by Ramprage » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:41 pm
by Marxist Germany » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:44 pm
by Ramprage » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:47 pm
Marxist Germany wrote:OOC:That resolution was passed before any of those rules existed, also this is illegal for meta gaming (mention of security council) and honest mistake
by The New Nordic Union » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:48 pm
Marxist Germany wrote:OOC:That resolution was passed before any of those rules existed, also this is illegal for meta gaming (mention of security council) and honest mistake
by Ramprage » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:51 pm
The New Nordic Union wrote:Marxist Germany wrote:OOC:That resolution was passed before any of those rules existed, also this is illegal for meta gaming (mention of security council) and honest mistake
OOC: Also, all passed resolutions are legal by virtue of passing alone; illegality is no grounds for repeal.
by Kenmoria » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:53 pm
by Ramprage » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:59 pm
Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Unfortunately, your proposal is illegal for a few reasons. Firstly, it is assumed that all passed resolutions are legal by default, so illegality cannot be used as an argument in a repeal. Secondly, as has been mentioned, you cannot mention the SC in any way whatsoever. Also, you can’t mention ‘NationStates’, since that is metagaming.)
“GA #002 is a landmark piece of legislation, and one that many authors, some of which had previously passed resolutions, have tried to repeal. However, it is so old and important that I don’t think anyone can succeed, especially on a first attempt.”
by The New Nordic Union » Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:08 pm
Ramprage wrote:OOC: not my first attempted repeal(even tho it was other GA resolution), using puppet nation for several reasons. Isn't every argument legal as long as it convinces people? And Nationstates is mentioned here, because over and over again it is mentioned in that resolution and i am stating the fact. Can i make it like: "Resolution uses several times 'NationStates', thou it's role for the purpose of the resolution is unknown.
"Historical resolutions will always stay in archive as one of our GA resolution commands, future generations will be free to see it, but it doesn't justify reason to keep it as an acting law"
by Kenmoria » Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:09 pm
Ramprage wrote:Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. Unfortunately, your proposal is illegal for a few reasons. Firstly, it is assumed that all passed resolutions are legal by default, so illegality cannot be used as an argument in a repeal. Secondly, as has been mentioned, you cannot mention the SC in any way whatsoever. Also, you can’t mention ‘NationStates’, since that is metagaming.)
“GA #002 is a landmark piece of legislation, and one that many authors, some of which had previously passed resolutions, have tried to repeal. However, it is so old and important that I don’t think anyone can succeed, especially on a first attempt.”
OOC: not my first attempted repeal(even tho it was other GA resolution), using puppet nation for several reasons. Isn't every argument legal as long as it convinces people? And Nationstates is mentioned here, because over and over again it is mentioned in that resolution and i am stating the fact. Can i make it like: "Resolution uses several times 'NationStates', thou it's role for the purpose of the resolution is unknown.
"Historical resolutions will always stay in archive as one of our GA resolution commands, future generations will be free to see it, but it doesn't justify reason to keep it as an acting law"
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:53 pm
by Widowed Land » Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:08 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: The fourth argument implicates the Branding rule, and wouldn't be legal.
OP, I appreciate your responsiveness and your dislike of GAR#2. I share your concerns with it. However, I do not think your repeal theory is likely to succeed. I recommend cutting your teeth on a different proposal to repeal.
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:19 pm
Widowed Land wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: The fourth argument implicates the Branding rule, and wouldn't be legal.
OP, I appreciate your responsiveness and your dislike of GAR#2. I share your concerns with it. However, I do not think your repeal theory is likely to succeed. I recommend cutting your teeth on a different proposal to repeal.
OOC: Author says that he(or she) doesn't think that it will pass through. I believe there's same repeal proposed right now. But it was rendered illegal because of branding and metagaming(and tons of other broken law.) Oh and I agree with this repeal, cause.... well common sense.
by Widowed Land » Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:29 pm
Separatist Peoples wrote:Widowed Land wrote:
OOC: Author says that he(or she) doesn't think that it will pass through. I believe there's same repeal proposed right now. But it was rendered illegal because of branding and metagaming(and tons of other broken law.) Oh and I agree with this repeal, cause.... well common sense.
OOC: You shouldn't submit something you know is doomed. It wastes everybody's time and gums up the queue with garbage. That goes for OP and you.
by Araraukar » Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:43 pm
Widowed Land wrote:OOC: you in the first place cannot speak of the garbage. And mind your own business.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Apr 16, 2019 3:46 pm
by Widowed Land » Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:10 pm
by Marxist Germany » Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:06 am
Widowed Land wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Can. Am. I've seen probably thousands of drafts. I am eminently qualified to judge them as garbage.
No.
OOC: omg, it was you? sorry, i thought it was other nation, which i don't like much. Not sleeping didn't do much good. Sorry again, it wasn't for you.
by Separatist Peoples » Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:08 am
Widowed Land wrote:Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: Can. Am. I've seen probably thousands of drafts. I am eminently qualified to judge them as garbage.
No.
OOC: omg, it was you? sorry, i thought it was other nation, which i don't like much. Not sleeping didn't do much good. Sorry again, it wasn't for you.
by Widowed Land » Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:11 am
by Frisbeeteria » Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:42 am
Widowed Land wrote:OOc: not excuses, it was meant for you.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement