NationStates Jolt Archive

National Sovereignty Act

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy

Strength: Strong

Description: NOTING the ridiculous amount of national sovereignty tresspasses by the UN in the past this resolution:

PROPOSES,

-The United Nations CANNOT pass resolutions that restrict the national sovereignty of member nations.

-The United Nations CANNOT alter certain laws of member nations without their consent.

-The United Nations CANNOT impose certain political ideals upon member nations

-The United Nations CANNOT interfere with international trade among member nations without their permission.

-The United Nations CANNOT interfere with any UN nation's economy without their permission.

-The United Nations CANNOT force certain systems of measurement or currency upon member nations.

-The United Nations CANNOT disobey any of the following the points above.

Henceforth, any proposal that denies any of the aforementioned points shall be considered null and void.

Comments?

Good? Bad? Repulsive?

It makes the NS-UN purposeless. It may also affect the game coding and be because of this not valid.

Although I am in full support of this resolution, I believe it unlikely that it will gain much support and it is highly probable that it will be deleted by the game mods (and you may also receive a warning letter about removal from the NS-UN if you pursue such "heretical" proposals."

If you were to modify this proposal into a resolution expressing the opinion of the General Assembly (and making sure that you state it is not binding and would not affect game mechanics,) then you may have a better shot of at least keeping it on the table... and who knows, it may come to a vote!

Good luck!

It wasn't intended to change the game mechanics or anything. :?

But it does, since the ministry of Compliance has to be removed.

It wasn't intended to change the game mechanics or anything. :?

I know New Genoa. But it does violate game mechanics. According to our all-powerful mods, we cannot propose the following:

1) We cannot repeal a past resolution.

2) We cannot create subsidary bodies since that would involve changes in how the game mechanics...hence, no Secretary General, and no WHO and no WTO.

3) We cannot limit the powers of the UN. It can do whatever it wants.

I hate these limitations, but I can't do much about them.

The part, "Henceforth, any proposal that denies any of the aforementioned points shall be considered null and void," is asking to change the mechanics of the game.

You can't just wave a wand and make them "null and void" as far as i know. :cry:

Sorry, I didn't mean for it to change the mechanics in any way... :?

It wasn't intended to change the game mechanics or anything. :?

I know New Genoa. But it does violate game mechanics. According to our all-powerful mods, we cannot propose the following:

1) We cannot repeal a past resolution.

2) We cannot create subsidary bodies since that would involve changes in how the game mechanics...hence, no Secretary General, and no WHO and no WTO.

3) We cannot limit the powers of the UN. It can do whatever it wants.

I hate these limitations, but I can't do much about them.1.) This doesn't repeal any previous laws

2.) :cry:

3.) But it can limit the powers of its member nations? Bull... :evil:

It wasn't intended to change the game mechanics or anything. :?

I know New Genoa. But it does violate game mechanics. According to our all-powerful mods, we cannot propose the following:

1) We cannot repeal a past resolution.

2) We cannot create subsidary bodies since that would involve changes in how the game mechanics...hence, no Secretary General, and no WHO and no WTO.

3) We cannot limit the powers of the UN. It can do whatever it wants.

I hate these limitations, but I can't do much about them.15


If the UN can do wahtever it wants, then it should be able to decide to limit or modify or regulate the use of its own powers.
Otherwise it's like having a car with no brakes.
Power is not useful or productive unless it is controlled.

All legislative bodies have procedural rules which they may adopt and modify. Can the UN accomplish some self-regulation that way?

Any other comments?

NationStates United Nations resolutions have two effects:

One, based on the content of the resolution, affects RP only. If, for example, there's a resolution stating that you can't torture prisoners of war (and, in fact, there is), and someone posts in a thread, "We got some information out of our prisoners by torturing them," you're allowed to say, "No you didn't--the U.N. says you can't."

The other is *totally independent* of what the resolution actually *says*. It's determined only by the resolution's *category*--human rights, free trade, environment, etc. The *category* of the resolution can make changes to member nations' levels of political, economic, and civil freedoms, to their crime rate, to the quality of their environment, etc.

This is why resolutions limiting the U.N.'s powers are disallowed. The U.N. is more than just RP and posts--it's a real part of the game's programming--so the first consideration can't apply to it. And the second category only applies to member nations' laws.

Suppose the mods allowed your resolution, and it passed. Then suppose someone submitted a U.N. proposal in violation of your resolution. What would you expect to happen? Would the mods have to remove it? (That's a lot of work for them, given that NationStates is free.) Would they have to change the game's programming, to automatically remove it? Would they have to change the game's programming to make it "null and void" (that is, to keep it from having its normal effects based on category)?

Sincerely,
Javier Hootenany
Undersecretary to the United Nations Ambassador for NationStates Rules and Regulations
Community of Gurthark

And what if someone submitted a proposal encouraging torture? Or in violation of any passed resolutions? :roll:

NationStates United Nations resolutions have two effects:

One, based on the content of the resolution, affects RP only. If, for example, there's a resolution stating that you can't torture prisoners of war (and, in fact, there is), and someone posts in a thread, "We got some information out of our prisoners by torturing them," you're allowed to say, "No you didn't--the U.N. says you can't."

The other is *totally independent* of what the resolution actually *says*. It's determined only by the resolution's *category*--human rights, free trade, environment, etc. The *category* of the resolution can make changes to member nations' levels of political, economic, and civil freedoms, to their crime rate, to the quality of their environment, etc.

This is why resolutions limiting the U.N.'s powers are disallowed. The U.N. is more than just RP and posts--it's a real part of the game's programming--so the first consideration can't apply to it. And the second category only applies to member nations' laws.

Suppose the mods allowed your resolution, and it passed. Then suppose someone submitted a U.N. proposal in violation of your resolution. What would you expect to happen? Would the mods have to remove it? (That's a lot of work for them, given that NationStates is free.) Would they have to change the game's programming, to automatically remove it? Would they have to change the game's programming to make it "null and void" (that is, to keep it from having its normal effects based on category)?

Sincerely,
Javier Hootenany
Undersecretary to the United Nations Ambassador for NationStates Rules and Regulations
Community of Gurthark

That is a good point. However, it seems the mods are doing a fairly thorough job of screening and deleting posted resolutions ANYWAYS. I don't think their job would be increased too much.

Personally, I would like to think that if someone passed a resolution in violation of an existing resolution, people would be intelligent enough to recognize that and vote it down.

However, consider this...the real UN often makes contradictory resolutions. Why should NS be any different? Of course, if someone in the real UN manages to somehow pass a law in violation of a previous one, a motion can be made to repeal the latter law. Here in NS, we can't even repeall a past resolution.

I would say that if we allowed UN powers to be limited as well as allowed the repeal of past resolutions, an equitable balance would be attained.

-New Clarkhall.

*Applauds*

this resoloution is a true masterpiece!

This resolution is directly opposed to our stated foreign policy of supporting and furthering the United Nations' sovereignty. We look forward to the eventual creation of a unified global state, and this resolution would make it considerably more difficult. A global state would eliminate warfare, ensure that basic standards concerning quality of life and basic rights and freedoms are met all around the world, and would revolutionize trade. This resolution, therefore, is quite detrimental, in our opinion.

Office of the Governor

New Genoa - I tried posting a similar state sovereignty proposal. It got removed and i received a warning (i too did not realize it would change the game mechanics, but did see the mod's point once it had been explained). I then tried a proposal, bearing in mind all that i had been told, asking (but stating explicitly that nothing would be banned) people to look at current proposals as well as those that had been fully passed before posting new ones on tired topics. The goal was to reduce those topics that had already been dealt with, or that are re-posted everyday (but never put to a full vote), by bringing it to the attention of member states that these issues had been beaten to death. This second proposal got me booted from the UN, and my 2 appeals never even received a response.
Moral of the story: Bear in mind what the mods tell you and err on the side of caution when making for proposals, because in the UN, it's 2 strikes and you're out.

Hmmm..... There could be a quality control measure for membership into the UN. You can systematically weed out nations.

That is a scary thought but it could work....