NationStates Jolt Archive

I’d be grateful if we could have a discussion regarding the above. It is my feeling that we should consider entering a ‘rule’ that the UN cannot make resolutions on a topic, if a daily issue already exists for it. For example as I understand it, the death penalty is already a daily issue so even if the UN bans it, nations can still effectively ban it because we are unable to change the mechanics of the game. In addition I feel this makes a mockery of the NSUN, because it can be blatantly ignored and is one of the reasons why some nations have so little respect for it. In addition it will clearly define what is a local issue compared to an international issue.

My second point is that if we don’t stop doing this, we will legislate on almost every daily issue rendering them virtually obsolete and thus becoming unable to form a nation based on our own ideologies. I feel this is one of the fundamental aspects of the game and at the rate we are eroding the daily issues, I feel it will result in the loss of ‘the flavour’ of the game. I suppose my point is that I enjoy NS and I want others to enjoy it also, but if we destroy the daily issue system by which we define our nations, every nation will be the same, resulting in a very dull NS world.

I thank you for your time and look forward to your comments.

The option we can also follow is to make it so certain issues cannot be recieved by UN nations.

Thank you for the speedy reply.

Perhaps that would be a good starting point where resolutions have already been passed for example in the case of Euthanasia. I have to admit I did not realise this was possible, however I feel once an issue has been decided as local it should stay that way to avoid confusion.

That is a good point. It was actually the first thing I thought of when I saw the UN resolution. Myrth, is there a way that your point can actually be done?

I'm betting it is possible, Myrdinn. They already restrict certain issues based on the nation's category. For example, only nations with the U.N. category of Anarchy (such as my own) recieve the Too Low On Laws issue. The coding might be a pain in the @$$ though (but no more so than coding a repeal function into the U.N. I'm sure). :wink:

DP

Good idea. One flaw though.

The point of the UN is that people have to compromise with the masses involved with the organization.

We have 100% control over what we vote on an issue. But if you are in the UN, your vote is only a part of the decision.

Keeping daily issues out of UN topics would be messing it up.

The option we can also follow is to make it so certain issues cannot be recieved by UN nations.

I like this idea better than anything I've seen thus far. By allowing only certain issues to be received by UN nations, this adds to the "illusion" that nations cannot back out of UN law.

The point of the UN is that people have to compromise with the masses involved with the organization.

However, the only flaw in that logic is that UN members already have compromised themselves by following UN law.

Thus, choosing an issue choice, say about the death penalty, should never be presented unless they are out of the UN, because they will already be following a resolution on it one way or another.

Also, of note, should this now be :arrow: Technical?

If we are thinking about stopping certain issues to UN members what about new members? Members who existed before this proposed change would have had their relevant stats altered either by the passing of a resolution or the issue, but new members will never be given the opportunity to make a decision on these issues and therefore their stats will not be reflected in the same way. Does his approach not seem a little unfair to both current and new members?

It’s just a thought and I also agree we should probably move this to technical.

Any further comments or ideas anyone?

If we are thinking about stopping certain issues to UN members what about new members?

Part of joining the United Nations in NS and in RL is compromise. Thus, new nations would have to adhere to the rules set forth before them, just like one accepting citizenship in a country must adhere to the laws and legislation that passed before they became a legal member of that nation.

It's all a part of compromise.