NationStates Jolt Archive

We wrote a draft proposal on the "UN forum"
The Nations of Enn and Texan Hotrodders, have noticed nicely, that our proposal may be a violation, as it's both about Human Rights and moral decency and then they invited us to split it in 2 propositions.

Please, we would like to have the advice of a mod, to know if there is really a violation or not?

Thank you for your time and your advice.

Pazu-Lenny Nero, Foreign-Affairs Minister of the The Most Serene Republic of Love and esterel

ps: here is the draft:
________________________________________________________________________
Human Cloning: Rights & Ban

Category: ?
Strength: Strong

The United Nations,

-------------------- Executive Summary ----------------------------------------

-A- FULLY AWARE that there are different kinds of Human cloning and that they must be dealt separately

-1- MANDATES all Nations to allow and support “Scientific & Therapeutic Human Cloning” and to control them very seriously

-2- MANDATES all the Nations who allow “Reproductive Human Cloning”:
- to discourage doing it with technologies that pose undue risk to the health of the clone; and
- to forbid doing it when there are no parental project for the child

-3- BAN “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning”

-4- DECLARES “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning” as a crime against Humanity

-------------------- Part I: “Scientific & Therapeutic Human Cloning” --------------------

-B- DEFINING
“Therapeutic Human Cloning” as: the creation of day-old embryo, by transfer of a cell nucleus into an enucleated egg, with the aim of harvesting the cells for subsequent culture amplification and injection into a Human for therapeutic purposes.
“Scientific Human Cloning” as: the scientific researches on “Therapeutic Human Cloning”.

-C- CONVINCED that “Therapeutic Human Cloning”, in the same manner as “Stem Cells” is a very promising way to improve health and happiness of Humans Beings and is a promising booming economic activity

-1- MANDATES all Nations to allow and support “Scientific & Therapeutic Human Cloning” and to control them very seriously

-------------------- Part II: “Reproductive Human Cloning” --------------------

-D- DEFINING “Reproductive Human Cloning” as: the creation of an embryo, by transfer of a cell nucleus into an enucleated egg, with the aim of creating a new individual with the same genetic ID (as an identical twin). In this resolution this definition is extended to "reproductive cloning with altered genome"

-E- REAFFIRMING STRONGLY that cloned and genetically engineered persons have the very same rights as other persons as stated in the UN RESOLUTION #56 BioRights Declaration

-2- MANDATES all the Nations who allow “Reproductive Human Cloning”:
- to discourage doing it with technologies that pose undue risk to the health of the clone; and
- to forbid doing it when there are no parental project for the child

-------------------- Part III: “Mass Reproductive Human Cloning” --------------------

-F- DEFINING “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning” as an action of “Reproductive Human Cloning” in the aim to give birth intentionally to several cloned persons with the same genetic ID

-G- ALARMED BY the fact that “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning” is a great danger to Human Diversity

-3- BAN “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning”

-4- DECLARES “Mass Reproduction Human Cloning” as a crime against Humanity
___________________________________________________________________________

We request that this be taken to the current tract on this proposal as we have issues already presented there against it and would like MOD views on them...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9531915#post9531915


That it as written violates Resolution 56 then if it is passed will violate Resolution 83.....


Thank You....

Thanks to the Nation of Zeldon 6229 Nodlez for his post. It's an interesting debate.
We would like also to know if our proposition violate the UN resolution 56 "BioRights Declaration" or not?

We don't think so, as with our proposition, cloned humans have the rights to reproduce in the same manner as non-cloned Humans, by:
-sex
-"Reproductive Cloning" (attended it's not "Mass reproductive cloning")
-IVF
-IVF from "Stem cells harvested Gametes"

They have also the right to adopt children.

Thank you

Thanks to the Nation of Zeldon 6229 Nodlez for his post. It's an interesting debate.
We would like also to know if our proposition violate the UN resolution 56 "BioRights Declaration" or not?

We don't think so, as with our proposition, cloned humans have the rights to reproduce in the same manner as non-cloned Humans, by:
-sex
-"Reproductive Cloning" (attended it's not "Mass reproductive cloning")
-IVF
-IVF from "Stem cells harvested Gametes"

They have also the right to adopt children.

Thank you

But as I state in the depate in tract they like many humans can't repoduce but one way..... mass reproductive cloning... which would be not allowed under this proposal thus their means of reproduction is denied them.... this is a genetic condition that causes them not to be able to reproduce by a sexual act or other method... Also the issue at point that was brought out was to produce identical genetic ID....... under genocided 83 genetic condition is noted... thus anything dealing with genetics would fall as a condition of such... genetics...

But as I state in the depate in tract they like many humans can't repoduce but one way..... mass reproductive cloning... which would be not allowed under this proposal thus their means of reproduction is denied them.... this is a genetic condition that causes them not to be able to reproduce by a sexual act or other method... Also the issue at point that was brought out was to produce identical genetic ID....... under genocided 83 genetic condition is noted... thus anything dealing with genetics would fall as a condition of such... genetics...
This argument makes absolutely no sense. Any "human" that can only reproduce via "mass reproductive cloning" is outside the purview of reasonable, and thus is not something that a Proposal writer needs to worry about. They don't have to deal with every condition of every absurdist idea that people come up with. Your attempts to link "anything dealing with genetics" to the Eon Convention on Genocide is equally baffling.

Genocide is defined as the systematic and deliberate extermination of a society, or part of a society, based on arbitrary criteria (such as skin colour, genetic conditions or religion). Those covered by this resolution are those protected by The UBR.Banning Mass Cloning is not the same as commiting mass executions based on genetics. I have no idea how you could possibly make such a logical leap.

For the Proposal itself, it's almost a toss-up. I think it would be legal either way: You can keep it as a single Proposal (in which case it's Human Rights: Strong), or you can spin the last section off as a Moral Decency Proposal.

I would, however, like another GM to pop in with a second opinion.

- The Most Glorious Hack
NationStates Game Moderator

As a player: The layout a syle of the Proposal needs work. Right now it reads like a shopping list. I think it could use some fleshing out. Also, your bullet scheme is... unorthodox.

thanks for your answer
As you, we will wait another GM advice about the single proposal, we think a single proposal is better, but it's ok if must split it.
We will try to improve style and grammar

Your attempts to link "anything dealing with genetics" to the Eon Convention on Genocide is equally baffling.

Banning Mass Cloning is not the same as commiting mass executions based on genetics. I have no idea how you could possibly make such a logical leap.

I'm not a moderator, but actually I'll voice in and say that I too agree that banning or in this case placing restrictions on cloning is not genocide.


For the Proposal itself, it's almost a toss-up. I think it would be legal either way: You can keep it as a single Proposal (in which case it's Human Rights: Strong), or you can spin the last section off as a Moral Decency Proposal.

I would, however, like another GM to pop in with a second opinion.


Let me dig up Cogitations ruling on my old Good Samaritan Laws proposal from Oct. 2004, which originally was submitted as a longer proposal under Political Freedom IIRC. In the process of appealing the moderation warning issued to me for submitting it to the wrong category Cog actually ruled that it was *two* proposals: one moral decency, and I can't remember what the other category was. I ended up taking his suggested rewrites and submitting just the moral decency portion.

That said, having focused on just the numbered (activating) clauses, it reads like a moral decency (i.e. public health) resolution to me. Though L&E uses a different style, he/she does stick to standard numbering convention for the activating clauses, making it easy to really see what the resolution is doing. :)

The reason I'm calling it moral decency is I'm looking at the Good Samaritan Laws and Epidemic Prevention Protocols as examples. Both resolutions restricted people from doing something, in order to protect public health. In this resolution this is where I'm seeing the similar sort of idea:

"-2- MANDATES all the Nations who allow “Reproductive Human Cloning”:
- to discourage doing it with technologies that pose undue risk to the health of the clone; and
- to forbid doing it when there are no parental project for the child"

BTW, L&E, I'm a bit unclear on what the second sub-clause means ... I think it probably should read, "to forbid doing it when there are no parental protections for the child", though I'm not sure what parental protection is ... so I could be wrong here.


As a player: The layout a syle of the Proposal needs work. Right now it reads like a shopping list. I think it could use some fleshing out. Also, your bullet scheme is... unorthodox.

edit:
I think it is simply just a different way of looking at things. During the debate on Mitigation of Large Reservoirs, the most outspoken opponent to the resolution complained because the preamble and activating clauses weren't mixed. *shrug*

Here is the link I promised:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=356458

I was pretty mad at the time, as I thought I had a pretty solid case. In any event, the key posts to read are obviously Cog's. He worked through my proposal and pretty much trimmed it down to a Social Justice and Moral Decency resolution. That said, I see L&E's proposal as really more of a straight up MD proposal.

Any "human" that can only reproduce via "mass reproductive cloning" is outside the purview of reasonable, and thus is not something that a Proposal writer needs to worry about. .





My point here is that it is how I was reproduced thus as a product of that process I am a product of a crime against humanity and this is a call to prevent me from beng. As it will ban the very process that created me... Why... because of some fear of the process.. that mass clones all equal in every way much stronger and better than normal humans produced by the sexual act are out of that act.. It is a process of reproduction that can like anything be abused or work for the greater good... The proposer has in past supported IVF another reproductive process that can be abused as much as this one can... What is the difference between IVF and MASS Cloning they are both reproductive processes... One words for you the other for me.. both processes can be abused. This condemes Mass Cloning and the proposer still supports IVF, why can they condeme one process of reproduction and not another, IVF. Both have faults, both have a chance of being abused, both have people who believe they both are wrong. I believe sexual intercourse is wrong as a means of reproduction... I do not condeme those who use it.. I do hope that they will not abuse it as they would not abuse IVF or Cloning.. The UN can't single out an individual act of reproduction and say it's right or wrong... As it's membership is diverse and created by many different processes of reproduction.... to condeme the process you single out the product as evil, thus the UN can't and should never single out individuals and condeme them simply because they were not born like other members... Again back to mother black father while in real.. or back to father jew mother pagan... or mother dwarf father giant... if you condeme the process of how a person got here you condeme them... If you ban it you end their future thus genocide them.. in time... systamaticly...

Zarta Warden
UN Ambassador Zeldon
Clone #R2000Z129A


OOC: I'm sorting through a lot of email on this from others trying to mix it all in.. So bear with me.. As have ten others inputing right now...


Also almost forgot that the issue of what constitutes MASS here... is it 2 or 200.. as some will say any over one is MASS... so we get back to IVF as a form of MASS Reproduction in that it has producted more than one fetus... so is the proposer now also condeming IVF which they earlier and in the debates supported... as they are not comdeming cloning just on process of it Mass Reproductive... just as they are not support a reproductive processes just IVF.. and Sexual..

Let me try another point that has been made by one of my little family here debating this issue..



This proposal condemes a process called mass reproductive cloning.... as a crime against humanity... simply because it can be abused and produce identical humans.. am I right so far... thus we must not continue the procedure and get these clones from it... am I stll on track.. because of the genetic implications that might come about having multiple clones with identical beliefs, thoughts, ideals, and whatever.... Thus we don't want humans who believe, think, pray, and whatever alike.. Am I still on track..

Go ban or condeme any religion or government then.. leave reproductive cloning alone. Go ban sexual reproduction as it produces a fetus... from a single cell that might develope to believe, think, pray, or whatever like all other humans..

This proposal is a first step to comdeming individuality not promoting it.. as it says I have to reproduce only your way... or be comdemed as committing a crime against humanity if I reproduce the way I came to be... mass reproductive cloning... my religion a foundation of my nation..


Also placing restrictions on any single group is wrong... This would place restrictions on my nation... It for us would be like saying you must kneel on both knees to pray not just one or stand. It is how we got here and how we hope our future generations will get here... Am I to stop praying because I do it standing or on one leg simply because a others prefer to kneel on both knees... what happens when we get those who want to lay down and pray who is right and how do we pray and meet the beliefs of all.. The proposer believes in IVF I support thier belief in that reproductive process as I wish them the best possible future.. They need to be dealing with their own reproductive issues and improve on them and leave me to improve on my own reproductive process... I also know any process can be abused as am a product of abuse in this process but we have worded long before the UN was to insure no abuse comes about in or reproductive process... The proposer needs to work to insure the same in their own reproductive process... We need to exchange information on how to do this improve IVF and MASS not comdeme each other... and in turn neglect our own problems to busy comdeming others.... We are all human and have faults and do things wrong.. in the eyes of others... condeming each other is not help in correcting or own faults.. just gives us an excuse to ignore them as we find others to blame or comdeme...

I'm not a moderator, but actually I'll voice in and say that I too agree that banning or in this case placing restrictions on cloning is not genocide..


Genocide as I understand it is any process that ends in a single group, race, religion, green people, blue people, or clones, being systamaticly killed off to result in a loss of their kind.. To ban mass reproductive cloning would result in no more of there kind being produced.... since the process is banned thus those that exist today when thy are gone are just that gone....

This would be like saying to get rid of blue skinned people we will breed them on with green or red skinned people thus produce a new more aceptible skin color... between red and green but not blue.. that we don't want..

Or more realist... only blacks can marry blacks and have children and only whites and whites can have children because the process of black and white marriages only produces mixed babies....

Back to role... since mass reproductive cloning here is a means or reproduction carried out for generations (14) our citizens are clones and are unique individuals much like any group in a society.. what makes them who they are is how they came to be... by the process of mass reproductive cloning... They could well have been created by sexual reproduction or IVF reproduction but they were produced by Mass reproductive cloning... You have in this proposal singled out a group based on how they came to be and want to act against the process they came to be by. Many here are who they are because they were born by sexual reproduction and thus raised by parents who came to be by sexual reproduction... if your you child born by sexual reproduction turns out bad do you stop having childtren by sexual reproduction or try to find a reason they turned out bad.. to improve the process not ban it because one child yours turned out bad.. To ban it means an end to you having children by sexual reproduction thus and end to possible great children by you through you and sexual reproduction...


Note where I say sexual reproduction figure in mixed marriages, religions, nationalities as the means to produce a child... here we are into clones..... as that the subject of the proposal but the deeper agenda here is to say if you aren't born like me you are not my equal.. if both your parents were not pure white southern hicks who kiss snakes then you are not like me.. if they didn't man on top of woman make you then... you are not like me... if they mixed you up in a test tube then you are not like me, heck you ain't even human...


Again I want to stress that this singles out a group of people and makes they reproductive process a crime and is trying to restrict that process and even to ban it... Also that the fact that they comdeme it as a crime against humanity makes any product of that crime also one against humanity.... Thus in rape is the child out of a rape to be considered a crime... sure I understand rape as a crime as one of the party were not willing to it... but with mass cloning reproduction all parties are willing to create a new life... If one is concerned about abuse... then for sexual reproduce has rape as its abuse... deal with the abuse not the process... for sexual it's rape that's the abuse........ since there is not a clear idea on what number MASS means that can be argued as Sexual reproduction results in twins.... when is it MASS reproduction. also IVF is know to produce many fetus when is it MASS reproduction.. The abuse comes in when we take only one and leave the others or abuse them, in any reproductive process... Thus we must control all MASS reproductive processes not just one.... to prevent any abuse of the proces.... Have twins keep one sale the other live happy off profits and raise the one to breed more to sale.. if done by a Sexual, IVF, or Clone reproductive proces is... wrong... thus is the issue to address not comdeme the process....

Garnilorn, Zeldon 6229 Nodlez, this is not an in character forum. Keep the IC stuff out.

Sorry forgot where I was at...

Okay cleared my head run my uncle out...


Question but the rules one can't ammend a current Resolution such as 56.

Thus since resolution 56 doesn't in it define clones nor set the process by which one becomes a clone any effect to define that in a latter proposal that might change the intent of 56 would be amending 56 thus violation of rules..


Example: Clones are living forms geneticly form in a gray test tube with 2 parts thus and one part that mixed. Part one taken from the left arm of an adult female and Part two taken form the ass of an adult male.


Don't look at the content just the idea of one defing the proces to get clones... As one might understand that a clone is:

Example: Clones are geneticly procuded living humans formed by inducing a sign cell to divide into many thus developing in time into a fully developed human.. The single cells used can be taken from any viable part of the parent human.....

So if the above is what I follow to determine clones who under Resolution 56 have equal rights... How can they change that to the one first noted... Thus changing the intent of Resolution 56.. in new resolution..


Also can a New Resolution Restrict Rigths given or implied given in an old active Resolution 56..


Here Clones are given all right of normal humans... Among those one would assume to be their right to choose a reproductive process that works best for them.. Thus is they use Sexual or IVF or MASS Clone they have a right just like all humans to use the best reproductive process for them..


Again I know the issue of abuse of Cloning comes up and is a deep one in real life... but so are a lot of other issues in real life deep... Black and White mixed marriages have been a deep issue in my family for many generations... It has hurt the children produced by them.. Thus to me banning or restricting mass reproductive cloning would be the same as saying no mixed marriages because of what they produce... Be is mixed jew/pagan, mexican/europen white/black... its not the process that is bad it how you might treat the outcome.... Here this resolution has condemeded that process thus in turn condemed the outcome..

So hear when is real real and role role... I know that cloning has not been done on humans just animals... also know that there are problems with the process and that it can be abused.. I all for preventing abuse just not condeming the process simply because it might or can be abused... It also can be a great benifit to humans... if used right... sexual reproduction if used right has proven that... but do we ban it because it might result in rape... a crime...


Cloning is just the subject of this...

Banning Mass Cloning is not the same as commiting mass executions based on genetics. I have no idea how you could possibly make such a logical leap..


So the only way to 'genocide' is to mass execute... go in an kill them all... What were the Nazi doing to women they sterilized or breed to Germans to breed out other races and produce Germans... Also what would the process of taking children from parents and forcing them to learn a new reliegion or serve a new whatever, not continue to learn and follow those things they parents believe in.. Genocide doen't always mean killing out the race or group... you can simply force them to change their ways to believe other things...

Again the mixed marriage as an example.... Because the outcome of mixed marriages is seen as wrong (by some) do we come to ban it, thus prevent mixed children who don't belong in either group or do we work to bring those mixed children in one of the groups or allow them to become separate productive group... living in peace with the other two groups they were formed out of.. Banning the process because we fear the product is wrong.. mass reproductive cloneing is a process that can have good and bad outcome.. Instead of condeming the process fully one needs to work to impove the process to promote only a good outcome.. also one must not label the out come as a product of a crime against humanity.. Would be like calling a child born of rape a rapist or believing that the rape gene is passed on so it must be aborted before it can go on and duplicate the crimes of the parent... a rapist..

We are having a hard time keeping in mind game rules and real life then role... So please bear with us....

So the only way to 'genocide' is to mass execute... go in an kill them all... What were the Nazi doing to women they sterilized or breed to Germans to breed out other races and produce Germans...

Pretty much. Genocide usually means the deliberate and systematic destruction of a specific people or society, by a *different* people, society, or government.

Hasn't anybody here ever watched the movie Dune, with Sting? :) The emperor screamed this at one point, "This is genocide, the deliberate and systematic destruction of all life!" when having a fit over the control of Spice Melange.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide


Interesting side note: Sept. 17 (IIRC) the RL United Nations will be meeting in a special session to discuss the addition of new permament members to the Security Council *and* the possibility of requiring the UN to intervene in cases of genocide, something which in our life-time the UN has totally failed to do. Whether or not this will happen, the issue of genocide is about to become better defined in international circles.

To best understand "genocide" as it applies to international affairs, it is probably best to go back to Lemkin's original statement:

Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.

I'd like to highlight part of his definition: "intended to signify a coordinate plan of different actions aiming at the destruction / annihilating [national] groups".

The key is different actions.

If I claimed my culture was to blow up school buildings and airplanes, a law passed to make it illegal for EVERYBODY to stop blowing up school buidlings and airplanes is not genocide. It is not a "different" action targeted against me. It is a rule that all follow, and that is honestly the problem with the loophole you are trying to construct.

Frankly, nobody cares about clones. Hell, it looks to me as if Love and esterel's resolution actually is trying to prevent clones *pain* and to become second classes "body parts" for society ... which is why some of those claiming this is a "Human Rights" resolution have a good case. I just happen to believe that "Moral Decency" exists as citizens trade civil freedoms for protection, the basis of the "Social Contract" that Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote about when it explained why governments exist in the first place. :)


Now looking at this from the POV of the Catholic Church, condoms and other birth control measures are "bad" because they prevent children from being conceived. But employing birth control isn't a systematic program to eliminate one group at the expense of another. Now if the systematic program was instead to say, "Condoms *must* be worn by Catholics, but Protestants have a choice", then there is a program designed to eliminate one group by another.

I really think that the focus of this moderation debate shouldn't be to try and nail an idea on a misuse of genocide, but rather to *help* Love and esterel find the appropriate category so he (?) can submit it. Just my opinion of course.

Frankly, nobody cares about clones. Hell, it looks to me as if Love and esterel's resolution actually is trying to prevent clones *pain* and to become second classes "body parts" for society ... .


Therefore under Resolution 56 since clones are equal to normal humans does this mean that at some point we can substitue one or all of these:
'geneticly engineered' or 'naturally born' or 'unmodified persons'.

The four beings noted in R56 into a single proposal and present it and it would be legal as it doen't step on any rights given any of these under a UN resolution.. Either given openly in that resolution or implied by it..

As I would think that the right to proceate, reproduce if not given is assumed to be one all four have.. and can't be denieghed.. I also believe that all four have a right to life, meaning it can't be taken from then.. This new proposal takes away the life of an embryo at some point.. and embryo is the start of a human fetus... thus we get into other issues of abortion and when is life.. but if the other three have a right to life and to reproduce as they can and as they trust then clones under Resolution 56 have the same rights.


To remove a method of reproduction that produced an individual who is by such unique is wrong... I have indicated mixed marriages that produce other than a child of say one race, religion, or nationility due to mixture of the prarents.. To ban mixed marriages would be considered wrong simply as a means to end mixed children.. Would it not be considered a right of all to marry whom they please and have children as they find they can.. To ban this dooms those created from is as there will be no more of thier kind around.. Mixed Children or Clones.. as if none are reproduced they are lost. Genocide done slow and systamaticly as well as delibertly... Only this proposal promotes the actual killing of the clone in an early stage of life to be used for other than intened prupose.. The same issues seen with abortion of a normal birth fetus that produces a natural person..

So if one can't kill the fetus of a natural person as they, fetus, have the right to become a natural person then so do clones have the right to become a clone.. since they are equal to natural persons and its only the process of reproduction that differs between them..

Side Note: In this case I know blowing the idea 'All Men Created Equal' but this is NS..

As for nobody cares about clones.... Resolution 56 passed 12,137 for it so somebody must care... as only about 4,500 were against it..


Thank You for your reply,,,

Frankly, nobody cares about clones. Hell, it looks to me as if Love and esterel's resolution actually is trying to prevent clones *pain* and to become second classes "body parts" for society ... which is why some of those claiming this is a "Human Rights" resolution have a good case.


I think you are right about the hidden agenda of this proposal..

Thus I ask, how can it be allowed if clones are equal to 'narural persons' according to Resolution 56... does this mean that next they also will be moving to do this to the 'natural persons'. If so what rights do 'natural persons' have that will protect them from being abused in this way. Is there not one UN resolution that this violates, would this not in time be a genocide of all humans.

Also the proposal has in forum under gone several changes that move it closer to doing as noted by Mikitivity.. Thus request the Mods review the most current one there..

As the current draft expands on issues not covered in detail here and I feel changes the intent of the proposal... Rights & Ban -- even the title is one that I now wonder about.. You give one right and take what... Give the dog a bone so you can rob the hen house...

Thank You,

Request MODS review the track in forum on Cloning proposal and if I'm out of line let me know.. If I'm not let me know as I will stop now until I hear from you as I seem to be upsetting the proposer.

I will inform you that Zeldon and Garne are not the same individuals but a group of six individuals playing NS.. We due to the rule of one member in NS and the fact that we share computers as well as services lost membership of Garnilorn as we set up two other nations on one service and at times used same computer... Thus we have now moved to follow the rules Zeldon is our UN player... The others three nations are not in UN but allied advisors to Zeldon... These are also using a common email address so that we all can have a common point to send and get messages in... The other three are in on that email address and Zeldon is in on a single email address so as to prevent rules violation in regards to UN membership...

Thank you, Wayne
RP Zarta Warden
UN Ambassador Zeldon

George
RP George Warden
Advisor Zeldon from Garne

Vic
RP Isaac Fargon
Advisor Zeldon from Vilevilla

Ann
RP Helen Fargon
Advison Zeldon from Sysmoningiva

The other two are passive players and just advise us from time to time..

Thank YOU!