NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, I have noticed a growing hostility between Delegates, Proposal Writers, and Individual nations. So, in a attempt to end such hositlity I am posting a list a guidelines. If you disagree with these guidelines, tough, nothing I will ask of you will take more than 30 minutes out of your time.


Delegates:
Read at least 3 pages of proposals everyday, don't just wait until there is not resolution up for vote. Resolutions get to be voted on for 5 days, where endorsements only get 3, meaning that if you wait, two days worth of well written, intelligent, and excellent proposals will die needlessly.

If you don't want the job, quit, move out of the region and then move back in, all your endorsements will be gone and you will have given the message of "thanks but no thanks" to the region.

Don't endorse idiotic proposals (read Proposal Writers for more info on what qualifies as idiotic)

Also, don't abuse your authority as a delegate, don't kick people out of a region for disagreeing with you, don't kick people out of a region because they have the same amount of endorsements as your own nation. (only seen this once, but still its just plain wrong). Remember, you are there to represent the people of your region, not rule them.

Don't go idle for weeks at a time. If you do need to go for a while, move to another region and come back, don't just idle out on vacation mode and let your region's vote in the proposal process go unheard.

Proposal Writers:
Actually think the proposal through before you submit it, I read proposals everyday and there is a lot of stupid stuff. Some of the proposals are only one sentence which basically says "This is bad, it should be outlawed". There is no excuse for this, its part of a proposal writers job to try and poke holes in your own proposal and make it as good as possible before submitting it for endorsement. There are also proposals that go on and on about how bad something is, but says nothing about how to fix it.

Use the forums, post your proposals in the forums for at least a day before submitting, this will help fix loopholes, cure bad grammar, etc.

Avoid wierd formats. Bad formats are distracting and make a otherwise great proposal look horrid.

Use grammar/spellcheck. We all have computers, and even the simplest of word processing programs has a spellcheck, so use it.

Don't cold-call the entire world to try and get your proposal passed. Actually read the nation's info first, if its obvious they don't agree with your views, pass them by and move on, its to much of a strain on the server to just tg someone when you know it will be rejected. Also, please try to avoid telegramming a delegate that has already endorsed your proposal.

Individual nations:
Don't endorse everybody, because then you'll get stuck with a bad delegate, actually pay attention to their personal views before endorsing them.

If your delegate does something you disagree with, or goes idle for more than a few days, withdraw your endorsement, don't just sit back and whine about it.

Speaking of whining, don't spam the forums with posts like "this resolution sucks, it passed, I have a stick up my butt but not enough brains to pull it out" If you don't like a resolution, vote against it, tell others _specifically_ why they shouldn't, and if it passes anyway, either try and fix the error from the inside (by amending it through your own proposal) or leave. And if you did leave, there is no reason you have to tell us, so don't.

If everyone does this, the UN will run a lot smoother, there will be less reason for people to complain, and we might finally actually start running this place like the programmers intended.

Not bad, possibly worthy of sticky :)

The problem lies not within the UN delegates themselves, it lies within the proposals.

There is no room for people who have "morals". There are many closeminded liberals in the U.N, and those are the people who own the UN. So there's no improving it. Sorry. Until the left in the UN agrees to at least think before voting, or hear people out, it's not going to happen.

Not bad, possibly worthy of sticky :)If so I'd be the newest nation to earn one. Anyway, about the other guy, its not any one groups fault. Its tiny little errors in each group adding up to result in one HUGE problem. In other words, for this nice little bit of diplomacy to work, ALL sides will have to do their best to adhere to it. If everyone does their part, we can finally have an efficent and peaceful voting environment.
Bill and Ted said it best, "Be excellent to each other and party on...."

I agree. This is quite a sticky worthy post.

As for the lay of blame...

It is not just the nations who "own" then UN, with their morals who are to blame for our problems. We are equally affected by those nations who idly sit by and allow bad propositions to be passed.

Therefore I would urge that all nations stop looking for someone to blame and follow the guidelines set down by the esteemed nation of Leetonia.

Congratulations Leetonia for a thought-provoking, well-written piece of commentary.

The problem lies not within the UN delegates themselves, it lies within the proposals.

There is no room for people who have "morals". There are many closeminded liberals in the U.N, and those are the people who own the UN. So there's no improving it. Sorry. Until the left in the UN agrees to at least think before voting, or hear people out, it's not going to happen.

This might come as a shock to you:

But just because somebody doesn't agree with you or see things your way, doesn't mean they've not considered the item.

My nation has no tolerance for other nations abusing the UN to push religious based domestic issues on the international community.

Michael

I agree. This is quite a sticky worthy post.
...
Congratulations Leetonia for a thought-provoking, well-written piece of commentary. :D ::beams happily:: :D
In all honesty I can't take all the credit, this is mainly stuff that individual people have said over time (though admittedly paraphrased). Only part I claim as mostly original (or at least not knowingly "copied") is the portion on Delegates.

Leetonia - Its the quality of the post not the age of the posting nation that counts :)

Leetonia - Its the quality of the post not the age of the posting nation that counts :):Marches around waving the "Not all n00bs are mooks" flag:

Leetonia - Its the quality of the post not the age of the posting nation that counts :)


I agree. Your wise beyond your posts Leetonia :D

I agree. This is quite a sticky worthy post.


I agree. The content is great.

A minor suggestion ... us bold or italics tags to further make it easier to read the three principle sections.

But if a mod agrees, this could maybe be stickied to one of the existing threads.

10kMichael

A minor suggestion ... us bold or italics tags to further make it easier to read the three principle sections.
Duely noted, and done.

Edited the original post to be a little more diplomatic (I cut into all the groups a little hard, was a little mad, but I'm cool now)

Sticky declined I guess....

Sticky declined I guess....

Well, find the already stickied thread about proposals and first see if you think your post would make a good *reply* to that thread. It will still be viewed. :)

10kMichael

Avoid wierd formats. Bad formats are distracting and make a otherwise great proposal look horrid.

Use grammar/spellcheck. We all have computers, and even the simplest of word processing programs has a spellcheck, so use it.

While you make some good points, I feel obligated to point out, given your insistence that proposal writers use a spellchecker, that wierd is properly spelled weird.

"If everyone does this, the UN will run a lot smoother, there will be less reason for people to complain, and we might finally actually start running this place like the programmers intended." (Leetonia)

I don't know Leetonia. The friction and frustration created from the miscommunication is half the fun. It makes things interesting. I’m sure part of you agrees with this. Helpful advice though.

Delegates:
Read at least 3 pages of proposals everyday, don't just wait until there is not resolution up for vote. Resolutions get to be voted on for 5 days, where endorsements only get 3, meaning that if you wait, two days worth of well written, intelligent, and excellent proposals will die needlessly.


The vast majority of proposals are disposable, IMNSHO. Except under very rare circumstances I refuse to acknowledge any proposals that have not been proofed in the NS UN Forum. Also, if one has an idea worth turning into a UN proposal, it is worth being proofed by people who may have some important imput on the issue; it is worth making sure proposals with dire unintended consequences do not slide through.

Therefore, I check the NS UN often and look for drafts. If something looks interesting and worthy of support, I THEN look for it on the pages. I honestly have no problem if a member or delegate from any region sends me a TG on a proposal. I will review it if link is posted. However, I always discourage posting proposals w/out a draft process on the forums.


Proposal Writers:
Don't cold-call the entire world to try and get your proposal passed.

Actually, I have no problem w/ an active campaign process; and in fact support it. If an individual nation has something important to tell me, I have no desire to stop that information from getting through. I applaud nations who try to sway delegates with reasoned statements.

As for server load. I think that's more of problem w/ interface and design, but I'll not go into my extensive problems w/ my observations on this game's design and mechanics...


Individual nations:


Also, when it comes to TG'ing delegates and members, there's plenty of incentive to do this to promote agendas in coordinated campaigns. The very fact that the vast majority of UN members and delegates pay no attention to the forums is reason enough. Also, short of a significant change to the UI and basic game mechanics this is just going to be a lot of venting on all sides. I'm done w/ being frustrated w/ the lack of participation. At this point, all we can do is accept this, because only a scant minority of all members and delegates have even been on these forums, nevermind participated regularly.


If everyone does this, the UN will run a lot smoother, there will be less reason for people to complain, and we might finally actually start running this place like the programmers intended.

I mean no offense, but this will undoubtedly cause some defensiveness. I'm not sure the programmers thought out all the necessary structures required to support a game of this type prior to building. I'm just hoping somone will program the universal government app I'd started designing for me. :)

I don't know Leetonia. The friction and frustration created from the miscommunication is half the fun. It makes things interesting. I?m sure part of you agrees with this. Helpful advice though.

:D

*hand raised*

OOC: I actually loved it when I got a telegram saying, "Your proposal is insulting and we are passing a law to legalize the consumption of your borrowing owls, as DOG MEAT." (This is paraphrased.)

The point being, it showed enough that the UN Delegate in question was not only not going to endorse my proposal, but honestly did take the time to read about my country.

It was clever and well roleplayed! This I loved, and though I won't telegram that nation again, they are not in my ignore list, because I wish more UN Delegates would do that instead of saying, "If you ever telegram me, I'll report you to the moderators" <--- especially when it is in response to submitting a polite request for an endorsement. That doesn't show that any time was spent reading the proposal, and leaves you wondering ... "What did I do to get that cold reply?"

10kMichael

The vast majority of proposals are disposable, IMNSHO. Except under very rare circumstances I refuse to acknowledge any proposals that have not been proofed in the NS UN Forum. Also, if one has an idea worth turning into a UN proposal, it is worth being proofed by people who may have some important imput on the issue; it is worth making sure proposals with dire unintended consequences do not slide through.

Therefore, I check the NS UN often and look for drafts. If something looks interesting and worthy of support, I THEN look for it on the pages. I honestly have no problem if a member or delegate from any region sends me a TG on a proposal. I will review it if link is posted. However, I always discourage posting proposals w/out a draft process on the forums.


Actually, I have no problem w/ an active campaign process; and in fact support it. If an individual nation has something important to tell me, I have no desire to stop that information from getting through. I applaud nations who try to sway delegates with reasoned statements.

As for server load. I think that's more of problem w/ interface and design, but I'll not go into my extensive problems w/ my observations on this game's design and mechanics...



Also, when it comes to TG'ing delegates and members, there's plenty of incentive to do this to promote agendas in coordinated campaigns. The very fact that the vast majority of UN members and delegates pay no attention to the forums is reason enough. Also, short of a significant change to the UI and basic game mechanics this is just going to be a lot of venting on all sides. I'm done w/ being frustrated w/ the lack of participation. At this point, all we can do is accept this, because only a scant minority of all members and delegates have even been on these forums, nevermind participated regularly.



I mean no offense, but this will undoubtedly cause some defensiveness. I'm not sure the programmers thought out all the necessary structures required to support a game of this type prior to building. I'm just hoping somone will program the universal government app I'd started designing for me. :)
As you said yourself, a large amount of NationStates ignores the forums, so wouldn't it be best to read at least a few pages of proposals a day in the interest of catching good proposals that didn't happen to go through a drafting process?

As you said yourself, a large amount of NationStates ignores the forums, so wouldn't it be best to read at least a few pages of proposals a day in the interest of catching good proposals that didn't happen to go through a drafting process?

The argument is founded on the premise that proposals that are simply tossed into the queue without being subjected the (often fatal) rigors of debate in the forum are rarely worth reading. This, if you look back historically through proposals that have actually become resolutions, appears to be true. The vast majority of them were placed in the forum first, debated over, then voted upon in their final form.

As per the rest of this treatise, I find myself agreeing with most of it, but seeing no way to ever possibly enforce it. There may be bad delegates out there, but there's nothing we can do about it. The people elect them, and the people aren't always the brightest bunch. I'm sure we could fill an entire thread with ideas that would change this, from revoking delegateship until you hit a certain post count to tying the weight of your vote to the amount of activity you engage in, but when push comes to shove, none of it is going to come to fruition.

So for all those who voluntarily abide by and support these guidelines, fair play to you. For everyone else, well, it's nothing we're not used to.

Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Sophista: Back In Action