WA Piece: 5/17/2014

The World Assembly has managed to pass a couple of resolutions in the past week, but none more controversial than the security council resolution Liberate "Liberal Haven". When a collection of right wing groups (including several national socialist regions) decided to raid and "refound" Liberal Haven... a coalition of defenders, imperialists, and raiders began to work towards a liberation effort.

In a crushing vote (9,355 in favor and 1,467 against), the SC passed the liberation of Liberal Haven by author Cormac A Stark, and the region itself saw a new delegate take power shortly afterward. Though there have been some rumblings of "raider unity being broken" the vast majority of players have praised the resolution and ingame actions associated with the liberation.

In the General Assembly a sluggish pace has been maintained, with the first resolution in two weeks actually passing. To date the only resolution in the category of "logging," "Sustainable Forest Management" passed with 8,132 voters in favor and 3,525 opposed.

Finally, in an act many GA forum regulars saw coming, the administration team has elevated Mousebumples and Mallorea and Riva to the position of Moderator in order to alleviate some of the load carried by Ardchoille, one of the last active mods whose area of specialty was the General Assembly.








Note to Editor: I left off any sort of stylized "sign offs" or anything else as I have no idea how you're organizing this. But that's the piece.
 
Ok, so I'd like your articles to focus on only one story. This is sort of presented as a summary of what the WA has been up to. I'd like you to cut the last two paragraphs and expand a bit on Liberal Haven (sorry, I know how much you hate the SC :P). In particular, you might address who in particular was campaigning for its passage, and who was opposed to it. Where are these rumblings about raider unity coming from? Is there anyone you can quote on-record?

Also, if you're going to include news about the liberation itself, some specific details would go well. Who is the new delegate? Who was involved in the attempt? For example, you might say "A coalition of unlikely allies including...." rather than "A coalition of defenders, imperialists, and raiders."

This is a good article, and timely. Are you comfortable making the edits I've suggested?
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
Ok, so I'd like your articles to focus on only one story. This is sort of presented as a summary of what the WA has been up to. I'd like you to cut the last two paragraphs and expand a bit on Liberal Haven (sorry, I know how much you hate the SC :P). In particular, you might address who in particular was campaigning for its passage, and who was opposed to it. Where are these rumblings about raider unity coming from? Is there anyone you can quote on-record?

Also, if you're going to include news about the liberation itself, some specific details would go well. Who is the new delegate? Who was involved in the attempt? For example, you might say "A coalition of unlikely allies including...." rather than "A coalition of defenders, imperialists, and raiders."

This is a good article, and timely. Are you comfortable making the edits I've suggested?
The problem is when discussing SC resolution(especially Liberations) in too much detail... it becomes a GP piece and not a WA piece. My area of expertise is the WA... with a particular focus in the GA. If you want a indepth and detailed article on a liberation you're asking the wrong guy. ;)
 
Is there maybe another piece of WA legislation that you could contrast it with? Also, some details about *how* it was passed and how the campaign to get it to quorum and pass went would be good. Keep in mind you're writing for a predominately non-WA audience, so this isn't boring yet for most of them :P

EDIT: There are 91 words in the paragraphs I want to cut - if you can give me that much more on Liberate Liberal Haven I think this will be in good shape.
 
I think some stats on where support and opposition for the vote came from, and some quotes from notable supporters and opponents would make this article ready for print. As it stands, this isn't going to be published until it gets fleshed out at least a bit. 400 words is a maximum, but I think at least 200 is necessary to say anything of substance.
 
Back
Top