Hello, IDU! I am Corporal Clegg , hailing from The North Pacific.

I have been listed as your ambassador from TNP for a while now, and as it turns out, I have never introduced myself!

I've been a citizen of The North Pacific for nearly sixteen months as of yet and I have been on Nation States for about two years playing around with other nations until I had finally decided to settle in and become an active member of the world's largest and most active region!

I've filled a few executive roles in my time spent there in the ministries of Foreign and Home Affairs, but I have recently reappeared from a 90-day period of inactivity (In fact may also be that I am not officially a member of the Diplomatic Corps).

Anyhow, that's my story! Please PM me if you need anything of me, and I look forward to being your Ambassador from The North Pacific!

Best regards,
Corporal Clegg

I was up until 3am my time making these, so y'all better like them!

The regional values are Justice, Education, Industry, and the Environment.

Justice is represented by Lady Justice.

Education is represented by a book.

Industry, and clean industry at that so as to better reflect our environment value, is represented by wind turbines/generators.

Environment is represented by a Forest-Man, who lives simply and does not adversely effect the environment.


Coat of Arms



Flag

A coup d'etat in the forum administration of TNP has led me to immediately retire from all connection with that forum and that region, and as long planned, I have returned to the IDU to stay.

It will take time to get back up to speed, to meet all of the many nations who have come to the IDU since my last period of activity here, and to see how I can best contribute,but under no circumstances will I accept involvement with any representatives from TNP until and unless they make a formal and complete peacr offering to me. This is the second time I have come to the IDU as a refugee from TNP, and I will not go through that again.

Meanwhile, meet Lieb, she's the schnauzer who has been with me since 2010, and turned 5 in September!

Attachments:

• Lieb_20120601_Smile.jpg (102.85 KB)
  

So, the recent revival in regional activity having lead to a revival of interest in the regional map, some questions about how we handle the map now arise.


Basic Information

Earlier threads

The main thread about our original map, whose cartographer was Domnonia, ran from 2006 to 2010 and is at http://s10.zetaboards.com/IDU/topic/707772/23/#new.

The future of the map after Dom had been gone for a while was discussed at http://s10.zetaboards.com/IDU/topic/708329/1/.

The work of Embolalia, extending to his [uncompleted] 'NS Globe' project, was discussed at http://s10.zetaboards.com/IDU/topic/708347/6/#new from 2010 to 2012.

And some work that Belschaft began in 2012 is discussed at http://s10.zetaboards.com/IDU/topic/7431840/2/#new.


'Fractal Reality'
This is a concept that was used at times during earlier map-making and other RP within the region, and that has also been used by other RP-ing regions as well. Basically it not only invokes the 'Multiverse' concept, in which numerous alternative versions of reality exist in some way "parallel" to each other, but says that areas in one version of Reality can come into temporary or prolonged contact (or even exchange places altogether) with areas from other versions, thus helping to explain such matters as multiple nations claiming to occupy the same areas in terms of RL geography, nations appearing & disappearing as their players create them or let them cease to exist OOC, how some nations' histories feature earlier contact with (and perhaps colonists from) countries that aren't on the same maps (At one stage we even had a nation within the region that had two completely different histories, with colonisation from two separate sets of RL cultures, both simultaneously true!), the presence of various species of plants or animals [or other life-forms] that "really" belong in particular RL ranges, and even wholesale changes in the regional maps such as those that Embolalia made... and the Bermuda Triangle?
^_^

Oh, and this also allows for inter-Reality leakages of heat and moisture into or out of specific areas, thus giving them climates slightly different from what would logically be expected from their actual situations, although diffusion [and so on] mean that this still shouldn't be taken to extremes: You still shouldn?t get tropical rainforest in proximity to an ice-cap, for example, unless the latter is relatively small and at a significantly higher altitude than the latter? As I recall, this was used to explain why Malabra?s southern districts have a tropical climate rather than just a sub-tropical one.



Initial Questions

1. Which basic design do we use? There is Domnonia?s original map (visible @ https://app.box.com/shared/fqplfsbso0) on which the region consists of two adjacent continents and various islands, Embolalia's revised design (visible @ https://raw.githubusercontent.com/embola...leproj.png) with those two continents combined but with some further land-masses then added nearby for placing nations belonging to certain other regions, there's a version of the latter without those surrounding lands, there's the possibility of taking the original map and making only some of Embolalia's changes, there?s using RL maps which obviously would not suit those of urrs who have already created more detailed maps of our own nations that fit into either of the non-RL maps, and there is creating a new map altogether but including the current shapes and [possibly] relative locations for any existing nations whose players do not want to see those details changed.

2. Which format do we use for the map's master copies? 'Vector-based' formats such as .pdf & .svg would allow saving the maps as smaller files, and may provide greater flexibility in some respects, but are probably less accessible to the membership in general than 'pixel-based' formats such as .png (which I think is the best option in this category), .bmp, .gif, or .jpg, which might prevent some people who would otherwise want to work on the maps from doing so?

3. Where do we set the map in terms of latitude, and how wide would it extend in terms of longitude? A reference to the original map either in our forum or on NSwiki said that the basic area was from c.22o to 60-somethingo North, although with Dom's consent I added some extensions northwards from The Ursine Northlands, and this seems reasonable to me although I recognise that some people might also want extensions for their own nations southwards into the tropics. If we keep degrees of latitude and longitude on the same scale as each other then this will tell us the region's extent in degrees of longitude too, and I have a table saved [somewhere] that gives the actual distances per degree of longitude for relevant latitudes.

4. For how long are nations kept on the map after they OOC either cease to exist or move into other regions?

5. Should there be a qualifying period of residence, or perhaps level of activity, required before a nation can claim a place on the map?

Hello all,

Just a quick hello Nova Sodor to my neighbours in the IDU.

I hope that all are well.

Prohibiting Animal Abuse
A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.
Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Losthaven

Quote: Description: The Member Nations of the World Assembly:

Recognizing that animals are sentient beings capable of experiencing stress, fear, and pain;

Convinced that there is no just cause for intentionally abusing an animal, and that animals should be cared for in ways that support a healthy life free from suffering;

Resolved that animal abuse is utterly unjustifiable and should be universally condemned and prohibited;

Now, therefore, the General Assembly hereby enacts the following provisions, subject to the rules and laws set by earlier WA resolutions that are still in force:

1. Defines an "animal" for the purposes of this resolution as any non-person species of mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, or fish.

2. Prohibits the intentional abuse of animals, including:

causing an animal serious and debilitating bodily disfigurement;

inflicting physical trauma or intense pain on an animal;

recklessly abandoning an animal or otherwise placing the animal at grave risk of death, injury, disfigurement or disease;

torturing an animal;

sexually assaulting an animal; and

maliciously or cruelly killing an animal;

3. Clarifies that the following acts do not constitute abuse and are not prohibited by this resolution:

acts of veterinary medicine - including the acts of a licensed veterinarian taken in the course of caring for an animal, emergency aid provided to an animal in distress, and any other acts based on sound veterinary science;

animal research that is conducted for a legitimate scientific purpose and does not needlessly inflict pain or suffering;

butchering, slaughtering, or killing an animal for food or other consumption, so long as the methods used are not cruel and the animal is killed as swiftly and painlessly as possible;

acts of pest control, including any reasonable method of dealing with pests that is not unnecessarily cruel,

the employment of properly trained animals in potentially dangerous situations or occupations - such as law enforcement animals, guard dogs, war horses, and other service animals - so long as the animal is adequately handled for use in such situations and the intent is to avoid harm to the animal,

acts based on the science of animal breeding and appropriate care;

4. Outlaws the use of animals in fighting sports, or any other exhibition where the purpose, theme, or substance of the exhibition endangers the long term health and safety of the animal;

5. Requires that any person who keeps an animal - whether commercially, as a pet, or for any other purpose - must provide that animal with reasonable and appropriate care, including:

food of appropriate quantity and quality to keep the animal healthy,

access to a sufficient quantity of clean water to satisfy the animal's needs,

sufficient space for exercise as necessary for the health of the animal,

regular maintenance of the animal's space to keep it reasonably free of debris, waste, and disease, if the animal is kept in an enclosure,

shelter, refuge, or other appropriate protective barriers that supply reasonable protection from weather and injury, and

adequate personal attention and care necessary to keep the animal free from distress, injury, neglect and disease;

6. Further requires that any person who keeps an animal must, to the best of their means and ability, provide the animal with access to professional veterinary care deemed necessary to relieve the animal from distress, injury, neglect or disease.[/quote]

Hey guys,

I wanted to learn more about creating some form of way to conduct a realistic economic, political, or military background and roleplay for nations, and I wanted to learn more about what resources are available in that effort. Is there anyone interested in learning more about these topics as well?

Please provide sources if you know more on how to create successful and realistic companies, political factions, and military technology, et. cetera.

It's election time in the Prosaic Union, and the nations of the IDU are invited to cast their votes. You're allowed to vote for two parties.

The backdrop for the election is grounded in NS facts, but these are somewhat modified to create a more realistic and interesting situation, for example the economy here is not, like in NS, solely made up of Book Publishing. Because, you know, that's absurd. It's still very much in a shitty state though, that much hasn't changed. The outline here is that Gnejs has had a weak and inefficient economy for several years (think category: fair/reasonable), but are now in the midst of a major recession.

Context of the election:

The Prosaic Union is a parliamentary democracy where the Prime Minister exercises the executive powers. Legislative power lies with both the government and the Parliament, but the latter is the supreme legislature. The parliament is called the Storting, and consists of one chamber. The Storting can pass a law by simple majority of the 169 representatives, elected based on proportional representation for four-year terms.

Gnejs is a fairly average and left-centrist representative democracy, with a few quirks, pockets of radicalism and a big soft spot for its beautiful environment. Political freedoms are pretty standard, and civil rights are on the verge of abundant. But it's the economy everybody is talking about at the moment. The Gnejsian economy is sizeable, but terribly stagnant. 78.3 % of the economy is government activity and state-owned industry. Private industry accounts for 15.7 %, whereas black market activity is estimated to 6 % (probably too low an estimate).

For the last decades, the economic situation has been vulnerable, but somewhat stable. The dominant publishing and printing industry employ a large number of citizens, and have in intervals achieved respectable export figures of both material and end products. The nation has a large but extremely inefficient agricultural sector, and a terribly outdated fishing industry. Both have been pillars of the Gnejsian economy for a long time, mainly due to their share size, but they have struggled for years. Publishing and printing have experienced a massive drop in revenue in the last decade as demands from foreign markets have plummeted, due to the "digital revolution". Few of the market actors have successfully managed the paradigm transition.

The combined effects have thrown Gnejs into a deep recession ? with the smallest GDP per capita in the IDU, and an unemployment rate at 14.89 % - shaking the foundations of political life, as the dominant Unionist Party of Gnejs and their junior government party the Socialist Party of Gnejs struggle against a vocal opposition.

The Election: your options:

Unionist Party of Gnejs (UPG)
The grey eminence of Gnejsian political life, the UPG have been in power, with various coalition partners and on their own, since the early 60's. UPG advocates a strong welfare state, funded through taxes and duties, and profiles itself as a progressive party. They are essentially the architects of modern day Gnejs. Having been very popular with the electorate for years, the recent exposure of the nation's economic vulnerability have landed them in a difficult position. UPG additionally have a strong commitment to environmental issues, and this has often guided their policymaking. For example in their managing of agriculture and fisheries, their resistance to extensive tourism, and most radically the controversial decision of outlawing the use of cars outside of the public transportation system. The banning of cars was, however, a cause mainly driven by the Gnejs Green Party, a junior coalition partner of the UPG at the time. UPG have always had an ambivalent stance towards membership in the IDU and the WA. However, in later years they have consolidated their stance as cautious proponents of both.

The current leader of the UPG is Cornelis Naess, who is also the Prime minister.

UPG currently holds 69 of the 160 seats in the Storting.

Socialist Party of Gnejs (SPG)
?The reds? were founded after a split in the UPG in the mid-80's. They have jumped from being junior coalition partners to an extremely vocal opposition party and back again ever since. SPG have managed to attract a more or less steady 15-17 seat in the Storting for a long period of time. They claim to be advocates for the working class and society's unfortunate, although voices within the opposition maintain their claim that the party always have, and still only attract the lazy and ignorant. They are mainly concerned with maintaining government dominance in the business sector, providing a well-functioning welfare system and a top quality public school. Although on these issues, they are not far apart from the policies of the UPG. The division between the SPG and UPG is mainly connected to civil rights issues, multiculturalism and liberalizing refugee immigration policy. However, somewhat paradoxically, the SPG are fierce opponents of labor immigration, a trait they share with the UPG. The SPG have gone from being opposed to Gnejsian IDU-membership, to becoming great proponents. They remain opposed to Gnejsian WA-membership. The SPG are also in favor of re-allowing cars within Gnejs.

The party?s leader is Marfa Fredhell from the northern city of Finntorp on Ecpatia, who is also the Minister of Finance. She is 47 and has a PhD in economics from the University of Kejm in Port Kejm.

SPG currently holds 17 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

The Moderate Party (MP)
The "Mod's" are the biggest opposition party. The party advocates economic liberalism, reduction of taxes, and individual rights, and defines itself as a centrist-liberal party. It has historically been - alongside The Progressive Alliance - the most outspokenly pro-IDU party in Gnejs, supporting membership during the 2005 referendum. They also support membership within the WA. The party generally supports privatization of certain government industry, semi-privatization through state-funded private services, cutting taxes and increased labor immigration. MP have supported many of the UPGs reforms in welfare and certain civil rights issues. One of their big proposals during the campaigning have been facilitating the establishing of a tourism industry, making use of the country's famous environment in the pressing economic times. MP are also in favor of re-allowing cars within Gnejs.

The current leader of the "Mod's" is Arne Vreeswijk, a 36-year-old ex-civil servant from Esias in the southern parts of Gnejs.

MP currently holds 33 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

Gnejs Green Party (GGP)
GGP are a fairly new edition the Gnejsian political scene. They entered the Storting in the mid-00's, and have been a junior coalition partner to the UPG for one full term. Because of the UPG's strong position on "green" issues, there has traditionally been little room for other green parties in Gnejs. However, GGP have taken a somewhat more radical stance in many environmental discussions, and coupled with growing dissatisfaction with UPG-dominance, they have been able to achieve a stable representation for consecutive terms. Environmental issues are, obviously, GGP's top priority and strict environmental regulations, such as a banning of cars outside the public transportation system is one of the most radical ideas the party has put in front of the Storting. Besides the environment, the party is concerned with social welfare, education, Gnejsian involvement in the IDU and the WA, feminism, a more decentralized government, direct democracy and gay rights.

The party is led by a duo: Nicolas Winborg, a 25-year-old journalist from Port Kejm, and Ingra Karlberg, 47 years old from Finntorp on Ecpatia.

GGP currently holds 8 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

Centre Party (CP)
The Centrists are an agrarian interest party for the Gnejs farming population, although they have broadened their scope somewhat over the last decades. They sport fairly conservative views on social issues, whereas they generally support the statist approach to the economy. The great dividing line between the CP and the ruling coalition lies in government support to the agricultural sector and the trout fishing industry, which the CP believes to be grossly insufficient. The party is opposed to Gnejsian WA-membership, and remain somewhat skeptical about involvement in the IDU.

The Centrists leader is Hanna De Laval, a 37-year-old farmer from western parts of Gnejs.

CP currently holds 24 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

The Progressive Alliance (TPA)
Social-liberals. Advocates personal freedom under the pre-condition of an active state. Have traditionally supported many of the UPG-reforms in welfare and certain civil rights issues. The party is a strong supporter of multiculturalism and overall relaxed integration measures, a position they share with the GGP and portions of the SPG, and to a lesser extent the UPG. The dividing line between TPA and the parties traditionally considered 'Left-wing' lies in economic issues, where TPA advocates substantial privatizations of state-owned businesses, abolishing, among other things, wealth and inheritance taxes to stimulate private capital growth and investment. TPA are also strong advocates for increased labor immigration, an issue where they are very much at odds with the UPG and the SPG. Big supporters of the IDU, somewhat skeptical towards the WA.

The current TPA leader is Trond Norrby, a 52-year-old lecturer from Port Kejm.

TPA currently holds 14 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

National Democrats (ND)
The National Democrats is the newest party to gain seats in the Storting, having only received their four representatives' last election. They are very socially conservative, while moderate in economic terms. They are often disregarded as a "one-issue-party", the issue in question being immigration. They advocate a withdrawal from the WA, only partial contact with the IDU, a closing of borders and repatriation of non-citizens and citizens they refer to as "ethnically and culturally distinct" from the majority. None of the other parties wish to be associated with ND, something that several prominent politologists in Gnejs claim have increased their popular support, as some view them as unfairly treated by the established parties.

Their current leader is Knut Atrix, a 68-year-old farmer from the south of Gnejs.

ND currently holds 4 of the 169 seats in the Storting.

I made a thread for new roleplay posts. Feel free to create as much as you want!

So I finally got around to re-writing this thing from a "social justice" perspective. Basically just a "stream of consciousness" way of writing it, so it's not very well thought out, but I thought I'd post it here anyways. Initial responses from when I posted the version labelled "Second Draft" here on the forums were, in short, "not an international issue of note" and "try social justice, but I still won't support it." My ambition as of now is very modest: I'd like to write a proposal that is legal and reasonably well-argued. I don't really care about getting it to vote or passing. Practice run, more or less. Comments would be appriciated nontheless.

Quote: Phone Home Act

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES that many WA member states operate with similar and compatible systems and infrastructure for wireless telecommunications,

RECOGNIZES that providers of wireless telecommunications networks - that are commercially accessible to the public - in different member states often enter into authentication, authorization and billing agreements, allowing users from different nations to continue using wireless communication devices seamlessly by connecting to foreign commercially accessible wireless telecommunications networks while in other member states,

REALISING that connecting to foreign commercially accessible wireless telecommunications networks often involves surcharges for non-domestic users for the services used while connected,

NOTES that there are substantial variations in said surcharges, causing financial unpredictability for users, especially for those of limited means,

BELIEVING nationals from member states, regardless of their socioeconomic status and financial resources, should have reasonable access to pursuing private long-distance communication through their own devices while visiting other member states without dreading unpredictable monetary consequences,

Hereby,

MANDATES that all providers of commercially accessible wireless telecommunications networks in member states refrain from adding surcharges for non-domestic users from other member-states connecting to their network via wireless communication devices, beyond the minimum transaction costs required to facilitate connectivity and service provision,

REQUIRES that all providers of commercially accessible wireless telecommunications networks in member states give notice, through appropriate channels and free of charge, to all non-domestic users from other member-states concerning the current rates of network services for said user upon connecting to their network,

DECREES that all member states shall greet visitors from other member states, upon entry, with a piece of cake or quick-bread, preferably scones.[/quote]

Old drafts
Spoiler: click to togglePhone Home Act

Category: Social Justice Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES that many member states operate with similar telecommunications systems, allowing users from different nations to continue using their mobile phone devices seamlessly while outside their domestic telecommunications network and in other member states,

REALISING that telecommunications networks often operate with surcharges for non-domestic users for the tele- text and data services used while connected to their network,

NOTES that no international regulation exists covering this area and that there are substantial variations in said surcharges between nations and networks, causing financial unpredictability for users, especially for those of limited means,

BELIEVING nationals from WA member states, regardless of their socioeconomic status and financial resources, should have reasonable access to pursuing private long-distance communication while visiting other member states without dreading unpredictable monetary consequences,

Hereby,

MANDATES that all network owners/operators in WA member states refrain from adding surcharges for non-domestic users from other member states connecting to their network for the first 120 minutes of calling and 1 megabytes of data;

REQUIRES that all network owners/operators in WA member states give notice, through appropriate channels, to all non-domestic users from other member states concerning the current rates of network services for said user upon connecting to their network.

Spoiler: click to toggleSecond draft. I've tried making this a "free trade" proposal. Any feedback would be much appreciated. I'll take this to the NS forums at some point, not sure when, it might be a while until I have the time for it. But I would be very glad to get some comments from our more experienced players before that time. I've gathered that being torn apart on the forums is sort of standard procedure for the WA. But, you know, anything we can do to lessen the need for being torn would be nice.

Fair Roaming Act
A resolution to reduce barriers for free trade
Category: Free trade Strength: Strong Proposed by: Gnejs

Desciption: The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES the tremendous benefits that telecommunication and internet access have had, and continues to have, in enabling human interaction, connecting societies and strengthening enterprise and business.

COMITTED to the removal of obstacles to further free trade and shared markets between member states in areas appropriate.

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution, International Roaming as the technology that allows wireless communication devices to stay connected to a network, from here on "guest network", while traveling abroad and outside the area of coverage of the users standard domestic network; facilitating the possibility to seamlessly make and receive calls, send text messages and send or receive data.

Further DEFINES International Roaming Fees as extra charges made to the user for the tele- text- and data services used while connected to a guest network in another nation, and International Roaming Contracts as the legal frameworks between network owners/operators of different nations that:

1)governs the technical enabling of, and the billing procedures related to, users' seamless connection between networks, and thereby
2)determines International Roaming Fees

CONCERNED that no international regulation exists covering this area, resulting in the possibility of substantial variations in International Roaming Fees between nations and networks ? dependent on the user's standard domestic network and its International Roaming Contracts ? and also between domestic users of a network and "travelling/visiting" users.

WORRIED that the unpredictability for users of said variations while visiting different nations, and the difference in charging between domestic and "travelling/visiting" users, results in lowering the use of telecommunication and internet services on wireless communication devices, effectively hampering professional and private interaction and communication due to monetary concerns on the part of the "travelling/visiting" user.

CONVINCED that an abolishment of International Roaming Fees will achieve a greater predictability for users, and result in increasing use of network services while travelling/visiting abroad.

CONFIDENT that this will strengthen the maintaining of professional and private relationships through instant access to information at predictable prices.

CONVINCED that, despite causing a short-term loss of revenue, network owners/operators will ultimately gain from the abolishment of International Roaming Fees due to increased usage of services by a larger pool of potential customers.

Further ASSURED that this is case, as the abolishment of International Roaming Fees will enable domestic network owners/operators to compete for customers in new markets in other member states.

Therefore,

MANDATES that all network owners/operators in WA member nations, within their International Roaming Contracts, refrains from adding International Roaming Fees for non-domestic users, and solely operate with their domestic rates for all users connected to their network.

Further MANDATES that all network owners/operators in WA member nations gives notice, through appropriate channels, hereunder text message, to all "travelling/visiting" users, upon connecting to a "guest network", concerning the current rates of network services for said user.

In closing, ASSERTS that it is the sole prerogative of the network owner/operator to determine the prices for services provided within their respective network, within the confines of national and international law and regulations.[spoiler/]


First Draft:
Spoiler: click to toggleAs suggested a month ago or so, here is an attempt at a proposal covering "roaming" while travelling abroad in other WA-member states.

I had two drafts going on, one more radical that calls for the abolishment of all roaming fees in member states, and another one that is slightly (or maybe significantly) less ambitious, namely one that mandates that roaming fees can only be set a certain % higher than domestic rates (I have no idea what this % should be though, suggestions are very welcome). The one posted here is nr. 2. Mainly because I finished writing this one first, but maybe this one would also stand a greater chance in the WA?

I would really appreciate some feedback/comments/suggestions. Do you think this is a good idea to put in front of the WA? Is it "legal" (I'm not very familiar with these legality rules)? What category should this be in, and what strenght? Are there any loop holes, is it written clearly enough, what is it lacking, etc. etc.

Fair Roaming Act
A resolution to ?
Category: ? Strength: ? Proposed by: Gnejs

Desciption: The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES the tremendous benefits that telecommunication and internet access have had, and continues to have, in enabling human interaction, connecting societies and strengthening enterprise and business.

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution, International Roaming as the technology that allows wireless communication devices to stay connected to a network, from here on "guest network", while traveling abroad and outside the area of coverage of the users standard domestic network; facilitating the possibility to seamlessly make and receive calls, send text messages and send or receive data.

Further DEFINES International Roaming Fees as charges made to the user for the tele- text- and data services used while connected to a guest network in another nation, and International Roaming Contracts as the legal frameworks between network owners/operators of different nations that 1.) governs the technical enabling of, and the billing procedures related to, users seamless connection between networks and thereby 2.) determines International Roaming Fees.

CONCERNED that no international regulation exists covering this area, resulting in the possibility of substantial variations in International Roaming Fees between nations and networks - dependent on the users standard domestic network and its International Roaming Contracts - and also between domestic users of a network and "travelling/visiting" users.

WORRIED that the unpredictability for users of said variations, and the difference in charging between domestic and "travelling/visiting" users, results in lowering the use of telecommunication and internet services on wireless communication devices, effectively hampering private and professional interaction and communication due to monetary concerns on the part of the "travelling/visiting" user.

ASSERTS that it is the sole prerogative of the network owner/operator to determine the prices for services provided within their respective network for their own domestic users, within the confines of national and international law and regulations.

RECOGNIZING the legitimacy of network owners/operators to differentiate charges between domestic and "travelling/visiting" user to cover potential expenses connected to International Roaming.

However, CONVINCED that an international standard regulating the levels of International Roaming Fees will achieve a greater predictability for users, and result in increasing use of network services while travelling/visiting abroad, further strengthening the maintaining of private and professional relationships through instant access to information at predictable prices.

Therefore,

MANDATES that all network owners/operators in WA member nations, within their International Roaming Contracts, must not set International Roaming Fees for non-domestic users higher than X % of their domestic rates.

Further MANDATES that all network owners/operators in WA member nations gives notice through appropriate channels, hereunder text messages, to all "travelling/visiting" users, upon connecting to a "guest network", concerning the current rates for network services for said user.

ASSERTS that this resolution does not prohibit WA member nations from going further and setting lower maximum International Roaming Fee rates for network owners/operators within in their nation, or deciding on the abolishment of said fees.[spoiler/]