by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«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.

Tinhampton wrote:
    Whereas all sapient rights are put in danger wherever unnecessary armed conflict occurs, the General Assembly hereby:

    a. establishes the World Assembly Peace Prize, hereinafter the Prize,

    b. tasks the WA Commission on Human Rights with:

      i. receiving nominations for the Prize from anyone who works as a head of state or government, legislator, or professor in any member state, in addition to any leaders of member state delegations to the World Assembly; and disregarding nominations with the effect of such individuals nominating themselves, their co-workers or their employer for the Prize,

      ii. awarding the Prize each year to that person or group of people resident in any member state who has been nominated in accordance with Article b(i),

      iii. basing its decision to award the Prize to any given person or group solely on whether, in its view, they have demonstrably contributed more than any other such person or group in the previous year to the resolution, without violence and with respect for all sapient rights protected by international law, of major conflicts between and within nations which involved or could have realistically involved large-scale acts of violence, and

      iv. rewarding (each of) the winner(s) of the Prize in each year with a medallion containing one ounce of 99.9% pure silver and of one-and-a-half inch diameter, which shall have on its obverse the words "WA PEACE PRIZE - WITH PEACE COMES FREEDOM" surrounding the logo of the World Assembly, and on its reverse nothing,

    c. forbids members from confiscating any rewards bestowed upon Prize winners under Article b(iv) for any reason not enshrined by prior and standing international law, and

    d. encourages all members to refrain from organised armed conflict which is not necessary to prevent practices (such as terrorism, genocide, and other crimes against humanity) that threaten the achievement of all sapient rights.

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:

.

·

·
·

·


'Convention Against Heisting'
·
·
..
·

Background Information

Proposal title: 'Convention Against Heisting'
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.

Links


.No Recommendation.
·

The Office's Analysis

Heisting is a deplorable practice in the Cards community, and this proposal is well-intentioned for trying to warn against it. Since there are no in-game consequences for heisting, a Security Council declaration calling it out may be the best the world can do to express its disapproval. In addition, the proposal does provide potentially helpful advice to new Cards players on how best to avoid getting heisted. However, several senior South Pacifican members of the Cards community have pointed out issues with the proposal: First, it uses terminology that is non-standard and preferred only by one region, lending that region's program the World Assembly's stamp of officiality; second, the "Reducing Risk" section omits (and thereby discourages) one of the most important techniques used by Card traders to avoid heisting; and third, the resolution is somewhat clumsily-written overall, with excess specifics that may not stand the test of time in some places, and inaccuracies in others. Therefore, due to the South Pacific's split opinion on this proposal, the Office cannot issue a confident recommendation, and instead advises nations to consider the opinions below when making an independent decision.

Supplementary Opinions
·
·
FOR | AGAINST
·

For

From TSP Citizens

Osheiga is a Legislator in the South Pacific and a member of OWL's staff.

Osheiga wrote:I’m very doubtful this legislation will stop heisting entirely, but it’s good advice to put out for newer card farmers and doesn’t seem to have any massive negative drawbacks, so I’ll support it. And heisting suucks, so that’s another reason.

Nyxonia is a Legislator in the South Pacific.

Nyxonia wrote:I doubt that the convention will make any difference but I am not against the idea. There are no real in game consequences for people who continue to take advantage of this loophole and we an "suggest and recommend away" with toothless legislation. Still, I will vote in favor but the response is just feel-good words.

From the World

At the time of writing, OWL had not found a solid opinion for the resolution from the rest of the world. You can make your own opinion heard by posting it on the Regional Message Board of the WA Voting Center!

Against

From TSP Citizens

HumanSanity is the South Pacific's Minister of Defence and an active participant in trading cards.

HumanSanity wrote: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.

Witchcraft and Sorcery is the Prime Minister of the South Pacific and an active participant in trading cards.

Witchcraft and Sorcery wrote: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.

Lucabaduka is the South Pacific's Minister of Engagement and an active participant in trading cards.

Lucabaduka wrote:HumanSanity's arguments above well-represents my opinion on the subject matter.

From the World

Astrobolt is a member of 10000 Islands.

Astrobolt wrote:A SC declaration on cards etiquette is a great idea, and a perfect example of what a declaration should be. However, this proposal was rushed, and would benefit from a rewrite. One thing that is interesting, this proposal never actually recommends that individuals refrain from heisting, only that guilds do so. In fact, this proposal puts the onus on the victim of the heist to come to an agreement with the perpetrator, in effect letting heisters off the hook.

Praeceps is a citizen of the North Pacific.

Praeceps wrote:Against. This has been rushed.



·

WELCOME BEGINNER'S GUIDE WRITING GUIDE VOTING CENTER LinkDISCORD


·

·
LinkLink
·
·
Read dispatch

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.

Doge Land wrote:who would be put in charge of giving out the award?

The WA Commission on Human Rights.

World Assembly Peace Prize

Against

«12. . .96979899100101102. . .115116»

Advertisement