NationStates Jolt Archive

Maybe I'm the only one, though I doubt it, who has noticed that many of the proposals popping up these days are a ridiculous misuse of UN power. It should be clearly defined that the UN does not and should not have the power to meddle in the individual affairs of a sovreign nation. Therefore, I have Submitted the proposal "Limitation of UN Powers" toclarify these facts. I would humbly request the support of my fellow delegates, as I belive that this proposal will not only more firmly define the nature of the UN, but make the proposal list a little more easy to sort through.

While I do agree that many resolutions have unfortunately infringed on the sovereignty of our states, I should point out that proposals to limit the UN's powers are generally considered game mechanics changes and tossed out. I just stick with voting against them, but sadly that hasn't been working, as memory serves.

The whole point of joining the UN is that the applying nation understands that it will give certain powers and rights over to the UN. If you don't like it, leave.

The whole point of joining the UN is that the applying nation understands that it will give certain powers and rights over to the UN. If you don't like it, leave.

Or we could simply lobby for change.

Maybe I'm the only one, though I doubt it, who has noticed that many of the proposals popping up these days are a ridiculous misuse of UN power. It should be clearly defined that the UN does not and should not have the power to meddle in the individual affairs of a sovreign nation. Therefore, I have Submitted the proposal "Limitation of UN Powers" toclarify these facts. I would humbly request the support of my fellow delegates, as I belive that this proposal will not only more firmly define the nature of the UN, but make the proposal list a little more easy to sort through.

This was already done back in Feb. 2004 in the form of the Rights and Duties resolution.

The problem is we can't create any resolution that limits game mechanics (with the exception being that resolutions can be passed, so long as they don't undo prior resolutions).

The best way to ensure that quality resolutions are passed, is to set a consistent string of well written resolutions. But that isn't an easy task, as well written is very subjective.

With respect to the current resolution on Education, its author Hersfold has actually stared work on a much better IMHO proposal to amend the current resolution. I commend that nation's UN representative for recognizing that the main argument against their proposal was the lack of specifics and for responding quickly. I would guess that in a matter of days Hersfold (who is having troubles posting to the forum) will be asking for ideas from us.

With that in mind ... the message was heard and the next step is for the rest of us to put forth constructive comments.

That said, although there already is a Rights and Duties resolution, it can never hurt to reaffirm beliefs. If you wanted to make a simple resolution to reaffirm the Rights and Duties resolution I would support it and campaign for it within my region.

[OOC: Don't ever submit a game mechanics proposal without first getting feedback from the rest of us ... it could result in ejection from the UN. But the Mods are happy to tell you before hand if your proposal is game mechanics based or not, so long as you also understand they are busy running the UN *and* representing their nations.] :)

10kMichael

Or we could simply lobby for change.

Nope, you can't. It's already been covered as pointed out in this thread.

Or we could simply lobby for change.

Nope, you can't. It's already been covered as pointed out in this thread.

What, pray tell, is preventing me?

Old business, boys? I leave for a few weeks and the whole bloody organization goes to Hell in a handbasket.

Look, we go through this "Gah! Get the UN out of our national affairs!" business every time someone sees a resolution they don't like about to pass. As hard as it may be to believe, people really have thought of this before you, and have dealt with it accordingly. The problem is no matter how many resolutions I pass banning x kind of proposal, nothing can stop x kind of proposal from being submitted. Save for Enodia, bless his heart, running around and checking every proposal against all prior resolutions, it just doesn't matter.

So lets all save ourselves the trouble, and save our whining for when it really matters, eh?

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

Look, we go through this "Gah! Get the UN out of our national affairs!" business every time someone sees a resolution they don't like about to pass.

It has nothing to do with whether I like the proposal or not. If it limits national freedoms in a manner that is outside the U.N.'s purview, even in a way I personally approve of, it gets an AGAINST vote.

As hard as it may be to believe, people really have thought of this before you, and have dealt with it accordingly.

Shocking.

The problem is no matter how many resolutions I pass banning x kind of proposal, nothing can stop x kind of proposal from being submitted. Save for Enodia, bless his heart, running around and checking every proposal against all prior resolutions, it just doesn't matter.

I would not ask Enodia to do all that. I would request a change in game mechanics or the appointing of more moderators so that the current Mods have more time.

So lets all save ourselves the trouble, and save our whining for when it really matters, eh?

Who was whining? I saw a bit of polite discourse, but no whining.

Polite discourse can still be whining. As in, "By jove, look at that chap, he's walking into our cigar club wearing jeans. Yardley! Escort that fellow out, would you?" Still polite. Still whining.

Any time people stand up and start making stump speeches about tired issues that a) have already been resolved (see Rights and Duties) or b) won't ever be resolved in a thousand years (see any gay marriage thread in this forum), its a degree of whining.

Better to move on and deal with more substantive issues. If there aren't any on the forum, perhaps we ought to busy ourselves with thinking some up?

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

As unpopular as it might make me, I'd like to point something out:

Common sense is the only thing preventing the passing of any resolution that isn't a game mechanics issue.
If I were to get 160 Delegates to support my theoretical proposal which allowed Gethamane to determine what type of educational system would be allowed in every UN Nation, it would get voted on by the General Assembly. Furthermore, if I got what appears to be 15-20,000 votes in favor, it would pass.
The point being that the UN has as much power as we (the General Assembly, specifically the Delegates) want to give it so long as it doesn't violate game mechanics.

Finally, unless I became mistaken somewhere along the line, game mechanics won't be changed until NS2 (when NS1 should get an upgrade, from what I understand).

The real way in which we limit the UN's power is by having a huge number of delegates, none of which who search through the proposal pages. We check the ignorance of the masses against the apathy of the other, elected masses. Quite ingenius, I think.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

Polite discourse can still be whining.

Yes it can. You are quite correct. As to whether there was whining on this thread...I think we may just have to agree that our perceptions of what constitutes whining are quite different, and get over it. So stop whining about all the whining, alright? :wink:

Any time people stand up and start making stump speeches about tired issues that a) have already been resolved (see Rights and Duties) or b) won't ever be resolved in a thousand years (see any gay marriage thread in this forum), its a degree of whining.

You have a very interesting definition of whining, sir.

Better to move on and deal with more substantive issues. If there aren't any on the forum, perhaps we ought to busy ourselves with thinking some up?

If that's the way you feel, you are free to do so.

Interesting debate...
Some cheese with that Whine

Just Joking. Anyway a few friends of mine got together and theorized that perhaps if it had a grand wrapping, anything would get passed. For instance... If we were to... say create a proposal titled Cutting through the Red Tape. Put some issues and proposals meant to streamline the process. Have the tag line saying... oh, Issues 1 to 7c is designed to respect everyone's national soverncey and so forth, but slip in a 7d saying all power to approve resolutions is to be given to Sophista (again just an example dearies) We agreed that it will pass. Should anyone complain about 7d, we would claim it was a typo mistake... Just like Hersford, and poof. Sophista is now in charge of approving all Resolutions.

Any bets that this woudn't work?

[whole post is ooc]

What's the point... after all, we can pass resolution after resolution (as it is going now) but the mods are doing nothing to enforce them. I believe only a small fraction of UN Members actually read the boards. the rest judge the resolution by it's title.

Rights and Duties: If everyone read them and followed it, we wouldn't be in this mess.

For those who are honest in their Role-Playing, these are limitations and shackles imposed by the UN but is blatenly ignored by everyone else.

The letter we get about the compliance minestry is a joke. after all, After the FREEDOM OF CHOICE resolution passed, anyone making a legislative choice on any issue is restricting their people's freedom of choice thus violating the resolution (read it again.) Yet the Mods are ignoring that.

You ask for substantive issues? Name one. The way the UN is run? Nothing is substantial. Nothing's enforced. The Mods watch and do... Nothing... except tell us what we can't do.

You tell us leave if we don't like it... we could but that wouldn't be role playing would it? and Role-Playing is the name of this game.

and they want us to Pay for NS-2? It better have improvements on an Order of Magnitude over NS-1.

Let's try what Naughty bits and her friends suggest... HEY MODS, CAN WE RUN THIS LITTLE EXPERIMENT? after all pass or fail no one obeys the resolutions anyway.

Boy, that whine was a good year!

dp Sorry

Turning TP into new post:

Actually, no! Let's give the UN More Power. Infact, I want them to enforce all of these resolutions as they are written. That will teach people to READ and INVESTIGATE all resolutions and proposals before voting.

As hard as it may be to believe, people really have thought of this before you, and have dealt with it accordingly.


OOC: Kind of funny to see a nation 9 months younger than me addressing me like some n00b. No offense of course.

I realize that this resolution can't change game mechanics, and that there will be no perfect system until A)People realize what the UN is really for and B)NS2, but I'd still like to see this proposal passed on principle, so that there can be specific language that can be quoted whenever another "ban firearms" proposal debate thread pops up. I have to admit that I was not aware of the "Rights and Duties" Resolution.

In response to Tuesday Heights: yes, a nation which joins the UN must agree to relinquish some of its rights, but a line must be drawn somewhere. Simply because a majority of UN members may approve of a certain political idea, that does not make it good for all of the UN. Internal issues must be left to the control of individual nations, otherwise we might as well be one huge confederacy. A nation should have the right to be in the UN to make important descisions about WMD policies and suchlike, but still be able to keep its unique ideals.

endorsement ends today.

please, seriously consider endorsing this proposal. Even if it doesn't fix everything, it's the idea that should really matter.

voting ending soon