Well Played Mr. President!

letzrockexpress · Sep 12, 2013

Turtle said:
Huh? What are you talking about?

A protocol is defined with two primary definitions, one being that of the customs and regulations dealing with diplomatic formality, precedence, and etiquette, and the other being that of a treaty or agreement between states. It is also the draft document from which an actual treaty is derived. It is the set form, usually a rigid one, in which something must be done. In computing it is the specific set form in which data must be presented for handling by a particular computer configuration - deviate from that and the data is unusable and meaningless (TCP/IP and various other Internet protocols). Where you came up with "suggestion," I'll never know. If you must use a euphemism for protocol, then agreement, covenant, contract, obligation, pact and formality are all far more accurate synonyms than is "suggestion."

Ratification is literally a principal's approval of an act of the principal's agent where the agent lacked the authority legally bind the principal. Ambassadors to the United Nations, for example, are agents of their principal home countries and cannot enter into legally binding contracts unless specifically given that authority and power by their principal. I know of no UN Ambassador with such authority and power.

By "General Assembly" I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you mean the General Assembly of the United Nations. If that's so, then the General Assembly can ratify things until they're blue in the face, and it doesn't become a law or a treaty until the signatories to the resolution ratify it in their home countries, such as in the United States when it gets ratified by the Senate (tho-thirds vote). As of May 2013, 138 nation-states have ratified, or agreed to, the Geneva Protocol, thereby making it a law, a treaty, a rule (see also: agreement, covenant, contract, obligation, pact, formality).

If you want to debate something, the least you could do is come prepared. A good start would be getting a dictionary. A really thick and heavy one. The next time you think you know what something means, look it up, and read the definitions, before posting about it.

Now, slowly, put the cork back on the end of the fork before you poke your eye out.

If I understand the COC

This comes dangerously close to a personal attack...

Turtle · Sep 12, 2013

letzrockexpress said:
If I understand the COC This comes dangerously close to a personal attack...

Possibly. Depends on how you look at it.

Slo-Ride · Sep 12, 2013

Turtle said:
Possibly. Depends on how you look at it.

If this goes to counsel for a decision, any chance we can have vote?

Brisco · Sep 12, 2013

letzrockexpress said:
If I understand the COC This comes dangerously close to a personal attack...

Turtle said:
Possibly. Depends on how you look at it.

Slo-Ride said:
If this goes to counsel for a decision, any chance we can have vote?

In other words.........from a Moderators stand point.......We are allowed........You are NOT.

And.........Do as you're TOLD............NOT as WE do............

Members VOTE................Yeah..........Right........

Slo-Ride · Sep 12, 2013

Well I was kinda just funin Turtle..I think he knows that or I hope he does. Didn't/mean to stir a pot here here. I know how some feel about a COC...To me its their site and if I wanna play its by their rules I guess.And it doesn't bother me..
But hey Thanks for putting all that together for me Brisco..It would have taken me a month of Sundays to link all those

Turtle · Sep 12, 2013

Slo-Ride said:
Well I was kinda just funin Turtle..I think he knows that or I hope he does.

Of course I do. It's all good.

Didn't/mean to stir a pot here here.

You didn't. Brisco brings his own pot. It's what he lives for.

Pilgrim · Sep 13, 2013

letzrockexpress said:
It is a suggestion, or perhaps a Gentleman's Agreement, but not binding.. #2 in your list of definitions says as much and applies to the context in which I was using it. An agreement is not necessarily binding upon anyone. For instance, there have been countless agreements between drivers to not haul cheap freight. They are still doing it. There is no legal penalty for doing it. An agreement with no teeth is a suggestion.

Obviously, this discussion is pointless. After reading this reply, I'd suggest you get an eyepatch over both eyes before using a fork or playing with your pots and pans.

Footnote: for those who haven't seen it, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels (from Turtle's post) is one of the best movies ever made.