PhilosophersBoard

Nusakota wrote:

Also on that note. Can I please implore our WA delegates to vote against repealing "Promotion of Clean Energy"? The current act is too soft but we should vote in a "Clean Energy Milestones Act" or whatnot instead of repealing it. Build on it instead of tossing it out.

Wouldn't it be better to scrap it all together and replace it with a resolution that is build more concrete than GA #357? As it stand now that resolution is more about suggesting good intend then actual enforced policy, so for it to be replaced with a proposal that has a harder approach would be more favorable in my opinion.

Shanlix wrote:

Wouldn't it be better to scrap it all together and replace it with a resolution that is build more concrete than GA #357? As it stand now that resolution is more about suggesting good intend then actual enforced policy, so for it to be replaced with a proposal that has a harder approach would be more favorable in my opinion.

WA resolutions are never enforceable. National Sovereignty takes precedent.

That is outside the point though. The main argument for repealing is to quote: "replacement resolution is necessary to provide member nations with the comprehensive framework and international cooperation needed to drive the switch in energy reliance from fossil fuels to clean energy sources"

You don't need to repeal the resolution to provide frameworks. A separate framework for renewable energy would have sufficed. The worse you have to do is make amendments on GA #357. Reading up GA #357 I found that it has no fundamental failings in terms of direction. Repealing scraps the act and gives no guarantee that any replacement act will be pushed through.

E-land wrote:

hello

Hello E-land. Welcome.

thx also i have a question. why sepret flags we should have one flag

E-land wrote:

thx also i have a question. why sepret flags we should have one flag

That’s an idea. We could all have the question mark as our flag. I suspect though that people prefer to choose a separate flag for their nation.

Reporter wrote:

In Aamayska, the nation's secret service is so secret that nobody knows if it has one.

Welcome new nations.

The Protectorate of Reporter has been recorded as the first nation in the region to recognize the legitimacy of the regime. The Director thanks you, and wishes you a better tomorrow.

Greetings friends, and slightly belated thanks for establishing an embassy with Forest. Philosophy 115 is our oldest embassy and I'm delighted to be able to continue that relationship directly rather than by means of a puppet. I will be remaining as Forest's representative here and I'm happy to be contacted at any time.

For anyone not familiar with Forest, we have a range of reasonably serious discussions on our RMB that cover all sorts of topics, not just those relating to environmental issues. I think that many people who post in Philosophers would also feel at home in Forest and I'd like to encourage you to join in via the new embassy.

Nusakota wrote:

WA resolutions are never enforceable. National Sovereignty takes precedent.

You don't need to repeal the resolution to provide frameworks. A separate framework for renewable energy would have sufficed. The worse you have to do is make amendments on GA #357. Reading up GA #357 I found that it has no fundamental failings in terms of direction. Repealing scraps the act and gives no guarantee that any replacement act will be pushed through.

I'm afraid these two points are untrue. GA Resolution #466 World Assembly Justice Accord sets out a system of fines and sanctions incurred by WA member nations that refuse to comply with a GA resolution. These sanctions are a matter of roleplay and have no effect on a nation's stats but there is assumed to be enforcement. When a new resolution passes you always get the "laws have been enacted..." telegram and you always get the small change to your nation's stats associated with the new law. And resolutions cannot be amended, they can only be repealed. In order to change a resolution it must first be repealed and the new version has to be passed as a new resolution. If the replacement were to be similar to the original but with a few changes that would require the consent of the original author so as to avoid a charge of plagiarism.

It's not a hugely realistic system but it does make sense in terms of the way the GA minigame interacts with game mechanics involving a nations stats. We inhabit a strange fictional world in which things such as the Paris Agreement have actual teeth, and nations can't always make commitments they then wholly ignore, and that's comforting in a way.

In regards to the child debate, I just wanna say in Ober Land, teenagers 13 and up have the right to run away from home

New Poll • Favourite classic film?

Culturally skewed to Hollywood with a touch of Germany and Britain. I love French films, but I left them out, most of the British classics too. Italy - yes the 1960s, those were the days. Sweden - Bergman, the master. Bollywood - great fun, maybe another time.

Sunrise Trail wrote:

New Poll • Favourite classic film?

Culturally skewed to Hollywood with a touch of Germany and Britain. I love French films, but I left them out, most of the British classics too. Italy - yes the 1960s, those were the days. Sweden - Bergman, the master. Bollywood - great fun, maybe another time.

The Seventh Seal would have been my choice, if Bergman had been included.