[DRAFT 3] Repeal "World Assembly Central Library Compact"

[SussyAmongusLand]

This is my First time creating a world assembly proposal. I am not experienced in this and I am aware there will be faults within this proposal. I will heavily appreciate criticism and use it to better this proposal and any future proposals I will create.

(I am aware this is still a bit short, I will try to lengthen it a little more in the next draft.)

---

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging that the proposal 'World Assembly Central Library Compact' comes with good intent, however fails to succeed in the reasons of this repeal as stated below,

Noting that WACLC has mandated all World Assembly nations to join their library, however does not require the nation's within WACLC to donate works, questioning the necessity of all World Assembly nations having to join this system;

Disheartened that World Assembly nations of less size may be overshadowed by those of nations that have greater size and longer history, as well as mandating that all works submitted to WACLC still must be funded by the nation that has submitted their work to WACLC.

Worried that while WACLC does keep nations works preserved digitally, there is no guarantee that the works are safe as such from cyber attacks;

Concerned for World Assembly nations that are willing to submit works to WACLC, however are against the use of technology and refusal to donate historical works digitally;

Herby repeals 397 GA 'World Assembly Central Library Compact'.

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging that the proposal 'World Assembly Central Library Compact' comes with good intent, however fails to succeed in the reasons of this repeal as stated below,

Noting that WACLC has mandated all World Assembly nations to join their library, however does not require the nation's within WACLC to donate works, questioning the necessity of all World Assembly nations having to join this system;

Disheartened that nations of less significant size works could possibly be overshadowed by larger nations that have a longer history;

Worried that while WACLC does keep nations works digitalized and preserved, there is no guarantee that the works will be safe digitally online;

Concerned for nations that are willing to submit works to WACLC, however they are against the use technology and will refuse due to the digitalization of works;

Herby repeals 397 GA 'World Assembly Central Library Compact'.

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging that the proposal 'World Assembly Central Library Compact' comes with good intent, however fails to succeed in the reasons of this repeal as stated below,

Concerned by clause 10, highlighting the importance of having transportation from WACLC to other World Assembly nations, which in vagueness, does not outright state whether it be certain World Assembly nations, or all of them;

Distressed at clause 14, which states that all World Assembly nations have their rights promoting as any literary works or important cultural documents can be taken from one's nation without any clarification on them being taken;

Noting that all works that are donated to WACLC is optional, questioning the reasoning of the proposal is necessary if it does not provide any significance to certain World Assembly nations that participate;

Discouraged that written works from other nations will be viewed differently in comparison to WACLC having a massive cultural and historical range of works;

Shocked that when work is voluntarily submitted to WACLC, it will be digitalized and also being provided to other nations that can be viewed by them, in which digitalization is heavily frowned upon for historical works that should be preserved;

Hoping, that legislation will be prepared for replacement and soon passed;

Herby repeals 397 GA 'World Assembly Central Library Compact'.

[The Overmind]

The target resolution has a total of ten operative clauses. What you call "clause 10" is clause 7, subclause 1. What you call "clause 14" is clause 8.

Clause 7, and its first subclause, read:
"Mandates that the Office of Building Management (OBM) locate suitable land(s) and/or a planet, in international territory on which to build the WACLC, which shall:
- Have adequate access to transportation to & from the WACLC & WA Nations,"

Your argument is that it may only refer to certain WA nations, but I think you're trying to argue if it's unclear if it's "any" or "all" WA nations.

Clause 8 reads:
"Encourages all WA Nations seek wherever possible to donate new, informative written works to the WACLC and the ULEN for circulation amongst nations and/or archival purposes;"

Followed by clauses 9 and 10, which read:
"Affirms that all donors retain cultural ownership of all written works donated to the WACLC, and may elect to remove their work from circulation by providing written notice to the ULCEC;
Clarifies that nothing herein shall be read as to remove written works from member states, and that all contributions to the WACLC must be voluntary;"

Your argument is:

Distressed at clause 14, which states that all World Assembly nations have their rights promoting as any literary works or important cultural documents can be taken from one's nation without any clarification on them being taken;

This is a clear-cut case of Honest Mistake. The resolution does not stipulate, at all, that literary works or important cultural documents may be taken from a member nation, with or without clarification. Your repeal text, as written, would be illegal for this misrepresentation.

Moving on:

Noting that all works that are donated to WACLC is optional, questioning the reasoning of the proposal is necessary if it does not provide any significance to certain World Assembly nations that participate;

It provides exactly what is on the label: a World Assembly central library, where such donations can be housed and accessed.

Discouraged that written works from other nations will be viewed differently in comparision to WACLC having a massive cultural and historical range of works;

Are you arguing that this proposal is unfair to member nations because their own libraries do not measure up to the World Assembly central library? Because that seems a bit egotistical on the part of any such member nation who might hold this concern. The function of a library is, ostensibly, to give access to important works, not amass the glory for having curated the finest collection of such works. We're unconvinced by this line of reasoning.

Shocked that when work is voluntarily submitted to WACLC, it will be digitalized and also being provided to other nations that can be viewed by them, in which digitalization is heavily frowned upon for historical works that should be preserved;

Digitization of a work, assuming it is digitalized with care, does nothing to affect the preservation of the work, save preserve it in an additional form, decreasing the odds of that work being lost forever.

Hoping, that legislation will be prepared for replacement and soon passed;

This seems superfluous to include in a repeal argument.

[SussyAmongusLand]

Firstly, before anything mentioned, I appreciate the feedback.

Your argument is that it may only refer to certain WA nations, but I think you're trying to argue if it's unclear if it's "any" or "all" WA nations.

Sorry for the clarification, as I meant in all WA nations, as of the clause that is -

Further, Requires all WA nations adopt standards governing the preservation, restoration, and security of historical, cultural, or important written works;

Distressed at clause 14, which states that all World Assembly nations have their rights promoting as any literary works or important cultural documents can be taken from one's nation without any clarification on them being taken;

This is a clear-cut case of Honest Mistake. The resolution does not stipulate, at all, that literary works or important cultural documents may be taken from a member nation, with or without clarification. Your repeal text, as written, would be illegal for this misrepresentation.

Not sure how I didn't see this was illegal, thanks for pointing it out, I will remove it in my next draft.

Noting that all works that are donated to WACLC is optional, questioning the reasoning of the proposal is necessary if it does not provide any significance to certain World Assembly nations that participate;

It provides exactly what is on the label: a World Assembly central library, where such donations can be housed and accessed.

I viewed this more as a "WACLC will be accepting your nation's works into our library, however it isn't required for your nation to actually donate your work." I suppose I should have made this more clear but it contradicts this statement, in which 'encouragement' is used repeatedly within their proposal, such as here.

Encourages that all WA Nations unable to provide for the preservation and security of historic & cultural written works, seek wherever permissible to donate such works to the WACLC;

Are you arguing that this proposal is unfair to member nations because their own libraries do not measure up to the World Assembly central library? Because that seems a bit egotistical on the part of any such member nation who might hold this concern. The function of a library is, ostensibly, to give access to important works, not amass the glory for having curated the finest collection of such works. We're unconvinced by this line of reasoning.

Would a statement such as "Disheartened that nations of less significant size would have to match up with nations with larger and more history would overshadow nations that have less significant size." be more sufficient? Also, while an 'egotistical' scenario could entirely happen, I see where you are coming from and it is probably more safe to linger away from that route.

Shocked that when work is voluntarily submitted to WACLC, it will be digitalized and also being provided to other nations that can be viewed by them, in which digitalization is heavily frowned upon for historical works that should be preserved;

Digitization of a work, assuming it is digitalized with care, does nothing to affect the preservation of the work, save preserve it in an additional form, decreasing the odds of that work being lost forever.

In my next draft I could (possibly) point out that they have no guarantee that nation's works will actually be digitalized with care, as seen in this clause -

Establishes & builds a World Assembly Central Library Complex (WACLC), with the purpose of:
-Restoring & Replicating older written works, which may have become damaged with age,
-Collecting new & informative written works for archival purposes,
-Displaying rare, unique, or important works from nations,
-Providing scholastic access to such works, and maintaining the circulation of important written works among nations;

What I also meant in my clause, is that whilst there are going to be some WA nations that will submit their works to WACLC digitally, there are WA nations that opposed of using technology and anything digital in such way, probably should have clarified that as well.

Hoping, that legislation will be prepared for replacement and soon passed;

This seems superfluous to include in a repeal argument.

I suppose I'll just remove this, as it is not necessary.

---

Once again, I appreciate the criticism and feedback you gave me.

[SussyAmongusLand]

/bump

[SussyAmongusLand]

/bump (Draft 3 has been posted, grammar mistakes have been fixed as well as adding more clarity to the repeal.)