NationStates Jolt Archive

I've been told an idea I was considering proposing for the UN is a major games mechanics violation but I think it would be a really interesting addition to the game. Delegates get their power through endorsments. I wanted to propose a measure that placed term limits on delegates. To do this effectively the system would need a mechanic that would after a set number of resolution votes clear all nations endorsment.
I think this would solve several problems I see in the game
A. people who convince friend to join the game with no real intention of ever particapating just so they can have delegate authority would have checks & balances in place.
B. It would give a more realistic feel to the role of the delegate if they actually had to make their regions happy or risk losing their positions.
C. I have heard talk that if a nation endorses you until they withdraw their endorsment it is there forever. Even if they leave the UN or the game. If this is the case it would be a great way to clear out the system of nations no longer involed & would add realism in that manner.(if this is true.)
If UN resolutions can cause
Taxes to rise
Poliical freedoms Civil rights & Economies to change? Why is the delegate button locked down?

C is false

I'll admit I'm not as active as Botswombata in the game. I just kinda do my own thing. I deal with my issues, I vote on resolutions, I don't think about the game mechanics very much. But we are a small region with only a few nations to give endorsements to our delegate. Does this mean that our region has such a small voice compared to those delegates who have so many endorsements when it comes time to vote for and against things in the UN? How many endorsements are sitting from long dormant nations? That doesn't seem quite right to me. Re-endorsements seem like a good way to clear out that clutter as well as keep nations more active in the UN.

I think that setting term limits is something that should be left for the region to figure out. I know for a fact that there are certain regions that have Delegate elections after 30 days as a delegate.

I'll admit I'm not as active as Botswombata in the game. I just kinda do my own thing. I deal with my issues, I vote on resolutions, I don't think about the game mechanics very much. But we are a small region with only a few nations to give endorsements to our delegate. Does this mean that our region has such a small voice compared to those delegates who have so many endorsements when it comes time to vote for and against things in the UN? How many endorsements are sitting from long dormant nations? That doesn't seem quite right to me. Re-endorsements seem like a good way to clear out that clutter as well as keep nations more active in the UN.

Your region has less of a voice than regions such as The Pacifics, for obvious reasons.

It wouldn't be right to take away legitimate endorsements from a delegate, or any UN member for that matter, because its still an endorsement, whether the nation is active or not.

I think that setting term limits is something that should be left for the region to figure out. I know for a fact that there are certain regions that have Delegate elections after 30 days as a delegate.



Your region has less of a voice than regions such as The Pacifics, for obvious reasons.

It wouldn't be right to take away legitimate endorsements from a delegate, or any UN member for that matter, because its still an endorsement, whether the nation is active or not.
It's not like people couldn't turn around & re-endorse the same delegate so I'm still failing to see the wrong in this.
I've seen a number of proposals that are clearly "not right" that seem to have been cleared such as "Compulsory Democracy" & "Compulsory Gun Ownership?"

If this is not technically able to be done that is one thing. I will drop the issue here & now but if this is an ideology then don't the people have the right to make that decission?

This is a legitimate issue govermental bodies make all over the world. Whether or not to elect officals & how it is to be handled.
If the people hate the idea they will shoot it down.
Again if this is a technical hardship let me know. I will understand. I will be disappointed but I will understand

Half the fun of NationStates is the internal politics of a region. If a delegate wishes to make themself eternal dictator for life, they're free to do so and hold on to the delegacy for as long as they can. If someone wishes to set up a democracy, they're similarly free to do so.

My issue is still being dodged.
Is this technically not able to be set up within the confines of the game?
Is this why it would be a rules violation?

I'm hearing lots of Ideaology but no facts.
Please advise.

My issue is still being dodged.
Is this technically not able to be set up within the confines of the game?
Is this why it would be a rules violation?

I'm hearing lots of Ideaology but no facts.
Please advise.

I'm sure its possible, but it's highly unlikely because regions should be able to make policies such as this by themselves, rather than be forced to by the game.

As a UN Resolution, yes it is illegal because it is proposing change to the games mechanics.

My issue is still being dodged.
Is this technically not able to be set up within the confines of the game?If UN resolutions can cause
Taxes to rise
Poliical freedoms Civil rights & Economies to change?
Why is the delegate button locked down?
Taxes, freedoms, and other factors are programmed to change with UN proposals. When a proposal is made using the appropriate proposal category, it takes effect automatically. You don't think Salusa and [violet] have to crawl around in the game engine everytime somebody votes on a resolution, do you?

The UN delegacy is not part of that programming. To change it, programming would have to be changed. Changes in programming are game mechanics alterations that require somebody to fiddle with the code, and those are not allowed. You can't vote more free time into Salusa or [violet]'s schedule (they are busy people), nor can you require changes to code that may not be technically feasible in this particular game.

Does that address your question?

Yes this was the answer I was looking for.
Thank You!
No I did not think the techs went in & made changes each time. I was just wondering if the programing was built to take a proposal on how endorsments are structured into account.

The game is a wonderful Idea & I understand how hard it would be to change programming to accomodate this so I will drop the line of questioning.

Back to the drawing board I say.