by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:03 pm
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:05 pm
by The Dark Star Republic » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:25 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Purists like myself might tell you that resolutions with specific targets (like PMC) are the only ones that can truly be considered "blockers," but some resolutions have the effect of blocking hypothetical future proposals on the same subject. WA General Fund, for instance, contains "blocker language" preventing the WA from taxing private individuals or regulating nations' internal tax policies, even though at the time there weren't any public drafts proposing to do either.
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:NatSov resolutions like ALC,
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:But this is not always the case. In fact, the resolution widely considered to be the very first blocker was introduced by Goobergunchia
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:1. Limit your subject matter. Moderators are usually hostile toward proposals that try to "close out a category" entirely, or have the effect of blocking most other kinds of legislation within a particular category. Obviously Human Rights and Social Justice are very broad subject areas, but Gun Control and Recreational Drug Use are not, so if you're trying to give nations total authority on whether to legalize, regulate or prohibit any type of gun, you're in trouble. Back off quick.
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Believe it or not, it's been tried before, by better players than you,
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:even if you're arrogant enough to think it doesn't violate it to the letter.
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote: Past examples of this unfortunate practice include a haphazard effort to bypass PMC and pass a ban on infant circumcision, and another during the UN era, which tried to get around Fair Sentencing Act so that a ban on the death penalty could be introduced.
by Chester Pearson » Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:25 pm
The Dark Star Republic wrote:Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:1. Limit your subject matter. Moderators are usually hostile toward proposals that try to "close out a category" entirely, or have the effect of blocking most other kinds of legislation within a particular category. Obviously Human Rights and Social Justice are very broad subject areas, but Gun Control and Recreational Drug Use are not, so if you're trying to give nations total authority on whether to legalize, regulate or prohibit any type of gun, you're in trouble. Back off quick.
There is a specific legality point worth making: mods have tended to come down more harshly on proposals that would block entire categories (most popular attempts target the fringe categories of Recreational Drug Use/Gambling/Gun Control/Tort Reform), such as Ardchoille commenting on Chester Pearson's Molsona-inspired gun laws blocker here.
Separatist Peoples wrote:With a lawnchair and a large bag of popcorn in hand, Ambassador SaDiablo walks in and sets himself up comfortably. Out of a dufflebag comes a large foam finger with the name "Chester Pearson" emblazoned on it, as well as a few six-packs.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:41 pm
by The Dark Star Republic » Thu Aug 07, 2014 6:41 am
by Sciongrad » Thu Aug 07, 2014 5:35 pm
by Hirota » Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:24 am
by The Eternal Kawaii » Fri Aug 08, 2014 9:31 pm
Hirota wrote:If you cut the rhetoric it would be more concise, and far more useful for newbies.
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Tue Aug 19, 2014 2:38 pm
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:36 am
by Hakio » Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:54 am
Pandeeria wrote:Racism is almost as good as eating babies.
by Luziyca » Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:03 pm
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:54 pm
Hakio wrote:Perfectly written, bravo! Down with blockers and their cockblock blockiness!
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement