Mar 9, 17 / Ari 12, 01 20:46 UTC
Recommendation: Decree No 2 Abrogation and institution of a Standard Authority ¶
today, we received the approval of the draft of a calendar system for Asgardia with the Decree No 2 of our head of our nation. The formalization of the drafted calendar system is incomplete, the development not finished and the approval does not reflect or provide the technical standard on what the calendar system is based. The provided conversion chart combined with the provided information about the calendar system reflects that the approved calendar system is an IFC (Internation Fixed Calendar) derivate with additional fixations of the end of the year and the synchronization of the beginning of the Asgardian year to the exact same day of the beginning of the gregorian year. The calendar will desync after the first occurred leap year. The calendar does ignore the February 29th of the gregorian calendar. The calendar system is unaware of leap seconds. The calendar system binds too much historic society decisions to its new representational asgardia age. The calendar system suffers from the same mathematical issues as the gregorian calendar and the same mathematical incompatibility as the gregorian date and time standard. The calendar system does not cover the need or decoupling of time zones and the start date and time is vague and not fixated to a specific (ZULU) date and time.
In hard words: The approved calendar system is just executed inheritance with added sugar and honey. A scientific cataclysm for a nation based on science. We can do that better.
I strongly recommend to abrogate the engaged Decree and to not longer establishing a date and time system proposal by the head of the nation. Instead of the abrogated Decree immediately a Standard Authority of Asgardia should be formed by an executive order, completely decoupled from the government to work on standards utilized in Asgardian environments.
I propose ATESA as the name for the authority which stands for "Asgardia Technical and Environmental Standards Authority" and should be lead by a director of standards, who proposes new standards to the head of the nation and takes the responsibility of a proper and public available draft and recommendation documentation bundled into a ATESA (online) Library.
ATESA should operate with a public - technology aware and socially mixed - audience to gather feedback about formed drafts. If a draft is ready to be proposed, the head of the nation (or later the council of ministers) can approve the standard and turn the Draft into a Recommendation. Recommendations are contracted Standards to operate on. As you see, a 100% transparent approach.
I personally see no professionalism in proposing half-baked calendar concepts as the "big thing" to vote on for a parliament that still does not exists. I also see no reason to not reply to those who submit their proposals, explicitly when they ask for feedback about the standards from the point of view of an acting government. I see the reason to improve such processes. That's why I do write this. That's where my hope is focussing.
Singularity Prime - Think Tank