(Passed) Inactive Regional Associations Act

In effort to cut down the amount of Inactive Regional Associations and allow for those who are active to re-create inactive associations, I bring forth the proposal to resolve this issue.




A Regional Association is considered to be inactive when:

1. Sixty days without a new post in their Association thread have passed.
   
2. The Founder of the association has left the region.
   
3. The association only has two or less members remaining.
   

The process to re-locate the Association to the section of the forums called "<< BIN >>" shall be as follows:

1. If sixty days has passed without a new post, the President of the WASC may move the thread to the << BIN >> at his/her own discretion.
   
2. If the Founder of the association has left, the President must make a post notifying the association members of this fact and the association must come up with a new founder or 'leader' within seventy-two hours of notification, otherwise the President may move the thread to the << BIN >> at his/her own discretion.
   
3. If the association has only two or less members, the President must notify the Association giving them seventy-two hours to gain another member. If the association fails to do so within the time provided, the President may move the thread to the << BIN >> at his/her own discretion.
   

Any Governmental Associations bearing the official "World Alliance" title, such as the "World Alliance Health Agency" maintain exemption from being removed and are subject to the administration of the WASC as a whole in order to be removed, seeing as it is a Governmental Entity.


Newly Formed Regional Associations will be given a grace period of thirty days to raise their membership above two members before a notification is given under Section 2 of the Removal Qualifications. Newly Formed Regional Associations will be marked with the tag "[Under-Construction]. If after a notification is given to a Regional Association, under Section 2 of the Removal Qualifications, they will be permitted to a week's worth of a 'reconstruction' phase marked by the tag, "[Rebooting]". In other words, they will be given a grand total of ten days to raise their membership above two in order to be considered in compliance with this law.  


When a Regional Association is archived, the founder or owner of the Association may appeal this decision to the WASC within forty-eight hours. In order for the WASC to hear the case, a member of the WASC must second the motion, within the forty-eight hour period, to appeal and then it will be brought forth for discussion and voting by the Security Council. If the appeal is successful, the Regional Association will simply be moved back into the Regional Associations section of the forums. Following this, for whatever reason the Regional Association was archived, the Association will be given a fourteen day grace period to resolve whatever issues caused the archival if it was originally just.


After a Regional Association has been archived, it cannot be re-created for a period of fourteen days by non-members and a period of thirty days for its original founder and members at the time of its archival.



"Regional Associations" only refer to those associations classified under the "Regional Associations" section of the forums.


Please note, this is an OOC or "Out-Of-Character" proposal aimed at giving the ability to the President of the WASC the ability to clean up inactive or old associations allowing for active members to re-create those associations. Any associations relocated to the << BIN >> are not seen as in-character actions taken by the President. They simply cease to exist until a new founder claims the association.



This proposal may now be debated on for a period of three days.

1) I'm against an association being declared "inactive" if there are less than or equal to two members within it. Some may fall on hard times, and may have a dip in membership.

2) I'd like for you to include in this proposal: [Under Construction], and a [Rebooting] tag so we can signify which associations are working on improving and which are not.

3) I would like to suggest a separate archive for regional associations labelled [Regional Associations] as there are many that have good content and it would be easy to have these threads become lost in the other jumble of threads withing <>.

Shockwave wrote:1) I'm against an association being declared "inactive" if there are less than or equal to two members within it. Some may fall on hard times, and may have a dip in membership.

2) I'd like for you to include in this proposal: [Under Construction], and a [Rebooting] tag so we can signify which associations are working on improving and which are not.

3) I would like to suggest a separate archive for regional associations labelled [Regional Associations] as there are many that have good content and it would be easy to have these threads become lost in the other jumble of threads withing <>.

I'll include #2 into the proposal and #3 will have to be handled by Great Eurussia and I'll go through the channels with that as that's a Forum Moderation issue, and not in the realm of the WASC. If you can come up with an alternative for #1 I'm willing to consider it.

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
I'll include #2 into the proposal and #3 will have to be handled by Great Eurussia and I'll go through the channels with that as that's a Forum Moderation issue, and not in the realm of the WASC. If you can come up with an alternative for #1 I'm willing to consider it.

My suggestion is that if it's below two members then it must either be labeled [rebooting] or we see an active membership campaign.

If the founder isn't trying to reboot or advertise their association then archive it.

Shockwave wrote:

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
I'll include #2 into the proposal and #3 will have to be handled by Great Eurussia and I'll go through the channels with that as that's a Forum Moderation issue, and not in the realm of the WASC. If you can come up with an alternative for #1 I'm willing to consider it.

My suggestion is that if it's below two members then it must either be labeled [rebooting] or we see an active membership campaign.

If the founder isn't trying to reboot or advertise their association then archive it.

Taking into consideration of your suggestions, I've come up with this:

Section 4

Newly Formed Regional Associations will be given a grace period of thirty days to raise their membership above two members before a notification is given under Section 2 of the Removal Qualifications. Newly Formed Regional Associations will be marked with the tag "[Under-Construction]. If after a notification is given to a Regional Association, under Section 2 of the Removal Qualifications, they will be permitted to a week's worth of a 'reconstruction' phase marked by the tag, "[Rebooting]". In other words, they will be given a grand total of ten days to raise their membership above two in order to be considered in compliance with this law.

Looks great.

The Republic of Corinthos supports this proposal.

I believe that there should be another passage about re-founding of an association, to prevent a loophole. This way, associations that fail to increase their numbers can be disbanded, however, there's nothing that prevents them from reforming their association the next day.

Corinthos wrote:The Republic of Corinthos supports this proposal.

I believe that there should be another passage about re-founding of an association, to prevent a loophole. This way, associations that fail to increase their numbers can be disbanded, however, there's nothing that prevents them from reforming their association the next day.

Excellent point.

Section 5

After a Regional Association has been archived, it cannot be re-created for a period of fourteen days by non-members and a period of thirty days for its original founder and members at the time of its archival.

This is the solution I've come up with to close that loophole.

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:

Section 5

After a Regional Association has been archived, it cannot be re-created for a period of fourteen days by non-members and a period of thirty days for its original founder and members at the time of its archival.

This is the solution I've come up with to close that loophole.

Thank you. I believe with this passage, this proposal is complete. I see no need for further modifications.

Regarding that new point, what would stop someone from essentially stealing someone else s idea by just waiting the required 14 days?

Also, could we include a new point in this proposal sating that if you do not want to wait the required amount of time, then you may be given special permission by the security council once voted on like any other proposal?

If the nation that is proposing the special permission is on the Security Council, then they should not be allowed to vote.

Snarfia Abstains for now...

Togana supports this.

Scouting is in favor

The Republic of Corinthos votes in favour of this proposal.

Shockwave wrote:At the moment I'm against.

If you can provide an explanation, perhaps I can answer some of your questions. It was just yesterday that you said it "Looks great". What changed?

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:

Shockwave wrote:At the moment I'm against.

If you can provide an explanation, perhaps I can answer some of your questions. It was just yesterday that you said it "Looks great". What changed?

Shockwave wrote:Regarding that new point, what would stop someone from essentially stealing someone else s idea by just waiting the required 14 days?

Also, could we include a new point in this proposal sating that if you do not want to wait the required amount of time, then you may be given special permission by the security council once voted on like any other proposal?

If the nation that is proposing the special permission is on the Security Council, then they should not be allowed to vote.

Sorry, when I posted my position on this proposal, I was in a rush. I forgot to say that I was abstaining, yet those votes do the same thing anyways.

What I quoted above is my response to the point brought up by you and Corinthos.

Shockwave wrote:

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:

Shockwave wrote:At the moment I'm against.

If you can provide an explanation, perhaps I can answer some of your questions. It was just yesterday that you said it "Looks great". What changed?

Shockwave wrote:Regarding that new point, what would stop someone from essentially stealing someone else s idea by just waiting the required 14 days?

Also, could we include a new point in this proposal sating that if you do not want to wait the required amount of time, then you may be given special permission by the security council once voted on like any other proposal?

If the nation that is proposing the special permission is on the Security Council, then they should not be allowed to vote.

Sorry, when I posted my position on this proposal, I was in a rush. I forgot to say that I was abstaining, yet those votes do the same thing anyways.

What I quoted above is my response to the point brought up by you and Corinthos.

Sorry, I believe I missed this.

If the person loses their Regional Association, it's pretty clear they probably didn't have enough interest to try and hold on to it. However, I would be willing to draft in an appeal process to appeal decisions the previous owner felt were unlawful or if he/she was targeted, etc. Would this suffice?

Most certainly; thank you for the explanation!

Therefore, I'm hereby In Favor of this proposal.

Serenarea is in favor.

As per Shockwave's request, I've amended the proposal:

Section 5

When a Regional Association is archived, the founder or owner of the Association may appeal this decision to the WASC within forty-eight hours. In order for the WASC to hear the case, a member of the WASC must second the motion, within the forty-eight hour period, to appeal and then it will be brought forth for discussion and voting by the Security Council. If the appeal is successful, the Regional Association will simply be moved back into the Regional Associations section of the forums. Following this, for whatever reason the Regional Association was archived, the Association will be given a fourteen day grace period to resolve whatever issues caused the archival if it was originally just.

This proposal may now be voted on for a period of two days.

FOR

With six votes in favour and one abstention this proposal passes!