NationStates Jolt Archive

The United Nations is rapidly becoming an irrelevant and largely cumbersome organisation which has lost it's vision and purpose.

The Kingdom of real Conservatives located in The League of Conservative States asks other like-minded nations to register their current dis-pleasure with current UN protocols and procedures.

Endorse a no-confidence vote in this pole and make people sit up and take notice.

As our nation is outside UN jurisdiction, we are unable to table this motion officially, but ask that a responsible UN delegate represent ours and other like-minded countries interests. We have not applied for UN membership as we believe it does little to enhance the lives of people in the world in it's current state. It has become a 'moaning nanny' who sits in the corner and talks of things of little or no consequence.

It is far too easy to join The UN. It is far too easy to table in-approprate and ill-thought out resolutions which detract member's attention from real issues affecting the world.

PROTEST NOW -join us in our crusade to make the UN a powerful force for change!

Sincerely,

Prime Minister Thatcher

I do think the issues have relevance to international affairs... though yes, many of the resolutions are badly worded, have many spelling and grammar errors and so forth.

I believe any resolution proposal with incorrect spelling and grammar ought to be taken off immediately. As lawmakers people ought to pay special attention to detail. Even if it means reading the resolution over again before sending it to correct spelling errors.

I hesitate to approve of resolution proposals, no matter what my stance may be on the issue it addresses, when there is bad spelling and grammar.

Given the choices, I give a vote of no confidence, though I do not agree on all the reasons the creator of this forum creates. I also believe there ought to be more voting options on this poll.

Confederacy of the Isles Region UN Delegate
Hung Tony

Why do you feel the need to change something that has no effect on you? If you want change, you're going to have to get in there and do the dirty work.

In answer to the above, I suspect there are many nations like ourselves that currently stand outside the UN due to the fact that joining it makes us a part of this whole ineffectual organisation, requiring us to implement non-descript, badly worded resolutions through our own parliament.

The Kingdom of real Conservatives does not wish to implement costly and in-effectual resolutions, thus we call on nations who are already members and agree with our stance to work to make the UN a more effective organisation so as to welcome new member states like ourselves.

By registering a vote of no confidence in our poll, we hope that those delegates who weild the power within the UN will sit up and take notice and ultimately take measures and/or pass resolutions to rectify the current problems and alleviate the current mis-givings of nations who are outside, but who would wish to join the UN.

Yours

Prime Minister Thatcher

I have abstained, as I have general confidence in the UN, but I will not vote for policies that have bad wording/grammar.

The current UN resolution should not be passed - anyone who doesn't know the difference between "band" and "banned" should not be allowed to make important decisions.

King Flubbert III

OOC: However, the failure of the UN to acknowledge that Hippos Are Really Quite Large was unacceptable, and those who campaign against fun resolutions need their heads examining. IT'S A GAME!!!

I suspect that the UN will always remain ineffectual and largely pointless. Most nations appear to be led by morons. The only real way to win is not to play.

Win?

Hey, I just turned into an Envoy. On my last post I was a Spokesperson. All this pointless posting pays dividends

I suspect that the UN will always remain ineffectual and largely pointless. Most nations appear to be led by morons. The only real way to win is not to play.

Actually I think the only way to win is to play. :) It's a game of politics... whoever lies and chea.. I mean lobbies better.. wins :)

PS. I didn't say that. I've been misquoted ! this thing is faulty ! :)

I'm going to wait and see how the current resolution fares. If it passes, a vote of no confidence might well be appropriate. It'll certainly keep me out of the UN. I don't want to have to implement that thing...

yay, another poorly written, off-mark resolution.

if it passes, Machinen will immediately resign from the U.N.

banning pop-ups will hurt the effeciency of the Internet. don't like pop-ups? many software companies in my nation, and others, produce programs that will limit or stop pop-ups. many are available for free.

-

I suspect that the UN will always remain ineffectual and largely pointless. Most nations appear to be led by morons. The only real way to win is not to play.

Actually I think the only way to win is to play. :) It's a game of politics... whoever lies and chea.. I mean lobbies better.. wins :)

PS. I didn't say that. I've been misquoted ! this thing is faulty ! :)

Nah, there's no way to 'win' NationStates. Frankly, I fail to see the point of this thing at all when, just by looking at the UN, you can tell that the 'game' is played almost entirely by complete idiots.

IC:
If the current resolution passes the Community of Bariloche will resign the UN. We do not think that any other resolutions were incorrect, and no of these "joke" proposals we keep hearing about are taken into concern but to laugh a little in the UN council break-room.

OOC:
"Supreme Awesome"? "We Rule"?

Of course the game is played by complete idiots... but I don't think they are in the UN.

this post never actually existed

I believe the UN does nothing and gets nowhere. All across the globe every nation hates the UN. I must admit when a UN convoy rolled through my home country of Somalia I would have destroyed along with Adid's milita. I have no confidence whatsoever the the UN will help restore order in Iraq, I believe the US should come down hard on Iraqis and not uphold the Convention law so much.

Whoa KORN, we're talking about our little fake UN, and while some people probably sympathise with your opinions, it doesnt really follow the disscussion now does it? The in-game "UN" on the other hand does need a serious overhaul. The recent swarm of idiotic and pointless proposals, most of which dont fall under the UN's jurisdiction, makes it almost degrading (and certainly pointless) to come on here and search through the filth to find a proposal worthy of my approval. I dont know who keeps approving the wonderful things that make it through to resolution votes, but it certainly speaks poorly of the worlds delegates. I loath to name myself one of their group, fearing an association with their kind reflects poorly on my own decisions. Regardless, (and getting back on topic) I proudly vote for no-confidence, and hope some of the less-than-intellegent nations out there will take notice and restrain themselves next time they think it a good idea to make a proposal.

Whoa KORN, we're talking about our little fake UN, and while some people probably sympathise with your opinions, it doesnt really follow the disscussion now does it? The in-game "UN" on the other hand does need a serious overhaul. The recent swarm of idiotic and pointless proposals, most of which dont fall under the UN's jurisdiction, makes it almost degrading (and certainly pointless) to come on here and search through the filth to find a proposal worthy of my approval. I dont know who keeps approving the wonderful things that make it through to resolution votes, but it certainly speaks poorly of the worlds delegates. I loath to name myself one of their group, fearing an association with their kind reflects poorly on my own decisions. Regardless, (and getting back on topic) I proudly vote for no-confidence, and hope some of the less-than-intellegent nations out there will take notice and restrain themselves next time they think it a good idea to make a proposal.

Whoa KORN, we're talking about our little fake UN, and while some people probably sympathise with your opinions, it doesnt really follow the disscussion now does it? The in-game "UN" on the other hand does need a serious overhaul. The recent swarm of idiotic and pointless proposals, most of which dont fall under the UN's jurisdiction, makes it almost degrading (and certainly pointless) to come on here and search through the filth to find a proposal worthy of my approval. I dont know who keeps approving the wonderful things that make it through to resolution votes, but it certainly speaks poorly of the worlds delegates. I loath to name myself one of their group, fearing an association with their kind reflects poorly on my own decisions. Regardless, (and getting back on topic) I proudly vote for no-confidence, and hope some of the less-than-intellegent nations out there will take notice and restrain themselves next time they think it a good idea to make a proposal.

Whoa KORN, we're talking about our little fake UN, and while some people probably sympathise with your opinions, it doesnt really follow the disscussion now does it? The in-game "UN" on the other hand does need a serious overhaul. The recent swarm of idiotic and pointless proposals, most of which dont fall under the UN's jurisdiction, makes it almost degrading (and certainly pointless) to come on here and search through the filth to find a proposal worthy of my approval. I dont know who keeps approving the wonderful things that make it through to resolution votes, but it certainly speaks poorly of the worlds delegates. I loath to name myself one of their group, fearing an association with their kind reflects poorly on my own decisions. Regardless, (and getting back on topic) I proudly vote for no-confidence, and hope some of the less-than-intellegent nations out there will take notice and restrain themselves next time they think it a good idea to make a proposal.

sorry bout the multi-post, browser trouble.

The UN could become much more powerful if only we did thus:
1. lowered the approval rate from 6% to 4 or 5
2. Had Mods delete all badly worded or proposals with bad grammar
3. Mods would also delete proposals that should be decided individually by nations (i.e. the one for vote now), and add them to the issues list.
Then the UN would be a lot more effective.

The UN could become much more powerful if only we did thus:
1. lowered the approval rate from 6% to 4 or 5
2. Had Mods delete all badly worded or proposals with bad grammar
3. Mods would also delete proposals that should be decided individually by nations (i.e. the one for vote now), and add them to the issues list.
Then the UN would be a lot more effective.

Actually...the approval rate required for implementation should be HIGHER, not lower. Too many dumb resolutions are making it to a vote.

The UN could become much more powerful if only we did thus:
1. lowered the approval rate from 6% to 4 or 5
2. Had Mods delete all badly worded or proposals with bad grammar
3. Mods would also delete proposals that should be decided individually by nations (i.e. the one for vote now), and add them to the issues list.
Then the UN would be a lot more effective.

It is true that this is just a game, and everyone who is angry about it should relax; however, the point is that this is role playing. If you have ever role played before, and someone with you is being a drag on the fun for the rest who are not taking it "seriously" per say but simply acting as if they were really there; it gets irritating. Now if you multiply that by a few hundred, I can understand it making a number of you enraged. In other games that involves role playing, there is a moderator who first warns those who are acting out of character on purpose whether for entertainment value or just for no apparent reason. Then if he/she continues with disrupting the game for the rest of the players, he is simply ejected from the game. I find that it would be a good idea that if the UN program can read IP addresses and such to determine who is who in the UN, then maybe the programmer or moderator could find those who are posting irrelavent proposals and simply eject them from the UN. Having already recognized them with the UN program, they can't be allowed back in with any they had in the UN or new nation they create.


Emperor Hazanko has spoken...

Yes, Anti-communist clan I agree whole heartdly with you, hence why our nation started this poll.

I don't think the moderators have a firm enough grasp on the operation of UN. Whilst I understand that in a game which encourages free speech and open debate, they cannot censor opinions, I do feel that they should be encouraging people to make a little more effort by deleting badly worded or pointless proposals.

Either that or alter the rules slightly as you suggest. Changing the rules doesn't admit you were wrong in the first place, just that as the game gains in popularity and the number of people using it increases it needs to be adapted. Complete in-action spoils it for those who want to play the game seriously. In the end all the good people will have left the game leaving it to be played and run by idiots. We at The kingdom of Real Conservatives enjoy the game and don't want to see that happen!

How do we take our grievances to the places that count?

Are there any UN delegates out there that would be willing to pick up this mantra and propose it officially? I think there would be a lot of people who would officially endorse it and get it to the voting table. That way the moderators would have to take notice.

Prime Minister Thatcher
The Kingdom of Real Conservatives (KRC)

p.s The poll clearly shows a mojority in favour of this resolution!

The glorious dominion of Bahgum is, also, becoming somewhat dissapointed by the current goings on at the UN. Aside from badly written proposals, the sheer volume of boring proposals (and those who take them seriously) is sucking the enjoyment out of this excellently thought out (and originally quite amusing) internet game.
Bahgum has not given up yet and has recently submitted a proposal to reduce barriers to wife trading *type 'wives' into proposal search list*, and hopefully protect the camel at the same time. Bahgum would be pleased to see your support.

UN Delegates might be encouraged to be a little more discriminating in what they are willing to approve. Bad phraseology, poor spelling, poor grammar, obvious open-endedness, yes, these are reasons not to approve a proposal-- but one must also think from the perspective of being a representative to the United Nations, not one's own nation. Personally, I can't stand pop-up advertising, or banners, or pop-unders for that matter, whic I note are not addressed by the current proposal; such forms of advertising-- indeed all forms of unsolicited advertising-- are illegal in Xikuang. How is that relevant to the purpose of the UN? Such trivialities are obviously for individual nations to decide. The UN has far more important things to consider, and UN delegates should bear that in mind and not go about wantonly approving anything that happens to take their fancy.

I'm not in favour of throwing out resolutions because they contain spelling or grammatical errors. It’s always worth bearing in mind that not everyone playing this game has English as a first (or possibly even second) language. To discriminate against such people is just…well you know what it is.

If the intent of the proposal is clear it doesn’t really matter whether it says “band” or “banned”. Language is about communication, and as long as an idea is conveyed accurately that should do.


It might also be worth pointing out that the moderators (Enodia I believe) do look at UN proposals and delete inappropriate ones. At present there are 23 pages of proposals being considered by the UN. Back when I was a delegate, before they were vetted in anyway, there was double that amount.

As to the remit of the UN: it isn’t really supposed to accurately reflect the real world UN. To quote the UN page: “The UN is the world's governing body.” That’s a much wider remit than the real world UN. In effect, the NS UN is a game device that you use to reshape the rest of the world the way you would like it to be so there’s little point in complaining about the scope of proposals.

There, that’s my 2 cents worth.

Well, I'm all for a little tolerance where it's clear that the writer's skill with the English language just isn't up to scratch, for whatever reason, but flagrant abuses of the 'come on ppl iz it 2 much 2 ask if we ban slavrey' variety evoke a very distasteful reaction in me. And I don't mind a bit of fun now and again (I honestly liked the 'Hippos are Really Quite Large' proposal), but I do wish that people would take it a bit more seriously.

'come on ppl iz it 2 much 2 ask if we ban slavrey' variety evoke a very distasteful reaction in me.

On this we agree.

And just so it's clear, my post wasn't specifically directed at you (you know I wouldn't pick on you :P ) but the people that think "band" instead or "banned" is a reason to reject a proposal.

I thin kmost of the issues in the UN have relevance to international affairs but then some immature 10 year old comes along and puts something about hippoes or toilet paper or something really random and stupid like that.

(you know I wouldn't pick on you :P )

Aw, even once in a while?

Alienware-- quite so, though I have seen well thought out, well written proposals from quite young people. It is the lack of consideration to the purpose the UN is designed to serve that ends up bogging it down in ridiculous and unneccesary considerations, that could be stopped in its tracks with more discriminate behaviour on the part of delegates. I applaud those mods who take the time to weed out the truly awful.

Perhaps making membership of the UN more selective is the answer?

Currently, you only have to be in the game 5 minutes to be able to join the UN. This devalue the importance of The UN's role. Maybe it would be better if people demonstrated a committment to the essence of the game before being permitted to enter their nation for membership of The UN.? A period of 30 days before they are allowed to apply for membership.

Just trying to think through the issue a bit more so we can all enjoy the game more....

I believe if member nations took more interest in voting for resolutions, proposing better proposals, and stopped fooling around with wasteful proposals, then maybe the UN would be better off overall.

Unfortunately, I don't see anything changing any time soon as long as the proposals that are being presented are as poorly written, unhelpful, and uncreative as they have been.

Agreed Tuesday Heights. However I notice that you and other world leaders who have contributed to this thread are UN members.

Is it not possible for you to adopt this proposal of No confidence and put it before UN congress for a vote?

If The No-Confidence Vote is achieved, there would then be room to propose changes to membership and admittance to The UN.

Prime Minister Thatcher
The KRC

It's an interesting notion. I wonder what would happen mechanically? In order to have real effect, rather than just the same sort of cross-UN settings shifting, it will require dedicated UN reform on the part of the game designers or whoever deals with the nuts and bolts of the UN. Any such people around? (looks around)

If it changed the game mechanics, the proposal would be deleted.

[quote="The Big Yellow Spot"]I have abstained, as I have general confidence in the UN, but I will not vote for policies that have bad wording/grammar.

The current UN resolution should not be passed - anyone who doesn't know the difference between "band" and "banned" should not be allowed to make important decisions.

King Flubbert III[/quote

Im just wondering how these awful-ly worded ones make it to the floor for debate....Are we so lazy as a body that some regional delegate out there cant re-write a good idea (anti-spam) and get that submitted?

Rather than participate or discuss the efficiency and mechanics of a body that imposes resolutions on sovereign states on the naive and flawed basis of a simple majority :wink: I would suggest that interested parties be allowed to create a rival organisation. Named something along the lines of The League of Extraordinary Nations this body could act as a focal point where sovereign nations may subscribe to resolutions as they see fit. In this manner all other nations will be able to see which states they are in general agreement with and make their own policy decisions and alliances.

Long live the Spud !!

If The No-Confidence Vote is achieved, there would then be room to propose changes to membership and admittance to The UN.


It's probably more likely that the proposal will be deleted before it reaches the floor.

The correct place to discuss changing the UN is the technical forum because the discussion is really about game mechanics.

I don't think the moderators are as unreasonable as some of you suggest. They are just as interested in making a good game for everybody as anybody else.

The only reason I know for nations or proposals being deleted is for being abusive or inflamatory etc. Not for expressing an opinion and suggesting ways to improve the game.

I think the game's author would be quite interested to see what happened if there was a vote of No Confidence!

Yes, we could discuss this subject in the technical forum but the aim of this thread is to rally support behind a potential proposal. Just talking about it in the technical forum may be interesting but I suspect will not have much effect.

This game is essentially democratic, giving everyone the chance to express themselves however they wish and if the majority of people on the forum have voted in the Poll that they have no confidence (only 15% have said they have full confidence!) then surely this proposal deserves a proper hearing throughout the whole UN?

We people in YbeR likes to play real. We don´t think UN is a ¨joke¨.
We are voting on the most reasonble thing to vote for.
So we all agree, in YbeR, to vote FOR the ¨Internet Advertising Pop-up¨

---------------------------------
People´s President of Macee

Some spoon-feeding required I think....

To quote Enodia's sticky Before you make a proposal (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=77286) (italicised by me):


there are three broad categories of proposal which will always be removed from the queue before they become able to be voted on by the general membership of the United Nations. These three categories are:

1. Suggestions for how to change the game mechanics
2. Proposals in which the category and the description do not match
3. Proposals which are deemed unworthy of UN consideration

Now, to explain these three categories in detail:

Game Mechanics
"We should make it so that all UN Members can vote on proposals before they reach the floor", "We should be able to vote on 2 proposals at once", "The UN should create <multinational organisation>". All of these proposals propose changes to the Game Mechanics governing the running of NationStates.
I cannot stress this enough, You Cannot Play God Here. Your proposal may well be a useful change to the way the game works, and a few changes to the game (ejection of nations from regions, proposal search function) had their genesis in proposals. The bottom line is that they were not adopted because of the successful passage of a proposal, and neither will your suggestion be.


Does that make it clear enough? You're wasting your time unless you take it to the technical forum.

Quite right, Celdonia.

One point that occurs to us in this debate is that people don't seem to like nations they deem as trivial/stupid/making a point they disagree with, and by extension this is in someway 'unrealistic'. We would hasten to point out that we are roleplaying in a world that includes dragons, legions of Elves, people who exist in space etc. etc. what exactly constitutes 'unrealistic'? People play this game for a wide variety of reasons (although there does seem to be the underlying desire to argue with strangers) and not all of them are sensible. Which is fine by us. Sometimes we wish to have a healthy debate about the viability of capitalism, on other occasions we merely wish to talk a load of old toot about hippos. Something nation states seems to be reasonably good at accomodating.
So lay off the UN, it's doing OK. And as we pointed out in the hippo thread, for some countries the anti-torture proposals and inumerable attempts to make liberalism the central politic of the UN seemed to be comedic. (Go on, check our human rights record...)
Drakos, Chief Diplomat, Hippo Wrangler and Head of the Hardcore Political Philosophy Think Tank of Drakosovar.

The glorious nation of Bahgum agrees wholeheartedly with Draksovar. We too like to see silly proposals, as well as some serious proposals, but we feel that ALL proposals should be written with some style and a sense of humour (or humor? if you're from the US) which befits the original style of the author of this game (NOTE: GAME).

This proposal is both badly written and dull, dull, dull. Surely it's possible to write a well presented, and mildly amusing proposal on the topic of pop ups (maybe involving viagra pop ups e.g.)????

As for moderators, we now know of three, very well written, amusing, totally frivolous proposals which have been deleted without warning or report. This really is a most miserable state of affairs. Now, must get back to our proposal on the changes to the human rights status of mother in laws (no prizes for guessing in which direction). Bets taken on how long it takes to be deleted!!!!!!

Keep the amusement going!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!