NationStates Jolt Archive

"Repealabiltiy" is one of the goals of a gradually forming alliance of which Thracia is a member.

Any adopted resolution should be subject to change or to a repeal, if there are enough approvals to bring a repeal to a vote and if the majority votes in favor of a repeal.

We would like to know whether or how much support there is for this idea.

We would appreciate your comments and counter-suggestions.

should we? Yes. Will we? No. It's not like the admins have philisophical objections to repealing resolutions, its a technical issue. It'll be in NS2

But until it gets itself coded, any "alliance" trying to repeal resolutions will find its numbers in the UN dropping at an alarming rate.

As someone who voted for and favors repealability, and who helped found the Alliance of which Thracia speaks, let me say that sometimes the U.N. decisions just are ill! It is very hard to stomach sometimes and we really don't want to be a rogue nation. The social balance in Zahumlje is pretty unique, We have Modern Feudalism, which is like a cross between the Medieval System, and Socialism. We have a mixed religious and ethnic situation and are recovering from a totally awful Civil War, and are rebuilding sucessfully. The least imbalance however could plunge Our Nation right back into Civil War and ethnic purgation. We do not want that. We want a good relation with the U.N. If it is truely not possible to have repeal provisions maybe it would be good to have more stringent standards for resolutions, or less stringent enforcement. No two Zahumljani communities are in complete agreement on what for example constitutes a fair trial, how does anyone expect the whole world to agree? Different need not always mean oppressed, but total sameness generally does, and in a world setting it is totally unfair to assume that only a Northern European/North American half way secular, half way Christian approach is correct for all situations. There really are only four values that are universal to all culture and all religion. Do not murder, do not steal, do not create division in a marriage and do not bear false witness. Regardless of a lack of religion or an observance of religion a society which cannot handle those four ideas is over already. Everything else is trimmings, iceing, gravy. I think the problem is over complexity is resulting from willy-nilly passage of every single U.N. Resolution, and you will see they will wind up contradicting each other. That gets annoying when you have Nations which are trying to simplify their legal systems.
Best Wishes Katja of Zahumlje Queen-Kommissar

Just wondering, but what about the possibility of passing a resolution declaring a previous resolution null and/or void? I mean, I'm not a theologian, nor am I a rocket scientist, but I was just wondering about that manner of possibility...

Cheers,

El Djere, Lord Praetor of Lesser Tyrannus

Is there anything to prevent one from submitting a proposal running something like this:


Monkey Love Act II

The General Assembly,
Recognising that the Monkey Love Act was really a rather silly idea,
Preferring that all those non-UN nations didn't laugh at us quite so much,

Resolves to reverse the policies implemented by the Monkey Love Act.

"Repealabiltiy" is one of the goals of a gradually forming alliance of which Thracia is a member.

Any adopted resolution should be subject to change or to a repeal, if there are enough approvals to bring a repeal to a vote and if the majority votes in favor of a repeal.

We would like to know whether or how much support there is for this idea.

We would appreciate your comments and counter-suggestions.

I think most of our nations are faced with a continuing cycle of the same issues. Granted the same events don't occur that frequently but on more than one occassion my government has considered taking the policity in the Confederation of Mikitivity in a different direction.

Naturally we should be able to do the same in the UN, by simplying passing a future resolution that would specifically revoke a previous one. However, I think it is important that future resolutions be very clear if they are attempting to change the direction of the UN.

Ultimately however this is an issue that lies in the hands of the UN Mods, and I'm confident that they have our best interests in heart.

10kMichael

If you created an issue that was precisely opposed to the one that go voted in, with exactly the opposite results, it would in effect cancel out the previous resolution and act as a reapealment, for all intents and purposes.

The issue of repealability would have been dealt with easily, if the moderators allowed proposals in the UN that aim to repeal previously adopted resolutions or to declare them null and void.

However, they normally do not allow such proposals. As soon as they notice them they delete them. Why? Because they claim that proposing the repeal of a previous resolution is demanding a change in the "game mechanics". This just doesn't make sense.

It is for this reason that we decided to form this alliance to mobilize the "public opinion", so to speak.

Max's game, Max's rule. Move on.

Max's game, Max's rule. Move on.

OOC:

True,
True,
Ain't gonna happen.

Why? Because most of us are curious. Too curious for our own good.

With that in mind, think of it this way. NationStates is not only a game, but an experiment. If we could repeal things, we'd constantly be arguing about gay rights and saving the rainforests. Not that these topics aren't important. They are, so much so that we'd be constantly arguing over them.

But at some point the experiment won't move forward unless we build rules upon rules, and spend some time dealing with other topics. Including I.G.N.O.R.E. cannons (which btw was a great thread, thanks for bringing it up).

It has already been mentioned that NationStates v2.x might change this aspect. It certainly will be interesting in the pay site.

10k

The issue of repealability would have been dealt with easily, if the moderators allowed proposals in the UN that aim to repeal previously adopted resolutions or to declare them null and void.

However, they normally do not allow such proposals. As soon as they notice them they delete them. Why? Because they claim that proposing the repeal of a previous resolution is demanding a change in the "game mechanics". This just doesn't make sense.

It is for this reason that we decided to form this alliance to mobilize the "public opinion", so to speak.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am in favour of repealing resolutions as well. However, until the game is coded that way, you can throw 3000 resolutions at me trying to repeal things and I will delete every single one of them and remove anyone from the UN who tries to propose 3 of them.
In fact, if you really want to make a public debate about it, I'm tempted to bring the expulsion thresh-hold down to 1 repeal resolution or 3 other ones. I don't want to do this, but I will make an example of those who can't accept simple game mechanics.

People have already said what I want to say, but I'll say it anyways.

I voted 'yes' because I feel we should be able to repeal them, however I know that it won't happen. As Fris said "Max's game Max's rules" and also the fact that it IS a technical issue that cannot be overrought without a complete 'reset' button (which would be worse overall).

SO, while I agree it SHOULD happen, I know it cannot until Nationstates 2 comes out.

YES. On favor of Repeability.

If by current situation, it cant be done, then is another history. So, stop minimizing our belives and positions and just shutting of all doors.

No to opression! No to Corruption!

Vive la liberte!
Vive la revolution!

Of course the laws should be subject to change. This includes repealing stupid laws. There are a few in existence already. The latest proposal to be passed, entitled something like "save the forests" COULD have been a good law. However, the proposer did no research, nor did the voters it seems. I plan on making a proposal at some time in the future to alter or repeal that piece of nonsense. Preferably, alter. It's a good IDEA, that should have been worked on. :(

a resolution to repeal might reasonably require a 2/3 or even 3/4 majority of full the full membership of the UN, and not just of those who actualy vote on it.

this seems a reasonable solution to the extremes of lack of recourse versus potential for frivolous repeal attempts.

=^^=
.../\...

Please NO! It's bad enough seeing the regular recurrence of really boring issues, never mind endlessly recycling through passed/unpassed.

We will impose sanctions any nation that attempts to allow the amendment or repeal of UN resolutions.

We will impose sanctions any nation that attempts to allow the amendment or repeal of UN resolutions.


I understand your position. Seeing that all laws are written in stone, and handed down from the Supreme Deity, only the lowest of apostate heathen would consider altering a law. Or repealing it.

Get a grip folks. In real life, laws are seldom repealed, but it happens. In real life, many useless laws are bypassed by passing other laws, with the courts eventually deciding which law takes precedence.

Maybe that's what is missing from this game. We seem to have a legislative body, and an executive body, but no judicial body. If I have missed a judicial body, I humbly apologize to the body of said judiciary. Please, step up and be noticed.

BTW, there is a fresh roll of paper in the restroom. When you are finished sanctioning, be sure to wipe. Please don't bring the smell back into civilized company.

Please NO! It's bad enough seeing the regular recurrence of really boring issues, never mind endlessly recycling through passed/unpassed.

Though I too agree with this, what if we could repeal a resolution only after it had been adopted for a set time, say 6 months, and that in order for it to be repealed it would require a 2/3 vote?

-or-

The proposal to repeal a previous resolution would only be allowed into the queue 6 months after the resolution it seeked to repeal and instead of requiring 6% of the UN Delegates, there would be a new category of UN proposals called "repeal" that would then automatically require something on the order of 15% of the UN Delegates to approve it.

[OOC: I'm just talking for the purposes for debate here. I'm aware that these are game mechanics issues. But naturally if people like this idea, maybe we could move the debate to an appropriate forum.]

Let us set the "game mechanics" part of the problem aside.

Let us concentrate on the role-play aspect of the issue. Let the effect of the passed resolution (e.g. Human Rights -- strong, furtherment of democracy -- significant, etc.) remain as it is. What if it was possible to pass a resolution that repealed a previous one not in terms of effects, but in words ONLY?

Would that be acceptable or satisfactory to the UN members?

I like the idea of repealability if times change. However, I think a simple majority isn't enough. Perhaps two-thirds?

Well, that could be a good alternative, Changes in word. Technically, we get what we want, the way it can be done.

Let us set the "game mechanics" part of the problem aside.

Let us concentrate on the role-play aspect of the issue. Let the effect of the passed resolution (e.g. Human Rights -- strong, furtherment of democracy -- significant, etc.) remain as it is. What if it was possible to pass a resolution that repealed a previous one not in terms of effects, but in words ONLY?

Would that be acceptable or satisfactory to the UN members?


I would like that yes :)

Let us set the "game mechanics" part of the problem aside.

Let us concentrate on the role-play aspect of the issue. Let the effect of the passed resolution (e.g. Human Rights -- strong, furtherment of democracy -- significant, etc.) remain as it is. What if it was possible to pass a resolution that repealed a previous one not in terms of effects, but in words ONLY?

Would that be acceptable or satisfactory to the UN members?


I would like that yes :)

OK, I get it...This IS Max's game, and we must follow Max's rules. Makes perfect sense, right? Well my little nation has no influence whatsoever in the U.N., and wants nothing more from this simulation than a fair and unhindered opportunity to excel. That said, WHY in Gods green earth would ANYONE support a measure that forbids "re-thinking" a major policy issue? If I remember correctly, prohibition seemed like a good idea at the time. And to quote Dr. Phil, "How's that working for you?"

WHY in Gods green earth would ANYONE support a measure that forbids "re-thinking" a major policy issue?
You seem to making the assumption that this is a political rule. It isn't. It's a coding rule. Max didn't think of coding repeals into the process when he made the game, and to fix it would require a lot of effort that he'd rather put into the paid game, NationStates II.

Just because you see it as a political issue, designed by the Man to keep you down, doesn't make it so. It's not cost-effective, so it probably won't be happening. Can we just let this four-thousandth topic on the subject die now?

OK, I get it...This IS Max's game, and we must follow Max's rules. Makes perfect sense, right? Well my little nation has no influence whatsoever in the U.N., and wants nothing more from this simulation than a fair and unhindered opportunity to excel. That said, WHY in Gods green earth would ANYONE support a measure that forbids "re-thinking" a major policy issue? If I remember correctly, prohibition seemed like a good idea at the time. And to quote Dr. Phil, "How's that working for you?"

*BANG*
*HEAD*
*AGAINST
*KEYBOARD*
*REPEATEDLY*

For the umpteen millionth time, nobody supports that decision in the sense that you mean it. It's just (in NS1 at any rate) a fact of life, kind of like the sky being blue and the sun rising in the east. The world might work better if any of those things were changed, but they can't be changed at the moment.

Hmm....this thread's in danger of turning into a circus sideshow... :shock:
*winks hugely, produces a box of party hats and several bottles of rum*

http://home.nc.rr.com/ezjtb/images/oddworld.jpg

Come one, Come All! Only Fifty Cents!
SEE the amazing non-godmodding newbie!
SEE the astonishingly corrupt moderators!
SEE proposals enacted and repealed right in front of you!
SEE the unbanning of previously banned nations!

YOU WON'T BELIEVE YOUR VERY EYES!


www.nationstates.net does not give any warranty or other assurance as to the content of the material appearing on the site, its accuracy, completeness, timelessness or fitness for any particular purpose. Access to the sideshow may be interrupted, restricted or delayed for any reason. NationStates will not take responsibility for any error, omission or inaccuracy in advertising material. Your mileage may vary. No refund, no return. Offer void where prohibited by law.