Republic of Mesque wrote:Honeydewistania wrote:I don't understand this. Do you believe that GenSec members shouldn't be allowed to play the game like everyone else? Proposing and voting on repeals is a right that should apply to all WA members. Removing the rules would also be catastrophic.
Granting the responsibilities and power of GenSec to 4-6 members is a mistake. People in the forums love to quote historicity as arguments, which, in this case, would serve to justify a system with severe power imbalances that depends on the time and good will of 4-6 people. Who chose GenSec? Doesn’t the World Assembly proclaim itself a democracy? Why don’t we get all GA Resolution Authors involved in the process of legality votes, without a top-down system? Elections and term limits? Nah, nation X is a GenSec since 20XX BCE, so why change?
Removing the rules would not be catastrophic - the worst resolutions that manage to dodge the rules are voted down. Several “poorly written” or “outdated” resolutions are repealed by authors. What this community could do to minimally improve is decentralize the verification of contradictions. If a resolution contradicts another, then enlarge the pool of members that can input a check and vote on a contradiction (GA authors with passed resolutions?). Finally, let more resolutions be voted, by reducing the time at vote. Most of the other rules are meant to maintain a closed-doors status quo, some of which were failed to be clarified, or consist in dark room legality decisions. All of this to keep this current that is unbothered to be changed, in code and in reception of new authors.
Completely agreed.
Remind me, are AI-written proposals really not illegal?