NationStates Jolt Archive

I've noticed over the weekend that several nations are in uproar over the passing of the recent Labor Union Rights resolution. (This is a technical question, I assure you.)

First, I ask this question: What is the approval percentage needed for a resolution to be enacted by the UN?

Second, I offer this solution: If the percentage required is too low, raise it. Unless this site has accounted for increased popularity, the current game mechanics are inadequate for the number of nations supported. A two-thirds or even three-fourths majority in the UN would allow for a fairer legislation on international issues.

---
The Real McCoy

First, I ask this question: What is the approval percentage needed for a resolution to be enacted by the UN?


I was under the impression that it just took a simple majority...

First, I ask this question: What is the approval percentage needed for a resolution to be enacted by the UN?


I was under the impression that it just took a simple majority...

I concur.

To move a proposal from the general queue to the state of actually being voted on (AKA "quorum") = 6% of total UN membership (this was roughly 120 approvals last I checked).
To pass a resolution which is able to be voted on by all UN members = 1 more vote FOR than AGAINST.

Note that it isn't a majority of all UN members or anything fancy like a 2/3 vote. A simple plurality of votes gets you over the line.

To move a proposal from the general queue to the state of actually being voted on (AKA "quorum") = 6% of total UN membership (this was roughly 120 approvals last I checked).
To pass a resolution which is able to be voted on by all UN members = 1 more vote FOR than AGAINST.

Note that it isn't a majority of all UN members or anything fancy like a 2/3 vote. A simple plurality of votes gets you over the line.

I'm not suggesting a majority of all UN members be needed; over 1/3 of the member nations didn't even cast a vote on the last issue. But of those who did, the resolution passed by about 55%-45%. There have already been complaints on the UN forum about the "democratic" aspects of the United Nations. These numbers seem to reveal that a large number of non-apathetic voters weren't well represented.

i'm guessing it's like voting for real, if you don't get ya butt off the couch then you turthfully don't count, majority rules whether six people vote of twenty thousand vote.

maybe it should be required that all UN members vote on an issue? It would make things a whole lot easier.



~alex~

i'm guessing it's like voting for real, if you don't get ya butt off the couch then you turthfully don't count, majority rules whether six people vote of twenty thousand vote.

maybe it should be required that all UN members vote on an issue? It would make things a whole lot easier.



~alex~

Not all UN members are always able to vote on issues, though. What about people on vacation? Besides, requiring a complete majority is unfair to those who feel that (for whatever reason) abstaining from voting would best serve the interests of their nation.

Not just people on vacation, what about inactive nations that will presumably be there for almost 28 days (by which time new inactive nations will take their place).

Compulsory voting isn't feasable in the NS UN, it's to easy for players to be apathetic.

There have already been complaints on the UN forum about the "democratic" aspects of the United Nations. These numbers seem to reveal that a large number of non-apathetic voters weren't well represented.

And whose fault is that?? The real problem lies with all the childish players who scream unfair when things dont go their way. They then leave the UN which means less of them able to vote against the resolutions they dislike!

If they actually did something about it like proposing well written proposals then they might have a leg to stand on.

If they stayed and argued for others to join then the UN would be more balanced and "democratic", basically, the choice is theirs.