Anime

I have no issues with people submitting proposals without going through a "proper" drafting process. Afterall, who is to dictate what is proper? Plenty of us don't visit the WA forums, and in the pass we remember Jolt, and now this current one, they are not exactly good experiences and the "comments" given there aren't always constructive.

Submissions should be evaluated based on their own strength is what I want to point out. Not having gone through the forum shouldn't be a reason to shoot them down. The only reason to shoot them down is that they are bad...

;)

My 2 cents.

Oh and btw Kawaii, I have one proposal coming up. Might need your approval soon.

Welcome, The Principality of Lucian De Mundo!

In WA news, the proposed resolution "Double Jeopardy Prohibition" was defeated 7,893 votes to 2,879, which comes as no surprise as we explained earlier. SV, we appreciate your principle that proposals should be voted on by merit rather than author, but The Empire of Quelesh really has been stretching the General Assembly's patience. This isn't the first proposal that they've tried to push through without even an attempt at debate.

It's our contention that the main flaw lies in lazy delegates. Part of our job as delegate is to screen proposals before they come up for vote to weed out the obviously bad ones; unfortunately, we suspect a lot of delegates endorse any proposal with a high-minded name without bothering to even read it. (Speaking of endorsements, we're looking forward to seeing that proposal you mentioned.)

Meanwhile, currently up for vote is the "better alternative" we mentioned, "Preventing Multiple Trials". It avoids the inflexibility of the previous proposal, for example by permitting (within strictly defined limits) retrials where significant miscarriages of justice had occurred during the original trial.

hi Konachan, where is your first nation if I may ask?

@Kawaii:
I've already posted in the NSforum, will PM you the link.

Oh btw, McDonalds here is selling Hello Kitty dolls at $3.60 a piece.

WA News: To absolutely no one's surprise, "Preventing Multiple Trials" was passed 7,757 votes to 3,078. If there were any surprises here, it was that the vote margin wasn't higher. We suspect that the previous resolution up for vote, "Double Jeopardy Prohibition", was actually more popular than its 7,893 to 2,879 vote defeat suggested. "Preventing Multiple Trials" won largely as a rebuke to the General Assembly hijinks we spoke of earlier.

There does appear to be a serious division, however, in the WA's attitude toward double jeopardy. It hinges on whether freedom from double jeopardy should be considered an absolute, non-negotiable right, or whether the right to a fair trial can overrule it on occasion. "Double Jeopardy Prohibition" argued for the former, while "Preventing Multiple Trials" argued for the latter. Currently, the latter view holds, but the issue is clouded due to the animosity against The Empire of Quelesh, the champion of the former view. We would not be surprised to see more repeals and more legislation on this topic in the future.

Meanwhile, in current WA business, up for vote is "Fairness in Multilateral Trade". It's a fairly long proposal, but in a nutshell it prohibits discrimination between WA nations regarding preferential trade status--under it, a WA nation cannot negotiate special deals for some WA nations while denying them to other WA nations.

While we are usually in favor of free-trade proposals, we're not really happy with this. It's much too anti-NatSov for our liking. Our nation, for example, uses special trading privileges as bargaining chips when negotiating land settlements for Kawaiian tribes. It's an important--in fact, vital--part of our foreign policy, and one that would be severely crippled under this legislation.

SV: From what we've heard about the Eastern Islands of Dharma from other representatives, that's a dubious assumption. Anyways, onto WA news: "Fairness in Multilateral Trade" was shot down 7,538 votes to 2,857. It's good to see that some folks are keeping check on the Assembly's occasional attempts at overreach.

Currently up for vote is the "Sustainable Fishing Act". It requires that all WA member nations determine and enforce limits on the amount of fish caught in waters they have jurisdiction over so that the stocks of those fish do not become depleted over time. We like this proposal, as it's reasonably well thought through and well written. It'll probably cut into your Trout Fishing sector some, but we think the overall gain to the environment will be worth it.