We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Sanctions against Lodamun and sympathisers
Details
Submitted by[?]: Grand Liberal Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 3587
Description[?]:
| Upon passage of this resolution the following will be adopted by Solentia: I) The use of the Lodamun currency is banned within our boarders and banned for use in international trade involving Solentian companies II) The importation of Lodamun and Lodamun sympathisers goods is banned III) The exportation of goods to Lodamun and Lodamun sympathizers is banned The embargo will remain in place so long as Lodamun and dictatorial sympathizers continue with the embargo on Solentia. Lodamuns sympathisers are any signatories of the below treaty REF: http://classic.particracy.net/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=2589 |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:28:43, December 05, 2013 CET | From | Grand Liberal Party | To | Debating the Sanctions against Lodamun and sympathisers |
| Message | OOC: I do not believe that decisions about economic trade have to be in the form of a treaty. They just like any other policy adopted by a government. |
| Date | 20:44:50, December 05, 2013 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Sanctions against Lodamun and sympathisers |
| Message | OOC: They're a major statement of foreign policy that bind other laws. If you didn't believe they needed to be in the form of a treaty, why did you make an attempt to sign a treaty about it BEFORE passing a regular bill? This is just a copy of the treaty without the treaty itself being signed because you failed to get the supermajority required. If you could have gotten the treaty signed, you would have. This wasn't the regular way of doing things where you would have done this first. You're only doing it AFTER failing to get the treaty signed. If this approach was used first, no-one would mind, but it wasn't. This is only being used now because the other way never worked out in your favour. The original "regular bill" about it wasn't even like this. It stated that the treaty was being signed: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=397384 <- This was an attempt to god-mode. At least that's not what this bill is doing, but it's still cunning (OOCly, not ICly). It was worded better than the last one, but apparently only because of the comments I made on the last one (13:43:52, December 05, 2013 CET). The next thing about treaties is that they're listed in "Diplomatic Details" from the nation page: http://classic.particracy.net/viewnation.php?nationid=42#diplomacy That way, there can be an official signing and withdrawal. If this bill lasts over 100 years, will anyone remember it to repeal it? -- It's not the first time anything like this has happened. Once you placed an embargo on Beluzia, through the forums, without doing anything in-game. You did something in-game for Gaduridos after being approached by Moderation, and only passed a bill because you couldn't do it the other way. (Moderation reference: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=357825 ) |
| Date | 01:29:28, December 06, 2013 CET | From | Grand Liberal Party | To | Debating the Sanctions against Lodamun and sympathisers |
| Message | OOC: To answer the points made, plus a few other things to consider: Sanctions are indeed a major statement of foreign policy, but probably less so than a declaration of war which can be made with only 50% majority. I do not see how economic and diplomatic sanctions bind other laws. Of course they impact on other laws, but only in the same way that all laws interweave and relate to each other at some point. By definition a treaty is an agreement between two or more nations. In RL I am not aware that sanctions take on the status of treaties between nations, nor would they need a supermajority in a nation to action. Of course we would have preferred to pass the treaty and join with other allies who may also do so (otherwise it wouldn't have been proposed). However we were well aware at the time that we didn't have the supermajority to do so. This current resolution should be viewed as an IC political manoeuvre. This is after all political simulation game. If a RL government was struggling to implement a policy via a certain path, they would try and choose an alternative route to do so. There is nothing wrong, against the rules or unusual about this. Regarding the original regular bill moderation have spoken about it and there is nothing more to add. I don't think it matters that this resolution / embargo won't be listed in the "Diplomatic Details" from the nation’s page. Lots of other important things are also not listed. In fact only treaties are included there so any other aspect of foreign policy and interaction is also missing. Since we are the players involved in this I don't think we are going to forget it exists, and when we are gone I hardly think it matters to the game whether it is repealed or not. There are literally hundreds of resolutions passed as bills in Solentia demanding all manner of things. I don't feel the need to specifically search them out and repeal each one of them. We don't know they exist, therefore to us in the game now they don't exist..... Regarding the message moderation send me (over 12 months ago), I argued that the action could be taken as an 'Executive Order', which is permitted in Solentia during times of war or potential national instability. They didn't disagree with this, but stated that as there was a majority to approve it anyway, it might keep certain players happier to do so. So I did. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 410 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 340 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Periodically, it is a good idea to go through your nation's Treaties and arrange to withdraw from any that are unwanted. |
| Random quote: "Any system that takes responsibility away from people, dehumanises them." - Author Unknown |