NationStates Jolt Archive

I think I have a pretty good resolution here. I realize now that (upon first proposing) I absentmindedly dipped into {the real world}. I think I've cleaned it up considerably, and I want everyone's thoughts on it now. More accurately, I want to know if I could actually get this approved or if it will sink miserably again and again:


It is believed in many societies that the ability to perceive the world in a philosophic light is what separates sentient life from non-sentient.

While science is distinctly important in providing logic to philosophy, it is writing, creative or otherwise, which gives the necessary medium for passing these ideas and logical arguments along.

Thusly proposed are the following articles of legislation:

1- While a nation's government maintains the right to monitor released works, the ruling body cannot ban these works from being circulated outside of their own boundaries.

2- If a written piece is banned within a nation, it may not simply be destroyed or withheld by the ruling body. Instead, the writer is allowed to have it printed in another nation (as long as this other nation is willing to accept the work).

3- Only if no nations accept a work may it fall out of print entirely.

With the passing of these laws, it is hoped that society within the World Assembly will enter a new dawn of enlightenment.

Theres not really much you can argue about here in regards to the general principles. A publication can be banned in one nation and be published in another quite easily.

Now all it needs is some flesh on the bones and a category chosen before the drafting gets serious.

I actually put it in once, but as I said before, I made the mistake of titling it the Poe Policies. That of course got it instant deletion and perhaps a warn.

If I remember correctly, I put it under "Education and Creativity" with the sub-subject as "Free Press". I believe from there on out it's simple enough that it will make it through. As was said in a journalism class I took (character aside for a moment), if it does not grab attention within 3 seconds, it will not get attention at all. Thusly, "to the point" may be a safe bet for me.

(edit) oh, and also, while it's not too difficult, some nations may forbid it from being released, and may even simply burn the author alive. The rights to have the work saved are not covered. I will actually add a 4th statement that, unless the author is convicted of a serious crime, he cannot be prosecuted over his work. For example, if a writer tells a story about commiting treason against his government, they can't hang him unless he actually tries to destroy them.

It is believed in many societies that the ability to perceive the world in a philosophic

light is what separates sentient life from non-sentient.

While science is distinctly important in providing logic to philosophy, it is writing,

creative or otherwise, which gives the necessary medium for passing these ideas and

logical arguments along.

Thusly proposed are the following articles of legislation:

1- While a nation's government maintains the right to monitor released works, the

ruling body cannot ban these works from being circulated outside of their own

boundaries.

2- If a written piece is banned within a nation, it may not simply be destroyed or

withheld by the ruling body. Instead, the writer is allowed to have it printed in

another nation (as long as this other nation is willing to accept the work).

3- A writer may not simply be prosecuted for an piece of writing. If he is to be

condemned, it must be for a serious crime, and not because of prejudice held against

their written work.

4- Only if no nations accept said writing may it fall out of print entirely.

With the passing of these laws, it is hoped that society within the World Assembly

will enter a new dawn of enlightenment.

You're trying to make me hurt you, aren't you?

It is believed in many societies that the ability to perceive the world in a philosophic light is what separates sentient life from non-sentient.

While science is distinctly important in providing logic to philosophy, it is writing, creative or otherwise, which gives the necessary medium for passing these ideas and logical arguments along.

Thusly proposed are the following articles of legislation:
"Thusly proposed"? If you're going to pose, do it right. "Thuswise proposed..." (OOC: heh. Chambers doesn't admit to "thusly", but is quite happy with "thuswise".)

1- While a nation's government maintains the right to monitor released works, the ruling body cannot ban these works from being circulated outside of their own boundaries.
This gets tied up in its attempts never to use the same word twice. That's a bad idea anyway in something legal, since it gives the sense of talking about different things. What was wrong with:

While a nation's government maintains the right to monitor released works [of what, by the way? Ice sculpture?], the government cannot ban those works from being circulated outside the nation.

If "Rights and Duties" goes through, this would be redundant anyway.

2- If a written piece is banned within a nation, it may not simply be destroyed or withheld by the ruling body. Instead, the writer is allowed to have it printed in another nation (as long as this other nation is willing to accept the work).

So if someone prints five million copies of "Mein Bumpf" before the government gets round to banning it, we can't actually stop them distributing it? Something doesn't seem quite right about this.

3- A writer may not simply be prosecuted for an piece of writing. If he is to be condemned, it must be for a serious crime, and not because of prejudice held against their written work.
Congratulations on nearly sneaking through immunity from prosecution for all writers of everything everywhere. Now try writing it in such a way that (say) someone calling for genocide can still be charged for it.

4- Only if no nations accept said writing may it fall out of print entirely.
Er, no. Something can also fall out of print entirely because it's crap, or the publishers can't be bothered with it, or any of a dozen other reasons.

--
Cerys Coch, Permanent Undersecretary

Vrall, how many more times are you planning to submit this before you listen to some of the legitimate criticism posted about it? I keep seeing this show up, and it never gets above the the default approvals level (those delegates who approve nearly everything, that is).

I'll let you in on a little secret. It's almost impossible to pass a WA proposal without a serious telegram campaign. Just reposting a flawed proposal over and over again will not get it into queue. Try revising it and make it worth our votes. THEN, resubmit.