ThaeciaBoard

Also Ackuzay why don't you make a General Assembly thread about your dispatch and the resolution?

Swedish-norwegian kingdoms wrote:

Also Ackuzay why don't you make a General Assembly thread about your dispatch and the resolution?

I'm working on it at this time. I will link when ready. We have achieved less than 90% for vote on the microplastics resolution. 80% is the next goal pending a legality challenge.

Ignore the thing above this post it was a mistake.

Ackuzay wrote:

I urge our region to reconsider our position on Reducing Microplastics and vote against the current resolution at vote "Reducing Microplastics" due to illegality and possible catastrophic consequences. This is outlined in an official dispatch here.

At the time of this writing our region is over 90% for a resolution that would cause the WA itself to violate Section 1, Article 1 of the rights and duties of WA states outlined in debate at the official debate thread.

Currently our region is over 90% for a resolution that would cause the WA itself to violate Section 1, Article 1 of the rights and duties of WA states.

Official Dispatch

I think that while the involvement on the RMB is great, as expressed in private, I don't think these are entirely convincing reasons for a legality challenge. Much of the legality issues raised revolve around "NatSov", which, when writing a repeal, cannot be used as the basis of the argument.

Further on that NatSov point; I believe that immunities are automatically granted by all international law, after all, it would basically paralyse the entire WA without it. Putting it alone on this proposal, GAR 2 still gives the impression that immunities by national law must always apply to any resolution by default.

Every other proposal in the past hasn't specifically said "this is an immunity to GAR 2" which I believe makes it clear that specifically stating it is not required for legality. Thus it must be by all logic automatically granted or every single resolution would be in contradiction to GAR 2.

GAR 7 does also indeed right of all employees to a safe working environment. However, this is a moral reasoning to vote against, not a legal reason, imo, because the argument presented is some nations may not have done the research to be able to identify a microplastic. Research not have being complete may be seen as to not constitute a safe environment, but it is of my opinion that it does not directly contradict GAR 7, thus I don't believe the proposal at hand is illegal.

You provide some interesting moral points for voting against, though, such as the lack of research completed. However I'm not a member of GenSec, nor do I ever aspire to be, so I would leave this in their hands. Simply sharing my thoughts.

Ackuzay wrote:

I am more than happy to help out as long as I can count on your support in voting against "reducing microplastics ." Although, I feel the need to state, my nation seems old, but my participation throughout the years has been nearly non-existent. I may not be the best nation to offer help, but feel free to send a telegram with a detailed request.

I mean I just want to help this region (bc im actually not in the wa 😎😎😎😎)

Swedish-norwegian kingdoms wrote:

I mean I just want to help this region (bc im actually not in the wa 😎😎😎😎)

Any nation can easily give support against Reducing Microplastics without being a WA state by publishing a dispatch detailing why your nation is against the resolution and discussing it on our RMB, RMB's our region has an embassy with that you can post in, and the General Assembly thread. Our region also has a #wa-debate channel in discord where you can try and convince Brototh that our region needs to re-align against "Reducing Microplastics."

Have a good day, Thaecia! I am having a great one!

As you know, we are celebrating Autism Acceptance Week! Now, here are some facts about autism,

Fact of the day: Eugen Bleuler, a Swiss psychiatrist, invented the term "autism" and "schizophrenia".

In 1943, Dr. Leo Kanner published the first systematic description of early infantile autism. Donald Triplett is the first case of Autism, he was observed by Dr. Kanner.

I will sleep now goodnight

Broustan

Broustan wrote:

:o that me

:fljushed: wait, fr?

Andusre wrote:

:fljushed: wait, fr?

i dunno lemme check brb

waffles