NationStates Jolt Archive

I propose a new resolution called "The United Nations"

It would be the following, please give me your thoughts:

"
WHEREAS soverign nations have the right to govern themselves
WHEREAS nations of this United Nations have persistantly attempted to create resolutions to govern this United Nations

LET IT BE RESOLVED that United Nations resolutions should not affect national laws

LET IT BE RESOLVED that, under a resolution, nations attempting to change soverign laws throughout these United Nations should place the word "DIRECTIVE", making the resolution unbinding and simply a strong suggestion.
"

The Empire does not wish to legalise prostitution or euthanasia. It feels that these are laws of nations and cannot be governed by resolutions. It proposes

So..................

you dont like the UN do you :)

couldn't agree more. i dropped out of the UN after the resolution regarding euthanasia was passed, and I'm even more glad I did now that prostitution is being debated. The people that are submitting the resolutions don't seem to realize what the UN is for.

No kidding...

This is why you resign from the UN. You can't teach na old dog new tricks as per the old age cliché.

Xiang Gang's resolution really makes a lot of sense, and I would rejoin the UN if it could be voted on.

The big problem in the UN is getting a resolution through at all - no delegates even vote - nothing gets through except for those with loads of puppets and satellites.

Change game mechanics which makes the proposal illegal, sorry :wink:

Change game mechanics which makes the proposal illegal, sorry :wink:

I thought about this a lot, and it doesn't:

"your nation will also be affected by any resolutions that pass" - United Nations section in the 'About' page

What I am proposing is simply the word "DIRECTIVE".

the current prostitution UN resolution is yet another resolution on a topic that should be decided on a local level.

I don't know why they insist on making local issues an international affair.

Issues like the environment and international trade are things that cross borders whereas I seriously doubt that prostitutes are are international in nature.

Unless the issue is addresing the plight of those prostitutes who are unfortunately captured, smuggled, bought and sold through international organized crime rings (which, sadly, this resolution does not address) prostitution should not be on the international agenda.

Actually, yes, this does propose a game mechanics change. You're proposing a change in how the UN works. The basic rule of thumb with that rule is: If a proposal requires that someone do additional coding to function, it's no good.

As far as the game's code is concerned, the text of a resolution is irrelevant. All that matters is the category and the modifier (usually a strength). It's unrealistic to expect the game to understand even well-written resolutions, and so the effects are entirely determined by the above-mentioned method (ie: "Human Rights" resolutions increase freedoms in all UN Member Nations, "Environmental" resolutions increase environmental scores and drop economic scores). That's why category and strength are so important, if you've ever wondered.

All that aside, there's still a large problem with this proposal in my eyes: There is no purpose in having a higher government if the lower governments can enact superior laws. In joining the United Nations and influencing its decisions, there is the catch that you must agree to be bound by those decisions.

Yes, typically I only support proposals which affect international affairs, defining those as problems that cross borders and require the intervention of an international body. One exception I make is the basic limitation of government -- the recognition and enforcement of certain civil liberties. We are within our rights to vote how we please, but amendments to the UN's de facto charter are not allowed under the game's rules.

(OOC) Just because the UN has produced some very poor proposals does not mean that it is not useful. I like the idea of global-level resolutions affecting a NS - it makes for more variety and more fun.

What needs to happen is before an inappropriate proposal such as is presently - and regrettably - being voted in by the teenage male segment of UN members, there should be more thorough review of the proposal, and inappriate ones pulled before they get to the voting stage.

We must remember that resolutions have passed recently which do alter game mechanics, negating issues and requiring recoding. Legalising euthanasia, for example, should be overturned because it affects an issue in the game. In the issue I said "this is not the right time for euthanasia", but could easily have chosen the third option, contravening the resolution. If we go with the UN, then this should not be possible.