Formal Discussion - Wartime provisions

Is there a deadline I'm not aware of?

The only deadline I'm aware of is the 21-day deadline to schedule a vote after it has been formally submitted. We are currently on day 7 of the formal discussion.

I can post a voting thread since people are generally agreed on this -- I assume that MO's most recent suggestions should be placed in as well?

(I personally like those changes).
 
Day seven technically ends in fifteen minutes - either way, this does need to get passed. ;)

I'm fine with MO's changes. They seem to cover up that particular loophole.
 
wizardofoz01:
A "region at war" is any region which has made a formal declaration, or made acts of war against The North Pacific, or vice versa. War does not constitute actions taken by or against the North Pacific Army unless the conflict meets the conditions above. A state of war exists until a formal peace treaty, surrender terms, or similar, is/are signed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
While I agree to the first bit, i.e. a region having declared war, these acts of is rather more cumbersome and up for extensive debate, if this should be law provision needs to be included that defines, exactly, who is deciding whether or not it is war...

a very important point i think - although i have only the one nation, i can imagine that those with more would agree on this...
 
bodhimanda:
While I agree to the first bit, i.e. a region having declared war, these acts of is rather more cumbersome and up for extensive debate, if this should be law provision needs to be included that defines, exactly, who is deciding whether or not it is war...

a very important point i think - although i have only the one nation, i can imagine that those with more would agree on this...
Click to expand...
On page two, I've made some revisions (that seem to be well-received) to the original proposal.

me:
No player maintaining a nation in a region at war with TNP may maintain a nation within TNP, or participate in the governance thereof, for the duration of hostilities. Any player found doing so will be stripped of membership in the Regional Assembly and subject to banishment from the region. A "region at war" is any region which has made a formal declaration, or made acts of war against The North Pacific, or vice versa, as deemed by decision by the Security Council. War does not constitute actions taken by or against the North Pacific Army unless the conflict meets the conditions above. A state of war exists until a formal peace treaty, surrender terms, or similar, is/are recognized.
Click to expand...

Basically, it says that the Security Council (using whatever mechanisms they have) decides when we're in a state of war. Furthermore, I changed "signed" in the final sentence to "recognized", as formal peace accords are rarely pursued in NS.

P.S. Welcome to the RA. :hello:
 
I want to be clear here.. Since many people approve of MO's changes, I will put this up for a vote.

HOWEVER --

I disagree with the implication that this bill is the longest one ever to be in formal discussion. That's simply not true -- many bills have been discussed in formal discussion for longer than 7 days.

By the way, it is NOT 21 days from the original post -- it is 21 days from when this was formally submitted. (ie when I started this thread).

I don't see any rule that says seven days of formal discussion is the limit. I know people are all anxious to vote here, but simply because this is wartime, I'm not tempted to curtail debate.
 
TNP Constitution:
C- The Speaker shall provide a notice of the referendum on the bill which shall include the date on which voting shall commence after a notice and comment period on the bill (in its final form) of at least 24 hours, but not to exceed seven days.
Click to expand...

And I did not say that this was the lngest formal discussion I had ever seen - I said seven days is the longest it is supposed to be, as shown above.
 
Hersfold:
TNP Constitution:
C- The Speaker shall provide a notice of the referendum on the bill which shall include the date on which voting shall commence after a notice and comment period on the bill (in its final form) of at least 24 hours, but not to exceed seven days.
Click to expand...

And I did not say that this was the lngest formal discussion I had ever seen - I said seven days is the longest it is supposed to be, as shown above.
Click to expand...
That mentions that there's up to 7 days to comment on the bill in its final form.

I still don't see any "violation" -- the final form of this includes MO's changes, which people didn't really start agreeing on until July 25-26. Final form to me means all changes in, preparing to go to vote -- not when the formal discussion starts.

I'd rather make sure everyone gets a chance to say something than to cut people off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top