*Furiously types a Repeal. Furiously.*
Advertisement
by Valentine Z » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:58 am
♪ If you are reading my sig, I want you to have the best day ever ! You are worth it, do not let anyone get you down ! ♪
Glory to De Geweldige Sierlijke Katachtige Utopia en Zijne Autonome Machten ov Valentine Z !
(✿◠‿◠) ☆ \(^_^)/ ☆
♡ Issues Thread ♡ Photography Stuff ♡ Project: Save F7. ♡ Stats Analysis ♡
♡ The Sixty! ♡ Valentian Stories! ♡ Gwen's Adventures! ♡
• Never trouble trouble until trouble troubles you.
• World Map is a cat playing with Australia.
by Ikania » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:04 pm
by ArenaC » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:08 pm
by Yokiria » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:17 pm
by WayNeacTia » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:20 pm
Yokiria wrote:Thank goodness, I can toss my repeal draft in the trash now.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac
wait
by United Massachusetts » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:25 pm
Unibot III wrote:Does the last clause satisfy Rule III?
“ The Security Council, by the advice and consent of the Delegates and member nations thereof, does hereby, in the name of the ever-knowing Violet, Liberate The East Pacific.”
There’s that strange Violet reference, sure, but there’s also another problem with the operative clause. The operative clause predicates action upon the advice and consent of the Delegates and member nations, but it’s entirely possible that a resolution, notwithstanding this clause, can pass *without* the support of Delegates or member nations at large. Not all delegates are created equally in terms of endorsements and member-nations don’t always vote in line with delegates.
by Sedgistan » Mon Mar 09, 2020 5:05 am
United Massachusetts wrote:Unibot III wrote:Does the last clause satisfy Rule III?
“ The Security Council, by the advice and consent of the Delegates and member nations thereof, does hereby, in the name of the ever-knowing Violet, Liberate The East Pacific.”
There’s that strange Violet reference, sure, but there’s also another problem with the operative clause. The operative clause predicates action upon the advice and consent of the Delegates and member nations, but it’s entirely possible that a resolution, notwithstanding this clause, can pass *without* the support of Delegates or member nations at large. Not all delegates are created equally in terms of endorsements and member-nations don’t always vote in line with delegates.
Per moderator precedent, it is legal insofar as that is the exact wording of SC 247, the first liberation.
by Jakker » Wed Mar 11, 2020 6:27 pm
The Bruce wrote:Mostly I feel sorry for [raiders], because they put in all this effort and at the end of the day have nothing to show for it and have created nothing.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement