NationStates Jolt Archive

Poll of the UN Structure possiblities

The Dragon Alliance
09-10-2003, 02:40
I believe that the whole UN process currently in use by NS is flawed and backwards. Right now anyone can suggest a proposal, the delegates have to vote on whether or not it reaches general assembly, THEN everyone votes on it.

this is completely backwards.

Anyone should be able to prospose one first of course, but then the UN members should vote whether or not a proposal reaches Delegate Council. I mean, what other purpose does the Delegateship serve than to be a sort of Security Council? a final deciding platform.

I suggest that we dispose of the number of delegate things required, and instead move the general assembly to voting on which ones are brought up before the High Council- AKA the Delegates. Then the delegates have a real job- inputting their region's opinion. That way it is more government-like.

It makes more sense! doesn't it make a hell of alot more sense for the UN as a whole (minus the delegates) to vote on the issues that should be voted on for resolution, and then the Regional Delegates, the true representary people, will actually do the voting, thus truly making having a delegate, and who your delegate is, being an important thing. right now the biggest thing delegates influence is which proposals reach voting phase. I believe this is menial and inefficient. The Delegates should be the ones who vote to pass or reject the actual resolution, the UN as a whole should vote on the proposals to see whether or not they reach Delegate Voting.

I figure that the UN voting ont he proposals to reach Delegate Voting would be a sort of percentage thing. 75% or some odd number should be needed to sign off on a proposal before it can be queued to reach Delegate voting. Maybe 60%. Not only would this promote more interaction by the UN Members in the UN, but I believe that it would and will be much more efficient.

thank you.

-Shivan "Blu" Dragn, Founder of the United Dragon Realms (and past delegate of it), ally of The Bruce (Wysteria) and Ineptia (The Heartland) and Alerica (North Alerica) and RedCommunist (USSR)
09-10-2003, 02:43
Huh, interesting idea.

As a power hungery delegate I say "me like", as Qaaolchoura I say "too elitist."
The Dragon Alliance
09-10-2003, 02:44
how about as a seeker of truth, or in other words, as a philosopher? or as a Government Structure Analyst?
09-10-2003, 09:10
One of the problems with the list of proposals now is that so few delegates bother to vote. I would expect that if there was a list of proposals for thegeneral membership to vote on, the same problem would occur: only a small portion of UN Members would bother to go through the list and vote on those proposals (so, large region delegates would end up having a field day every day!). Then the accepted proposals go to the delegate council to be voted on, and only delegates get to vote. I'm not sure what would happen then, other than even more non-delegates just deciding to further ignore the UN due to feeling of being overpowered and not being able to do anything about it.

Right now people with a relatively low activity level still have some (albeit limited) way of participating in the UN: voting on the issue on the floor. Your proposal would take that away. For a game to be successful it has to appeal to people with multiple interests as well as different levels of participation. While the current implementation of the UN isn't perfect by far, I don't see how your proposal is an improvement. It may better match Real Life decision processes, but that doesn't necesarily make for a better game. (imagine five nations with widely oposing viewpoints each having veto power, the UN would rarely pass any resolution at all!)

Tactical Grace
09-10-2003, 12:13
As a regional Delegate (with another nation), I do find it quite menial going through 7-14 pages of Proposals twice a week, endorsing the ones I like the look of (maybe one in three), only to see them disappear, and reappear a few days later in another guise. Your idea does strike me as a potentially interesting one. I do feel a change in the way we filter Proposals would be of benefit, if it means Delegates deal with a slightly greater number of Resolutions and do not have to touch Proposals at all if they do not wish to do so. Less repetitive work for us, and UN members would have an additional activity to keep them occupied. At the moment, I feel many newcomers are quite surprised and disillusioned by the limited range of activities which UN membership opens up.
09-10-2003, 12:18
I think we should limit the number of proposals to 20 at a time but lengthen the time allowed to vote on them to 14 days, most proposals that are good never make it because noone can be bothered to sift through tons of "lets ban gays" proposals... :roll:
Tactical Grace
09-10-2003, 12:32
So many great Proposals with lots of debate value get to within 20 endorsements of quorum, and drop off the stack. We should definitely be voting on two every week, not just one.
09-10-2003, 12:43
It is an issue that need addressing urgently and one that i've brought up time and time again but to no avail...
The Dragon Alliance
09-10-2003, 20:44
ARGH!!! what the heck!!! so much talk, so little VOTING!!!!!

come on people, the idea is simple-

At the proposal stage after a proposal has ben submitted (I am not addressing the issue of proposals themselves at this time), the general UN members do exactly what the Delegates currently do, only instead of a certain number of delegate approvals required, a certain percentage of UN member approvals is requied for the proposal to be queued for vote. Then, and the actual resolution voting stage, ONLY the delegates vote on it.

In this way the delegates will truly be the Representative of the UN member nations of their region. They can also vote whichever way they wish but a smart delegate would be siding with the majority opinion of the UN member nations of his region.

It makes MUCH more sense, and is more efficient, to have the miriad proposals debated and appoved/disapproved by the general assembly, and THEN have the delegates vote, as if a High Council, on the final decision.
Tactical Grace
09-10-2003, 20:55
I suppose I would endorse the above. The thing is, there may be a temptation amongst the Admin to keep things ticking over as they are, until this game is :shock: shut down.
09-10-2003, 21:52
On a first (brief) read I thought every issue would come to vote :shock: I see now that this is not the case ...

There are still a couple flaws though. As much as the delegatees hate reading through the list of proposals, imagine how much less the regular players would want to be bothered to read through all that. I think that one problem with this is that even fewer proposals would come to vote, assuming that the proposal process itself it unchanged (IE limit on numbers, some sort of filtering)
Tactical Grace
09-10-2003, 23:03
As much as the delegatees hate reading through the list of proposals, imagine how much less the regular players would want to be bothered to read through all that.
I have new UN members asking me what they are supposed to do with their membership. The current list of possibilities is sadly underwhelming for many.
The Dragon Alliance
10-10-2003, 03:12
yes! listen to the moderator! listen good!
10-10-2003, 18:16
I suppose I would endorse the above. The thing is, there may be a temptation amongst the Admin to keep things ticking over as they are, until this game is :shock: shut down.

Even with a vote, it's stil a "game rules" situation over which we players have no real control.

If it gains enough support I suppose it could be forwarded to [violet] as F.Y.I.