Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
MODERN ROLEPLAY NEWS: The world is good. And very quite beautiful.
New Users' Info
Cabinet & OOC News
Map Quick Links
RP Time: OST
Population: XX Nations
Technology: Post/Modern
Starter Guide Map Room MTRP Index
World Stage Ministry of Role Play OOC Discussion Databases
Announcements General Assembly Wolf's Tavern The Media
Caprecia

Founder: Dom | Prime Minister: Vacant| RP Ministers: Vacant

..:: YOUR NEWS : 16 OCT '14 ::..
***Things That Happened, Did***
Galdresia Iryiiad Syntreal
Zaroca Oracia
Specials Epicmaps Sketerra
Welcome to Caprecian Continents. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Proposal Drafting; Because I think it would be cool
Topic Started: Jan 4 2010, 04:00 AM (234 Views)
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

Hey folks, I think it'd be pretty nifty if we drafted a proposal, and submitted it to the WA, just to see how it goes down.

Obviously it should be something we care about, but also something that politically would get lots of support.

We can even give it a test run on the official NS forums for discussion of WA proposals.

I think our proposal should be a Human Rights thing, personally. perhaps something thats in the news these days, the Airline Passengers bill of rights?

or something to that effect. thoughts?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lucava
Member Avatar
The Lucavan Union
I'm not a WA person, so won't take too much part here. Please please please don't make it a Security Council resolution though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

yeah, there are way too many of those. amusing as they are, i want to see if i we can pass something fo- rizzo.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ubiquisque
Member Avatar
Large State
[ *  *  *  * ]
I would LOVE a resolution that bans that stupid forum topics on "the person above you" - be it whether you like the person's flag, motto, signature, deodorant or whatever. Condemn them. Now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

lol but i dont think WA resolutions affect the forum? They're just symbolic, recommendations like the UN. so it can't be anything with any actual consequences. i mean, i could condemn them, but we'd need a target and we'd need to involve ourselves with the security council. Its for another time, in my opinion.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Dominion
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
WA proposal concerning freedom of speech. No region or nation shall be prevented from their freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Its an obvious one for all of us, but it would be good to reaffirm this right.

And EA your really getting into this position, its good. About time we have an active delegate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

h'ok, thats a good idea. i'll post some ideas.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aetericus
Member Avatar
Medium State
[ *  *  * ]
A lot of topics have been taken, but there are a few we WA regulars haven't gotten around to yet.

You'll find that pretty much all civil and political rights are already guaranteed by a resolution, so don't bother with that. Also, remember that the WA can't form an armed force of any kind whatsoever.

Something like, say, a resolution regarding clean drinking water, or the formal status of PMC's in combat would be a good idea at this point. But for the most part we've already taken care of the obvious ones.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

PMC's are a good one. we almost talked about that at a Model UN conference i went to.

or, perhaps, we could do something about providing internet to all communities.

a resolution to provide high speed internet to all parts of the world, or something. because i think there is an initiative going on, i dont know if its UN supported though.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aetericus
Member Avatar
Medium State
[ *  *  * ]
A universal internet proposal would probably be shot down.

If not for the expense alone, then because of the logistics difficulties, not to mention that I don't think man people would consider the internet a "universal right".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

lets go with the PMC's, then.

How about this:

Quote:
 
The Nations of the World here Assembled,

NOTING the increasing presence of private military companies on the field of battle,

ACKNOWLEDGING the convenience of private military companies,

BEARING IN MIND that wars are fought and defined by the involved Nations,

DEEPLY CONCERNED that private military companies challenge that definition,

HEREBY

1. AFFIRMS the legal right of nations to hire private military companies,
2. ENCOURAGES nations to restrict the quantity of private troops deployed to a field of battle,
3. ENDORSES a cap on money spent on private military companies in times of war,
4. EMPHASIZES the necessity for regulations on private military companies,
5. CALLS UPON the nations of the World Assembly to support and affirm this resoltuion


Hows that look?

for capslock'd word reference, look here: http://tinyurl.com/ygdqmvd
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ubiquisque
Member Avatar
Large State
[ *  *  *  * ]
It seems a bit vague to me - how does one agree to a "cap on money' spent without knowing what the cap is? Similarly, if there is to be a restriction on the quantity of troops, what is the limit?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

Quote:
 
The Nations of the World here Assembled,

NOTING the increasing presence of private military companies on the field of battle,

ACKNOWLEDGING the convenience of private military companies,

BEARING IN MIND that wars are fought and defined by the involved Nations,

DEEPLY CONCERNED that private military companies challenge that definition,

HEREBY

1. AFFIRMS the legal right of nations to hire private military companies,
2. ENCOURAGES nations to restrict the quantity of private troops deployed to a field of battle,
3. REQUESTS that that restriction be limited to 15% of the total troops dedicated by a nation to a conflict
4. ENDORSES a cap on money spent on private military companies in times of war,
5. FURTHER REQUESTS that the financial cap be limited to 1% of a nations defense budget
6. EMPHASIZES the necessity for regulations on private military companies,
7. CALLS UPON the nations of the World Assembly to support and affirm this resolution


The percentages are arbitrary, but the best i could come up with without doing further research :P
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aetericus
Member Avatar
Medium State
[ *  *  * ]
Important advice, DON'T create standards, quotas, limits, etc. yourself within the text of the proposal.

Instead, become acquainted with the WA legislators best friend: the comittee. Create an aprporiately named WA organization and invest in it the power to make limits and regulations, as well as conduct inspections.

That way, you avoid setting arbitrary limits yourself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Epsilon Andromedae
Unregistered

aha! that is a good idea!

also, just when this comes up:

A comittee would fall under the "MILD" option, right?

here are the forms i need to fill out for a WA resolution:

Council: General Assembly (Duh)
Category: Global Disarmament (I'm suggesting a reduction in military spending, so thats what this one is)
Resolution name: (What do you folks think it should be called? Cleverness is always good!)
Description: (The Resolution itself)
Strength: Mild, Significant, or Strong. This is the only one i'm not sure of.

So what do you guys think of THAT?

In the meantime, i will be re-drafting my resolution to create a committee.

[EDIT]
For Reference on the Strength issue, i found this quote on their forums:
Quote:
 
Strong

Proposals that affect a very broad area of policy and/or use very strong language and possibly detailed clauses to affect a policy area in a dramatic way.

Significant

Proposals that affect a fair-sized area of policy and/or use fairly strong language to affect a policy area.

Mild

Proposals that affect a very limited area of policy and/or use fairly mild language to affect only that policy area, or broader policy areas in a very minor way.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Wolf's Tavern · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1



edge created by tiptopolive of ifsz