NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Repeal Civilian Air Compact

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 899
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Democratic Socialists

[PASSED] Repeal Civilian Air Compact

Postby Bisofeyr » Sun Oct 06, 2024 11:58 am

Target
The World Assembly,

Appreciating that sensible rules and regulations surrounding the flight and flight plans of civilian aircraft are often needed, and GA 752 "Civilian Air Compact" seeks to institute these sensible protocols, and

Believing that the Civilian Air Compact overreaches in its authority to institute those protocols, giving a much greater burden to members of this Assembly than is needed to maintain the security of passengers aboard civilian aircrafts, and

Concerned, for example, that clause (vi) gives pilots of all aircraft an unreasonable amount of power over their flight plan, which for military aviators may undermine the chain of command and give a low-level pilot flying in a combat zone the protected authority to comply with their enemies, since the clause applies to all aircraft instead of just civilian aircraft, and

Distressed at clause (i), which requires all civilian aircraft to be tracked, even those which do not enter the airspace of any member, to be tracked, which proves a needless regulation for aircraft in large pockets of non-members flying locally to be tracked, despite the fact that there is no incentive or reason for this tracking, and

Believing that the requirement for members to establish vehicular fleets to rescue survivors of aircraft crashes outside their borders is admirable, but still harmful to members tight on cash who have to supply their own resources to nearby nations who may not even be fellow members of this Assembly, and

Hoping that any future attempts to regulate civilian aircraft to do so with a more precise scalpel, reducing burden on members while still establishing sensible regulations, therefore

Repeals GA 752 "Civilian Air Compact".
Last edited by Refuge Isle on Sat Nov 09, 2024 11:48 am, edited 3 times in total.

Notable Government Officials:

Magus Regent: Delfi Quix

Chief WA Delegate: Norde Lot

Telegram me with time-sensitive requests.

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14661
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tinhampton » Sun Oct 06, 2024 2:24 pm

Reluctant support.

I think that CONCERNED is a Veracity violation, though. The tone of the entire RESOLVING clause in GA#752 makes clear that the clause is all about civilian aircraft, not military aircraft.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 329,537): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Lydia Anderson, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385, GA#597, GA#607, SC#415, GA#647, GA#656, GA#664, GA#671, GA#674, GA#675, GA#677, GA#680, Issue #1580, GA#682, GA#683, GA#684, GA#692, GA#693, GA#715, GA#757
The rest of my CV: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; anti-NPO cabalist in good standing; proclaimer of WZTC's move to Palmetto
Tinhampton the player: 49yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate; currently reading nothing (sorry)

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 899
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Sun Oct 06, 2024 2:28 pm

Tinhampton wrote:Reluctant support.

I think that CONCERNED is a Veracity violation, though. The tone of the entire RESOLVING clause in GA#752 makes clear that the clause is all about civilian aircraft, not military aircraft.

I might agree if "aircraft" was not explicitly defined as separate from "civilian aircraft". I read RESOLVING a good many times and ultimately it reads as largely preambulatory and does not change the fact that if a proposal defines a term, we ought to read it as is defined, rather than try an guess based on the tone of the preamble.

Notable Government Officials:

Magus Regent: Delfi Quix

Chief WA Delegate: Norde Lot

Telegram me with time-sensitive requests.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13042
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sun Oct 06, 2024 3:37 pm

Bisofeyr wrote:
Tinhampton wrote:Reluctant support.

I think that CONCERNED is a Veracity violation, though. The tone of the entire RESOLVING clause in GA#752 makes clear that the clause is all about civilian aircraft, not military aircraft.

I might agree if "aircraft" was not explicitly defined as separate from "civilian aircraft". I read RESOLVING a good many times and ultimately it reads as largely preambulatory and does not change the fact that if a proposal defines a term, we ought to read it as is defined, rather than try an guess based on the tone of the preamble.

The distinction there is of sufficient size, in my view, to trigger deference. Generally speaking, a material change in usage or language can be permissibly read to indicate a change in meaning. See Scalia and Garner Reading law (2012) pp 167ff (ch 25 "Presumption of consistent usage").
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Sun Oct 06, 2024 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Elyreia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 408
Founded: Jun 29, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Elyreia » Mon Oct 07, 2024 4:16 pm

I would argue alongside To Hampton that there is a veracity claim, as a member nation would be unduly inconveniencing themselves to apply the resolution to military aircraft when the compact and its preceding resolutions are in regards to civilian aircraft. A nation that enforces that ruling on their own military thus hinders themselves with the worst possible definition available, as "aircraft" and "civilian aircraft" are defined separately, but "aircraft" does not explicitly mean military aircraft only.

Such a definition used would be self-detrimental to a nation, and thus falls afoul a veracity claim.
Last edited by Elyreia on Mon Oct 07, 2024 4:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
The Principality of Elyreia (Dārilarostegun Elyreia)
The Principality of Elyreia Wiki
Currently recovering from abdominal surgery IRL
Proud member of the Gay Furry Pacific Clique

World Assembly Ambassador: Dārilaros Korus Vaelans
Uncrowned Head of the House of Vaelans-Volaria
[he/him/she/her/they/them]
(Character Dossier)

User avatar
The Ice States
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3757
Founded: Jun 23, 2022
Corporate Police State

Postby The Ice States » Mon Oct 07, 2024 4:28 pm

I agree with IA and Biso that the argument is legal, as "aircraft" is explicitly defined separately to "civilian aircraft"; were this not the case I would have read it as applying to only civilian aircraft as per noscitur a sociis.

I don't think this triggers the RNT prong of Veracity; the standard in [2022] GAS 5 requires a relatively high burden (the interpretation in the repeal must be "batshit insane"; the alternative is "straightforward and easy to comply with") which I don't think is met. This is because the wording in the target is sufficiently ambiguous as to trigger deference, and at least render this repeal's interpretation not "batshit insane".
Last edited by The Ice States on Mon Oct 07, 2024 4:35 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Guides to the General Assembly · GA Resolution Stat Effects · Festering Snakepit Wiki · WACampaign

Factbooks · WA Authorships · Nation map


"Petty tyrant", "antithetical to a better future for the WA". Posts in the WA forums are Ooc and unofficial, unless indicated otherwise.

User avatar
Aadhiris
Minister
 
Posts: 3096
Founded: Mar 05, 2024
Democratic Socialists

Postby Aadhiris » Mon Oct 07, 2024 4:32 pm

Against.
☆Rawr!!!☆
|| Henry - He/him + they/them ||
|| IC flag || view all my flags here! ||
|| "Perpetually tired loveable TETer," according to Statesburg || || "Communism killed millions of people!" and the Capitalist Lie ||
|| I survived the 10 Days of Terror (4/14/24 - 4/24/24)!!! || || Reggie supremacy :3 ||

No, I don't think of dark mode users when I make my sigs, or anything, for that matter.

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 899
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Tue Oct 08, 2024 4:18 am

Elyreia wrote:I would argue alongside To Hampton that there is a veracity claim, as a member nation would be unduly inconveniencing themselves to apply the resolution to military aircraft when the compact and its preceding resolutions are in regards to civilian aircraft. A nation that enforces that ruling on their own military thus hinders themselves with the worst possible definition available, as "aircraft" and "civilian aircraft" are defined separately, but "aircraft" does not explicitly mean military aircraft only.

Such a definition used would be self-detrimental to a nation, and thus falls afoul a veracity claim.

Unfortunately, RNT cannot apply when it is the plain reading of a resolution. The resolution clearly states that the "pilot" (which has a distinct definition from "civilian pilot" in the target) has sole authority over the "aircraft" (which has a distinct definition from "civilian aircraft" in the target) complies with combatant instructions. "Aircraft" (as opposed to "civilian aircraft") is used only three times outside of the definition, and one of those times is in the subordination clause. "Pilot" (as opposed to "civilian pilot") is used only once outside of definitions: that one time is here. Why would the resolution define something that is only used once in the substantive text of the resolution unless it wanted that singular usage to mean what it is defined as?

Notable Government Officials:

Magus Regent: Delfi Quix

Chief WA Delegate: Norde Lot

Telegram me with time-sensitive requests.

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 899
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Sun Oct 13, 2024 3:38 pm

Bumping this. I'll likely go for a bit of a shorter drafting period on this one, unless serious objections are raised.

Notable Government Officials:

Magus Regent: Delfi Quix

Chief WA Delegate: Norde Lot

Telegram me with time-sensitive requests.

User avatar
Haymarket Riot
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 315
Founded: Aug 29, 2023
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Haymarket Riot » Sat Oct 19, 2024 3:47 pm

Agreed that the argument in question is legal; this was part of the reasoning I personally ended up voting against the target.
The Butch Antifascists of Haymarket Riot
Proud Wife of Emiline
Mayor of Ridgefield||Diplomatic Officer of the Augustin Alliance||Minister of World Assembly Affairs for The North Pacific||General Assembly Secretariat as of 10/13/24
IC: President Jolene Josephine Jefferson of Haymarket Riot
Formerly: Lieutenant in the Black Hawks, Delegate of Pacifica, Prime Director of Anteria
An Author of: SC 228 | SC 523 | SC 524 | GA 742 | GA 748
"Love is wise, hatred is foolish" - Bertrand Russell

User avatar
Adkissa
Attaché
 
Posts: 74
Founded: Mar 13, 2024
Democratic Socialists

Postby Adkissa » Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:01 am

This repeal happened quickly.
Adkissa ❧
EC Chair, First Minister, & WAD of Blue Ridge

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14661
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tinhampton » Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:01 am

As Adkissa said, this was submitted - with CONCERNED in place. On further consideration, enshrining this argument into the WA's permanent records sits too uneasily with me to allow me to support this repeal.
Last edited by Tinhampton on Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 329,537): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Lydia Anderson, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385, GA#597, GA#607, SC#415, GA#647, GA#656, GA#664, GA#671, GA#674, GA#675, GA#677, GA#680, Issue #1580, GA#682, GA#683, GA#684, GA#692, GA#693, GA#715, GA#757
The rest of my CV: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; anti-NPO cabalist in good standing; proclaimer of WZTC's move to Palmetto
Tinhampton the player: 49yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate; currently reading nothing (sorry)

User avatar
Ci Arovannea
Envoy
 
Posts: 218
Founded: Apr 05, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Ci Arovannea » Tue Nov 05, 2024 2:37 pm

I'm inclined to suspect more personal reasons are involved, to cause such a rapid attempt at repeal.
:3

Deblar wrote:lmao he leeroy jenkins'd it

The Terren Dominion wrote:bro had insurrectional disfunction. It happens to a lot of older statesmen who try to seize power.

User avatar
The Dinland
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 4
Founded: Feb 26, 2024
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The Dinland » Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:09 pm

I cannot support this repeal. Tracking of all aircraft is necessary everywhere -- if Air Traffic Control cannot reach an aircraft, all safety precautions go out of the window.

User avatar
Merethin
Envoy
 
Posts: 224
Founded: Dec 18, 2023
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Merethin » Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:12 pm

Ci Arovannea wrote:I'm inclined to suspect more personal reasons are involved, to cause such a rapid attempt at repeal.

Repealing last week's proposal is just your average day in the GA.
Prime Minister of MHBs New Earth - Nuclear Bouquet in STALKER - Spellcaster in the Sparkling Army - Pirate Commander in the Trans Republican Army
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Finally, Herby does not Commend anyone - they’re a car.
Aadhiris wrote:Merethin is the correct wall

User avatar
Basshobia
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Mar 17, 2024
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Basshobia » Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:17 pm

Strongly Support. The last thing local flying clubs and the like need is more regulation. We dont need every single cessna or junk plane to be tracked, and the infrastructure and radar technology for that is just not in place in some areas. Local kit-builders and young pilots need less barriers to entry, not more.

User avatar
Simone Republic
Minister
 
Posts: 2433
Founded: Jul 09, 2019
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Simone Republic » Tue Nov 05, 2024 5:39 pm

All of the air transport related resolutions have been very difficult, both to draft and to get a consensus.
(It).

User avatar
BEEstreetz
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 362
Founded: May 28, 2022
Left-Leaning College State

Postby BEEstreetz » Tue Nov 05, 2024 7:08 pm

Not sufficiently convinced into voting for this repeal. Voting against.
Useful links: Rules | Guide | BBCodes | GA | Personal help | Reppy's sigshop | NS API Doc
-
OOC Info: | F-She/Her | Profession: Strategic Crisis Advisory | Religion: Pan-Abrahamic | Education: PolSci-IR->IntSec->DSA&Stats | Assembly Code Hobbyist.

User avatar
Andromeda Gerat
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Sep 03, 2024
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Andromeda Gerat » Thu Nov 07, 2024 9:00 am

distressed at clause (i), which requires all civilian aircraft to be tracked, even those which do not enter the airspace of any member, to be tracked

It will just have to be passed again with a few extra clauses that define aircraft types. I think the original was written well enough that it is open to legal interpretation as to what a civilian aircraft suffices. It follows along all air traffic procedure currently available on the web, and you shouldn't be flying into those heights without some kind of pilot licensing.
Obviously, repealing is being done in the favor of drone and ultralight anarchists. Which I can agree with as nobody should be looked at sideways for building an aircraft which never leaves the treeline and endangers others as much as a bicycle or other home built monstrosities. But the original document does not define small objects that well. Do drones leaving the treeline need pilot documentation? That's for local and state aircraft associations to figure out themselves as well as other maniacs attaching wingsuits and such to themselves. It's rarely fair for the international police to find needles in a haystack and barge down your door for "were you flying?"
The fors on this should come down.
Last edited by Andromeda Gerat on Thu Nov 07, 2024 9:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aequilibrea
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Nov 07, 2024
Ex-Nation

Postby Aequilibrea » Fri Nov 08, 2024 5:47 am

Andromeda Gerat wrote:
distressed at clause (i), which requires all civilian aircraft to be tracked, even those which do not enter the airspace of any member, to be tracked

It will just have to be passed again with a few extra clauses that define aircraft types. I think the original was written well enough that it is open to legal interpretation as to what a civilian aircraft suffices. It follows along all air traffic procedure currently available on the web, and you shouldn't be flying into those heights without some kind of pilot licensing.
Obviously, repealing is being done in the favor of drone and ultralight anarchists. Which I can agree with as nobody should be looked at sideways for building an aircraft which never leaves the treeline and endangers others as much as a bicycle or other home built monstrosities. But the original document does not define small objects that well. Do drones leaving the treeline need pilot documentation? That's for local and state aircraft associations to figure out themselves as well as other maniacs attaching wingsuits and such to themselves. It's rarely fair for the international police to find needles in a haystack and barge down your door for "were you flying?"
The fors on this should come down.



While we understand the concerns regarding the tracking of all civilian aircraft, including those that do not enter member airspace, it is important to ensure that regulations are clear, enforceable, and fair across all types of aviation activities. Rules should match the level of risk each type of aircraft poses. Small drones or personal aircraft that don't pose much danger shouldn't be treated the same as commercial flights.

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14661
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tinhampton » Sat Nov 09, 2024 10:00 am

Repeal "Civilian Air Compact" was passed 6,614 votes to 5,157. (56.19% support)

For: 6,614: Pallaith (710), Kethania (555), Imperium Anglorum (554), Merlovich (415), Fujai (399), UPC (264), Dragonian Kazaman (248), Toerana (215), Mechanocracy (131), Moukden and Kirin (113), Battadia (81), Haymarket Riot (76), America the Greater (73), Deims Kir (69), Vinslott (65), 9006 (46), WonGya (29), Greater New Orleans (29), Parkplace (28), MountAye (25), Kaputer (24), Bro Kinaba (23), Particle (22), Gideon (22), Zuuri (18), Fluffel (18), Oi Barbaroi (17), Kantabria (17), Venico (15), Joaozinho (13), China Free State (13), Einheitland (13), Jorovia (11), Of The Revived Soviet Union (10), Kanalania (9), Hawkwas Sovustian (9), Delmond (9), National Coraland of Fishery (8), El Tejon (8), RealTacoMan (8), Sensorian Isles (8), Anduava (7), Saint Xen Homaleland (7), Sorcery (7), Woonrocket (6), -Abrahamia- (6), Torchertopia (6), Heliotris (6), The Soviet state of Svalbard (6), Bassiliya (6), Empire of the Super Titan Dragon (5), Archasia (5), French New Wake Island (5), The Dragon Empire of United States (4), Oathori (4), Madrocea (4), New Saltaria (4), Cerealialand (4), Repreteop (4), Kylarnatia (4), Inco (4), ColdHeartedBastards (4), Marquesan (4), Faewoven (4), Bennathia (4), Stormi (4), Unified Academy of Japan (4), Azhdar (4), Red Prosperity (4), Quasi-Stellar Star Civilizations (3), Republic of Dixie (3), Millenhaal (3), Lakenbird (3), Overlord69 (3), Fortis Argentum (3), New Martle (3), The Neo-Soviet Empire (3), Seanat (3), Maxfax (3), Ramio Gre (3), Ferret Civilization (3), Thessallonika (3), Areutia (3), Dong Chong Gone (3), Hatful (3), Suzi Island (3), Malstha (3), Raccquesi (3), Aritristria (3), 11 Templar Knights (3), Waisnor (3), Flor-Fina (3), Hot Cat girl (2), America-1776 (2), Pantasio (2), WaffenBrightonburg (2), Pauldustllah (2), Carpana (2), Poknnville (2), Knootoss (2), Sneyland (2), Mournivalia (2), NBCLand (2), Secret Agent 99 (2), Sasilen (2), Bernelia (2), Draqia (2), Of The Germanic Empire (2), Gamdie (2), The Auglands (2), Durnil Islands (2), Jakapil Island (2), Egyptian Arabia (2), United Bongo States of the New America (2), North Nixia (2), Sanasalia (2), Dregs of the Earth (2), Quing Nara (2), IMPROPER CLASSIFICATIONS (2), Nupe (2), Doslonsu (2), Adeiatic (2), Confederate states of Gabon (2), National Front (2), North Helorgeroestarda (2), The Divin Fist (2), United Desri (2), Kractero (2), New Massachusett (2), Chantia (2), Gabrasicaly (2), The Greater Solev Union (2), Chemgota (2), Djeeta (2), Bali Kingdom (2), Western European Khilafat (2), Selevina (2), Republic and Town (2), Sedgistan (2), Tamilias (2), Bucharestian (2), GraySoap (2), Dytarma (2), and (1,887) individual member nations.

Against: 5,157: Xoriet (359), Treadwellia (261), Gagium (140), The Age of Dystopia (75), Rayekka (75), North Sion (67), South Boston Irishmen (66), Student Loan Debt (65), New Bradfordsburg (62), Heijmskringla (59), Vancouvia (58), Mikeswill (54), Labyrnna (48), West Nichibotsu (42), Adkissa (40), Tinhampton (39), Southern Polish (38), Eco-Paris Reformation (38), Roylaii (31), Landbang Rkipo Islands (31), Awesomeness (28), Filipino North Carolina (27), Mark (27), Alinek (26), Kolatis (23), Marquess of Marchmain (21), Kastaryn (20), Pitbull (20), NewTexas (19), Sanctaria (19), Donynezia (18), Lethinia (17), Rivierenland (15), TheGoldenEmpireGermany (13), Star Federation (13), The Independent States of Allied Forces (13), Konigsreich Von Prussen (12), Plus Nova Imperii (12), Ter Landia (12), Zany Zanes (11), L V M H (11), Bresinnia (11), Kizab (10), Toriniall (10), Lamoni (10), Ioavollr (9), Achias (9), The Voltarum (9), Ancientania (9), Crypthic (9), Hydroponic Nation (8), Weaven (8), Lower Nat Lux (8), Hipearia (7), The Hanzanburg Union (7), Economy Stimulators (7), Varnash (7), Great Cuban Empire (7), The Bolivian Socialist Falange (7), Lunar States (6), Foralkan Star Empire (6), Korumos (6), The Lystrosaurs Native Province (5), St Leone (5), Sernet (5), Rhombea (5), Dezmondia (5), The Western Rockies (5), Voxija (5), Space Country Of Disadvantaged (4), Alvernau (4), The Palentine (4), SussyAmongusLand (4), Monkeydonia (4), Lysset (4), Comrade Commisar (4), Vraene (4), Wobbegong (4), West Torino (4), Ghoublins (4), Perendinate (4), The Goh Dynasty (4), I dunno what (4), OmegaShenron (4), Lycantine (4), The Holland (4), Couch Empire (3), Grand American Union Republic (3), Incorporated States of New California (3), Wozmania (3), Gameran Autocracy (3), Wabacha (3), The Kamabo Co Deepsea Metro Service Area (3), Ex-Machina 374 (3), Otrea (3), New Neeburm (3), Sonvia (3), Redshirts (3), Ervehelde (3), Celtalia (3), Aestheria (3), Rendrid (3), Hua-Mulan (3), Lorai (3), Klanbergia (3), Chemung (3), Asase Lewa (3), Thayris (3), Darastrixethe (3), The Kingdom of Germany-KD (3), The Tree States (3), Cheezopolis (3), Analogous (3), German Reich of Liberty (3), Greedia (3), Yurtishka (3), Speederia (3), Golanchia (3), Luniom (3), Alscopia (2), Newer Ostland (2), Junastria (2), Poppyland (2), Depressive-State (2), Merinaya (2), Andech (2), EasternDeutschland (2), First Republican Autocracy of Slavyia (2), Afria New (2), Robo Topia (2), North Texia (2), Pinstripe Ball Python (2), Hault Louth (2), The Rickpublic (2), International Soviet Socialist Republics (2), Beeducalm (2), Krupdaddy (2), Thinngy (2), Khancanburi (2), Aratiah (2), The Anarchist Peoples Republic (2), Sardeigna (2), Weaklings (2), Aalander (2), Tellotictacious Whindlewharf (2), Westerd (2), The Sinistress (2), Democratic Federation of New Utopia (2), Derntill (2), Mancel Rictor (2), Lightford (2), Sianara (2), Parvus Islands (2), Nerodanus (2), Smiley Bob (2), The Imperial Atlas (2), Oprizek (2), Khladozemie (2), Clanbrasil (2), The Hill Republic (2), Qudrath (2), Lacmhacarh (2), Zombiedolphins (2), Alfolin (2), Smertski (2), Arneria-Irpa (2), Shattered Cascadia (2), Saxony-Thuringen (2), The Nation of the WA (2), Lehqhbraot (2), Danjou (2), The Ancient World (2), GreaterOhio (2), Greek Beasts (2), Alexandrious (2), Oldemburgos (2), Yanor (2), Exorius (2), The Terren Dominion (2), Vitoriana (2), United Dependencies (2), and (2,636) individual member nations.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 329,537): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Lydia Anderson, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385, GA#597, GA#607, SC#415, GA#647, GA#656, GA#664, GA#671, GA#674, GA#675, GA#677, GA#680, Issue #1580, GA#682, GA#683, GA#684, GA#692, GA#693, GA#715, GA#757
The rest of my CV: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; anti-NPO cabalist in good standing; proclaimer of WZTC's move to Palmetto
Tinhampton the player: 49yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate; currently reading nothing (sorry)


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arobe, Libera Publica, Polotino

Advertisement

Remove ads