NationStates Jolt Archive

Does the committee that the proposal in the first post of this thread would create do enough for the proposal to be legal?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=470627

Minor style notes: Change the amprastands to "and".
Doubled phrase: "4. STIPULATES that UNELECTED may not may not accept"


Legally, it's pretty shakey.Committees may be created, as long as certain things are kept in mind: nations do not sit on committees, they are staffed by mystical beings that instantly spring into existance and live only to serve on said committee. Committees are also bound by the above MetaGame rules. Also, keep in mind that Committees are additions to Proposals; they shouldn't be all the Proposal does.Right now, it looks like this Proposal exists only to create UNELECTED. While I like this Proposal, I think it still needs tweaking to be fully legal.

Minor style notes: Change the amprastands to "and".

Okay, that's easy enough.

Doubled phrase: "4. STIPULATES that UNELECTED may not may not accept"

Oops! I rearranged the order in which some phrases appeared in that clause quite shortly before asking this question, and must have slipped up when copying & pasting one of them: Easy enough to correct.


Legally, it's pretty shakey.Right now, it looks like this Proposal exists only to create UNELECTED. While I like this Proposal, I think it still needs tweaking to be fully legal.

That's what I was afraid of... I wasn't completely certain that it would be illegal as it stands, because I sort-of remembered a Mod's ruling during the drafting of another proposal that although committees which wouldn't do anything unless nations asked them to were illegal (because if nobody asked for their help they'd be doing nothing) committees that did something anyway might be allowable (and UNELECTED is supposed to study & plan even when it's not advising anybody, although maybe I could have said so more clearly in the draft...).
Okay.

Would adding another operative clause, along the lines of
[/i]"URGES the governments of nations where public elections are held to ensure that these are conducted fairly;"[/i]
be enough to make it sufficiently 'legal' (as long as I also trim enough characters out of the current clauses so that adding this one wouldn't take me over the maximum length allowed)?

I've added that clause, and made a few other changes to the wording. What's the ruling now?

More changes made: Is the version in the original thread's post#69 _ at http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=470627&page=5 _ acceptable?