NationStates Jolt Archive

Noting:

1. The importance and necessity of repealing Resolutions unfit for execution by the United Nations.

2. The alarming ease with which Resolutions can be repealed.

3. The increasingly large quantity of repeal Proposals in recent months and their resultant waste of legislative time.

4. The slow but steady erosion of civil liberties protected by United Nations Resolutions by frivolous repeal Proposals.

5. The compromising of the integrity of the United Nations by frivolous repeal Proposals and thus the decreased potency of its legislative authority.


Mandating:

1. Approval of 12% of the Regional Delegates for repeal Proposals to achieve quorum.

2. Approval of 60% of the general UN Nation States for a repeal Resolution to pass.

3. A limit of one repeal Proposal for any one United Nations Resolution at any given time.

I already deleted this once for being illegal. Trying to get yourself ejected?

Not at all. I was merely trying to see what other people though, as the game rules state I am permitted to use the forum to suggest game changes.

You're taking an RP element of a game and trying to make a structural change in the game code with it. It's called a game mechanics violation for a reason.

Think about it for a second - when was the last time mods acted on something because some resolution told them to? It isnt that hard to figure out.

And I do indeed remember seeing this appear in silly proposals a week or so ago.

Not at all. I was merely trying to see what other people though, as the game rules state I am permitted to use the forum to suggest game changes.

*points to technical board

This deals with resolutions and RP/organizational elements that surround the realm of the UN (stuff like UN HQ organization, discussions at the neighborhood bar, or the dozens of organizations such as the NSO, UNOG, and GTT). We are not about changing the rules.

I apologize and hope no undue harm was caused.

No, no harm. It was just presented as a Proposal, so it looked like you were drumming up support for it. You'd be surprized how many people do just that. In any event, moved to Tech.

2. The alarming ease with which Resolutions can be repealed.
I'd hardly call it easy. Still, it would be much harder if there weren't so many terribly written resolutions in the first place.

4. The slow but steady erosion of civil liberties protected by United Nations Resolutions by frivolous repeal Proposals.
Only those that pass have any effect. Could you point to a passed repeal you regard as 'frivolous'?

1. Approval of 12% of the Regional Delegates for repeal Proposals to achieve quorum.
You must be joking; even resolutions that have been in the queue for weeks rarely reach that level - repeal or otherwise.

2. Approval of 60% of the general UN Nation States for a repeal Resolution to pass.
A pretty arbitrary number. (And undemocratic, I might add.)

3. A limit of one repeal Proposal for any one United Nations Resolution at any given time.
That will lower the quality further - terribly-written repeals are constantly being submitted, and under this rule it would be difficult to submit well-written repeals because of that.

That will lower the quality further - terribly-written repeals are constantly being submitted, and under this rule it would be difficult to submit well-written repeals because of that.
On the other hand that would make searching for repeals a hell of a lot easier.

I'd add to the repeals thing. In the week leading up to Omigodtheykilledkenny's submission of Repeal "Gay Rights", he and I both scanned the proposal queue daily, to report all illegal submissions of other repeals to that resolution. There were many. Thankfully, the mods deleted them - and no doubt others - and so he got the first one in, so he could link to it directly. This made the TG campaign much easier. There was a repeal to the resolution submitted about an hour after his. Another two within a day or so.

The fact is, if someone has written a repeal, they shouldn't have to wait for an unrelated proposal to go through. Certain resolutions - offhand I'd say Gay Rights, Definition of Marriage, Metric System, and maybe Global Food Distribution Act, but there are others - have repeals lined up for them pretty much every day. Under your logic, many repeals would never be submitted, regardless of their merit. What about my repeal of Right to Divorce? I admit, I have a personal interest. But we counted at least ten submitted. I should have to wait forty days to submit a repeal? Bullshit. I hate to be arrogant, but our repeal was better than some of the others. It had more arguments. It even had the passive support of the resolution co-author. Your system would deny our repeal submission for forty days - regardless of its merits and flaws against those first ten proposals, regardless of its inherent merits and flaws, regardless of the fact that the post-RtD sentiment was strongly against, despite the overall vote, so the repeal quickly made it - by which time sentiment would have calmed and the repeal made more tricky, based solely on the fact that we spent an extra day or two preparing a good draft instead of simply shoving a couple of Bible quotes into the repeal window. In the event of another Promotion of Solar Panels, your suggestion penalises draftwork. That is not good for the UN.

Additionally, as I've outlined above, having multiple repeals in play makes it harder. So why limit that, if you dislike repeals!

And 12%? Ridiculous.

Noting:

1. The importance and necessity of repealing Resolutions unfit for execution by the United Nations.

Which is why you can have spurts of 3-5 repeals in a row - just as you can find patches of 3 consecutive resolutions that have been repealed. What's the problem?

2. The alarming ease with which Resolutions can be repealed.

Considering that probably a third of the proposals that get submitted ever are repeals (including everything that's deemed illegal), and the fact that you're not quite seeing that ratio of repeals to resolutions since repeals were introduced, I'd say they are no easier to do that resolutions. Again - you see spurts of 10 resolutions in a row and no one complains - but if you see 4 repeals in a row, all hell breaks loose

3. The increasingly large quantity of repeal Proposals in recent months and their resultant waste of legislative time.

Explain why they are wasteful? We've thought up some amazing ideas for these repeals of ways to replace them, but with the fact that a number of us replace resolutions on the order of months, its not surprising we haven't gotten around to replacing very many of them. I have a Right to Divorce replacement lieing around, Gruen has a Law of the Sea replacement, I have an idea for a Mandatory Recycling Replacement. Various others have replacements for many other resolutions and all of which improve upon the errors of the originals.

4. The slow but steady erosion of civil liberties protected by United Nations Resolutions by frivolous repeal Proposals.

We've eroded civil liberties? When? We've done more harm to environmental causes than anything else

5. The compromising of the integrity of the United Nations by frivolous repeal Proposals and thus the decreased potency of its legislative authority.

Bullshit


Mandating:

1. Approval of 12% of the Regional Delegates for repeal Proposals to achieve quorum.

You show me a resolution in the past year that got 12% support before hitting the floor and I MAY listen to you

2. Approval of 60% of the general UN Nation States for a repeal Resolution to pass.

I can sympathize with this idea, but I'm not supporting it

3. A limit of one repeal Proposal for any one United Nations Resolution at any given time.

I think others have beaten this one down a few times already.