NationStates Jolt Archive

Fellow members of the United Nations:

Irving-Zundel finds the abuses of the United Nations process are reaching epidemic levels. The United Nations are no longer a guardian of international peace and cooperation, but an oppressive tyranny punishing it's membership with radical authoritarian dictates. What is even worse is that these DICTATES (euphemistically termed "resolutions") are passed by ridiculously narrow margins.

The last resolution ("legalise prostitution") was decided by barely 10% of the votes cast! Any state that voted in favor of this bill should consider when a proposal it disagreed with passed by such a margin. The issue then is not this particular resoultion but the entire ridiculous process.

Some have advocated nullification. However, this would essentiall nullify the UN altogether. The only solution is to make resolution passage more difficult.

I believe a 2/3 majority would be ideal. However, as a start members are asked to show their support for at least an increase to 3/5. Most of these resolutions have powerful effects. Shall measures which may have devestating consequenses on thousands of nations be decided only by a simple majority? Shall 10,001 dicate sweeping, revolutionary laws to 10,000? This system is revolting. It is disgusting.

My nation finds these United Nations to be a wild, hysterical childish mob. A childish mob which, through an electoral process which can scarcely described as anything but instutionalized mob rule, is transforming it's minority of civilized members into a lawless barbarian horde. Fellow nations, in the name of common sense put an end to this! And the word "lawless" is not misused. When the power of law-making is abused this frequently -- when it is abused through resolutions which are either absurd or oppressive or both -- and when decent nations find these oppressive DICTATES forced onto them one after the other then this is not "law." This is lawlessness. This is legalized, institutionalized ANARCY which happens to go by the misnomer "United Nations" which 1) are not United and 2) are not Nations since they have no control over their internal affairs.

Take a stand in favor of common sense and vote to increase the resolution passage requirement to a 3/5 majority. This is nothing revolutionary about this. It is simply establishing some vestige of common sense in this body which thousands of common sense nations have already abandoned out of disgust.

Sense it is forbidden to make an offical proposal to this effect, this poll is our only recourse. Vote even if you have nothing to say. We want THOUSANDS of votes on this poll! That is the only way our voice will have any effect. Please support this proposition!

As Irving-Zundel's ambassador, I thank you.

I don't think that the majority to pass resolutions should be increased, rather enforcement of the UN's mandate should be stronger, limiting a succession of proposals which are outside that mandate.

But since that is unlikely to happen, I agree that the proportion should be adjusted, in line with the "real" United Nations

Illaria agrees with the proposal of the ambassador from Irving Zundel.

Our country still would like to see nullification powers with a massive majority required... like 40% of the entire UN delegation pool casting votes against a certain old proposal before it comes to the UN floor to be up for nullification or reversal. where a 3/4 majority or something is required for actual nullification.
(given current voting rates, it's highly unlikely to ever happen, but it would be there)

3/5 is dangerous because of current voting rates. Requiring a certain percentage difference perhaps between yea and nay might be more effective... but squeaking a resolution past with only 1000 vote difference is worriesome...

I like that idea, I would support such a proposal

We support any move to improve the United Nations... Also support our call to VOTE NO CONFIDENCE in the U.N.

You fools :!: When will you learn :?: Game mechanics proposals are illegal. I pity you all :cry: .

OOC: you can propose them all you want, they're just not gonna change unless you bribe the tech modling :P

OOC: you can propose them all you want, they're just not gonna change unless you bribe the tech modling :P
Now you got the point :P

I doubt that will happen...more likely to shuit down than change...I see no need for "supermajoriies" here.

We should probably end this before we incur the wrath of the men (and women) in green (and orange).

While I haven't been around long enough to learn how often the moderators actually listen to what comes out of our mouths, one would think that if you raise enough of a fuss, the necessary change will be implemented. For me, that fuss means helping to develop an enlightened discussion on the pros and cons of such a proposed change, and generating enough "buzz" among member nations to merit attention by the powers that be. Perhaps if people focused more on fleshing out this plan and its effects instead of a) insulting those would attempt to change the status quo and b) dancing around the issue as hopeless. Should any member nation rise to such a challenge, the nation of Sophista and her representatives will be there to accept as well.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

While I haven't been around long enough to learn how often the moderators actually listen to what comes out of our mouths, one would think that if you raise enough of a fuss, the necessary change will be implemented. For me, that fuss means helping to develop an enlightened discussion on the pros and cons of such a proposed change, and generating enough "buzz" among member nations to merit attention by the powers that be. Perhaps if people focused more on fleshing out this plan and its effects instead of a) insulting those would attempt to change the status quo and b) dancing around the issue as hopeless. Should any member nation rise to such a challenge, the nation of Sophista and her representatives will be there to accept as well.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs




Look okay we don't make the rules, but i've read a hundred of these threads, and the answer is always the same the U.N will not change we all know it is a wreck, and run by liberals but no one can or will change it. The game will not be changed in any big ways, unless SalusaSecondus or [violet] decide to change it and you will know if they do.

Sorry

if you raise enough of a fuss, the necessary change will be implemented.
It's not a matter of 'enough of a fuss'. There is a change freeze in effect until they relocate the servers, and that is weeks away at the very least. Nothing you say or do in the UN forum will make the slightest difference, as it is clearly stated in several of the stickies and announcements that such changes must be raised in the Technical forum.

If you look at the Submit proposal page, you will see quite clearly:

Inappropriate proposals will be removed. This includes proposals that:

- suggest changing how the game works (use the Forum instead)
- contain descriptions that do not match the category and effect
- are not worthy of the UN's consideration

It can't be any plainer than that. Please take the time to read the FAQ and the stickies before posting such proposals. Thank you.

This can and will happen if there is a concerted effort. It would require a great deal of lobbying.

Remeber, the squeaky wheel gets the oil.