Earth. Given that the totality that year passed through international waters and most of central and southeast Europe, as well as southwest Asia, you'd have a hard time proving exactly where it was taken. And I really don't think that the WA committee should be forced to check the local weather conditions to try and discern whether the photo could've been taken where the person submitting it says it was taken.

Which reminds me, if historical observations can also be submitted, if the original data is held by an existing organization or person or whatever, and the nation in which they were taken has ceased to exist or the area has since gained independence (both of which have happened in RL Europe more times than one might think), which nation do you ask permission from? Also same about international airspace or sea areas (or even space) - do nations get any say about the data collected there, whether or not it contains confidential data?

[Kranostav]

OOC: I'll get back to replying your points more thoroughly, but for the "confidential informatiuon" thing, maybe there could instead be an option for any nation whose soil (does it only apply to land-based or also observations done in their airspace or even low orbits? if airspace counts, then a "weather balloon" that gets launched from Nation A, drifts through Nation B's airspace, while measuring cosmic rays, and lands in Nation C is going to cause issues) the observations were made on, to have a look at the data submitted before it goes public in the database?

Though even that won't remove the issue of "observer not wanting to go through bureaucracy submitting the data and saying they got it while in a different nation (that doesn't care about such submissions) instead". Like if I'd submitted the photo of the 1999 solar eclipse, all you could do was to say that it must've been somewhere that the full shadow passed over the surface of the Earth. Given that the totality that year passed through international waters and most of central and southeast Europe, as well as southwest Asia, you'd have a hard time proving exactly where it was taken. And I really don't think that the WA committee should be forced to check the local weather conditions to try and discern whether the photo could've been taken where the person submitting it says it was taken.

Which reminds me, if historical observations can also be submitted, if the original data is held by an existing organization or person or whatever, and the nation in which they were taken has ceased to exist or the area has since gained independence (both of which have happened in RL Europe more times than one might think), which nation do you ask permission from? Also same about international airspace or sea areas (or even space) - do nations get any say about the data collected there, whether or not it contains confidential data?

How about I switch it to a removal method, one where if a nation can provide a worthy reason to the committee for a piece of data being pulled out of circulation, that piece of data will be removed. Now this would allow all private entities to have free reign over submissions, only to be held to nations pulling it back at a later time. Or perhaps even a system where when you submit a piece of data, you must name the country from whence it came. Before that data is posted the country is informed and allowed to look over any of the data that was submitted. That would bring the weight off the civilian and onto the government which is much better able to handle it.

[Araraukar]

Or perhaps even a system where when you submit a piece of data, you must name the country from whence it came. Before that data is posted the country is informed and allowed to look over any of the data that was submitted. That would bring the weight off the civilian and onto the government which is much better able to handle it.

OOC: That's exactly what I suggested.

[Kranostav]

Or perhaps even a system where when you submit a piece of data, you must name the country from whence it came. Before that data is posted the country is informed and allowed to look over any of the data that was submitted. That would bring the weight off the civilian and onto the government which is much better able to handle it.

OOC: That's exactly what I suggested.

I will be applying edits soon. RL is getting a tad busy as of late.

[Kranostav]

After a ton of edits from above and seeing how this proposal could compliment the current proposal at vote.

Lets go ahead and get some more feedback on the edits made.

[Capercom]

Hello hello. Quotas to hit, stuff to do. I see your recent request for more feedback and I need to show my bosses why they're paying me as much as they are! Which, isn't actually a lot considering what all I do sadly.

This has been well crafted and edited. I'm having to really nitpick here to find anything...thanks for making today's work difficult.

Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,

A point that I don't believe was made before, the secrecy of the data could be in relation to where the astrological data was being obtained. If the coordinates of the telescope is input with the data, and said telescope is on a secret military base...you wouldn't want that being public information. If a scientist in the military who is undercover working in another nation discovers something and sends it back to his/her home nation and they submit it...you wouldn't want that information being public. So I think this was worded properly and stands valid.

My question is, relying on the assumption that ASTRO comes out with reports/data compilations/findings/trends about all aspects space, if a nation requests data it submitted be kept confidential, does that data make it into the general pool of non-specific metrics used for other research? Does that make sense? What I'm getting at is, if a large majority of nations, for whatever reason, request confidentiality in relation to a certain subject, and by doing so ASTRO cannot use that data in any fashion, that would mean ASTRO would be putting out data with its stamp of approval via reports and studies that it knows to be not complete/incorrect at times. I see some members of the scientific community not being comfortable with that.

4. Permits privately owned entities to contribute astronomical data to ASTRO and retain the right to negotiate for appropriate compensation,

Truly the only concern I have is relation to Clause 4. Coming from a very liberal nation, I find it a hard sell to get me to buy into providing compensation for private entities. This is a door I don't feel keeps the process true to the name of scientific advancement. It also opens the door for messy situations. Some of them being:

- What if a company refuses to provide data to ASTRO because they want more compensation, but it's groundbreaking information, and they decide to release their information only on their company website. Does ASTRO have the legal rights, after being denied full access to the information to input into the database, to use any of that data? I feel ASTRO couldn't without being sued. What would stop every private entity from demanding an outrageous amount of money for the sole point of rendering ASTRO null due to lack of breaking news/historic data, so they could financially benefit from it without ASTRO being the middle man?

- Are the payments to each entity subject to any tariffs or taxation from the hosting nation? Is there a dedicated wing of ASTRO that will be solely handling the thousands of nation's tax payment paperwork for verification that those nations will obviously request?

- Is it really in the nature of the W.A. to provide compensation to private organizations for the betterment of society and our understanding of the world?

I understand obtaining data costs money, but ASTRO is not trying to create a new industry market for the global economy. It's trying to expand our knowledge. There can be other non-financial benefits somehow for recognition to the contribution. Names on plaques, brochures, newsletters, documentaries on how the data was obtained, etc. But a straight, thanks for the data here's a few hundred thousand whatever your currency is feels kind of wrong to me. Something like, offering grants to the organizations instead of bartering for compensation feels more in line with a way to pay for the data that fits with what I feel is the theme of science in the W.A.

Otherwise, I tried very hard to find issues with this, but it is a fantastic idea!

[Bears Armed]

[blocktext]

Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,

A point that I don't believe was made before, the secrecy of the data could be in relation to where the astrological data was being obtained. If the coordinates of the telescope is input with the data, and said telescope is on a secret military base...you wouldn't want that being public information. If a scientist in the military who is undercover working in another nation discovers something and sends it back to his/her home nation and they submit it...you wouldn't want that information being public. So I think this was worded properly and stands valid.

OOC
Without the coordinates [and time] where it was obtained, any data about the positions or movements of astronomical bodies loses most [if not all...] of its value...

... Unless you're assuming that observations are made from a flat world which is stationary at the centre of the cosmos?

[Ethnon]

This looks good

[Capercom]

[blocktext]

A point that I don't believe was made before, the secrecy of the data could be in relation to where the astrological data was being obtained. If the coordinates of the telescope is input with the data, and said telescope is on a secret military base...you wouldn't want that being public information. If a scientist in the military who is undercover working in another nation discovers something and sends it back to his/her home nation and they submit it...you wouldn't want that information being public. So I think this was worded properly and stands valid.

OOC
Without the coordinates [and time] where it was obtained, any data about the positions or movements of astronomical bodies loses most [if not all...] of its value...

... Unless you're assuming that observations are made from a flat world which is stationary at the centre of the cosmos?

Upon thinking about it further that makes sense. Astrological data is obtained by specific measurements based on location of the observer and the object. If that location data is altered/incorrect, it throws off the rest of the data and the future scientific observation and discoveries will be based on inaccuracies.

I told my boss I needed to meet with someone in the science wing of our government but he trusted my "B" in one semester of "Astronomy 101" in undergrad to be sufficient.

[Kranostav]

Contributing nations may request a temporary hold on, or total prevention of the release and dissemination of data they have contributed should a situation arise that the donated information might compromise the safety and integrity of the contributing nation,

A point that I don't believe was made before, the secrecy of the data could be in relation to where the astrological data was being obtained. If the coordinates of the telescope is input with the data, and said telescope is on a secret military base...you wouldn't want that being public information. If a scientist in the military who is undercover working in another nation discovers something and sends it back to his/her home nation and they submit it...you wouldn't want that information being public. So I think this was worded properly and stands valid.

My question is, relying on the assumption that ASTRO comes out with reports/data compilations/findings/trends about all aspects space, if a nation requests data it submitted be kept confidential, does that data make it into the general pool of non-specific metrics used for other research? Does that make sense? What I'm getting at is, if a large majority of nations, for whatever reason, request confidentiality in relation to a certain subject, and by doing so ASTRO cannot use that data in any fashion, that would mean ASTRO would be putting out data with its stamp of approval via reports and studies that it knows to be not complete/incorrect at times. I see some members of the scientific community not being comfortable with that.

4. Permits privately owned entities to contribute astronomical data to ASTRO and retain the right to negotiate for appropriate compensation,

Truly the only concern I have is relation to Clause 4. Coming from a very liberal nation, I find it a hard sell to get me to buy into providing compensation for private entities. This is a door I don't feel keeps the process true to the name of scientific advancement. It also opens the door for messy situations. Some of them being:

- What if a company refuses to provide data to ASTRO because they want more compensation, but it's groundbreaking information, and they decide to release their information only on their company website. Does ASTRO have the legal rights, after being denied full access to the information to input into the database, to use any of that data? I feel ASTRO couldn't without being sued. What would stop every private entity from demanding an outrageous amount of money for the sole point of rendering ASTRO null due to lack of breaking news/historic data, so they could financially benefit from it without ASTRO being the middle man?

- Are the payments to each entity subject to any tariffs or taxation from the hosting nation? Is there a dedicated wing of ASTRO that will be solely handling the thousands of nation's tax payment paperwork for verification that those nations will obviously request?

- Is it really in the nature of the W.A. to provide compensation to private organizations for the betterment of society and our understanding of the world?

I understand obtaining data costs money, but ASTRO is not trying to create a new industry market for the global economy. It's trying to expand our knowledge. There can be other non-financial benefits somehow for recognition to the contribution. Names on plaques, brochures, newsletters, documentaries on how the data was obtained, etc. But a straight, thanks for the data here's a few hundred thousand whatever your currency is feels kind of wrong to me. Something like, offering grants to the organizations instead of bartering for compensation feels more in line with a way to pay for the data that fits with what I feel is the theme of science in the W.A.

To your first point on the data, it should be noted that the information/data contributed is kept within a data base. Reports and derivatives of such are not explicitly sent out to all of the WA community. The process I imagine would be a database that can be accessed and specific data extracted rather than large amount of data being sent out for no specific reason. As for the confidentiality, I could potentially add a sub-clause declaring that perceived incorrect or misleading data be highlighted or even removed to not mislead the science community. However assuming the confidentiality really only be applied to the location from which the data came, the data is totally still usable as data can be drawn from observed phenomenon without knowing the specific location. Let me know if Im making sense here.

To your second point, I understand the skepticism behind providing direct monetary compensation to companies who donate data, however working around the industry IRL, astronomical research is extremely expensive. While donating is always appreciated and applauded, these companies have to make money, and such compensation could help that while having this data being put forth for a great clause. In regards to WA GenFund, you have no obligation to pay dues into it, so technically you wouldn't have to support its existence and therefore wouldn't have to support the industry in this way, however if you wish I could give some limit beyond what the General Fund does limit already.

This being said, ASTRO will never steal information. As for tarrifs, it would depend on national laws, as compensation being a broad term could be negotiated to something like a plaque, brochure, newsletter, documentary or grant as opposed to a cash equivalent.

I hope I answered your questions to the best of your ability, let me know if there is anything I can clarify!

[Kranostav]

[blocktext]

A point that I don't believe was made before, the secrecy of the data could be in relation to where the astrological data was being obtained. If the coordinates of the telescope is input with the data, and said telescope is on a secret military base...you wouldn't want that being public information. If a scientist in the military who is undercover working in another nation discovers something and sends it back to his/her home nation and they submit it...you wouldn't want that information being public. So I think this was worded properly and stands valid.

OOC
Without the coordinates [and time] where it was obtained, any data about the positions or movements of astronomical bodies loses most [if not all...] of its value...

... Unless you're assuming that observations are made from a flat world which is stationary at the centre of the cosmos?

Assuming lack of information on orbital periods or distances from other reference bodies, you are fairly correct. However coordinates are not that big of an issue as long as other reference data that includes local positions nonspecific to the region are provided. For example, you could study all about our own solar system and learn and apply concepts observed here based on information regarding our ss without ever knowing where exactly in our galaxy or universe we exist. Sure, that extra information would help but is not required as long as other information is present.

That being said Im not willing to deter nations from donating because they cant rescind data or information that could be used against them. That seems like an unnecessary punishment for otherwise good willed actions.

[Kranostav]

OOC
Without the coordinates [and time] where it was obtained, any data about the positions or movements of astronomical bodies loses most [if not all...] of its value...

... Unless you're assuming that observations are made from a flat world which is stationary at the centre of the cosmos?

Upon thinking about it further that makes sense. Astrological data is obtained by specific measurements based on location of the observer and the object. If that location data is altered/incorrect, it throws off the rest of the data and the future scientific observation and discoveries will be based on inaccuracies.

I told my boss I needed to meet with someone in the science wing of our government but he trusted my "B" in one semester of "Astronomy 101" in undergrad to be sufficient.

While referring to my previous answer to BA regarding this, I also have to comment that plenty of that data will exist. But I believe that it is best if nations have the option to rescind data that could be used against them. The last thing I want is for data from this database to be used to harm donating/contributing entities.

[Kenmoria]

“Your definition of astronomical data appears quite recursive, as both of the words are being used in the explanation itself. What makes an object astronomical? Some clarification on this point would be ideal. Other than that, I see no major issues with the proposal you are presenting.”

[Kranostav]

“Your definition of astronomical data appears quite recursive, as both of the words are being used in the explanation itself. What makes an object astronomical? Some clarification on this point would be ideal. Other than that, I see no major issues with the proposal you are presenting.”

Would the following edit suffice as a replacement that more adequately addresses the definition?
"Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the purposes of this proposal as information regarding objects within or related to space and the practice of astronomy, their features and physical attributes, and/or the stellar coordinates containing the aforementioned data,"

[Kenmoria]

“Your definition of astronomical data appears quite recursive, as both of the words are being used in the explanation itself. What makes an object astronomical? Some clarification on this point would be ideal. Other than that, I see no major issues with the proposal you are presenting.”

Would the following edit suffice as a replacement that more adequately addresses the definition?
"Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the purposes of this proposal as information regarding objects within or related to space and the practice of astronomy, their features and physical attributes, and/or the stellar coordinates containing the aforementioned data,"

“That seems good, yes; it’s much more precise and has less leeway for misinterpretation by member states.”

[Kranostav]

Would the following edit suffice as a replacement that more adequately addresses the definition?
"Defines ‘astronomical data’ for the purposes of this proposal as information regarding objects within or related to space and the practice of astronomy, their features and physical attributes, and/or the stellar coordinates containing the aforementioned data,"

“That seems good, yes; it’s much more precise and has less leeway for misinterpretation by member states.”

Glad to have that cleared up! Let me know if you see anything else.

[Kranostav]

Looking for additional comments/concerns. If you addressed it once already in this thread please readdress it as it's probably been a few months since we've discussed. Looking to wrap this up before it hits 1 year of drafting

[Kenmoria]

“Clause 4 has an a subclause then an i subclause, I believe the i should instead be a b.”

[Kranostav]

“Clause 4 has an a subclause then an i subclause, I believe the i should instead be a b.”

Ah yes indeed, cheeky monkey.

Fixed! Thank you!