[DRAFT] - THE G.A ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION ACT

[Adriatican]

BE IT KNOWN; that this Proposal shall be submitted for the consideration of all Delegates, present in membership of the General Chamber of the World Assembly on this day SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 01, 2019, and shall henceforth be entitled as follows; “THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION ACT”.

AS SUCH; may it further be known that the terms used to address the scope, effect, and intended recipient of legislative result shall be defined as follows:

GENERAL ASSEMBLY; shall be defined as
the Chamber within the World Assembly concerned and tasked with passing international law: resolutions to improve human rights, environmental standards, and the like, and who, in their administration, can effect, modify, and otherwise mold the laws of Member Nations.

PROPOSAL, “THE PROPOSAL;” the proposal heretofore authored and being considered.

THE ORGANIZATION(S); in reference to any and all World Assembly bodies and institutions which administrate Assembly law, in/as a collective.

GENERAL CHAMBER, “CHAMBER”, “THE CHAMBER”: in reference to the General Assembly of the World Assembly as a collective, terms are used as a literary tool to prevent repetitive terminology and any resulting confusion.

AS SUCH, & IN CONSIDERATION OF THE NEEDS OF CHAMBER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HEREBY RESOLVES THAT;

- the administrative needs of the General Chamber of the World Assembly and the associated General Secretariat, are immense, complex, and nuanced.

- that said needs, as referenced above, must be appropriately catered to in order to prevent a breakdown of sufficient functionality within the General Assembly.

- that said breakdown would negatively effect, in the extreme, any and all efforts to properly carry out the diplomatic and security tasks associated with the General Chamber, and due to the bicameral nature of the World Assembly as a whole, the entirety of the organization itself.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS THUS FURTHER RESOLVED;

- that an organization must be created for the specific and singular purpose of properly and centrally administrating; the calculation and disbursement of funding, coordination and development of proper Human Resources, location, maintenance, construction, and development of General Assembly, and related organizational offices, proper maintenance and management of records of attainder, accounting, and similar operations, as well as the multi-level management and execution of internal policy, procedure, strategy, and operations, within the General Assembly’s many; committees, organizations, offices, bodies, councils, bureaus, agencies, and related entities.

- and that as such, it does hereby create the Commission for General Administration, which shall, upon the approval of this proposal by the General Chamber, be tasked with the duties outlined above.

- the commission be managed at the executive level by the selection of Commissioners, and on a day to day basis by a Chancellor of the Commission.

- that the rules and policies surrounding both the selection of Commissioners, the number to be selected, and the selection of a Chancellor, be decided by the appropriate body at a time most convenient to them.

FURTHERMORE, THE CHAMBER HEREBY VESTS THE COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL SELECT AUTHORITIES & PRIVILEGES;

- the privilege to advise the General Assembly and General Secretariat on the fiscal, operational, and strategic advantage and feasibility of all existing and proposed organization’s, bodies, agencies, councils, commissions, bureaus, and like institutions, except those which are, or which can, be involved with the oversight and/or accountability of the Commission itself as determined and designated by the General Assembly.

- the authority to hold hearings, and issue mandatory summons for said hearings, on all matters, and in the case of summons; to all persons, which may be associated with the tasks, authorities, duties, and/or privileges of the Commission.

- the authority to determine the; relevancy, poignancy, and necessity of all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets.

-the authority to; close, shutter, suspend, terminate, pause, cancel, and/or otherwise end any and all; W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets.

- the authority to intervene in the daily administration of all organizations within the the jurisdiction of the Commission and General Assembly.

FURTHER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOES HEREBY MANDATE MEMBER NATIONS;

- Once every two years, render, for all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets that; benefit, are associated with, primarily function within, and/or are otherwise in cooperation with their country(ies), justification and proof of future ability to remain relevant, poignant, and necessary to the Commission and its Chancellor, via; report, testimony, and/or similar input.

- Cooperate with the Commission in good faith to achieve the above.

IT IS THUS RESOLVED.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Here's what it was flagged to be illegal in:

Illegal - Doesn't fit the category (or ANY category, really); mention of the General Secretariat (presuming that you mean the OOC 'GA Secretariat)' is Meta-gaming); the power that you give it over projects and agencies established by earlier resolutions contradicts (or amends) at least some of those resolutions; and 'Committee-Only' (Resolutions must require, or at least urge, more action from the member nations than just filing paperwork).

I suggest you familiarize yourself with the Proposal Rules and Passed Resolutions.

[Adriatican]

OOC: Here's what it was flagged to be illegal in:

Illegal - Doesn't fit the category (or ANY category, really); mention of the General Secretariat (presuming that you mean the OOC 'GA Secretariat)' is Meta-gaming); the power that you give it over projects and agencies established by earlier resolutions contradicts (or amends) at least some of those resolutions; and 'Committee-Only' (Resolutions must require, or at least urge, more action from the member nations than just filing paperwork).

I suggest you familiarize yourself with the Proposal Rules and Passed Resolutions.

I have, and I did, but as you might notice, there are some things in THIS version that were meant to be in the last, but didn’t make the character count. My question is how I can go about metamorphosizing it so it fits in a category whilst keeping the pieces that were cut out last time.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Here's what it was flagged to be illegal in:


I suggest you familiarize yourself with the Proposal Rules and Passed Resolutions.

I have, and I did, but as you might notice, there are some things in THIS version that were meant to be in the last, but didn’t make the character count. My question is how I can go about metamorphosizing it so it fits in a category whilst keeping the pieces that were cut out last time.

Well, you still have references to the Secretariat; you have a whole bunch of stuff that basically duplicates GAR #17; and you've got a lot of meaningless fluff (e.g. your intro paragraph with the date and all). Get rid of all that and you'll have made a start.

Good luck!

[Imperium Anglorum]

The use of the word heretofore is incorrect in the pseudo-prefatory définitions clause. It doesn't help that the proposal is written in a style more resembling a contract with the end dragged out of a court order, than a law.

[Kenmoria]

“My comments are in red.”

BE IT KNOWN; that this Proposal shall be submitted for the consideration of all Delegates, present in membership of the General Chamber of the World Assembly on this day SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 01, 2019, and shall henceforth be entitled as follows; “THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION ACT”. This is unnecessary and ultimately meaningless fluff, that does nothing to help the proposal. If you want to cut down on length, and if you don’t, this should go.

AS SUCH; may it further be known that the terms used to address the scope, effect, and intended recipient of legislative result shall be defined as follows: This seems overly long and could be very easily replaced by a simpler clause such as ‘Defines the following terms for the purposes of this resolution’. In addition, I don’t see why you feel the need to define you have.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY; shall be defined as
the Chamber within the World Assembly concerned and tasked with passing international law: resolutions to improve human rights, environmental standards, and the like, and who, in their administration, can effect, modify, and otherwise mold the laws of Member Nations. The General Assembly is well known within GA law, and you don’t need to define terms that are common knowledge.

PROPOSAL, “THE PROPOSAL;” the proposal heretofore authored and being considered. One of the more finicky rules about GA proposals is that they must be written as resolutions, otherwise they wouldn’t work when passed.

THE ORGANIZATION(S); in reference to any and all World Assembly bodies and institutions which administrate Assembly law, in/as a collective. This also seems to not really be necessary. It could be that doing this allows you to cut down on length, so it is understandable. However, this is more stylistic.

GENERAL CHAMBER, “CHAMBER”, “THE CHAMBER”: in reference to the General Assembly of the World Assembly as a collective, terms are used as a literary tool to prevent repetitive terminology and any resulting confusion. On a very similar note, I don’t see a need to define this. GA lawmakers are expected to know that the GA chamber is.

AS SUCH, & IN CONSIDERATION OF THE NEEDS OF CHAMBER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HEREBY RESOLVES THAT;

- the administrative needs of the General Chamber of the World Assembly and the associated General Secretariat, are immense, complex, and nuanced. What is this General Secretariat of which you speak? I, as an ambassador, have never heard of such a thing. Whatever they are, it seems to me as though they are not a suitable topic for this proposal.

- that said needs, as referenced above, must be appropriately catered to in order to prevent a breakdown of sufficient functionality within the General Assembly.

- that said breakdown would negatively effect, in the extreme, any and all efforts to properly carry out the diplomatic and security tasks associated with the General Chamber, and due to the bicameral nature of the World Assembly as a whole, the entirety of the organization itself. We don’t discuss the other chamber here, as it is far more concerned with itself. Just mentioning the effect on member nations and diplomatic law should be enough.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS THUS FURTHER RESOLVED;

- that an organization must be created for the specific and singular purpose of properly and centrally administrating; the calculation and disbursement of funding, coordination and development of proper Human Resources, location, maintenance, construction, and development of General Assembly, and related organizational offices, proper maintenance and management of records of attainder, accounting, and similar operations, as well as the multi-level management and execution of internal policy, procedure, strategy, and operations, within the General Assembly’s many; committees, organizations, offices, bodies, councils, bureaus, agencies, and related entities. A lot of this is tautological. One of the clearer example of this is that all bodies within the General Assembly are called committees, regardless of what function they are.

- and that as such, it does hereby create the Commission for General Administration, which shall, upon the approval of this proposal by the General Chamber, be tasked with the duties outlined above. On a style format, this should just mention the creation of the Commission for General Administration, since proposals are supposed to be written from the perspective of them being passed.

- the commission be managed at the executive level by the selection of Commissioners, and on a day to day basis by a Chancellor of the Commission. Committees can sort these things out for themselves, and do so in a very efficient way; you don’t need to mention this.

- that the rules and policies surrounding both the selection of Commissioners, the number to be selected, and the selection of a Chancellor, be decided by the appropriate body at a time most convenient to them. Although this is the correct approach, it is also implicit in any committees.

FURTHERMORE, THE CHAMBER HEREBY VESTS THE COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL SELECT AUTHORITIES & PRIVILEGES;

- the privilege to advise the General Assembly and General Secretariat on the fiscal, operational, and strategic advantage and feasibility of all existing and proposed organization’s, bodies, agencies, councils, commissions, bureaus, and like institutions, except those which are, or which can, be involved with the oversight and/or accountability of the Commission itself as determined and designated by the General Assembly. I’ve come to the decision that the General Secretariat, whatever they are, certainly shouldn’t be mentioned here. Also, the General Assembly is little more than a collection of member states, so it could be more direct to allow the committee to advise member stares.

- the authority to hold hearings, and issue mandatory summons for said hearings, on all matters, and in the case of summons; to all persons, which may be associated with the tasks, authorities, duties, and/or privileges of the Commission.

- the authority to determine the; relevancy, poignancy, and necessity of all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets. The committee can be given this authority, but it doesn’t mean much. Resolutions, when they become law, automatically enact any initiatives they create, regardless of what the Commission determines.

-the authority to; close, shutter, suspend, terminate, pause, cancel, and/or otherwise end any and all; W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets. There’s also quite a lot of tautology here. More importantly, this can’t really be done. If a committee is established to do, for example, a WA education programme, it will continue to educate until the resolution that established is repealed.

- the authority to intervene in the daily administration of all organizations within the the jurisdiction of the Commission and General Assembly. This also seems unnecessary and not fitting with GA convention.

FURTHER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOES HEREBY MANDATE MEMBER NATIONS;

- Once every two years, render, for all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets that; benefit, are associated with, primarily function within, and/or are otherwise in cooperation with their country(ies), justification and proof of future ability to remain relevant, poignant, and necessary to the Commission and its Chancellor, via; report, testimony, and/or similar input. Getting member states to do something is required of proposals, so this is good. However, this is simply filing paperwork, so I think you should require member nations to take additional action.

- Cooperate with the Commission in good faith to achieve the above. Compliance in clauses doesn’t need other clauses to mandate.

IT IS THUS RESOLVED. This doesn’t serve a purpose, as passing a proposal always puts its mandates into effect.

(OOC: The reason my ambassador is confused about Gensec is that they are an OOC construct, so don’t exist in the sense of his worldview.)

[Araraukar]

OOC: I think we can add "amendment" into the list of violations for this version. The whole "can stop a committe from doing its job" thing.

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: From what I have read so far, and speaking as only 1/6th of GenSec, there is so much illegal in this that it will require some serious convolutions and rewrites to be even close to legal. Committees only cease to function when the resolution which created them is repealed. Future resolutions cannot do so as that would indeed be, in my opinion, an amendment. Which is a no go feature. And just the mention of GenSec is indeed metagaming and/or a RL violation.

IC: (to his assistant, whispering) “What are you prattling on about? What do you mean I was speaking in something other than my native Harberian?? Angle-Isk? Never heard of it. What have I told you about hitting the sauce during business hours? Humph. The very nerve!”

[Adriatican]

Here’s my gripe with all of this, which very well may be brushed off with a “that’s just how it is” argumentation, but ever since I joined this game, the fact that a resolution from the G.A, many of which incur and require massive undertakings, can simply be “enacted”, that there is no administrative organ to oversee, assure, or manage said enactment, and that as such, a telegram saying “this happened, it’s law now” is all we get, has always bothered me.

In essence, I feel such a system hallows out the RP experience and cuts corners on the purpose of the entire matter. Countless bodies have been created by this Chamber as an aspect of the RP experience that is the foundation of NS, yet once they’re created, nothing happens. No meetings are held, no members are appointed, no consequences for our nations are noticeable, so what’s the point?

And before you start, no, I’m not asking for a change in gameplay, I’m asking for the RP community in this game to put a bit more effort into enriching the experience IC’ly.

Also, as a side note, don’t get me started on how nonsensical it is for an apparently OOC construct (the General Secretariat) to be empowered to judge the IC legality of IC laws, since, by their very nature, they’re in two separate planes of existence.

Additionally, the same can be said of the Secretariat being an OOC construct to begin with, since the U.N, off of which the W.A is openly based, actually HAS a Secretariat that administrate it’s management and programs.

[Imperium Anglorum]

If your question is "Who does the enacting?": Your nation enacts those laws.

[Adriatican]

If your question is "Who does the enacting?": Your nation enacts those laws.

I currently Chair a W.A committee organization empowered to regulate the global stock markets, how on earth does every W.A nation administrate it’s own version of that organization?

The answer is, they don’t, because there is only one ISEC, as that’s what was called for in the Resolution and having over 100 of them would have been egregiously confusing and wasteful, however, if I hadn’t have gone out of my way to set it up, it would never have actually existed, and the bill would have had no effect, and let’s be honest, how many member players do you know of that change their national IC laws based on what the W.A passes?

So,I ask again, without a central body to administrate operations within the G.A, thus allowing it to be IC’ly possible to claim these various internal organizations exist, and furthermore, without anyone actually actively participating in them, do they really exist, and do the resolutions that made them, actually have any effect, and if the answer to all that is no (which in my opinion, it currently is), what’s the whole point?

This is the same scenario I’ve seen in every RP thread in NS, where a nation who had no historical or foundational background set up to have something, suddenly gets it. Oh, my nation has been stuck in the dark ages since the dawn of time and thus can’t possibly have developed a uranium enrichment program, but watch as I RP destroying your entire army with domestically manufactured nuclear warheads.

Only here it’s; there’s no infrastructure, RP history/foundation, or indeed, actual threads to support the claim that these laws and their respective committees/organizations have been enacted/created, but watch as I insist that they do because I say so.

[Morover]

Also, as a side note, don’t get me started on how nonsensical it is for an apparently OOC construct (the General Secretariat) to be empowered to judge the IC legality of IC laws, since, by their very nature, they’re in two separate planes of existence.

OOC: legality is an OOC construct.

[WayNeacTia]

Well, you still have references to the Secretariat;

Why cannot the Secretariat be reference in a proposal? From an IC standpoint, the Secretariat does exist very much the same as a committee.

I would also question:

and 'Committee-Only' (Resolutions must require, or at least urge, more action from the member nations than just filing paperwork)

Really? Since when?

[Ransium]

Well, you still have references to the Secretariat;

Why cannot the Secretariat be reference in a proposal? From an IC standpoint, the Secretariat does exist very much the same as a committee.

I would also question:

and 'Committee-Only' (Resolutions must require, or at least urge, more action from the member nations than just filing paperwork)

Really? Since when?

See the second bullet (committees) in the “proposal basics” section of the WA-GA rules viewtopic.php?f=9&t=159348

A committee may be the primary agent of that effect, but forming it may not be the proposal's only action.

[WayNeacTia]

Why cannot the Secretariat be reference in a proposal? From an IC standpoint, the Secretariat does exist very much the same as a committee.

I would also question:



Really? Since when?

See the second bullet (committees) in the “proposal basics” section of the WA-GA rules viewtopic.php?f=9&t=159348

A committee may be the primary agent of that effect, but forming it may not be the proposal's only action.

Irrelevant. Proposal clearly states:

"FURTHER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOES HEREBY MANDATE MEMBER NATIONS;

- Once every two years, render, for all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets that; benefit, are associated with, primarily function within, and/or are otherwise in cooperation with their country(ies), justification and proof of future ability to remain relevant, poignant, and necessary to the Commission and its Chancellor, via; report, testimony, and/or similar input.

- Cooperate with the Commission in good faith to achieve the above."

It is clear that member nations are required to take some sort of action.

Further more The General Fund, and WA Headquarters make very similar stipulations on member nations. The only actual requirements of member nations in regards to the General Fund are to cooperate with the WA, and to provide voluntary donations.

As for this proposal, nations are required to file paperwork every two years. More examples include Multilateral Trade Talk, in which the only requirement is to send a rep every
so many years.

I strenuously encourage the author to challenge the ruling made by Bears Armed, as it seems like a rule was made up out of thin air, and then applied improperly.

[Bananaistan]

If your question is "Who does the enacting?": Your nation enacts those laws.

I currently Chair a W.A committee organization empowered to regulate the global stock markets, how on earth does every W.A nation administrate it’s own version of that organization?

The answer is, they don’t, because there is only one ISEC, as that’s what was called for in the Resolution and having over 100 of them would have been egregiously confusing and wasteful, however, if I hadn’t have gone out of my way to set it up, it would never have actually existed, and the bill would have had no effect, and let’s be honest, how many member players do you know of that change their national IC laws based on what the W.A passes?

So,I ask again, without a central body to administrate operations within the G.A, thus allowing it to be IC’ly possible to claim these various internal organizations exist, and furthermore, without anyone actually actively participating in them, do they really exist, and do the resolutions that made them, actually have any effect, and if the answer to all that is no (which in my opinion, it currently is), what’s the whole point?

This is the same scenario I’ve seen in every RP thread in NS, where a nation who had no historical or foundational background set up to have something, suddenly gets it. Oh, my nation has been stuck in the dark ages since the dawn of time and thus can’t possibly have developed a uranium enrichment program, but watch as I RP destroying your entire army with domestically manufactured nuclear warheads.

Only here it’s; there’s no infrastructure, RP history/foundation, or indeed, actual threads to support the claim that these laws and their respective committees/organizations have been enacted/created, but watch as I insist that they do because I say so.

OOC: Your RP organisation in some other forum has no effect on me or my nation, or anyone else who doesn't post in your thread in that other forum. As far as me and my nation are concerned, the WA committees have gnomes who deal with me, not you in your self appointed role on that committee. It's not part of GA roleplay to have committees making decisions and doing stuff. We don't require it. We're an international legislature concerned only with passing or repealing laws, and in doing so setting up, allocating tasks to and taking away tasks from all these committees.

Feel free to continue to insist that each committee have an OOC thread etc, it won't be legal to do so in a proposal however - under metagaming, you cannot force roleplay on anyone else.

See the second bullet (committees) in the “proposal basics” section of the WA-GA rules viewtopic.php?f=9&t=159348

Irrelevant. Proposal clearly states:

"FURTHER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOES HEREBY MANDATE MEMBER NATIONS;

- Once every two years, render, for all W.A sponsored, created, designated, funded, and/or associated; projects, initiatives, organizations, agencies, institutions, properties, and/or other related assets that; benefit, are associated with, primarily function within, and/or are otherwise in cooperation with their country(ies), justification and proof of future ability to remain relevant, poignant, and necessary to the Commission and its Chancellor, via; report, testimony, and/or similar input.

- Cooperate with the Commission in good faith to achieve the above."

It is clear that member nations are required to take some sort of action.

Further more The General Fund, and WA Headquarters make very similar stipulations on member nations. The only actual requirements of member nations in regards to the General Fund are to cooperate with the WA, and to provide voluntary donations.

As for this proposal, nations are required to file paperwork every two years. More examples include Multilateral Trade Talk, in which the only requirement is to send a rep every
so many years.

I strenuously encourage the author to challenge the ruling made by Bears Armed, as it seems like a rule was made up out of thin air, and then applied improperly.

OOC: Also from the committee rule: "Requiring member states to interact with the committee somehow is sufficient, provided the interaction creates a measurable burden - one more strenuous than simply filing paperwork."

Regarding previously passed resolutions, they're effectively irrelevant. We apply the rules as they stand now, not as they may have stood in the past. But in any case, all three of the resolutions you cite have actual operative clauses (note also the strength rule which allows for recommendations to be valid operative clauses).

[Imperium Anglorum]

If your question is "Who does the enacting?": Your nation enacts those laws.

I currently Chair a W.A committee organization empowered to regulate the global stock markets, how on earth does every W.A nation administrate it’s own version of that organization?

The answer is, they don’t, because there is only one ISEC, as that’s what was called for in the Resolution and having over 100 of them would have been egregiously confusing and wasteful, however, if I hadn’t have gone out of my way to set it up, it would never have actually existed, and the bill would have had no effect, and let’s be honest, how many member players do you know of that change their national IC laws based on what the W.A passes?

So,I ask again, without a central body to administrate operations within the G.A, thus allowing it to be IC’ly possible to claim these various internal organizations exist, and furthermore, without anyone actually actively participating in them, do they really exist, and do the resolutions that made them, actually have any effect, and if the answer to all that is no (which in my opinion, it currently is), what’s the whole point?

This is the same scenario I’ve seen in every RP thread in NS, where a nation who had no historical or foundational background set up to have something, suddenly gets it. Oh, my nation has been stuck in the dark ages since the dawn of time and thus can’t possibly have developed a uranium enrichment program, but watch as I RP destroying your entire army with domestically manufactured nuclear warheads.

Only here it’s; there’s no infrastructure, RP history/foundation, or indeed, actual threads to support the claim that these laws and their respective committees/organizations have been enacted/created, but watch as I insist that they do because I say so.

There are multiple sorts of questions to unpack here. I'll explain the framework, then give a list of questions. You select the ones you're unclear on.

The World Assembly can legislate in two broad manners: (1) primary legislation which enjoins either the WA itself or member nations and (2) secondary legislation which empowers the WA through its committees to take some actions. The first kind is directly enacted by the World Assembly either upon itself, requiring nothing, or enacted upon member nations, who are required by GA 2 and "the game" to enforce the mandates of GA resolutions. The second kind is based on powers delegated by the World Assembly: it creates a committee, which then executes some commands.

This yields a number of clarification points:

1. How does the WA enjoin itself?
2. How does the WA enjoin member nations?
3. How do member nations enforce WA law?
4. What happens when member nations do not enforce WA law?
5. From where do committees get their powers?
6. How are committees created? Staffed?
7. How can committees enjoin member nations?
8. What happens when member nations disregard committee promulgations?

[Araraukar]

4. What happens when member nations do not enforce WA law?
8. What happens when member nations disregard committee promulgations?

OOC: You sic your committee at them.

6. How are committees created? Staffed?

Not sure if these questions were meant solely for the author, but they're created by the resolutions and staffed by "faceless" WA workers that are in the RP reality of GA called "gnomes", simply because it's funnier to do so than to imagine them as humourless grey mass of bureaucrats (even though they basically are exactly that).

[Adriatican]

4. What happens when member nations do not enforce WA law?
8. What happens when member nations disregard committee promulgations?

OOC: You sic your committee at them.

6. How are committees created? Staffed?

Not sure if these questions were meant solely for the author, but they're created by the resolutions and staffed by "faceless" WA workers that are in the RP reality of GA called "gnomes", simply because it's funnier to do so than to imagine them as humourless grey mass of bureaucrats (even though they basically are exactly that).

And therein lies the significant difference between players, those that view all of this from a satirical lens, and those that look past that and use this site as the only half way decent nation simulator on the internet.

I’ll be submitting resolutions related to regulation of the international stock market and securities in the coming days, FYI.

[Kenmoria]

OOC: You sic your committee at them.


Not sure if these questions were meant solely for the author, but they're created by the resolutions and staffed by "faceless" WA workers that are in the RP reality of GA called "gnomes", simply because it's funnier to do so than to imagine them as humourless grey mass of bureaucrats (even though they basically are exactly that).

And therein lies the significant difference between players, those that view all of this from a satirical lens, and those that look past that and use this site as the only half way decent nation simulator on the internet.

(OOC: The GA can be roleplayed very realistically, but that requires significant work of reading all extant resolutions and working out what the committees and active clauses are doing. It also can be roleplayed very loosely, with fulfilling the mandates of resolutions whenever they are pointed out and ignoring paperwork given to committees as something done automatically.

The point is that players get to choose. This resolution aims to force a realistic view of committees and their actions, which isn’t what a lot of players want.

I’ll be submitting resolutions related to regulation of the international stock market and securities in the coming days, FYI.

I recommend submitting a draft on the GA forum first.)

[Araraukar]

I’ll be submitting resolutions related to regulation of the international stock market and securities in the coming days, FYI.

I recommend submitting a draft on the GA forum first.

OOC: Also be aware that copying bits of other people's proposals as well as real world laws, is against the rules. Being inspired by them is fine, but using word-for-word excerpts is not. And that if submitted, the plagiarism violation can get you kicked out of the WA for a year.

[Adriatican]

I recommend submitting a draft on the GA forum first.

OOC: Also be aware that copying bits of other people's proposals as well as real world laws, is against the rules. Being inspired by them is fine, but using word-for-word excerpts is not. And that if submitted, the plagiarism violation can get you kicked out of the WA for a year.

Thanks for the heads up.

[Araraukar]

Thanks for the heads up.

OOC: You really should read the Proposal Rules. (I mean, I assume you haven't, if the bit about plagiarism was new to you...)

[WayNeacTia]

Thanks for the heads up.

OOC: You really should read the Proposal Rules. (I mean, I assume you haven't, if the bit about plagiarism was new to you...)

I would make the assumption that the OP is simply being courteous towards you.

[Araraukar]

I would make the assumption that the OP is simply being courteous towards you.

OOC: Given how their second try (found in the other drafting thread they have up) ended up illegal as well for fairly obvious violations, I can only conclude they still haven't read the rules...