The ethno-state of Trashys wrote:How many endorsements do you need to make a proposal?
You need two endorsements to be able to submit a proposal to the WA. However, you can start drafting regardless of how many endorsements you have.
Advertisement
by Kenmoria » Fri May 01, 2020 4:52 am
The ethno-state of Trashys wrote:How many endorsements do you need to make a proposal?
by Frisbeeteria » Sun May 03, 2020 8:32 am
Meretica wrote:Question:
In regions with only one WA member, how is the WA delegate elected?
by Mornicoder » Sun May 10, 2020 8:02 pm
by Wallenburg » Sun May 10, 2020 10:50 pm
Mornicoder wrote:I have a question, is the WA voting system based on the electoral college? Because it seems that delegates of powerful regions have absurdly high voting power, such as having (1000-2000+) votes.
by Imperium Anglorum » Mon May 18, 2020 2:31 am
by Isaris » Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:35 pm
by Araraukar » Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:01 am
Isaris wrote:Would a resolution that restricts how police in member states must behave conflict with GAR#2 Rights and Duties of WA States? Basically, I'm trying to write a resolution about police accountability and holding law enforcement officers to the same standard as civilians for assault and homicide.
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 Isaris » Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:57 am
Araraukar wrote:Isaris wrote:Would a resolution that restricts how police in member states must behave conflict with GAR#2 Rights and Duties of WA States? Basically, I'm trying to write a resolution about police accountability and holding law enforcement officers to the same standard as civilians for assault and homicide.
The WA itself cannot have either a military or police force as per GA #2, but it definitely can give mandates to member nations as per their police and military activities - see for example pretty much every single "rules of war" type of resolution.
But think very carefully when writing, about how your proposal should not be a kneejerk reaction to RL events (as it kinda sounds like it would be), and how the police are supposed to be able to do their job, like arrest anyone if they can't actually take someone into custody (also be aware that in criminal law, attacking someone and pummeling them with your fists is not "assault" but "battery" - while merely threatening to do so, is assault), or stop someone who's currently shooting kids in a school or something seriously deadly like that.
by Honeydewistania » Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:19 pm
Alger wrote:if you have egoquotes in your signature, touch grass
by Morover » Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:25 pm
Honeydewistania wrote:If two proposals are held up by one at vote, the one submitted later gets quorum first but the one submitted earlier gets quorum right before the vote end, which one goes to vote?
by Australian rePublic » Mon Jun 15, 2020 4:53 am
by Araraukar » Mon Jun 15, 2020 5:03 am
Australian rePublic wrote:Can resolutions include diagrams?
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 Australian rePublic » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:04 pm
Araraukar wrote:Australian rePublic wrote:Can resolutions include diagrams?
You mean picture files? No. Technically might include URL (as text), but that would likely be called Metagaming, as it'd be a link to the RL Internet.
If you're drafting something so complex you think it needs a diagram, you probably should re-think whether that's something that should be attempted in the first place.
by Morover » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:06 pm
Australian rePublic wrote:Is there a word/character limit on resultions?Araraukar wrote:You mean picture files? No. Technically might include URL (as text), but that would likely be called Metagaming, as it'd be a link to the RL Internet.
If you're drafting something so complex you think it needs a diagram, you probably should re-think whether that's something that should be attempted in the first place.
Thanks.
by Australian rePublic » Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:28 pm
by Morover » Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:44 am
by Imperium Anglorum » Sun Jun 21, 2020 12:25 am
Australian rePublic wrote:5000 characters? Holy Crap! I'd be lucky if my draft doesn't exceed 5000 words
by Cretox State » Sun Jul 05, 2020 11:52 am
by Araraukar » Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:12 am
Cretox State wrote:Does GAR#43 “WA Labor Relations Act” prohibit yellow-dog contracts (agreements that forbid joining a union, often as a condition of employment)? Specifically clauses 2(c): “Employers are prohibited from engaging in actions which interfere with the right of workers to engage in strikes, or actions which interfere with the ability to maintain a strike” and 9: “FORBIDS discrimination based on union membership where employment is concerned. Union members and non-members must be afforded equal treatment in hiring, work assignment, compensation, promotion, training and education, and disciplinary actions.”
I’m asking because, while these agreements do interfere with union membership and the ability to strike, I don’t know if they can be considered “actions” or discrimination on the part of the employer. I am also uncertain if the resolution protects against retaliation for engaging in strikes.
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 Hannasea » Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:31 am
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:55 am
Hannasea wrote:This will not lead to anything, but I would like to make a small mumble of protest.
It seems at some point the "Human Rights" category has been changed into "Civil Rights". OK, whatever. Not here to argue that. But it also seems all resolutions passed as Human Rights have been retroactively changed to Civil Rights. That is not what happened with the introduction of repeals, Education and Creativity, Healthcare, and basically every other change in UN/WA history. Resolutions have never been retroactively edited. They were passed as Human Rights resolutions and should have remained as such, even if going forward only Civil Rights resolutions can be passed.
It is even worse that you have done it to Historical Resolutions, when this category never even existed.
Me making this murmur of disquiet will not lead to any change but I just want to say how incredibly annoying it is to find hard work has been retroactively edited without the consent of those writing it. A loud wet pffffft to those involved.
by Hannasea » Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:58 am
Separatist Peoples wrote:Civil Rights was a rename of an existing category and not a new creation. That's why.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bananaistan, Deustchlandz
Advertisement