Bax Marry Day

[Pangurstan]

I believe is all technically legal now

Category: Moral Decency | Strength: Strong

The World Assembly,

Believing that individuals who make extraordinary contributions to society should be recognized,

Understanding that Bax Marry, a prominent author, blogger, and website creator from a region known as Osstralia, has made extraordinary contributions to society, including, but not limited to:

1. the authorship of eight books, widely considered to be some of the greatest works of literature in the world, including a novel named Jennifer Bureaucracy
2. the creation of a political simulator website known as CountryStates, which caused a large, worldwide interest in politics, which has had numerous benefits, including the overthrow of multiple autocracies, their replacement with fully functioning democracies, and a vast reduction in global corruption

1. All member nations must recognize November 13th as Bax Marry Day
2. All member nations must recognize Bax Marry Day as a national holiday

All persons named in this resolution are entirely fictitious and only exist in my RP canon. Any resemblance to any person, living or dead, is entirely coincidental.

[Gruenberg]

Probably a category violation.

[Vavlar]

I believe this would be a metagaming violation.

[Jedinsto]

Perhaps use "Education and Creativity; Cultural Heritage"

[Outer Sparta]

How are you going to get past the metagaming rule here? Technically, you're basing this heavily off of Max Barry which would run afoul of the rules either way.

[Wallenburg]

Probably a category violation.

This is correct, there is nothing morally decent about OP's proposal. Also, the linked ruling does not affect how the Real World Reference rule is enforced, and I suspect GenSec wouldn't lean favorably toward obvious references to particular real-world places and people thinly veiled through misspellings and word-swaps.

[Gruenberg]

Probably a category violation.

This is correct, there is nothing morally decent about OP's proposal. Also, the linked ruling does not affect how the Real World Reference rule is enforced, and I suspect GenSec wouldn't lean favorably toward obvious references to particular real-world places and people thinly veiled through misspellings and word-swaps.

Uh, what? I hope you're going to clarify which non-RL references are too RL under this new metagaming regime.

[Wallenburg]

This is correct, there is nothing morally decent about OP's proposal. Also, the linked ruling does not affect how the Real World Reference rule is enforced, and I suspect GenSec wouldn't lean favorably toward obvious references to particular real-world places and people thinly veiled through misspellings and word-swaps.

Uh, what? I hope you're going to clarify which non-RL references are too RL under this new metagaming regime.

I think zero clarification is required, given metagaming and RL references have literally zero to do with each other under the proposal rules.

[Gruenberg]

Bax Marry is not a RL reference. It is a feature of Pangurstan's RP canon, just as Klyprer is a feature of Excidium's RP canon.

[Wallenburg]

Bax Marry is not a RL reference. It is a feature of Pangurstan's RP canon, just as Klyprer is a feature of Excidium's RP canon.

Wow, everything you said here was wrong. "Bax Marry" is clearly a RL reference to Max Barry, and schoolyard play at it being otherwise is unbecoming and dishonest. Neither Pangurstan's factbooks nor forum posts make any mention of Bax Marry, meaning no evidence exists for a Bax Marry even being included in their RP, much less originating from it. Klyprer isn't part of EP's canon, either, it belongs to The Ice States's canon. EP has merely elected to recognize that for the purpose of interacting with another player's RP. If this the epistemic rigor you apply to matters of legality, I am less surprised at the conclusions you have reached on such matters.

[Gruenberg]

Bax Marry is not a RL reference. It is a feature of Pangurstan's RP canon, just as Klyprer is a feature of Excidium's RP canon.

Wow, everything you said here was wrong. "Bax Marry" is clearly a RL reference to Max Barry, and schoolyard play at it being otherwise is unbecoming and dishonest.

Can you expand on the criteria you (and the other GenSec members) will be using to distinguish between RL references? For example, elements of the "Violetism" religion mentioned in issues are clearly based on Islam, but other elements of it are clearly not.

Neither Pangurstan's factbooks nor forum posts make any mention of Bax Marry, meaning no evidence exists for a Bax Marry even being included in their RP, much less originating from it.

Now we're getting somewhere. How many posts are needed to establish something as being sufficiently RPed? Though I'll again note, many users reference RL entities in their factbooks and forum posts.

EP has merely elected to recognize that for the purpose of interacting with another player's RP.

Good phrasing. EP has elected to recognize it. That's how consent works in free-form roleplaying. But everyone else in the WA has not consented to that. If they want to do so, they can sign up for a roleplay about it. But the entire nature of the WA is that one cannot ignore its resolution, that's a foundational detail, they have no chance to opt out if something is cited in the resolution text. This is the core of "forced roleplaying" idea that the metagaming rule (until yesterday) enforced.

[Wallenburg]

Wow, everything you said here was wrong. "Bax Marry" is clearly a RL reference to Max Barry, and schoolyard play at it being otherwise is unbecoming and dishonest.

Can you expand on the criteria you (and the other GenSec members) will be using to distinguish between RL references? For example, elements of the "Violetism" religion mentioned in issues are clearly based on Islam, but other elements of it are clearly not.

Neither Pangurstan's factbooks nor forum posts make any mention of Bax Marry, meaning no evidence exists for a Bax Marry even being included in their RP, much less originating from it.

Now we're getting somewhere. How many posts are needed to establish something as being sufficiently RPed? Though I'll again note, many users reference RL entities in their factbooks and forum posts.

A little something called "good faith" is pretty important to determining whether something is referring to a real-life subject or an RP invention. Consult honesty in claims of IC conduct for legality before the Real World Reference rule. 1/5.

EP has merely elected to recognize that for the purpose of interacting with another player's RP.

Good phrasing. EP has elected to recognize it. That's how consent works in free-form roleplaying. But everyone else in the WA has not consented to that. If they want to do so, they can sign up for a roleplay about it. But the entire nature of the WA is that one cannot ignore its resolution, that's a foundational detail, they have no chance to opt out if something is cited in the resolution text. This is the core of "forced roleplaying" idea that the metagaming rule (until yesterday) enforced.

Pretty much, yeah. Of course, Wallenburg has already had to on several different occasions and in an ongoing manner recognize gender despite my nation's vocal IC protestations that the idea of gender apart from sex makes no sense at all, but that wasn't a forced RP concern for most people at all. Same thing with resolutions requiring nations to recognize that internet technology exists. Frankly, I view the existence of some faraway religious system that I can simply say no Wallenburgians practice as far less intrusive to other nation RPs than the existence of and mandated interaction with ideas or technologies that radically reshape the fabric of society.

[Simone Republic]

I thought we already did the "International Maxtopia Day" resolution to cover for this.

OOC: Anyway, there's nothing to prevent Max Barry from plastering his name everywhere on this web site (it's after all kind of his) - just that it's currently displaying (unless you pay) with ads for his new book(s) anyway - so why bother?

[Outer Sparta]

I thought we already did the "International Maxtopia Day" resolution to cover for this.

OOC: Anyway, there's nothing to prevent Max Barry from plastering his name everywhere on this web site (it's after all kind of his) - just that it's currently displaying (unless you pay) with ads for his new book(s) anyway - so why bother?

The author's proposal would fit better as a declaration (but Maxtopia is already covered in that) or as a GA joke proposal to honor Max Barry (or give him tyrannical powers to rule us all as puny overlords or something).

[Gruenberg]

A little something called "good faith" is pretty important to determining whether something is referring to a real-life subject or an RP invention. Consult honesty in claims of IC conduct for legality before the Real World Reference rule.

I can't think of any other rule where a player's RP history has to be consulted; usually it's just the plain text of the proposal that matters. It sounds like an ambitious undertaking, but precisely because there hasn't been any rule enforced that way before, I guess I can't prejudge it. Will be interesting to see how this very new departure works.

[Simone Republic]

I thought we already did the "International Maxtopia Day" resolution to cover for this.

OOC: Anyway, there's nothing to prevent Max Barry from plastering his name everywhere on this web site (it's after all kind of his) - just that it's currently displaying (unless you pay) with ads for his new book(s) anyway - so why bother?

The author's proposal would fit better as a declaration (but Maxtopia is already covered in that) or as a GA joke proposal to honor Max Barry (or give him tyrannical powers to rule us all as puny overlords or something).

Tyrannical powers to rule are kind of under Exxon if you follow the Jennifer Government storyline.

[The Serendipitous]

A creature that looks nearly-humanoid, but falls into the territory of uncanny valley enters the chamber. In a bureaucratic and monotone manner, it says as follows.

"There is a twofold issue with this bill. The first is minor; why are we in the Moral Decency sect of the building? I think you may have mistakenly booked the wrong room, and the Education and Creativity chambers are much more well-suited. The second is more prominent; no single individual is prominent enough to have an international holiday made in their name. If there was one individual who the General Assembly should name a day in honor of, I would argue that it would be someone actually pertinent to the operations of the Assembly, such as Mr. Benjamin Bell, or any of the other authors with a long-term and meaningful tenure here, and not some random author from a nation that does not even come up on any census records, nor in the memory of any individual assimilated by The Serene, as per this vessel's last connection. The bill also gives no justification for the date of November thirteenth - something that we have been told is against the "rules" of this chamber, as it prioritizes a singular calendric system over others."

[Excidium Planetis]

Illegal for Real World Reference violations, nice try though.

[Wallenburg]

If there was one individual who the General Assembly should name a day in honor of...such as Mr. Benjamin Bell

Trevanyika nearly stumbles over herself to remove her shoes and bring them down across her desk in a near-drumroll, soles effecting many great leathery clock!s across the debate chamber. Only those with the most sensitive ears and most enduring patience manage to catch the Serendipitousian's later points.