Search results

Present There are some minor drafting issues here that cause some issues (improper capitalisation being one, where "public spaces" could be interpreted as not referring to the defined "Public Spaces", etc.), as well as some questionably-implementable ("prevent the device from being activated...

For Aside from being a little overbearing, I can see no major issues.

Present

Present Whilst I do feel this is overreaching slightly, I don't have any major issues, aside from that 5.1 should be, in line with standard practice, "publish" (instead of "set"), and include a more general requirement for public commitment to publishing (as not doing so renders any standards...

Present

Against Serious flaws have been pointed out above, and I'd remain generally opposed to this kind of intervention by the WA (even with consent—yes, I've read the resolution) as a matter of national policy only.

Present I'm not too certain about the pattern of definitions here; I'd probably forgive the lack of one for "sexual intercourse" if only the definition of "animal" weren't so bizarre... And my own guess for the motivation: perhaps because of the taboo and fairly uncontroversial nature of the...

For No particular issues beyond aforementioned formatting such; however, I do believe some flaws present themselves purely as a result of the proposal's mildness. Personally I don't really see the point of the proposal if it only addresses one easily-circumventable part of an unjust system of...

For

Present

Against How tiresome.

Against

As a point of order, given I don't really expect or need a response: I didn't ask why they're separate resolutions.

Against

You can have your repeal; it's a vote Present, not Against. In that case, why was that not the linked "replacement"/why was that not at least drafted forumside before the apparently-irrelevant repeal?

Present Concerns remain regarding the replacement even with only a cursory assessment—seems to entirely misunderstand and mislabel several vague headings (see "additives", "ingredients", "nutrient", "technology", and "warning"), and apparently subscribes to pseudoscientific, fearmongering...

Against National reasons

Against I should dread having to see many more such drivelous ramblings that bear no value beyond that of referencing an oh-so-relatable quibble.

For Though, the extraordinary mildness of this proposal is a somewhat disappointing reminder of the state of the issue.

Against

For

In that case, the crux of my original complaint stands, and your co-author seems to be in disagreement with you. I'll return to the source text for complete clarity: In summary, this gives two restrictions, which I'll try to write out in as unambiguous form as possible. If you think I'm wrong...

I wasn't aware of this, and the confusion stems from that both national and international airspace are defined by the resolution (implying a local definition, as opposed to one precedential) but only the former is referred to in 5a. Thank you, I do understand the intention of 4a. now, but...

…and international airspace? "Capacity management" is a very limited amount of justification for very normal airspace operations—within CAS, it is absolutely standard practice (and an absolute requirement for any semblance of order to operations) for instructions to be given to aircraft that...

Overview This resolution seeks to Commend Kalosia, a nation which has made extensive contributions to the NationStates WorldVision and World Hit Festival communities over a decade of high-quality songwriting, well-crafted choreography, and organization work since 2012. The resolution notes to...

For

Present

Present

Present

Against