Poll: Non-UN member's rights!
A lot of people complain that only the UN nations get to vote on the main UN resolution. I think its time that we either started taking a stand or shutting up about it.
Sorry, but that is the way it works.
If you are in the UN you get to help decide what the UN does, you also get to reap the benefits/live with the consequences.
If you are not going to live with the consequences nor reap the benefits there is no reason for you to be voting. There is no reason we should live with your decision when you yourself will not.
Another problem is this proposal would allow people with multiple nations to get more influence than they are normally allowed to.
If you want a say in what goes on, join the UN. If you are not willing to do that then what goes on doesn't effect you anyway.
There is only one requirement for the UN and that is an email address. There should be no reason for someone to complain about not being in the UN.
Collaboration
08-01-2004, 08:53
Why do you want it both ways? Apparently you would like to attempt to control UN policy without taking any responsibility for its actions?
Celdonia
08-01-2004, 15:33
A lot of people complain that only the UN nations get to vote on the main UN resolution. I think its time that we either started taking a stand or shutting up about it.
Can my 2+ billion population start voting in your national elections?
I thought proposals aimed at changing the game mechanics are not allowed.
Besides that, I would not want to have my nation placed under restrictions because a resoultion was passed by nations that will not be affected by it.
Not only that, there's the matter of ballot stuffing. Think mulitple accounts.
Sorry, but that is the way it works.
If you are in the UN you get to help decide what the UN does, you also get to reap the benefits/live with the consequences.
If you are not going to live with the consequences nor reap the benefits there is no reason for you to be voting. There is no reason we should live with your decision when you yourself will not.
Another problem is this proposal would allow people with multiple nations to get more influence than they are normally allowed to.
If you want a say in what goes on, join the UN. If you are not willing to do that then what goes on doesn't effect you anyway.
Well said!!
[OOC: It's a question of rights and responsibilities. All Pies is totally right; it needs nothing but an email address to be in the UN. What you propose is silly, Mashuga, and defeats the object of the UN, or indeed the very concept of membership of an organisation.]
The government of the Republic of Watenho does not feel this proposition is tenable. Rights and responsibilites, we feel, cannot be separated; to do so is an abuse of the power granted us by our people.
Felix Niels, President of Watenho
If you want a say in what goes on, join the UN. If you are not willing to do that then what goes on doesn't effect you anyway.
Well Xhadam, if it doesn't effect us, the no, i should just shut up, but why shouldn't it effect us, it would in the real world, so it should here in Nationstates.
Supreme Awesome
09-01-2004, 04:45
I want to see a UN proposal that proposes the UN dissolve.
No way. I don't see the point.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.
If you want a say in what goes on, join the UN. If you are not willing to do that then what goes on doesn't effect you anyway.
Well Xhadam, if it doesn't effect us, the no, i should just shut up, but why shouldn't it effect us, it would in the real world, so it should here in Nationstates.OOC:
First off, I am not sure that all, if any, resolutions that are passed in the UN can be used to directly force a non-UN country to do anything. I think the closest thing to that is passing a resolution dictating that UN nations can/must take action against a non-UN nation if that nation don't take some action.
Further, if you want to use real life as a model, non-UN nations don't get to vote anyway so that argument is moot.
And as myself and others pointed out it gives people who have multiple nations more power than the rules say they are allowed to have.
Dude, Mashuga, ur screwed up. No way should non un nations be able to vote against somethin that doesn't effect em anyway. thats just plain dumb. :?