«12. . .96979899100101102. . .115116»
NEW GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL DISCUSSION AND VOTE
---------------------------------------------------
Title: World Assembly Peace Prize
Author: Tinhampton
Purpose: To mandate the World Assembly Commission on Human Rights to organize an international award recognizing those who have made significant contributions to the causes of peace and international goodwill.
View submitted proposal | View on-site drafting thread
---------------------------------------------------
Please discuss and vote on how regional nations and the Delegate should vote on this proposal.
Always remember to include the name of the resolution you are talking about in your posts to avoid confusion!
Click here to read voting instructions (Please do this if you have never voted before!)




















World Assembly Peace Prize
For
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
We need something to congratulate people for their efforts at peace, so, yes, please
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
World Assembly Peace Prize
Present
World Assembly Peace Prize
Abstain
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
The creation of a prize like this will promote peaceful efforts, and will ultimately make the world better. It will also give an excellent reward to those deserving.
Convention Against Heisting
Present
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
Convention Against Heisting
Present
World Assembly Peace Prize
Present
Convention Against Heisting
Against
I think this proposal is well intentioned -- and I would like to see Declarations address Cards -- but I have a couple of issues with it based on my experience with trading cards.
1) I am adamantly opposed to Article II's codification of the term "Guild" into official WA parlance. "Guild" is very much a term in reference to TNP's Cards Guild -- an undoubtedly wonderful program -- but making it the standard go-to umbrella term for all regional/organizational cards programs is, in my opinion, a textual signal of TNP's soft power over the cards game, which I'm not okay with. No region except TNP (and to some extent Lazarus' "cards guild" channel) has adopted such terminology - see the NPO's program "Card Captor Pacifica", TEP's program "TEAPOT", or XKI's "Cards Co-operative", or the non-regional Card Gardens program, not to mention our "South Pacific Association for Cards Exchange (SPACE)" program. While TNP's program is the first major cards program, and is one with exceptional power and infrastructure, we should not instate its terminology semi-permanently in the World Assembly. I would have strongly preferred a more geopolitically neutral term like "organization". I also don't necessarily like the idea that "Guilds" should always mobilize against heisting -- Cards Organizations should determine their own purposes, and one could even create a guild premised on friendly and intense competition that includes heisting.
2) I don't think the resolution is adaptable to potential mechanics changes. I expressed a similar concern with On Interregional Recruitment, I think it's slightly less relevant here but still important. For example, the definitions section clearly defines a pull event as "an event in which nations attempt to duplicate artwork by matching an ask above market value and placing repeated, rapid, and increasing bids while card farming". I see two issues with this definition: a) duplicating artwork doesn't necessarily require a bid above Market Value (at least it didn't last time I hosted one several months ago) - it usually requires a bid above Deck Value - so I think the definition is inaccurate, b) the mechanic of "repeated, rapid, and increasing bids" is a somewhat recent evolution of the pull event mechanic, and one that could very plausibly be changed in the future by admin - it's not really a "core" mechanic of the cards game so much as a highly technical one. By going into specifics about how a "pull event" works, we're creating an inevitable scenario where needs for repeals-and-replaces occurs.
3) I think the "Reducing Risk" section has a major omission - which is the use of mass copy transfers. It asserts that you should only transfer on low copy cards - which I don't think is accurate - lots of farmers use mass copy transfers with great success (here are examples of mass copy transfer cards used by South Pacificans: my S2 Dustwind2, Lucabaduka's S2 Sylh Alanor, or
Witchcraft and Sorcery's S2 Southern Defender 26). If we want to codify advice on transfers, it should likely not discourage one of the most reliable forms of bank transfer available.
These issues are largely emblematic of the broader "rushed drafting" issue with this proposal, which leads me to vote against.
Active-duty SPSF
Convention Against Heisting
Against
I'm largely chiming in as a significant contributor to SPACE and the cards world as a whole. Currently rank 19 in the world, #2 in TSP, have been top 20 global for the better part of this year. HumanSanity pinged me about my transfer card and I'll throw in my two cents, though I largely agree with his post.
A couple of things to point out:
- firstly, pull events are well-documented to use junk value instead of market value as a determining factor.
- The "reducing risk" section has a few problems beyond what HS mentioned (which I will elaborate on below) - sections I and II I agree with but I find section II a bit clumsily worded. I think it tries to walk a line between easy to understand and technical and as a result I found it odd. This is a general problem I have with the resolution actually. I fear it tries to walk a line between easy to read for a new player and getting the "technical stuff" right and it feels a bit clumsy.
- It's hard to understate how important the failure to include mass-copy transfers is. It's perhaps the easiest way to minimize losses when transferring. Since I started playing cards late last year I've almost exclusively relied on this method and it is easily the least stressful way to move bank around. It does not require a low-owner card nor does it require you to watch the clock like a hawk as it ticks down.
- "Guild" is another non-starter, for the reasons HS mentioned. I don't really have anything to add there.
Active-duty SPSF member.
Convention Against Heisting
Present
I'm not involved or credible enough in the cards world to take a direct stance, so I'll sit this one out. Admittedly I'm seeing some strong arguments in opposition, though.
Active duty SPSF.
Convention Against Heisting
Against
Active-Duty, SPSF
HumanSanity's arguments above well-represents my opinion on the subject matter.
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
Active-Duty, SPSF
An inoffensive proposal that is in keeping with the spirit and aims of the General Assembly. It is unusual, in retrospect, that a convention of this nature did not already exist.
Convention Against Heisting
Against
i don't understand much, but well, as a card farmer, i suggest that i must vote against
World Assembly Peace Prize
For
Convention Against Heisting
Against
What a ridiculous proposal. The floodgates are now open on simply ludicrous Security Council proposals like this.
Voting on SC proposal Convention Against Heisting has been ended.
Result:
For: 7
Against: 6
OWL recommendation: No recommendation
Link:
—.

·
Author: Debussy
Purpose: The resolution attempts to codify into international standards against “heisting”, a practice where card farmers take bank from other card farmers when they are “transferring” international artwork from a farm nation to their main nation.

·
—WELCOME— —BEGINNER'S GUIDE— —WRITING GUIDE— —VOTING CENTER— —

—




















World Assembly Peace Prize
Against
This seems like a resolution trying to conjure a game mechanic out of thin air. Sure, it's trying to do something good, but once we pass this, it'll end up doing nothing. And I know, I know, "bUT doGE, yoU jusT rP IT!!!" but even then, who would be put in charge of giving out the award? Unless there was some big plan behind the scenes that I don't know about, I'm voting against.
The WA Commission on Human Rights.
World Assembly Peace Prize
Against
«12. . .96979899100101102. . .115116»
Advertisement