(Passed) WA Roleplaying Act Amendment

New Rhodinia wrote:In favor. Will the original recommendation for New Rhodinia as a moderator be present in this proposal?

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:AS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED BY: XOLOX

Section 9 - Roleplay Integrity

This section is intended to prevent what is commonly known as "godmodding". If needed, a participant in the roleplay may request the arbitration of an unbiased or unaligned Roleplay Moderator or the Founder to settle a dispute concerning the feasibility of a battle report. The one who requests the arbitration may choose who the arbitrator is, as long as they are not involved with any side of the war or battle in question(unless the one accused agrees to this). Once the arbitrator has dealt with the issue, their judgement may not be disputed unless another unbiased or unaligned moderator exists to be appealed to. If there are no candidates for the job, the dispute may be put to vote by the Security Council.

* Pending - (5) - Chivalry, Zanland, Scottlands, China China, Muchos Estados Unidos

* Yes - ( 8 ) - Scouting, Empire of Russia, Snarfia, Ebsotz, Serenarea, New Korrea, New Rhodinia, Great Eurussia    

* No - (0) -  

* Abstain - (0) -

Muchos Estados Unidos wrote:against

Xolox wrote:

Muchos Estados Unidos wrote:against

Interesting choice. I wonder if it has anything to do with the proposal being written by me.

Great Eurussia wrote:

The WA Presidency believes that the Security Council has been very lenient lately on allowing non-member states of the SC to voice their opinions. However, seeing that there are nations that are being disrespectful to certain WASC members and in the whole WASC itself, the WA President believes that our efforts to allow more opinions to be heard even from non-SC members are being abused and as such resorting to very undiplomatic overtures. Hence, the WA Presidency, by virtue of the WASC Act, is asking the Vice Presidency to maintain order, dequorum, and professionalism within the halls of the Security Council.

Therefore, the WA Presidency, for the sake of the integrity and dignity of the Security Council, invokes the privileges of all member states of the SC to maintain their exclusive rights of expressing opinions on matters exclusive solely to the Security Council. Therefore, diplomats from non-SC member states shall be barred from interfering in all forums and discussions of the SC, unless otherwise duly welcomed and invited, without opposition.

Thus, non-member states may opt to privately discuss with SC member states, to lobby or speak on their behalf before the Security Council. If they wish to initiate talks of any matter, the WA Affairs Dialogue Subforum is the only place expected to be and should be and non-SC members have all the freedom to invite SC members on those fora and exchange of discussions.

So ordered.

(If there is a conflicting law, that regulation shall prevail.)

OOC: It is my grave disappointment for nations not to realize that being a member state of the SC is a privilege and exercising such privilege rests SOLELY on those nations in the Security Council, regardless of how other nations view those actions and react on its repercussions. It is also a common sense that SC members deserve the respect necessary as SC members, regardless of their political views or actions within the SC. And critics of certain SC members may have all the freedom to initiate rhetoric against their opponents outside the halls of the SC, however, as civilized sovereign states, non-SC members were never granted the privilege nor right to disrespect any member state of the SC much more within the SC halls itself.

Thus, the VP may request for the immediate deletion of non-member state's posts on any thread of the Security Council. We apologize for any inconvenience, but we find this action necessary for the integrity of the Security Council.

Thank you.

The Holy Empire of Artite wrote:

Xolox wrote:

Muchos Estados Unidos wrote:against

Interesting choice. I wonder if it has anything to do with the proposal being written by me.

Most likely, you see, when those who seek to put international tensions before the betterment of the WA then they really should be kicked off the WASC, this is not the place for them to promote their nation of to affect something because it was proposed by some one they do not like. MEU AND KORREA, perfect examples. They do nothing positive because they have this sense of entitlement, they think that since they are small nations that have big friends they can do what ever they want....


They think they have friends....

Xolox wrote:

Muchos Estados Unidos wrote:against

Interesting choice. I wonder if it has anything to do with the proposal being written by me.

* Pending - (3) - Chivalry, Zanland, China China

* Yes - (9) - Scouting, Empire of Russia, Snarfia, Ebsotz, Serenarea, New Korrea, New Rhodinia, Great Eurussia, Scottlands      

* No - (1) - Muchos Estados Unidos

* Abstain - (0) -