Magecastle
Wolf of the North
- Pronouns
- He/Him
- TNP Nation
- Magecastle_Embassy_Building_A5
- Discord
- red_canine
Now you know how to navigate the GA rules and evaluate proposals, understand RNT, and everything else we have learnt so far. However, we have not yet put these skills to actual use in drafting proposals! This lesson starts with how to repeal.
Introduction
Due to game mechanics, we cannot amend resolutions we have already passed. The only way to "fix" problematic legislation is to repeal, and -- if necessary -- replace it. Replacements, and positive legislation generally, is a separate topic which will be covered in the next lesson. This lesson will address how to write a repeal.
This guide assumes that you have already understood the previous lesson on evaluating resolutions. In other words, it assumes that you understand how to find out flaws in, or other counterarguments against, a positive resolution. If you are not sure about this, check out Lesson 4.
Picking a Fight Target
So, first off. When you are a new author, you should not try to repeal some resolution with a controversial or widely known principle. Repealing GA #399 (which contains a gun-control blocker) or GA #499 (which, inter alia, mandates access to abortion clinics) is not going to go well if you are a first-time author, even if you do not make arguments relating to such controversy. Likewise, humourous resolutions such as GA #122 or GA #8 usually contain an aspect of history which will make them harder to repeal (although there are some exceptions; for example GA #600 was passed despite widespread opposition from GA regulars, so passing its repeal was relatively easy).
There is a list of resolutions here, which you can go through to find a good repeal target (NB: Site mechanics disallow you from submitting a repeal of either GA #1, a repealed resolution, or any repeal itself). A resolution is a good repeal target if you can build a compelling, politically uncontroversial case that the resolution is either problematic or useless/redundant.
In some cases, especially relating to the former, where the resolution has a beneficial goal yet is executed poorly, a replacement resolution may be demanded by voters or regulars. You may want to avoid having to draft a replacement by choosing a repeal target which is useless/redundant or has a problematic principle. Alternatively, you can draft a replacement the same way you would any new active legislation; although no replacement should contain text directly sourced from the repeal target, unless you have received the explicit permission of the author of the target, as this disallowed by site rules.
Drafting a Repeal
So now that you have picked a target, you need to write a repeal. Generally, a repeal should list clauses, such as
before ending with "The World Assembly hereby repeals [target name]." These arguments, taken together, should present a rationale which compellingly justifies that the target either is useless or redundant, or is actively harmful to member nations. Omit any controversial political arguments (such as arguing for repeal of GA #666 for establishing an international police).
Once you have written a coherent repeal argument, you should post it to the General Assembly forums. There, you should receive feedback from fellow authors, many of which have years of experience passing resolutions. Make sure to address this feedback in a civil and respectful manner, while amending your draft according to feedback you are given so as to resolve any concerns regarding the repeal from other players. Unless you are a very experienced author, do not submit your proposal until it has been in drafting on the forums for at least three weeks, and a replacement (if any) is at least largely garnering support on the forums. Once your repeal is submitted, you will have to campaign for it so that it can get to vote; but that is covered in the final lesson.
Repeals and the Rules
As we saw in the third lesson, there are many rules which apply to GA proposals. You should check that lesson out if you have not already; but there are two rules which are the most relevant to repeals; these are the Honest Mistake and National Sovereignty rules.
Honest Mistake
Despite the name, this rule prohibits any misrepresentation of any resolution (even if not the target) in a repeal, regardless of whether such misrepresentation is intentional or not. Just one statement which misrepresents any resolution (even if not the target) is enough to make your repeal illegal! That said, even in the GA we are not so pedantic as to require every statement to be 100% specific and precise; limited exaggeration is permitted, as is using weaselly or embellished wording.
The other prong of the Honest Mistake rule is that any arguments you make in a repeal must be compliant with Reasonable Nation Theory -- ie, may not argue that a resolution has an effect which only arises in bizarre or absurd nations (such as one where chicks are born as nuclear bombs), or where a nation adopts a patently self-detrimental or bad faith interpretation of a resolution (such as interpreting a mandate for medical treatment as requiring a nation to genocide quarantined populations). However, RNT cannot override actual text of a resolution; so if a resolution can only be interpreted one way, even one which is extremely self-detrimental, it is absolutely legal to point this out in a repeal.
One way of avoiding illegalities based on the Honest Mistake rule is to use airtight wording which does not go overly into specific details which might be Honest Mistakes, where one is unsure about these details. For example, one can state that some mandate of a resolution harms small businesses without going into the argument that it does so as it forces small businesses to pay very expensive fees. Weaselly wording can even be used to avoid specifying a particular mechanism, eg "Concerned that Section 3c of GA #999 could pose a significant financial burden upon smaller or developing businesses, thereby promoting monopolisation and harming economies of member nations". However, this kind of wording may, in the voting stage, be misunderstood, or even derided as insufficiently argued, so be careful in this regard!
National Sovereignty
The National Sovereignty rule prohibits a repeal from solely arguing that a topic should be left up to individual member nations to legislate on. This includes arguments for "religious sovereignty" or similar; for example, that churches should individually address discrimination in religious events. However, it is permitted to make national sovereignty arguments or variants thereof as long as they are not the only argument made in a repeal. See eg GA #368. Arguing that a resolution is a waste of funds is also the closest to national sovereignty which can be made as a sole argument.
It is important to note that an argument in a repeal that a term or mandate in the target is vague is considered a national sovereignty argument. The sole exception is where there is an example or argument made relating to potential misreadings or problematic effects arising as a result of this vagueness.
The Challenge Process
Even if a proposal is marked legal when submitted to the proposal queue, its legality can still be challenged by another player. This happens when a player posts a thread on the forum pointing out a potential illegality in the proposal. If the Secretariat votes through a simple majority that the proposal indeed violates the rules, the Secretariat may hold the proposal, or -- if it has already reached vote -- discard it, preventing the proposal from passing regardless of whether it achieves a majority in favour. Only rulings made in response to a legality challenge are binding upon future legality decisions, although they may still be overturned by majority vote of the Secretariat. Resolutions which have already passed cannot have their legality challenged.
Having a repeal of yours be challenged can be overwhelming; but you should stay calm and provide reasoned argumentation for the legality of your proposal. If you do not know how to make a counterargument to the legality challenge due to not being sufficiently familiar with the rules or whatever other reason (which is totally fine!) that is not to worry either -- other players can also weigh in. However, if the consensus is that the proposal is illegal, you should at least consider withdrawing the proposal (assuming it is not already at vote) to fix the potential legality issues. You should note that it is usually considered bad form to initiate a legality challenge on a proposal for political reasons, such as a repeal being of one's resolution.
Assignment
I think the most that can be done regarding an assignment on this one is to try going through the process of drafting a repeal, or aspects thereof, yourself.
- Go through the list of resolutions (forum version, NS version) and pick a resolution you think would be a good repeal target. Why do you think it is a good repeal target?
- Make a list of all arguments which could be made for repealing that resolution, and which would be best to include in a repeal.
- (Optional) Put the best and most relevant of the above arguments into a repeal, and actually try writing a repeal yourself! Although if you do this, I would advise you to check out Lesson Seven before actually posting it to the forums.