(Passed) WA Forums Act

[Great Eurussia]

---

WORLD ALLIANCE FORUMS ACT
Authored by the Empire of Great Eurussia

Co-authored by the United States of Scouting


This is an OOC proposal.

Following the conversation with Scouting, we would like to jointly initiate a Security Counci enacted law providing guidelines on the conduct within the WA Forums.

Section 1) The official off-site forum of the World Alliance shall be the existing World Alliance Forums.

Section 2) Freedom of speech is recognized throughout the WA Forums provided that its exercise is regulated by existing rules or existing policies per subsequent WA Sub-Forums or per WA thread. All account holders (nations) are expect to maintain a minimum standard of behavior.

Section 3) Any posts or any thread at the WA Forums containing any of the following shall be prohibited:

• illegal
  
• spam
  
• defamatory
  
• obscene
  
• threatening
  
• malicious
  
• griefing
  

Section 4) The following are the applicable punishments or consequences for any blatant violation of any of the prohibition prescribed on Section 3. On the other hand, any executive or judicial action of the Security Council beyond the scope of this Act shall remain superior.

• First Offense - Forum Warning
  
• Second Offense - 1 Day Forum Ban
  
• Third Offense - 3 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fourth Offense - 7 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fifth Offense - Permanent Forum Ban
  

Section 5) It is necessary that offenses shall be counted based on the similarity of the grounds for issuing the said punishments. It is also encouraged tha dedicated thread shall he created to serve as the depository of offenses made to all account holders (nations) for reference.


Section 6) All account holders (nations) at the WA Forums have the privilege to invoke this Act as necessary as it is needed. And shall be acted and weighed upon by any applicable authority available.

Section 7) All account holders (nations) subjected to the provisions of Section 4 may opt for an appeal within one day after the implementation of the punishment/s. Initially, an appeal shall be filed to the Vice Presidency whose decision, if favorable to the concerned account holder (nation) shall have the consent of the Presidency. Otherwise, if the decision of the Vice Presidency is not in favor of the account holder (nation), that decision is final.

Section 8) But as a means of last resort for the account holder (nation) accorded with the particular punishment, in connection to Section 7, it may opt for a last attempt to reverse the decision of the Vice Presidency by seeking an endorsement to overturn the punishment decision of the Vice Presidency from an existing member of the Security Council which shall then be subjected to the approval of the Security Council. Whatever the outcome shall be final and immediately executory.

NOTE: This initial draft is just the outcome of discussions between Scouting and Eurussia, including the adoption of reasonable and applicable NS Rules as initial basis. All sorts of opinion and revisions are very much welcome.

Thank you.

[New Rhodinia]

Considering these warnings will strictly apply to any OOC verbal abuse, New Rhodinia is in favor.

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

---

WORLD ALLIANCE FORUMS ACT
Authored by the Empire of Great Eurussia

Co-authored by the United States of Scouting

This is an OOC proposal.

Following the conversation with Scouting, we would like to jointly initiate a Security Counci enacted law providing guidelines on the conduct within the WA Forums.

Section 1) The official off-site forum of the World Alliance shall be the existing World Alliance Forums.

Section 2) Freedom of speech is recognized throughout the WA Forums provided that its exercise is regulated by existing rules or existing policies per subsequent WA Sub-Forums or per WA thread. All account holders (nations) are expect to maintain a minimum standard of behavior.

Section 3) Any posts or any thread at the WA Forums containing any of the following shall be prohibited:

• illegal
  
• spam
  
• defamatory
  
• obscene
  
• threatening
  
• malicious
  
• griefing
  

Section 4) The following are the applicable punishments or consequences for any blatant violation of any of the prohibition prescribed on Section 3. On the other hand, any executive or judicial action of the Security Council beyond the scope of this Act shall remain superior.

• First Offense - Forum Warning
  
• Second Offense - 1 Day Forum Ban
  
• Third Offense - 3 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fourth Offense - 7 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fifth Offense - Permanent Forum Ban
  

Section 5) It is necessary that offenses shall be counted based on the similarity of the grounds for issuing the said punishments. It is also encouraged tha dedicated thread shall he created to serve as the depository of offenses made to all account holders (nations) for reference.


Section 6) All account holders (nations) at the WA Forums have the privilege to invoke this Act as necessary as it is needed. And shall be acted and weighed upon by any applicable authority available.

NOTE: This initial draft is just the outcome of discussions between Scouting and Eurussia, including the adoption of reasonable and applicable NS Rules as initial basis. All sorts of opinion and revisions are very much welcome.

Thank you.

The legislative proposal is open for three (3) days debate and amendments.

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

[Kingdom of Scottlands]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

I agree just to be fair

[Great Eurussia]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

[Muchos Estados Unidos]

Hmmm.

[Zanland]

favor

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

[Great Eurussia]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

Eurussia suggests that the "punished nation" may be allowed to appeal within 1 day upon receiving that punishment by the Forum Admin. He should make the appeal first to the Vice President of the Security Council who should weigh in, if the decision of the VP is in favor of the "punished nation," it must seek the consent of the President. If the decision of the VP is not in favor to the "punished nation," that decision will remain final.

The last and final attempt of the punished nation is to seek the support of the Security Council by asking a member of the Security Council to propose the revocation of the punishment. If the SC overturns the decisions of the VP and/or the President, that will prevail.

Although these process should remain transparent by way of posting in any appropriate thread at the WA Forums. This is to make sure that all nations will see the proceedings or the reasons of the VP and the appealing nations and all involved, including the President. This is to prevent corruption, accusations of power tripping and to protect the integrity of all the authorities and even the appealing nations involved.

What do you think?

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

Eurussia suggests that the "punished nation" may be allowed to appeal within 1 day upon receiving that punishment by the Forum Admin. He should make the appeal first to the Vice President of the Security Council who should weigh in, if the decision of the VP is in favor of the "punished nation," it must seek the consent of the President. If the decision of the VP is not in favor to the "punished nation," that decision will remain final.

Although these process should remain transparent by way of posting in any appropriate thread at the WA Forums. This is to make sure that all nations will see the proceedings or the reasons of the VP and the appealing nations and all involved, including the President. This is to prevent corruption, accusations of power tripping and to protect the integrity of all the authorities and even the appealing nations involved.

What do you think?

Well, I think if an appeal is accepted, a thread could be opened in WA Affairs Dialogue, allowing the appealing party to answer questions, but I still feel that there should be a private discussion area for moderators, when the questions have been answered, a verdict should be posted in which all of the moderators agree on.

[Serenarea]

Serenarea is in FAVOR.

[Great Eurussia]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

Eurussia suggests that the "punished nation" may be allowed to appeal within 1 day upon receiving that punishment by the Forum Admin. He should make the appeal first to the Vice President of the Security Council who should weigh in, if the decision of the VP is in favor of the "punished nation," it must seek the consent of the President. If the decision of the VP is not in favor to the "punished nation," that decision will remain final.

Although these process should remain transparent by way of posting in any appropriate thread at the WA Forums. This is to make sure that all nations will see the proceedings or the reasons of the VP and the appealing nations and all involved, including the President. This is to prevent corruption, accusations of power tripping and to protect the integrity of all the authorities and even the appealing nations involved.

What do you think?

Well, I think if an appeal is accepted, a thread could be opened in WA Affairs Dialogue, allowing the appealing party to answer questions, but I still feel that there should be a private discussion area for moderators, when the questions have been answered, a verdict should be posted in which all of the moderators agree on.

Well, it will be on the discretion of the VP and all involved. In anyway, the WA Forums has a private messaging feature which will serve that purpose which I think could involve more nations as group messaging. Unlike in the NS, where you need to buy stamps.

In case you missed it, we have included this,

The last and final attempt of the punished nation is to seek the support of the Security Council by asking a member of the Security Council to propose the revocation of the punishment. If the SC overturns the decisions of the VP and/or the President, that will prevail.

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

Eurussia suggests that the "punished nation" may be allowed to appeal within 1 day upon receiving that punishment by the Forum Admin. He should make the appeal first to the Vice President of the Security Council who should weigh in, if the decision of the VP is in favor of the "punished nation," it must seek the consent of the President. If the decision of the VP is not in favor to the "punished nation," that decision will remain final.

Although these process should remain transparent by way of posting in any appropriate thread at the WA Forums. This is to make sure that all nations will see the proceedings or the reasons of the VP and the appealing nations and all involved, including the President. This is to prevent corruption, accusations of power tripping and to protect the integrity of all the authorities and even the appealing nations involved.

What do you think?

Well, I think if an appeal is accepted, a thread could be opened in WA Affairs Dialogue, allowing the appealing party to answer questions, but I still feel that there should be a private discussion area for moderators, when the questions have been answered, a verdict should be posted in which all of the moderators agree on.

Well, it will be on the discretion of the VP and all involved. In anyway, the WA Forums has a private messaging feature which will serve that purpose which I think could involve more nations as group messaging. Unlike in the NS, where you need to buy stamps.

In case you missed it, we have included this,

The last and final attempt of the punished nation is to seek the support of the Security Council by asking a member of the Security Council to propose the revocation of the punishment. If the SC overturns the decisions of the VP and/or the President, that will prevail.

I suppose this is reasonable, we can always amend it in the future if we need to. Let's put it in writing.

[Great Eurussia]

My only suggestion is to have an appeal process.

 We wish to hear the proposed appeal process.

We suggest that if a member who was punished with administrative action wishes to appeal, that they send a message to the President requesting an appeal, via telegram, and the President can either accept or reject the appeal request based on the information given by the requester. Should the President be the one who gave the administrative action in the first place, the appeal can be submitted to the Vice-President who will then decide. If an appeal is accepted, all forum moderators would get together and review the case in a special access forum. Any questions that the moderators may have will be asked via telegram and it's up to the requester to keep up with the telegrams and respond in a timely manner. The appeal process would take no less than 48 hours and no longer than 7 days.

The above is a rough idea on how it would work and we welcome anyone to expand or simply upon it.

Eurussia suggests that the "punished nation" may be allowed to appeal within 1 day upon receiving that punishment by the Forum Admin. He should make the appeal first to the Vice President of the Security Council who should weigh in, if the decision of the VP is in favor of the "punished nation," it must seek the consent of the President. If the decision of the VP is not in favor to the "punished nation," that decision will remain final.

Although these process should remain transparent by way of posting in any appropriate thread at the WA Forums. This is to make sure that all nations will see the proceedings or the reasons of the VP and the appealing nations and all involved, including the President. This is to prevent corruption, accusations of power tripping and to protect the integrity of all the authorities and even the appealing nations involved.

What do you think?

Well, I think if an appeal is accepted, a thread could be opened in WA Affairs Dialogue, allowing the appealing party to answer questions, but I still feel that there should be a private discussion area for moderators, when the questions have been answered, a verdict should be posted in which all of the moderators agree on.

Well, it will be on the discretion of the VP and all involved. In anyway, the WA Forums has a private messaging feature which will serve that purpose which I think could involve more nations as group messaging. Unlike in the NS, where you need to buy stamps.

In case you missed it, we have included this,

The last and final attempt of the punished nation is to seek the support of the Security Council by asking a member of the Security Council to propose the revocation of the punishment. If the SC overturns the decisions of the VP and/or the President, that will prevail.

I suppose this is reasonable, we can always amend it in the future if we need to. Let's put it in writing.

Noted.

[Great Eurussia]

---

WORLD ALLIANCE FORUMS ACT
Authored by the Empire of Great Eurussia

Co-authored by the United States of Scouting


This is an OOC proposal.

Following the conversation with Scouting, we would like to jointly initiate a Security Counci enacted law providing guidelines on the conduct within the WA Forums.

Section 1) The official off-site forum of the World Alliance shall be the existing World Alliance Forums.

Section 2) Freedom of speech is recognized throughout the WA Forums provided that its exercise is regulated by existing rules or existing policies per subsequent WA Sub-Forums or per WA thread. All account holders (nations) are expect to maintain a minimum standard of behavior.

Section 3) Any posts or any thread at the WA Forums containing any of the following shall be prohibited:

• illegal
  
• spam
  
• defamatory
  
• obscene
  
• threatening
  
• malicious
  
• griefing
  

Section 4) The following are the applicable punishments or consequences for any blatant violation of any of the prohibition prescribed on Section 3. On the other hand, any executive or judicial action of the Security Council beyond the scope of this Act shall remain superior.

• First Offense - Forum Warning
  
• Second Offense - 1 Day Forum Ban
  
• Third Offense - 3 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fourth Offense - 7 Day Forum Ban
  
• Fifth Offense - Permanent Forum Ban
  

Section 5) It is necessary that offenses shall be counted based on the similarity of the grounds for issuing the said punishments. It is also encouraged tha dedicated thread shall he created to serve as the depository of offenses made to all account holders (nations) for reference.


Section 6) All account holders (nations) at the WA Forums have the privilege to invoke this Act as necessary as it is needed. And shall be acted and weighed upon by any applicable authority available.

Section 7) All account holders (nations) subjected to the provisions of Section 4 may opt for an appeal within one day after the implementation of the punishment/s. Initially, an appeal shall be filed to the Vice Presidency whose decision, if favorable to the concerned account holder (nation) shall have the consent of the Presidency. Otherwise, if the decision of the Vice Presidency is not in favor of the account holder (nation), that decision is final.

Section 8) But as a means of last resort for the account holder (nation) accorded with the particular punishment, in connection to Section 7, it may opt for a last attempt to reverse the decision of the Vice Presidency by seeking an endorsement to overturn the punishment decision of the Vice Presidency from an existing member of the Security Council which shall then be subjected to the approval of the Security Council. Whatever the outcome shall be final and immediately executory.

NOTE: This initial draft is just the outcome of discussions between Scouting and Eurussia, including the adoption of reasonable and applicable NS Rules as initial basis. All sorts of opinion and revisions are very much welcome.

Thank you.

LATEST amended VERSION of the proposal.

[DPRNK]

I support

[Muchos Estados Unidos]

FOR

[Kingdom of Scottlands]

Favor

[Great Eurussia]

The proposal is now subject to 2 days vote. There are already 6 in favor with no opposition nor abstentions. 

Thank you.

[Kingdom of Ireland]

Favor

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

Favor

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

With apprx. 12 hours remaining, the following WASC Members have voted in favor:

Empire of Russia
Scottlands
MEU
New Korrea
Serenarea
Zanland
New Rhodinia
Scouting


For a total of 8 votes in favor, none against, and no abstentions.

Pending Votes:

Ebsotz
Snarfia
Great Eurussia

[Snarfian Federation]

In Favor

[UnitedStatesOfScouting]

With 9 votes in favor, and none against/abstentions, the "WA Forums Act" is hereby passed!

[Sponsored content]