NationStates Jolt Archive

I posted this in the UN forum itself, but realize it should be in this forum....

This message is not a formal proposal, but a call for reform of the United Nations. As posted in the first message in the "What is the Mandate of the U.N.?" forum, the United Nations has specific duties. Abysseria charges that the United Nations members regularly do not meet the standards required for the UN to be a viable international governing body. As such, Abysseria recommends, and calls for support of, the following changes:

1. The U.N. forum moderators delete any proposals calling for a resolution that has already been legislated into existance by part of, or the entirety of, a previously passed resolution.

2. That U.N. forum moderators consider a system that requires voters to participate, or at the minimum, view debate on the currently proposed resolution.

3. That U.N. forum moderators delte any proposals that violate the mandate of the United Nations before allowing member nations that are improperly informed the ability to support a misguided proposal.

Abysseria recognizes that these steps are broadly stated, that they give much power to the forum moderators, and that they infringe on the liberty of member nations. However, Abysseria believes that liberty must be sacrificed to create order. The U.N., as it functions now, includes far too many nations that vote without considering debate, or participating in debate. It allows for proposals that violate the UN mandate. It allows for proposals that over-legislate.

Abysseria also recognizes, and firmly believes, that a majority of UN members are uninformed to the point of repeatedly making poor, and that is to say uniformed, decisions that have negatively impacted the UN. Abysseria believes that the four proposals listed here, each calling for UN nations make informed decisions, will better our community.

Regards,

The Commonwealth of Abysseria

1. The U.N. forum moderators delete any proposals calling for a resolution that has already been legislated into existance by part of, or the entirety of, a previously passed resolution. Why? Remember, the issue system works on the same principle: Legalising something two times affects your civil rights more than doing it one time ;)

I see no reason why the UN should work in another way.

2. That U.N. forum moderators consider a system that requires voters to participate, or at the minimum, view debate on the currently proposed resolution. Mhm... you have any idea how such a system could work?

3. That U.N. forum moderators delte any proposals that violate the mandate of the United Nations before allowing member nations that are improperly informed the ability to support a misguided proposal. AFAIK, this is already the case.

The first comment I must make is that the forum moderators do not have power to do anything to UN resolutions or proposals. Such ability is possessed only by game moderators, and normally falls under the jurisdiction of Enodia.

This given,

1. How do you determine whether the specific material covered in a resolution has been covered already? The real life UN is full of resolutions that build upon, refute, or reinforce existing resolutions. Now, it's already policy that resolutions to the effect or pepealing others are not going to be introduced in NS. However, I see no reason why the others should not be allowed. For example, the last two resolutions to be passed are somewhat similar and do include some overlap in their mandates. This isn't a problem; it simply demonstrates that the UN must continually adapt to changes in the real world.

2. Whilst it would be nice to effect a democratic system whereby only informed and intelligent voters participate, it would both be next to impossible to do so and almost completely unfair. Firstly, are you to then suggest that the mods go and take names of everyone participating in threads debating current proposals? What about if somebody reads the thread, and decides that they agree with a post somebody else has made about the topic, and thus decides not to make a comment because it would already have been addressed? Are they to post a message saying 'I agree', for the sole purpose of contributing to the discussion. I somehow can't see how that adds to anything.

3. This is what Enodia does. However, as I think is completely understandable, he can't spend every waking minute looking over proposals to ensure that they meet expectations. Be realistic, and trust that any completely pointless and/or unacceptable resolutions will be deleted in time.

4.Abysseria believes that the four proposals listed here You've only made three proposals :P