By default, one doesn't have the right to distribute - whilst your NWO-SA licence does grant this right, the NWO-CS one doesn't?
A general problem with self-written licences is that it increases the problem of licence incompatibility. Also - because of the risks of incompatibility, or a desire to restrict to "Free" licences - some sites or distribution platforms limit themselves to "standard" ones, or say those approved by FSF or OSI. Now, there's no reason why your licence couldn't be approved also if it becomes popular, but it is a hurdle to cross.
To me, licensing schemes should have more of a handshake vibe than a "see you in court" vibe.
But the bit in all-caps is not about threatening to sue the person using the work, it's about protecting the original author.
In some ways, I'd argue that your text is actually more of a court vibe - the "I agree" makes it read like a contract that you require someone to agree to. Open Source licences however typically don't require you to agree to anything (since they grant extra rights, subject to conditions), indeed the GPL makes it clear that it isn't a contract that one has to agree to.
The GPL may be long and complex, but that's because there are a lot of issues to go across when you talk about requiring people to distribute the modified source code (as your NWO-SA does). What if I link to a closed source library? What is "easily accessible" - and how do I achieve that if distributing code in say a hardware product? What if I create a derivative work to use internally within a company? The GPL has answers to all of that - not just in the legalise itself, but from people who have answered those questions.
Even if I didn't care about any of that, if I put your code into my GPL'd software, other people who do care about that aren't going to touch my software.
Now, it may be that you don't really care about any of this - I note that you talk about rejecting copyright altogether - so do you mean these are more your preferences rather than a legal requirement? But in that case, these shouldn't be called licences at all - go with WTFPL, and put these as optional preferences in your documentation.