All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Last week
-
-
Now, you are both masked as Delegate. If it's ok, I will leave your mask until she officially overtakes you in endorsements.
-
No problem. You might want to mask Neenee as Delegate while you're at it.
-
Probably Zazumo will be my new TWP nation. I'm moving Terra Zazumo back to my region where it's the founder. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience.
-
Done I'm slowly getting caught up with things. Thanks for being so patient.
-
Rep. of Wenceworth joined the community
-
Sword BJ joined the community
- Earlier
-
2 new cits for masking: Craiolia and United Orthodox States Thanks in advance!
-
United Orthodox States changed their profile photo
-
Tea-island-systems joined the community
-
Bymaria joined the community
-
Craiolia joined the community
-
Overthinkers changed their profile photo
-
Could my Speaker masking be removed and replaced with Guardian? Thank you.
-
United Orthodox States joined the community
-
Makris changed their profile photo
-
Makris joined the community
-
Nuclear Apocalypse: What you need to know
Westwind replied to Xerox Prime's topic in General Discussion
Although someone else's gravedig can be used as an opportunity for a traditional TWP threadjack. So next time a Nuclear Apocalypse approaches, don't forget the wisdom of Dr. Strangelove. "Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy, the FEAR to attack." Be sure they will fear TWP before the next apocalypse! -
Zazumo changed their profile photo
-
Aerilia joined the community
-
Liberate Boston was passed 13,494 votes to 1,552
-
Nuclear Apocalypse: What you need to know
Darkesia replied to Xerox Prime's topic in General Discussion
Gravedigging without comic intent is generally frowned upon. That being said, we are a mostly "hands-off" admin team, so I"m not locking the thread. Only pointing out that you are 15 months late with your response. -
I have spoken with Greater Dienstad on several occasions. I have found GD to be extremely helpful and friendly. I have gotten advice on starting/expanding rp in TWP and Equilism. They are willing to work hard to assist regions build rp. If they didn't know the answer, they found people who did. This person has been an active part of NS rp for a long time helping many. I fully endorse Commend Greater Dienstad!
- 1 reply
-
- 1
-
-
A commendation proposal for a region that is known for its RP achievements. From what I have gathered, at least in the context of RP, they are quite commendable. So unless one dislikes the idea of commending a region for RP only, there isn't much of a reason to oppose this. discussion thread
-
.thumb.jpg.1410be88be68837e1d0a9e9a38b10838.jpg)
Nuclear Apocalypse: What you need to know
Rizorien replied to Xerox Prime's topic in General Discussion
I totally agree, just saying. I'd rather get burned by TNP TSP TEP than someone in my own freaking region -
Looks cool to me. Go for it!
-
Rizorien changed their profile photo
-
Kersoldin joined the community
-
[PASSED] Preventing the Illicit Trade of Cultural Artefacts
Arotania replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
Preventing the Illicit Trade of Cultural Artefacts was passed 13,524 votes to 1,968 -
I read that as "add to the Trolls".
-
[AT VOTE] Asbestos Consumption, Disposal and Worker Protection
Arotania posted a topic in GA resolutions
In general the 'Workplace Safety Standards Act' (GA#7) already exists. This proposal mostly consists of a hefty amount of micromanaging. The 6 years in (3) seem completely arbitrary, same for the number in (6). (7) limits disposal to putting the asbestos in a landfill. Yet other methods exist, like thermal decomposition that simply transforms asbestos into non-hazardous substances by sufficient heating. Especially for the omission in this last part I recommend to vote against this. discussion thread -
Cauveryland joined the community
-
[PASSED] Preventing the Illicit Trade of Cultural Artefacts
Arotania replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
First of all: nice to have you chime in here! For human remains - there was a proposal in the works that would deal with human remains, burials, graves, etc. specifically. Not quite sure what the status of that is currently. But I think this could really be a topic that would fit a resolution of its own, dealing with more than international smuggling. As for the international part - the WA inherently is an international organization. The faction of people that put an emphasis on national sovereignty and would like the WA to legislate on as little as possible is significant. Also the 'Disturbed..' clause is meant to reference Daesh/ISIL. The proposal's author linked some sources on how they earn significant amounts of money in this way. So the author also had this in mind when writing the proposal. While a more comprehensive approach might be warranted it was outside of the initial motivation and would perhaps not lead to such widespread support. At least it doesn't block further legislation on this topic. I think 4c addresses this. Not a native speaker, so sometimes a few minutiae fly over my head. Here you can find the author's explanation for that part's wording. The way I read it, there is room for future resolutions on more specific cases and the author intends to possibly write this in the future. 7 starts with 'Invites', thus making the whole section non-mandatory. The same would be the case for 'encourages' or 'urges'. Mandatory legislation would have to start with 'requires', 'mandates' or something similar. Basically the section should be read as 'It would be nice if you ....'. When this reached queue and vote I was asleep and when I logged in this already had support by the majority of the GCR's delegates, so not really in the realm of possibility to turn this around right now. Depending on how I managed to address your concerns (and your own interest of course) there is always the possibility to try to repeal this. Beside of this, if you are interested, I can TG you if other anthropology-related proposals come up. We had 'Protecting Minority Languages' by the same author some time ago. By the sound of it, at least they will be the source of topically related proposals from time to time. -
[SUBMITTED] Individual Free Expression Guarantee
Arotania replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
OK, I have sobered sufficiently and on a (short :P) break from football. This proposal in the meantime had reached quorum but then Sciongrad launched a countercampaign and it lost a couple of delegate votes. Currently it needs seven more approval with seven hours to spare. In any case the current proposal still has more than a day left on the clock for voting. So no surprise votes possible. Now first of all, thanks for sharing your thoughts. The 'communicate information' part indeed is pretty fuzzy. This seems to be one of the more contentious points from what I gather from the onsite forum. From my purely personal view I like to tie this to power relations, i.e. there should be very few, if any at all, limitations on how you can criticize anyone in a position of power, especially if it is directly over you. This naturally includes governments. This proposal omits all nuances and leaves itself very open to 'creative' interpretations, though. Yes, that section is at least a bit too vague. All in all the devil is, as so often, in the details. This proposal seems to have fallen into the trap of hastily adding exceptions to appease certain commenters. No red line or explanation why exactly these exceptions were chosen and formulated in this way. This ultimately also led to the old resolution's repeal. While a good chunk of the basics seem to be a good foundation, I really got the expression that this was submitted too early and hastily and that it could use a lot of work on its minutiae. Assuring to know that I am not alone in the region with this impression. If this reaches vote there will not be support from all sides. Even a repeal attempt has been anounced for the case this passes. This needs more work (and lose the useless definitions), all PSAs I am going to put out will reflect this. Let's see how this proceeds. If anyone else wants to add to the topic, feel free to respond, I will leave this thread open, even if this fails to reach quorum. This topic is far from being exhaustively dealt with. -
The regions mentioned in the 'Observing' clause are Kaiserreich and The Invaders. So while this is not exactly a high priority region, the liberation should be OK to let pass. discussion thread
-
Commend Helaw was passed 12,783 votes to 2,258
-
[SUBMITTED] Individual Free Expression Guarantee
LiberNovusAmericae replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
I think section 5(2) is also too vague, and could possibly be exploited to justify censorship of anti-war sentiment. It is understandable to exclude classified military secrets from free speech protection, but that section is much more broad than that. -
3to5.thumb.png.b7416c5ada7fec4a5276545f55f3c503.png)
[PASSED] Preventing the Illicit Trade of Cultural Artefacts
Fujai replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
Being in the anthropology field, this subject is very near and dear to my heart, although there are some parts of this proposal that are cause for concern. (1a) The definition of artifact is incredibly broad and could cause some problems, namely in the sheer volume of artifacts that would require repatriation. Importantly, it does not specifically cover human remains, but definitely should. It also does not define who gets to decide if an object holds this "importance", so a powerful group could conceivably attempt to deny a culture their history if they're not able to define their own importance. (1b) My most significant grievance is that this doesn't seem to combat artifacts that are stolen but not moved internationally. That's a very big problem, especially considering artifacts from Indigenous Peoples. (5) It should be specified that "significant concerns" of preservation need to be arbitrated by WATCH, otherwise nations will try to pull a Parthenon Marbles scheme. (6), (10) All stolen artifacts must be returned to their rightful, regardless of when they were stolen, and allowing member nations to arbitrate the status of artifacts independently seems to me to endanger future repatriation. If a stolen artifact is arbitrated as legal, then would it not be possibly to repatriate it via future resolutions? Or does section 10 cover this (or am I just reading it wrong)? (7) It should be noted that creating an inventory of every cultural artifact could take massive amounts of time and money, something that not all nations have. These can prove exceptionally difficult, as in the past careful inventories were not kept, and provides no support, advisory or monetary, from WATCH in doing this (although WATCH could create their own policies related to this). Overall I would recommend voting against in favor of more revision and resubmission. -
[SUBMITTED] Individual Free Expression Guarantee
Davelands replied to Arotania's topic in GA resolutions
Way too broad of a right. Who decides what is intimidating, malicious, and hateful commentary? The state? If so then what is to stop them from labeling criticism of the government as hateful commentary? -
This is the first in line for the replacement proposals for 'Freedom of Expression' that was just repealed. While this is not yet in queue, this is a serious first proposal for what could be multiple resolutions that would replace the old ones. Current motion seems to be in the direction that the old resolution is split into smaller parts to make the whole thing more robust. This proposal therefore limits itself to individual speech. Group expressions (say for example ACLU) are left for other proposals to pursue. The same goes for juristic persons. Now this proposal at hand lays the ground for freedom of expression and against compelled speech (2). 3 establishes general anti-censorship regulations, naturally excempting non-public state communications (think classified information of intelligence services). 4 prohibits censorship based on mediums, i.e. not in newspapers, the internet or something different. Points 2-4 are absolutely well done and couldn't really be improved. Since no freedom of expression can be completely without exceptions (the classical yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre comes to mind), 5 provides permissable exceptions. I am currently a bit too much intoxicated to go into detail there, perhaps we can have a discussion on this list. 6 addresses the main point of the repeal (don't want tobacco sales men advertise to children). 1 is a bit bizarre, as the defined words aren't used. Depending on how this goes and what other proposal come out of the repeal, it might be sensible to establish, what the region thinks is acceptible in regard to this topic. I (or anyone else interested) might push the impending proposals in certain directions. So any thoughts and comments are very welcome. discussion thread
