NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] REPEAL Extinction Preparation Act

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

[PASSED] REPEAL Extinction Preparation Act

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Thu May 05, 2011 8:11 pm

Delegates click HERE to approve!

World Assembly Resolution #126
Extinction Preparation Act
A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts.
Category: Education and Creativity
Area of Effect: Educational
Proposed by: The Associated Peoples
Description: REALIZING that a major catastrophe could threaten the existence of any number of species.
SEEKING to install safeguards for the recovery of any species that falls victim to an extinction event.
RECOGNIZING that many nations may have safeguards in place.
CONCERNED that such safeguards can be lost due to disasters both natural and manufactured.
BELIEVING that all nations can benefit from mutual preparation.
HEREBY:
I. AUTHORIZES the creation of the Extinction Preparation Research Facility (EPRF).
a.) The facility will be located in a neutral World Assembly controlled territory. Ideally, in an arctic region well above sea level, with little to no seismic activity, to minimize the danger of damage due to electrical failure, flooding or structural damage.
b.) The facility is to be staffed, constructed and maintained by the World Assembly Scientific Programme (WASP).
c.) Member nations may use this facility freely, while non-member nations may use it for a nominal fee, which will provide additional funding for upkeep.
II. EMPOWERS staff scientists to research advanced methods of artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer, cloning and efficient horticultural replenishment, as well as the study of keystone species and methods for rebuilding ecosystems.
a.) All discoveries shall be made available to any establishment showing legitimate interest.
III. URGES member nations to supply specimens of seeds, saplings and genetic animal materials (sperm, eggs and DNA).
IV. REQUIRES acceptable preservation methods to be observed.
Co-authored by The Coyote Coalition


The World Assembly:

APPLAUDS the aim of GA#126, Extinction Preparation Act, which attempted to preserve biodiversity and encourage research amongst all the nations of the world;
BELIEVES, however, that using a single facility for this purpose is highly impractical for a number of reasons, most notably:
  • The variety of storage conditions required to safely preserve all contributed genetic samples; for example: embryonic samples would need to be stored differently from agricultural seeds,
  • The logistical issues that some nations may encounter when making contributions and/or sending their scientists to the facility to conduct research;
  • The large amount of space required to allow for proper examination of all contributed materials may be better suited for multiple facilities due to the aforementioned items,
  • The security risk as a single disaster - whether caused by nature or by man - would take out all materials, information, and employees of the facility,
NOTES that this resolution fails to ensure that a wide array of genetic samples will actually be sent to the facility as it merely "urges member nations to supply specimens" and lacks any clause to allow the WASP to request specific samples;

RECOGNIZES that individual nations are more than capable of funding and maintaining security over similar projects on a national and/or regional level:

REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #126, Extinction Preparation Act.

Co-authored by: [nation=short]Mousebumples[/nation]






Ideas, criticism, inspiration, worship, hatred, and Darwinism are all welcome and appreciated.

Zakath finished speaking and looked up from his draft
I understand the premise behind this resolution, but the details simply don't come together well enough. Why the Arctic? Why ONE FACILITY? It is supposed to be our last and best hope, yet we only build one? There are no defenses to this facility besides putting it in a "neutral" territory. Neutrality can be a transient property my friends.

The research at this facility could be valuable, but governments and pharmaceutical companies already explore these avenues on their own. Competition within the companies and governments spur development, and it is unlikely that governments will want to share their latest developments in biotechnology with every other nation in existence. Also, this research could be used by nonWA members in harmful ways, as mentioned above.


Feel free to take this as you will. I have simply noted an excess of ineffective and unnecessary resolutions, and I am simply trying to do my small part in trimming the list of Resolutions.
The World Assembly:

WHILE NOTING that the Extinction Preparation Act attempted to preserve biodiversity and encourage research amongst all the nations of the world,

RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical, considering the necessary space to examine, store, record information about, and test this material,

SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one facility, potentially risking all such research and knowledge should a disaster befall the facility, and highly inconveniencing the scientists of the Universes,

CONCERNED that a single facility is incapable of servicing all those who may wish to use the facility and access the information within, due to both problems with transportation and the inevitable crowding that would occur within the facility,

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for, due to a lack of safeguards built into the facility itself such as the non-existent security forces,

FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single facility from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed, and that available technology to protect the facility was not utilized as it has been in the past construction of WA facilities,

AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will actually be sent to the facility,

ALSO AWARE that individual nations are more than capable of funding and maintaining security over their own projects, and that the World Assembly therefore has no need to legislate on this issue,

BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless, and merely creates a single, overcrowded, inconveniently located, underprotected, and ultimately fruitless facility,

HEREBY REPEALS World Assembly Resolution #126, the Extinction Preparation Act


The World Assembly:
NOTING that the Extinction Preparation Act attempts to preserve biodiversity,
APPLAUDING the foresight of its authors,
REMEMBERING the resounding “Meh” that arose from the World Assembly at the proposition of this Act,
RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical, considering the necessary space to examine, store, record information about, and test this material,
SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge, and highly inconveniencing the scientists of the Universes,
CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,
DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,
FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed, and that available technology to protect the center was not utilized,
AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,
BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,
HEREBY REPEALS World Assembly Resolution #126, the Extinction Preparation Act

The World Assembly:
NOTING that the Extinction Preparation Act attempts to preserve biodiversity,
APPLAUDING the foresight of its authors,
REMEMBERING the resounding “Meh” that arose from the World Assembly at the proposition of this Act,
RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical,
SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge,
CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,
DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,
FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed,
AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,
BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,
HEREBY REPEALS World Assembly Resolution #126, the Extinction Preparation Act
Last edited by Mallorea and Riva on Tue Jun 14, 2011 9:01 am, edited 18 times in total.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Otrenia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 729
Founded: Dec 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Otrenia » Thu May 05, 2011 8:19 pm

Too bad those WA cards are made by NatSov's, a "Repeal for Repeal's Sake" card would come in handy often...

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Thu May 05, 2011 8:21 pm

Otrenia wrote:Too bad those WA cards are made by NatSov's, a "Repeal for Repeal's Sake" card would come in handy often...


cough

National Sovereignty has very little to do with this repeal.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Otrenia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 729
Founded: Dec 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Otrenia » Thu May 05, 2011 8:36 pm

double cough

That's what they all say. But to actually address the repeal.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical,
SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge,


What do you want? A hundred of them? This resolution does not prevent nations from establishing their won facilities, so by cooperating with the WA EPRF there would be many of these facilities. This facility is very important, however as we are so frequently reminded, the WA only has a limited amount of funds, so one of these undoubtedly expensive facilities is enough. We are convinced that "an arctic region well above sea level, with little to no seismic activity" is very reasonable protection.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,


Probably because they aren't in the WA. We have to fund this Assembly somehow, if they want to use the facility of an organization they won't join then they should have to compensate the WA somehow, after all joining is free.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,


Obviously if a non-WA nation is advanced enough to use the relatively mild discoveries of the EPRF then they are very close to (if not capable of) developing biological weapons with or without the EPRF.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed,


In what manner can it be guaranteed? We need a safeguard against extinction of important species, thus this is one of our best options. Obviously we cannot prevent every possible danger to it, but that is no reason to just scrap it.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,
BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,


Well sure it doesn't ensure that samples will be sent, the EPRF shouldn't force nations to send samples. But why would nations, especially WA nations for whom it is free, not send samples?

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Thu May 05, 2011 8:45 pm

Otrenia wrote:double cough

That's what they all say. But to actually address the repeal.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical,
SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge,


What do you want? A hundred of them? This resolution does not prevent nations from establishing their won facilities, so by cooperating with the WA EPRF there would be many of these facilities. This facility is very important, however as we are so frequently reminded, the WA only has a limited amount of funds, so one of these undoubtedly expensive facilities is enough. We are convinced that "an arctic region well above sea level, with little to no seismic activity" is very reasonable protection.

Would you prefer to just have the one? If we are banking on each nation creating its own programs THEN WHY HAVE THIS FACILITY? And an arctic region, well above sea level, with little to no seismic activity would still be hard pressed to survive an extinction event such as meteorite strike, nuclear war, or general planet destruction. At least there is more than one of this "undoubtedly expensive facilities"... Yet the sarcasm needs to be noted.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,


Probably because they aren't in the WA. We have to fund this Assembly somehow, if they want to use the facility of an organization they won't join then they should have to compensate the WA somehow, after all joining is free.


Yes but it is discouraging to the ultimate end of gathering all genetic informations.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,


Obviously if a non-WA nation is advanced enough to use the relatively mild discoveries of the EPRF then they are very close to (if not capable of) developing biological weapons with or without the EPRF.

Suddenly these discoveries are only mild, raising once again the issue of whether this single facility can actually DO anything. And there is no reason that a nation newly interested in biological warfare could not piggyback off of this research entirely.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed,


In what manner can it be guaranteed? We need a safeguard against extinction of important species, thus this is one of our best options. Obviously we cannot prevent every possible danger to it, but that is no reason to just scrap it.

How about building more than one? Or encouraging nations to create and defend their own? Or utilizing the same defenses that protect the World Assembly Headquarters?

Mallorea and Riva wrote:AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,
BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,


Well sure it doesn't ensure that samples will be sent, the EPRF shouldn't force nations to send samples. But why would nations, especially WA nations for whom it is free, not send samples?


They wouldn't send them for a variety of reasons:
1-They see no point
2-They do not want their unique genetic codes examined
3-They do not wish for their unique animals to be cloned by other nations
4-They fear the use of bioweapons against them
5-Non-member nations don't feel like paying a fee.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Just Guy
Envoy
 
Posts: 309
Founded: Sep 16, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Just Guy » Fri May 06, 2011 3:41 am

Finally! You have our full support.
Elindra doing the Defenders' propaganda for the day:
Kshrlmnt wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Defenders are naturally disadvantaged in NationStates

One thing I like about raiding.

User avatar
Mousebumples
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 8412
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mousebumples » Fri May 06, 2011 4:49 am

OOC: I'd support this repeal if it were composed solely of Justin Bieber lyrics ... And I really don't care for Justin Bieber.

IC: Your Excellency, I'd like to pledge my support for this endeavor. I had this resolution on my "repeal list" as well, so I'll see if I can't make some suggestions for improvement over the next few days.

Yours,
Nikolas Eberhart
Ambassador for the Doctoral Monkey Feet of Mousebumples
WA Delegate for Monkey Island
Leader of the Mouse-a-rific Mousetastic Moderator Mousedom of Mousebumples
Past WA Delegate for Europeia & Monkey Island
Proud Member of UNOG
I'm an "adorably marvelous NatSov" - Mallorea and Riva
GA Resolutions (sorted by category) | Why Repeal? | Reppy's Sig Workshop

User avatar
Just Guy
Envoy
 
Posts: 309
Founded: Sep 16, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Just Guy » Fri May 06, 2011 5:58 am

Mousebumples wrote:OOC: I'd support this repeal if it were composed solely of Justin Bieber lyrics ... And I really don't care for Justin Bieber.


Is that a challenge? ;)
Elindra doing the Defenders' propaganda for the day:
Kshrlmnt wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Defenders are naturally disadvantaged in NationStates

One thing I like about raiding.

User avatar
Monikian WA Mission
Diplomat
 
Posts: 927
Founded: Nov 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Monikian WA Mission » Fri May 06, 2011 6:33 am

"Monkiah fully supports this."
All posts should be assumed to be IC unless I am using an OOC indicator.

Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.85

(An asterisk [*] {or exclamation point [!] at the beginning of a word} in Monikian Words indicates a clicking sound which is not easily translatable in the Latin alphabet)

some cool stuff

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Fri May 06, 2011 7:09 am

This is excellent to hear. I am in no rush to submit this, so any and all suggestions for additions or modifications would be welcome. While I agree that lyrics of certain untalented artists would be sufficient, it would be distasteful to have such lyrics etched into the World Assemblies Resolutions. ;)
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Fri May 06, 2011 8:50 am

The Rogue Nation of Flibbleites fully supports the repeal of this overly expensive boondoggle.

Otrenia wrote:Too bad those WA cards are made by NatSov's, a "Repeal for Repeal's Sake" card would come in handy often...

What the frak does National Sovereignty have to do with the WA cards? Anyone can make one regardless of their NatSov/IntFed/whatever leanings.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Fri May 06, 2011 8:52 am

Mallorea and Riva wrote:REMEMBERING the resounding “Meh” that arose from the World Assembly at the proposition of this Act,

Yet they passed it? With 54% support?

Mallorea and Riva wrote:RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical,

... You realize how small genetic material is, right?

Mallorea and Riva wrote:SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge,

Yes, scientific research should be partitioned throughout no less than ten institutions in at least five different countries. That's certainly 'practical' and furthers research by leaps and bounds!

Mallorea and Riva wrote:CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,

Because NatSovs would cry and moan about how they're paying for non-members to benefit from WA resolutions.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,

Except that they obvious cannot. See: Biological Weapons Conference.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed,

The WAHQ isn't safe from volcanoes and nuclear weapons, either. Clearly, we should tear it down. It never should have been built in the first place.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,

Um... what? Which parts of member nations supplying genetic specimens is difficult to understand?

Mallorea and Riva wrote:BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,

See above.

It certainly is possible for the Extinction Preparation Act to be written better. The same could be said of this repeal, as well.
Last edited by Glen-Rhodes on Fri May 06, 2011 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Fri May 06, 2011 12:07 pm

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Mallorea and Riva wrote:REMEMBERING the resounding “Meh” that arose from the World Assembly at the proposition of this Act,

Yet they passed it? With 54% support?

54% in this Assembly is hardly an impressive majority. Also I refer you to the following http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=4311189#p4311189

Mallorea and Riva wrote:RECOGNIZING that the construction of a single facility to house every genetic sample available is highly impractical,

... You realize how small genetic material is, right?

Sigh
Yes I understand that. But the facilities to store, maintain, examine, and record all of this information would need to be rather large, and preferably in multiple areas to allow scientists from multiple regions to study it, as the resolution claims will happen.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:SHOCKED that such scientists and research would be placed into one area, potentially risking all such research and knowledge,

Yes, scientific research should be partitioned throughout no less than ten institutions in at least five different countries. That's certainly 'practical' and furthers research by leaps and bounds!

Mallorea and Riva wrote:CONFUSED as to why non-WA member nations must pay a fee in order to use the facilities designed to ensure the survival of all life in the known Universes,

Because NatSovs would cry and moan about how they're paying for non-members to benefit from WA resolutions.

The point of this resolution is to transcend politics as normal and create a multinational database. Charging selectively discourages this.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:DEEPLY CONCERNED that the research of this facility could be used by non-WA member nations to construct advanced biological weapons capable of undoing that which the facility strives for,

Except that they obvious cannot. See: Biological Weapons Conference.

I would refer you to the fact that the Conference can only affect member nations.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:FURTHER RECOGNIZING that the safety of this single center from natural or anthropogenic causes is not guaranteed,

The WAHQ isn't safe from volcanoes and nuclear weapons, either. Clearly, we should tear it down. It never should have been built in the first place.

The WAHQ is the best they could come up with. This resolution doesn't match its safety. And whether it should have been built or not to begin with is irrelevant to this debate.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:AWARE that the Act fails to ensure that ANY genetic samples will be sent to the center,

Um... what? Which parts of member nations supplying genetic specimens is difficult to understand?


Where does it say that nations must send this material? Nowhere. It only requests that they do. This is not an operative clause.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:BELIEVING that without an ensured supply of information and genetic samples this act is essentially meaningless,

See above.

See above.

It certainly is possible for the Extinction Preparation Act to be written better. The same could be said of this repeal, as well.


I agree. That is why I am drafting it. I will go back now and make a few revisions.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Darenjo
Minister
 
Posts: 2178
Founded: Mar 31, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Darenjo » Fri May 06, 2011 1:35 pm

OOC: The only way I wouldn't support this would be if it consisted of the lyrics to "Friday."

IC: Full support!
Dr. Park Si-Jung, Ambassador to the World Assembly for The People's Democracy of Darenjo

Proud Member of Eastern Islands of Dharma!

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Fri May 06, 2011 1:49 pm

Mallorea and Riva wrote:54% in this Assembly is hardly an impressive majority. Also I refer you to the following http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=4311189#p4311189

Actually, it is an impressive majority. It's a little less than four points greater than a majority. There were less people in support of building the actual headquarters of the World Assembly.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Yes I understand that. But the facilities to store, maintain, examine, and record all of this information would need to be rather large, and preferably in multiple areas to allow scientists from multiple regions to study it, as the resolution claims will happen.

First, the construction of large facilities is not new to the World Assembly. The Seedbank stores seeds from nearly every food plant used in peoples' diets. Storing genetic material would not be incredibly difficult for the World Assembly to do, given that it already has a blueprint.

Second, there is no reason why there needs to be multiple facilities. Scientists are capable of studying without the EPRF. Let's not forget that the scientific studying of genetic material was happening long before the EPRF was even thought into existence. And if scientists really want to get their hands on EPRF material, they can go there. It's not unheard of for scientists to travel abroad for their research.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:The point of this resolution is to transcend politics as normal and create a multinational database. Charging selectively discourages this.

You can't ignore politics. I think the resolution could have passed without the provision, but it wasn't hurt by including it.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:I would refer you to the fact that the Conference can only affect member nations.

Even if you take that approach, the EPRF is funded by member nations, and those member nations are forbidden from facilitating the development or use of biological weapons.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:The WAHQ is the best they could come up with. This resolution doesn't match its safety. And whether it should have been built or not to begin with is irrelevant to this debate.

Why exactly do you believe that the HQ is more safe than the EPRF? The WAHQ resolution doesn't even stipulate any kind of structural integrity standards. For all we know, the building could collapse any minute.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Where does it say that nations must send this material? Nowhere. It only requests that they do. This is not an operative clause.

So, you are advocating that the World Assembly forcefully collect genetic samples of people and other living organism? And you are also arguing that because nations aren't required to send in genetic material, they won't do so? Please explain both, because right now your arguments are unconvincing.

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Fri May 06, 2011 2:28 pm

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Mallorea and Riva wrote:54% in this Assembly is hardly an impressive majority. Also I refer you to the following http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=4311189#p4311189

Actually, it is an impressive majority. It's a little less than four points greater than a majority. There were less people in support of building the actual headquarters of the World Assembly.

Four points is certainly not impressive, and once again you refer to the debate over the WAHQ which you despise, yet you use its passage as a standard to prove the popularity of this one. Strange.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Yes I understand that. But the facilities to store, maintain, examine, and record all of this information would need to be rather large, and preferably in multiple areas to allow scientists from multiple regions to study it, as the resolution claims will happen.

First, the construction of large facilities is not new to the World Assembly. The Seedbank stores seeds from nearly every food plant used in peoples' diets. Storing genetic material would not be incredibly difficult for the World Assembly to do, given that it already has a blueprint

Second, there is no reason why there needs to be multiple facilities. Scientists are capable of studying without the EPRF. Let's not forget that the scientific studying of genetic material was happening long before the EPRF was even thought into existence. And if scientists really want to get their hands on EPRF material, they can go there. It's not unheard of for scientists to travel abroad for their research.

Ah yes, the seedbank, which raises the question as to how duplicative this resolution is.
Secondly there are plenty of reasons to have multiple facilities, and I am delighted to have the chance to list them!
1-Convenience-Scientists are capable of studying abroad. Keep in mind, however, that we are creating one building in the entire universe for EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST to have to travel to, no matter how far. Not very convenient. And this leads into my second point:
2-Practicality-Cramming all of those scientists into ONE BUILDING will be a significant challenge.
3-Overall security-If we construct just one of these buildings then a single accident would be able to undo all of the work within the center, and the ability to safeguard the genetic codes is depleted. It is the equivalent of building a single bomb shelter for the entire population of a nation. Good luck getting there, good luck getting in, and hope nothing bad happens to it!
Mallorea and Riva wrote:The point of this resolution is to transcend politics as normal and create a multinational database. Charging selectively discourages this.

You can't ignore politics. I think the resolution could have passed without the provision, but it wasn't hurt by including it.

So essentially what you’re saying is “Why not include it?”, to which I refer you to my earlier arguments.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:I would refer you to the fact that the Conference can only affect member nations.

Even if you take that approach, the EPRF is funded by member nations, and those member nations are forbidden from facilitating the development or use of biological weapons.

Remember how you want to charge nonmember nations to use the facilities? They help fund this place too, and they have NO restrictions on taking benevolent research and using it to their own ends.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:The WAHQ is the best they could come up with. This resolution doesn't match its safety. And whether it should have been built or not to begin with is irrelevant to this debate.

Why exactly do you believe that the HQ is more safe than the EPRF? The WAHQ resolution doesn't even stipulate any kind of structural integrity standards. For all we know, the building could collapse any minute.

Neither does this center. Its location (singular) is supposedly safe, yet it doesn’t even have anything saying that ACME weapons nullifiers are placed within it! Again, any vendettas against the WAHQ can be dealt with elsewhere. I merely claim that the WAHQ has safety advantages that could have been incorporated into the center.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Where does it say that nations must send this material? Nowhere. It only requests that they do. This is not an operative clause.

1-So, you are advocating that the World Assembly forcefully collect genetic samples of people and other living organism?
2-And you are also arguing that because nations aren't required to send in genetic material, they won't do so? Please explain both, because right now your arguments are unconvincing.

In response to your arguments:
1-I do not advocate anything. I merely point out the obvious flaw in this resolution, that it assumes that member nations will ignore their own projects based along these lines and contribute to this one. Remember the Space Station that was legislated into (and almost immediately out of) existence? Same concept.
2-This is exactly what I claim, for the reasons above and do to previously mentioned factors such as the concept that nations will not want such important and potentially dangerous information on display for EVERY SCIENTIST in the world to see.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Fri May 06, 2011 5:25 pm

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Four points is certainly not impressive, and once again you refer to the debate over the WAHQ which you despise, yet you use its passage as a standard to prove the popularity of this one. Strange.

First of all, I don't 'despite' the WAHQ and never said I did. The entire purpose of pointing it out is that your assertion of a lackluster response to the EPA is absurd, unless you're also arguing that we should repeal all other resolutions that have less than 75% support or that all of those resolutions are at the very least barely supported.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:1-Convenience-Scientists are capable of studying abroad. Keep in mind, however, that we are creating one building in the entire universe for EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST to have to travel to, no matter how far. Not very convenient. And this leads into my second point:
2-Practicality-Cramming all of those scientists into ONE BUILDING will be a significant challenge.

And every single scientist needs to go to the EPRF to study genetic material because...?

Mallorea and Riva wrote:3-Overall security-If we construct just one of these buildings then a single accident would be able to undo all of the work within the center, and the ability to safeguard the genetic codes is depleted. It is the equivalent of building a single bomb shelter for the entire population of a nation. Good luck getting there, good luck getting in, and hope nothing bad happens to it!

So we should have about 8000 different HQs for the World Assembly. Each nation's governmental buildings should be as far as possible away from the others. The best policy to ensure security is to make sure that institutions are greatly fragmented, regardless of the practical costs.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:So essentially what you’re saying is “Why not include it?”, to which I refer you to my earlier arguments.

Your arguments, frankly, suck. The clause was included to avoid an unnecessary backlash by regulars who would have undoubtedly spent the four days of voting time complaining about how they're spending thousands of billions of trillions of dollars on nations who aren't even members of the World Assembly.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Remember how you want to charge nonmember nations to use the facilities? They help fund this place too, and they have NO restrictions on taking benevolent research and using it to their own ends.

Yeah, your argument is still unconvincing. It's quite clear and quite obvious that a World Assembly facility will not be used to construct weapons which the World Assembly itself has banned.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Neither does this center. Its location (singular) is supposedly safe, yet it doesn’t even have anything saying that ACME weapons nullifiers are placed within it!

Neither does the WAHQ. ACME weapons nullifiers are a product of entertaining roleplay, not international law.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:1-I do not advocate anything. I merely point out the obvious flaw in this resolution, that it assumes that member nations will ignore their own projects based along these lines and contribute to this one. Remember the Space Station that was legislated into (and almost immediately out of) existence? Same concept

It's not a flaw.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:2-This is exactly what I claim, for the reasons above and do to previously mentioned factors such as the concept that nations will not want such important and potentially dangerous information on display for EVERY SCIENTIST in the world to see.

You know, it just strains credulity to think that all nations are so isolated and so paranoid that none of them would ever, ever, ever work together on peaceful scientific research.

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Fri May 06, 2011 5:41 pm

Zakath yawned loudly
You begin to bore me Ambassador.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Four points is certainly not impressive, and once again you refer to the debate over the WAHQ which you despise, yet you use its passage as a standard to prove the popularity of this one. Strange.

First of all, I don't 'despite' the WAHQ and never said I did. The entire purpose of pointing it out is that your assertion of a lackluster response to the EPA is absurd, unless you're also arguing that we should repeal all other resolutions that have less than 75% support or that all of those resolutions are at the very least barely supported.

It was a lackluster response because the entire debate thread derailed, and no serious argument has yet been made as to why such a center needs to exist.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:1-Convenience-Scientists are capable of studying abroad. Keep in mind, however, that we are creating one building in the entire universe for EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST to have to travel to, no matter how far. Not very convenient. And this leads into my second point:
2-Practicality-Cramming all of those scientists into ONE BUILDING will be a significant challenge.

And every single scientist needs to go to the EPRF to study genetic material because...?

Direct testing on samples is preferable to hypothesizing results. And the point is that the EPRF does not have the capacity to fulfill its function, one facility CANNOT house such a massive project.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:3-Overall security-If we construct just one of these buildings then a single accident would be able to undo all of the work within the center, and the ability to safeguard the genetic codes is depleted. It is the equivalent of building a single bomb shelter for the entire population of a nation. Good luck getting there, good luck getting in, and hope nothing bad happens to it!

So we should have about 8000 different HQs for the World Assembly. Each nation's governmental buildings should be as far as possible away from the others. The best policy to ensure security is to make sure that institutions are greatly fragmented, regardless of the practical costs.

I find your hyperbole to be inconsequential. The point that has been made repeatedly is that creating just a single building designed to be the “Noah’s Ark” of genetic information is idiocy. From a security perspective trying to admit scientists from every single nation demands security protocols which are not expressed in the resolution.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:So essentially what you’re saying is “Why not include it?”, to which I refer you to my earlier arguments.

Your arguments, frankly, suck. The clause was included to avoid an unnecessary backlash by regulars who would have undoubtedly spent the four days of voting time complaining about how they're spending thousands of billions of trillions of dollars on nations who aren't even members of the World Assembly.

And instead we are giving access to valuable genetic information to all who wish to see it and have a few marks in their pockets. Excellent.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Remember how you want to charge nonmember nations to use the facilities? They help fund this place too, and they have NO restrictions on taking benevolent research and using it to their own ends.

Yeah, your argument is still unconvincing. It's quite clear and quite obvious that a World Assembly facility will not be used to construct weapons which the World Assembly itself has banned.

It’s so clear and obvious that you do not feel the need to make any assertions as to why your statements are true? Come now ambassador, at least put some effort into your defense of this resolution.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Neither does this center. Its location (singular) is supposedly safe, yet it doesn’t even have anything saying that ACME weapons nullifiers are placed within it!

Neither does the WAHQ. ACME weapons nullifiers are a product of entertaining roleplay, not international law.

I refer you to the resolution wherein it states “furnishing the necessary security to protect the headquarters complex and all who use it”.- http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=320#p320
Mallorea and Riva wrote:1-I do not advocate anything. I merely point out the obvious flaw in this resolution, that it assumes that member nations will ignore their own projects based along these lines and contribute to this one. Remember the Space Station that was legislated into (and almost immediately out of) existence? Same concept

It's not a flaw.

Your grasp of rhetoric is stunning ambassador.
Mallorea and Riva wrote:2-This is exactly what I claim, for the reasons above and do to previously mentioned factors such as the concept that nations will not want such important and potentially dangerous information on display for EVERY SCIENTIST in the world to see.

You know, it just strains credulity to think that all nations are so isolated and so paranoid that none of them would ever, ever, ever work together on peaceful scientific research.

The alternative is to trust every single nation with the genetic codes of your people, and the facilities to test on them.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Sat May 07, 2011 10:59 am

Mallorea and Riva wrote:Direct testing on samples is preferable to hypothesizing results. And the point is that the EPRF does not have the capacity to fulfill its function, one facility CANNOT house such a massive project.

What you fail to realize is that the primary purpose of the Extinction Preparation Act is not to facilitate scientific research. It's to preserve genetic material. Staff scientists are permitted to engage in research regarding the re-population of extinct species. In fact, upon a closer inspection, no where does the resolution say that outside scientists can even go to the EPRF and study. Discoveries made by staff scientists can be 'made available' to scientific establishments, which can mean anything from advanced readings of publications to actual shipment of genetic material to, yes, a third-party scientist coming to the EPRF.

What you also fail to realize is that the EPRF is not the only scientific facility capable of doing research on genetic material. Any decent research university will have more-than-capable facilities. I've tried to get you to understand this simple fact, but maybe I wasn't being direct enough. Your concerns are not legitimate. They are the product of a misunderstanding.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:I find your hyperbole to be inconsequential.

As do I yours.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:And instead we are giving access to valuable genetic information to all who wish to see it and have a few marks in their pockets. Excellent.

If there's one meme that has shown to be the least intelligent one followed by so many people in the World Assembly, it's the idea that non-member states are the archetypal bad guy, out to kill anyone they see. Try and come up with a better counter-argument.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:It’s so clear and obvious that you do not feel the need to make any assertions as to why your statements are true? Come now ambassador, at least put some effort into your defense of this resolution.

The World Assembly is not going to permit the construction of a weapon, which it has expressly banned, in its own facilities. That's obvious, common-sense and needs no further 'defense.'

Mallorea and Riva wrote:I refer you to the resolution wherein it states “furnishing the necessary security to protect the headquarters complex and all who use it”.- http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=320#p320

Yeah, ACME stuff is still the product of roleplay, not international law.

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Sat May 07, 2011 11:23 am

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Direct testing on samples is preferable to hypothesizing results. And the point is that the EPRF does not have the capacity to fulfill its function, one facility CANNOT house such a massive project.

What you fail to realize is that the primary purpose of the Extinction Preparation Act is not to facilitate scientific research.

II. EMPOWERS staff scientists to research advanced methods of artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer, cloning and efficient horticultural replenishment, as well as the study of keystone species and methods for rebuilding ecosystems..

I refer you to this quote from the resolution.
Glen-Rhodes wrote: It's to preserve genetic material. Staff scientists are permitted to engage in research regarding the re-population of extinct species. In fact, upon a closer inspection, no where does the resolution say that outside scientists can even go to the EPRF and study

Member nations may use this facility freely, while non-member nations may use it for a nominal fee, which will provide additional funding for upkeep.

Once again I refer you to the resolution, which proves that you are simply incorrect.
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Discoveries made by staff scientists can be 'made available' to scientific establishments, which can mean anything from advanced readings of publications to actual shipment of genetic material to, yes, a third-party scientist coming to the EPRF.

I don’t dispute this, except for the notion of genetic material being shipped across the Universes to ANY interested scientist.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:What you also fail to realize is that the EPRF is not the only scientific facility capable of doing research on genetic material. Any decent research university will have more-than-capable facilities. I've tried to get you to understand this simple fact, but maybe I wasn't being direct enough. Your concerns are not legitimate. They are the product of a misunderstanding.

If “any decent research university” can do any of this, then why, oh why, did we create and fund this facility? Besides, one of my concerns is the security of genetic information, and the likelihood that nations won’t send such information to be viewed by anyone.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:I find your hyperbole to be inconsequential.

As do I yours.

Then let us not utilize it.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:And instead we are giving access to valuable genetic information to all who wish to see it and have a few marks in their pockets. Excellent.

If there's one meme that has shown to be the least intelligent one followed by so many people in the World Assembly, it's the idea that non-member states are the archetypal bad guy, out to kill anyone they see. Try and come up with a better counter-argument.

Not all non-member states are evil, but I challenge you to say that you cannot think of a single ARCTIC nation that would use this research to do evil.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:It’s so clear and obvious that you do not feel the need to make any assertions as to why your statements are true? Come now ambassador, at least put some effort into your defense of this resolution.

The World Assembly is not going to permit the construction of a weapon, which it has expressly banned, in its own facilities. That's obvious, common-sense and needs no further 'defense.'

And how will they enforce this? Through their non-existent security protocols? Or their non-existent screening measures? Either one is equally ignored in the resolution.

Mallorea and Riva wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:I refer you to the resolution wherein it states “furnishing the necessary security to protect the headquarters complex and all who use it”.- http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=320#p320

Yeah, ACME stuff is still the product of roleplay, not international law.

And still you ignore the fact that there is absolutely no security in this facility. They didn’t even try to put any in. The ACME stuff specifically is the product of roleplay, but it is based in the fact that the WAHQ has defense and security systems built into it.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Sat May 07, 2011 5:12 pm

It's a facility that harbors biological material that inherently requires security. Therefore, security will be provided. Stop with the ontological obsession over text. The World Assembly has an implied power of security when it comes to projects owned or run by the institution itself. It's common sense. This isn't some local government. We can't write security protocols, nor do we need to. If security is needed, it will be provided. This isn't some kind of revolutionary, unconventional idea.
Last edited by Glen-Rhodes on Sat May 07, 2011 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Sat May 07, 2011 8:41 pm

Glen-Rhodes wrote:It's a facility that harbors biological material that inherently requires security. Therefore, security will be provided. Stop with the ontological obsession over text. The World Assembly has an implied power of security when it comes to projects owned or run by the institution itself. It's common sense. This isn't some local government. We can't write security protocols, nor do we need to. If security is needed, it will be provided. This isn't some kind of revolutionary, unconventional idea.

The law means what the law says, and in this case the law says nothing about security. Perhaps you should stop reading things into resolutions that simply aren't there.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

User avatar
Mallorea and Riva
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9252
Founded: Sep 29, 2010
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Mallorea and Riva » Sat May 07, 2011 8:45 pm

Flibbleites wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:It's a facility that harbors biological material that inherently requires security. Therefore, security will be provided. Stop with the ontological obsession over text. The World Assembly has an implied power of security when it comes to projects owned or run by the institution itself. It's common sense. This isn't some local government. We can't write security protocols, nor do we need to. If security is needed, it will be provided. This isn't some kind of revolutionary, unconventional idea.

The law means what the law says, and in this case the law says nothing about security. Perhaps you should stop reading things into resolutions that simply aren't there.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative


Well said.
Ideological Bulwark #253
Retired Charter Nation: Political Affairs in Antarctic Oasis
Retired Major and Field Marshal of The Black Hawks
Retired Colonel of DEN Central Command, now defunct
Former Delegate of The South Pacific, winner of TSP's "Best Dali" Award
Retired Secretary of Defense of Stargate
Terror of The Joint Systems Alliance
Mall Isaraider, son of Tram and Spartz, Brother of Jakker, Tal, and apparently Sev the treacherous bastard.
Frattastan quote of the month: "I don't think chatting with someone over the Internet about casual topics falls under faithful or unfaithful. :<"

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18492
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sun May 08, 2011 6:13 am

Flibbleites wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:It's a facility that harbors biological material that inherently requires security. Therefore, security will be provided. Stop with the ontological obsession over text. The World Assembly has an implied power of security when it comes to projects owned or run by the institution itself. It's common sense. This isn't some local government. We can't write security protocols, nor do we need to. If security is needed, it will be provided. This isn't some kind of revolutionary, unconventional idea.

The law means what the law says, and in this case the law says nothing about security. Perhaps you should stop reading things into resolutions that simply aren't there.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

The law says nothing about janitorial services either: Are you suggesting that the establishment in question must therefore lack those?!?
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Glen-Rhodes
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9020
Founded: Jun 25, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Glen-Rhodes » Sun May 08, 2011 10:17 am

Bears Armed wrote:The law says nothing about janitorial services either: Are you suggesting that the establishment in question must therefore lack those?!?

Not only that, but there are very few resolutions that, for example, spell out accommodations for committees -- and there are a lot of committees. He's also suggesting that they don't have buildings or offices, electricity, computers, telephones, etc, including security. There has and always will be implied powers in resolutions. If the World Assembly reasonably must do something to carry out an obligation, it will do it. In this case, a facility harboring dangerous biological material necessitates a standard level of security; therefore the World Assembly will provide it.
Last edited by Glen-Rhodes on Sun May 08, 2011 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads