Search results

(Non-WA) I also vote for this proposal.

(Non-WA) I am strongly for this. I make this point better on the forums, but, in brief, the targeted resolution is boring. By leaving everything to a committee, there is less material on which to roleplay, not to mention fewer substantive clauses to debate. Though the entire GA being run by a...

(Non-WA) I am against this proposal. There are better written possible repeals of GA #086, which this would prevent from passing. The arguments presented in this repeal are a mixture of being unconvincing, and requiring further elaboration. It could certainly have benefited from some drafting...

(Non-WA) Present - I agree with Magecastle’s analysis of the repeal. Though a repeal is desirable. The arguments used in Excidium Planetis’ version are not ones with which I can agree.

I did forget that you had a replacement: sorry. In terms of the other one, clause 2a is objectionable, in that transport of extremely hazardous substance could be made less safe by having random, unannounced inspections, creating more people on the vessel unnecessarily. Clause 4 contains an...

(Non-WA) I am entirely for this. The proposal is well-written, covering a complex topic in an easy-to-understand way.

Nation in TNP: Mensun WA Nation (if different): Kenmoria (currently, I plan to switch back to Mensun at some point) Discord Tag: Kenmoria #7989 Resolutions Authored (if any): Two authored (469 and 475) and four coauthored (441, 481, 494, 511) Have you read the opening address: Yes WA Area of...

I’m a TNPer and my TNP-nation is Mensun.

(Non-WA) I am against this. There is a lack of a suitable replacement, and the clauses in the repeal are not convincing. Too many of them focus on what the resolution could additionally do, which is unpersuasive when the GA could pass further legislation.

(Non-WA) I am, on balance, in favour of this.

I am against. This condemnation is not well-argued. Nowhere does it argue as to why TCB is particularly deserving of special recognition, making only general points about communism generally.

This is a fun proposal. I am for it.

I am for this.

I am present.

I’ll be a lone voice saying that I am in favour this proposal. I acknowledge that it is not the most ground-breaking or impactful proposal, but it does not cause any harm and it is well-written. The fact that something has presumably already happened doesn’t mean that it necessarily has.

As the author, I am naturally wholly for this. The replacement will, I hope, be an effective reimplementation of all the foundational aspects of GA #002, without the flaws for which it was repealed. I am happy to answer any questions raised here.

I am against on the basis that there is no replacement being drafted. Though the repeal alleges that this is because nations are capable of handling this domestically, I doubt the correctness of this argument. The potentially international nature of patents and their implementations means that...

I am also in favour of this. The repeal argues this very well. Though 603 had good aims and intentions, it was executed in a generalised, sweeping fashion, which was not appropriate in this case.

I agree that it is not an infringement of copyright. Legally speaking, there’s no issue, which is certainly better than the alternative. However, it is still verbatim copying of an existing text. My issue is more with the unoriginality of such a practice, and with the precedent that it sets.

Because there is a replacement, I would lean FOR this. GA #002 might be historic, symbolic, influential, and so on, but it is long-due a replacement. It was also plagiarised.