Advertisement
by Barfleur » Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:04 pm
Old Hope wrote:It would make sense to use the category "Moral Decency", in this case.
by Crowheim » Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:23 am
by Tinhampton » Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:58 am
Crowheim wrote:I believe Legal Reform fits this proposed resolution well. However it's not an option for me to use...
by Maowi » Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:33 pm
by Crowheim » Thu Feb 11, 2021 8:47 pm
Maowi wrote:"We are in support of the enactment of these measures - extant World Assembly resolutions may potentially have some impact on the subject matter, already, but should this pass I firmly believe the worst-case scenario would be no harm done, and the best-case scenario the implementation of highly important protections.
"I suggest changing the "clarifying" line in the preamble into an active clause, perhaps to be inserted between clauses IV) and V). It currently reads as a further explanation of the authorship's thoughts about the issue, rather than a substantive caveat to the restrictions imposed by the proposal - and I believe the latter is both preferable and necessary.
"Further, I do not think the creation of a commission in clause V) is optimal use of World Assembly resources. Surely the compensation should come from those member states allowing these horrific practices in the first place? I believe it should not be too complicated to require member states to organise this for themselves, instead of an external, World Assembly-run commission."
by Tinfect » Fri Feb 12, 2021 10:37 am
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by Maowi » Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:46 pm
Crowheim wrote:"Thank you for your support. We have replaced the original clause V with a clause containing the bulk of your clarifying suggestion, to appease concerns about the restrictions."
by Crowheim » Sat Feb 13, 2021 6:57 am
Barfleur wrote:OOC: Some grammatical advice: add "and" at the end of clause IV and replace the comma at the end of clause V with a period.
Tinfect wrote:OOC:
Why is there a clause defining sexual assault? The term is not used in the resolution.
Maowi wrote:Crowheim wrote:"Thank you for your support. We have replaced the original clause V with a clause containing the bulk of your clarifying suggestion, to appease concerns about the restrictions."
"I believe that should resolve my concerns. However, what was your reason for outright removing the clause regarding compensation for those against whom the defence has been used? I thought the underlying idea was good, and merely disagreed with executing it via WA committee."
by Crowheim » Tue Feb 16, 2021 8:40 pm
by Jedinsto » Tue Feb 16, 2021 9:45 pm
by Crowheim » Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:18 am
Jedinsto wrote:As for content, I think it's ready to go. In terms of formatting, I would suggest you change the listing from I) and II) to 1. and 2. Also, I think you could do away with the "generally a gay man" and "generally a transgender woman" parts, even though they don't affect the actual content.
by Tinhampton » Wed Feb 17, 2021 7:49 am
by Ardiveds » Wed Feb 17, 2021 8:13 am
Hereby encourages:
6. member states to provide compensation to the victims of Gay Panic Defense, or their families in cases where the victim is not able to receive compensation.
by Imperium Anglorum » Wed Feb 17, 2021 8:39 am
by Maowi » Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:48 am
by Imperium Anglorum » Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:28 am
by Crowheim » Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:26 pm
Tinhampton wrote:You define "sexual assault" in Article 3 but refer to all forms of "assault" in the first two articles.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement