NationStates Jolt Archive

Alright, I am putting the draft and resolution here:

Here is the resolution I wish to appeal:

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Automobile Manufacturing
Proposed by: Kibombwe

Description: We, the people of Kibombwe, propose that every nation should start developing hydrogen powered cars. We have polluted the air for too long -- it needs to stop. By passing this resolution we will be able to accompish these three things.

1. Less acid rain. Acid rain a problem that we feel should be stopped. It is especially a problem in the Northeast corner of the U.S.A. The Northeast is a place rich in historical buildings which acid rain damages. We passed a "PROTECT HISTORICAL SITES." This would only furthermore protect historical sites.

2. We wouldn't have to use as much oil. Oil is a nonrenewable resource that we only have so much of. By passing this resolution we would only prolong the time that we have oil on earth.

3. We would have cleaner air. Does anyone remember the days when "fresh air" was actually fresh? When it was a pure thing, without chemicals and other junk mixing in the air. With cleaner air, everyone would live longer, happier lives.

I hope that anyone and everyone who reads this agrees with us. PLEASE MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE!!!

Here is my draft so far:


RECOGNIZING the good environmental intentions of this resolution,

WHEREAS there are many more viable, already in effect, environmentally efficient car desines such as hybrid, solar, electric, and other such things, that are easier and less expensive to produce, research and fuel,

KNOWING that there are nations who do not use vehicles,

REPEALS resolution #18

Anyone who has suggestions for changes and fixes, by all means go ahead and make them.

Suggestions would help please.

Cruising through the past resolutions I found one that required nations to research hydrogen cars, so I proposed this:
Glad to see newer members paying attention to the history of the UN.

SEEING as there are many more viable, already in effect, environmentally efficient car desines such as hybrid, solar, electric, and other such things, that are easier and less expensive to produce, research and fuel,
Eh, use "WHEREAS" instead of "SEEING as." You also have a grammar problem there. You start off with a comparison. "many more viable" but you never say "than Hydrogen Powered vehicles." The whole clause needs rewording. Something like, "WHEREAS there are many potentially more viable environmentally friendly, efficient fuel sources than Hydrogen" or something to that effect.

KNOWING that there are nations who do not want to spend money on car research, and some may not have the money at all, or do not use cars,
Don't use the word "cars." It's too specific. Use vehicles. This clause could also be a lot more concise. Use ACKNOWLEDGING for starters, and then shorten it. You don't need to make lists. A single reason is often strong enough.

RECOGNIZING the good environmental intentions of this resolution, and that a new, better written one may be written up,
This should come before the previous clauses. It's more of a preamble kind of clause.

NOTICING the minor mistake in it that mentions a real world place,
That's unnecessary. The Resolution in question came before some of the rules. That clause may make this proposal illegal, if mentioning the real world counts as an RW reference.

This resolution REPEALS resolution #18
Omit "This resolution."

I think you are right on all those things, next time I will run proposals through you...

And for the record, I am not a new member, I just do not use the forums. You know what they say about assuming...;)

I think you are right on all those things, next time I will run proposals through you...

And for the record, I am not a new member, I just do not use the forums. You know what they say about assuming...;)

May 2006 would be considered new, unless you had a different country before this.

I did.

Given the recent failure of a repeal of #18, I think it best to wait a while before trying again.

Issues of legality aren't acceptable for Repeals. I didn't issue a warning or anything, so if you want to keep drafting, be my guest.

I agree with what Norderia's said, but I wish you good luck regardless. Resolution 18 is a bad resolution based upon bad science and I think the sooner it's repealed the better.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I agree with what Norderia's said, but I wish you good luck regardless. Resolution 18 is a bad resolution based upon bad science and I think the sooner it's repealed the better.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f235/HoratioSulla/625ba8b0.jpg

Sorry, just wanted to use that card. :p

Well I have a few things to say on this one...

Always put your resolution/repeal in quotes . Also as everyone seems to forget when you want to repeal something post the orginal resolution too(also in quotes.)

Also I agree you need to wait a while because of the other attempted repeal. But this repeal needs ALOT of work anyway so that should not be a problem.

here is the resolution by the way

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Automobile Manufacturing
Proposed by: Kibombwe

Description: We, the people of Kibombwe, propose that every nation should start developing hydrogen powered cars. We have polluted the air for too long -- it needs to stop. By passing this resolution we will be able to accompish these three things.

1. Less acid rain. Acid rain a problem that we feel should be stopped. It is especially a problem in the Northeast corner of the U.S.A. The Northeast is a place rich in historical buildings which acid rain damages. We passed a "PROTECT HISTORICAL SITES." This would only furthermore protect historical sites.

2. We wouldn't have to use as much oil. Oil is a nonrenewable resource that we only have so much of. By passing this resolution we would only prolong the time that we have oil on earth.

3. We would have cleaner air. Does anyone remember the days when "fresh air" was actually fresh? When it was a pure thing, without chemicals and other junk mixing in the air. With cleaner air, everyone would live longer, happier lives.

I hope that anyone and everyone who reads this agrees with us. PLEASE MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE!!!

Always put your resolution/repeal in quotes

Eh, that isn't necessarily true. Instead, one should try to just set off their comments from the proposal. That way we can just click quote to deal with the proposal, instead of having to copy and paste it. Just as long as the author sets off 3 or so lines between their proposal and their own comments about it.

Otherwise though, yeah, actual Resolutions should go in quotes near the repeal of it.

Sorry, just wanted to use that card.

Ah, the Cat Girls. How many have died so far? It must be running into the thousands by now surely?

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Alright I am gonna start a thread on helping me draft another one.

Alright I am gonna start a thread on helping me draft another one.
No, you edit the first post of your existing thread.

Threads merged.

RECOGNIZING the good environmental intentions of this resolution, and that a new, better written one may be written up,

Here I would stop by just saying

RECOGNIZING the good environmental intentions of this resolution.

The rest seems unnessasary

WHEREAS there are many more viable, already in effect, environmentally efficient car desines such as hybrid, solar, electric, and other such things, that are easier and less expensive to produce, research and fuel,

generaly good needs to be re-worded though


KNOWING that there are nations who do not want to spend money on vehicle research, and some may not have the money at all, or do not use vehicles,

Omit this because nations don't want to spend money is not a good reason. They clearly have the money because no amount was chosen.

I think you should say something along the lines of these somwhere in your repeal

NOTING that not all countries use vehicles (unsure if this is important it may be out of place)

OBSERVING The resolution does not specify any amount for countries to contribute so is in effect useless.

I will omit the money and writing up parts, and please put suggestion when you say "nees to be reworded".