Zachnia
07-01-2004, 04:10
I have voted against this proposal, and I encourage all other UN members to do the same, on the grounds of too many editorial flaws in the works. Let's take a look at the proposal itself for a second...
Come on you know what i mean. these things are the bane of our existence. If they were band, it would create world peace as everyone would walk around in a happy daze knowing that there internet surfing will be trouble free.
Now let's take a look at a UN proposal the has already been passed called Resolution 245A Proper Grammar...
Too long have UN Proposals been filled with improper grammar. One can scarcely move between two pages of proposals without seeing some sort of grammar or spelling error. People need to realize that "your" and "you're" are NOT the same word. People also need to realize that "to" and "too" are also not the same word, and that the "Vaticant" does not exist. Any country that files a proposal with such language shall henceforth be banned from proposals until such time as they understand the English language and can properly convey their ideas.
Obviously, the proposal has many grammatical, capitalization, and spelling errors, including using "i" instead of "I," and "band" instead of "banned" So, according to 245A, we must NOT vote for this proposal.
Also, let's take a deeper look at the proposal. It never proposes anything! It says we'd be more peaceful without them, and that they're the bane of our existance, clearly implying a distaste for pop-up adds. However, it never officially proposes that it should be banned, it never proposes anything in fact. So, let's follow the footsteps 245A has set for us, and reject this proposal, and perhaps accept it actually is a proposal.
Come on you know what i mean. these things are the bane of our existence. If they were band, it would create world peace as everyone would walk around in a happy daze knowing that there internet surfing will be trouble free.
Now let's take a look at a UN proposal the has already been passed called Resolution 245A Proper Grammar...
Too long have UN Proposals been filled with improper grammar. One can scarcely move between two pages of proposals without seeing some sort of grammar or spelling error. People need to realize that "your" and "you're" are NOT the same word. People also need to realize that "to" and "too" are also not the same word, and that the "Vaticant" does not exist. Any country that files a proposal with such language shall henceforth be banned from proposals until such time as they understand the English language and can properly convey their ideas.
Obviously, the proposal has many grammatical, capitalization, and spelling errors, including using "i" instead of "I," and "band" instead of "banned" So, according to 245A, we must NOT vote for this proposal.
Also, let's take a deeper look at the proposal. It never proposes anything! It says we'd be more peaceful without them, and that they're the bane of our existance, clearly implying a distaste for pop-up adds. However, it never officially proposes that it should be banned, it never proposes anything in fact. So, let's follow the footsteps 245A has set for us, and reject this proposal, and perhaps accept it actually is a proposal.