(Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Shockwave Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:35 pm

As author of this proposal, we are In Favor!

Apepistan Fri Apr 10, 2015 9:47 pm

As a supporter of setting clear rules for the WA and the WASC, we are in favor of this proposal.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:04 am

To clarify, are these sections being ADDED on, or edited?

Shockwave Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:07 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:To clarify, are these sections being ADDED on, or edited?

These should be added on.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:11 am

Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.

Shockwave Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:14 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.

Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:17 am

Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.
Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

People mess up, it happens. Even with Politicians. They do shady stuff, but do you see them getting kicked out of office for having a speeding ticket while driving their personal vehicle? It's my personal opinion. If it doesn't change, I won't be submitting a vote, as I feel that it's too strict.

Shockwave Sat Apr 11, 2015 12:31 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.
Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

People mess up, it happens. Even with Politicians. They do shady stuff, but do you see them getting kicked out of office for having a speeding ticket while driving their personal vehicle? It's my personal opinion. If it doesn't change, I won't be submitting a vote, as I feel that it's too strict.

Well then don't, I could care less right now.......

You want it your way then make your own damn proposal and stop criticizing mine......

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Apr 11, 2015 7:46 am

Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.
Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

People mess up, it happens. Even with Politicians. They do shady stuff, but do you see them getting kicked out of office for having a speeding ticket while driving their personal vehicle? It's my personal opinion. If it doesn't change, I won't be submitting a vote, as I feel that it's too strict.
Well then don't, I could care less right now.......

You want it your way then make your own damn proposal and stop criticizing mine......

I support your proposal and I simply think that a SMALL part of it be changed. I don't want to hurt the proposal in the voting so I won't issue a vote at all, as abstention would be equal to voting against.

Shockwave Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:54 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.
Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

People mess up, it happens. Even with Politicians. They do shady stuff, but do you see them getting kicked out of office for having a speeding ticket while driving their personal vehicle? It's my personal opinion. If it doesn't change, I won't be submitting a vote, as I feel that it's too strict.
Well then don't, I could care less right now.......

You want it your way then make your own damn proposal and stop criticizing mine......

I support your proposal and I simply think that a SMALL part of it be changed. I don't want to hurt the proposal in the voting so I won't issue a vote at all, as abstention would be equal to voting against.

That small part is one of the biggest points in there. If you choose to not vote then don't, just don't expect me to change it because you find one little fault in there and you won't bother creating your own.

Kingdom of Ireland Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:17 am

in favor

Great Eurussia Sun Apr 12, 2015 11:30 pm

Lockdownn wrote:
Section (1) States either already on the Security Council or not will either be removed/banned or just removed for a specified amount of time by the remover if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been convicted by the court of breaking any law enforced by the Security Council within a (1) month time frame from the date of conviction/conclusion of law.

Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

Sub-Section (3) The nation has not made an effort to improve/control its' relations with any nation(s) in this region, proper grammar, obscene language, any other such threatening attitude towards a nation not including RP matters.

Section (2) States will not be allowed on the Council or will be immediately removed if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been perma-banned from the WA forum.

Sub-section (2) The nation has been removed more then once for any other offense but will then have to either prove they are worthy of a seat back on the council, or convince the council as a whole they have learned from their mistakes.

This would be an added amendment for both member states, and states wanting to gain a seat.

This is not affiliated with New Rhodinia's proposal, this is an independent proposal

The legislative proposal may now be debated within three (3) days.

Great Eurussia Sun Apr 12, 2015 11:37 pm

Lockdownn wrote:
Section (1) States either already on the Security Council or not will either be removed/banned or just removed for a specified amount of time by the remover if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been convicted by the court of breaking any law enforced by the Security Council within a (1) month time frame from the date of conviction/conclusion of law.

Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

Sub-Section (3) The nation has not made an effort to improve/control its' relations with any nation(s) in this region, proper grammar, obscene language, any other such threatening attitude towards a nation not including RP matters.

Section (2) States will not be allowed on the Council or will be immediately removed if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been perma-banned from the WA forum.

Sub-section (2) The nation has been removed more then once for any other offense but will then have to either prove they are worthy of a seat back on the council, or convince the council as a whole they have learned from their mistakes.

This would be an added amendment for both member states, and states wanting to gain a seat.

This is not affiliated with New Rhodinia's proposal, this is an independent proposal

Eurussia is not in favor. We would like to maintain and insist on the freedom of the Security Council to decide and determine the length of its banjections, if any, based on the merits of an issue. Since not all international laws have the same gravity of sensitivity.

Muchos Estados Unidos Mon Apr 13, 2015 8:04 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

I believe that this should be changed to ban only, as a warning is suppose to be as it says, a warning, your one chance.
Well if you cannot follow the rules then why should you be on a position to make the rules.......

People mess up, it happens. Even with Politicians. They do shady stuff, but do you see them getting kicked out of office for having a speeding ticket while driving their personal vehicle? It's my personal opinion. If it doesn't change, I won't be submitting a vote, as I feel that it's too strict.
Well then don't, I could care less right now.......

You want it your way then make your own damn proposal and stop criticizing mine......

I support your proposal and I simply think that a SMALL part of it be changed. I don't want to hurt the proposal in the voting so I won't issue a vote at all, as abstention would be equal to voting against.

Well I am against.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Wed Apr 15, 2015 3:59 am

Republic of New Korrea wrote:NO. Shouldn't this be dismissed? Lockdownn is gone.

As he submitted the proposal while in office as his continent's representative, this proposal will be allowed. (Doesn't look like it will be passed anyway, so you have nothing to worry about)

Serenarea Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:48 am

Serenarea is in FAVOR

I.S.I.S Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:19 pm

Can I still vote?

Great Eurussia Thu Apr 16, 2015 8:38 am

I.S.I.S wrote:Can I still vote?

Being a secondary seat holder and having your primary seat holder voted already, NO, you cannot vote anymore on this particular proposal.

Great Eurussia Thu Apr 16, 2015 9:55 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Lockdownn wrote:
Section (1) States either already on the Security Council or not will either be removed/banned or just removed for a specified amount of time by the remover if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been convicted by the court of breaking any law enforced by the Security Council within a (1) month time frame from the date of conviction/conclusion of law.

Sub-Section (2) The nation has been either banned or warned or both, within a (1) month time frame since the date of the ban/warn.

Sub-Section (3) The nation has not made an effort to improve/control its' relations with any nation(s) in this region, proper grammar, obscene language, any other such threatening attitude towards a nation not including RP matters.

Section (2) States will not be allowed on the Council or will be immediately removed if and only if:

Sub-Section (1) The nation has been perma-banned from the WA forum.

Sub-section (2) The nation has been removed more then once for any other offense but will then have to either prove they are worthy of a seat back on the council, or convince the council as a whole they have learned from their mistakes.

This would be an added amendment for both member states, and states wanting to gain a seat.

This is not affiliated with New Rhodinia's proposal, this is an independent proposal

The legislative proposal may now be debated within three (3) days.

This may now be voted within two (2) days.

Great Eurussia Thu Apr 16, 2015 10:04 am

Eurussia abstains.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:46 am

As Author dismissed, this is hereby dismissed.

Sponsored content

(Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

(Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

NOTICE

Eurussian Vote

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act

NOTICE

Eurussian Vote

NOTICE

Re: (Dismissed) WASC Amendment Act