Esamopia
12-10-2003, 01:54
"Out of the last four proposals that have reached a quorum, three have failed. This brings us great pleasure as it emphasizes the need for two things:
1. Higher percentage of endorsements, perhaps all the way up to the original 10%, since many of the previous resolutions have been liked only by a few delegates, and have wasted much time and debate and ultimately FAILED: If more endorsements are necessary, then resolutions that come to a vote have a greater chance of passing and all irrelevant proposals can never waste time and space by being brought to a vote by the whole UN.
2. Less time for proposals to get endorsements: This is necessary because so many proposals are often put before the UN Delegates, and with pages and pages of special interest/frivilous/impossible to pass resolutions, any good proposals become lost in the chaos. I remember from my days as UN Delegate of "Elitist Disdain" that I never had the time nor the inclination of reading so many proposals and I doubt that other delegates care as well. If we limit the time, there would be less proposals to consider, and the diamond shine of good resolutions would be bright enough for all to endorse!
3. Increasing the number of endorsements necessary for a UN proposal, or perhaps even forcing all proposals to be made by the UN regional delegate:
This is necessary since any nation, with two other UN members in the region, can spew out a large supply of useless resolutions, taking up space and burying good proposals! If more endorsements were needed, or if only the delegate got to submit proposals (any good delegate would forward her region's proposals,) then it would show that the nation is involved enough to either get many endorsements or the Delegate's help in a resolution. With fewer resolutions, those that are good get more coverage, and we all win!
Please consider these ideas and make comments!
1. Higher percentage of endorsements, perhaps all the way up to the original 10%, since many of the previous resolutions have been liked only by a few delegates, and have wasted much time and debate and ultimately FAILED: If more endorsements are necessary, then resolutions that come to a vote have a greater chance of passing and all irrelevant proposals can never waste time and space by being brought to a vote by the whole UN.
2. Less time for proposals to get endorsements: This is necessary because so many proposals are often put before the UN Delegates, and with pages and pages of special interest/frivilous/impossible to pass resolutions, any good proposals become lost in the chaos. I remember from my days as UN Delegate of "Elitist Disdain" that I never had the time nor the inclination of reading so many proposals and I doubt that other delegates care as well. If we limit the time, there would be less proposals to consider, and the diamond shine of good resolutions would be bright enough for all to endorse!
3. Increasing the number of endorsements necessary for a UN proposal, or perhaps even forcing all proposals to be made by the UN regional delegate:
This is necessary since any nation, with two other UN members in the region, can spew out a large supply of useless resolutions, taking up space and burying good proposals! If more endorsements were needed, or if only the delegate got to submit proposals (any good delegate would forward her region's proposals,) then it would show that the nation is involved enough to either get many endorsements or the Delegate's help in a resolution. With fewer resolutions, those that are good get more coverage, and we all win!
Please consider these ideas and make comments!