NationStates Jolt Archive

Correct me if I'm wrong.
The UN resolutions passes even if less then 50% of the UN members have voted.

I think there should always be more then 50% voters to make a resolution pass or not. Less then that is not significant for the majority of the UN nations.

lets take the previous resolution, I think there was somthing like 14.000 nations that had voted. The total of UN members is near 34.000.
14.000 is way below 50% of voters.

Am I wrong?

The UN has the problem of states being members of the UN but still not willing to participate. Either we solve that problem or we adjust the percentage of needed participation. That would require an estimation of what percentage of the UN members are actively participating and voting on a regular basis.

- Tanja Carolin for the Free Land of Cloudy Somewhere

But it could be that somebody just doesn't like the way the porpousal has been formulated and doesn't want to vote for neither options. Then the law shouldn't pass. Eventually it can be re-written and posted once more for better luck.

If there are too many countries in the UN that aren't active, then they should not be there... UN rules doesn't affect non-members right?
better fewer and active then many and lazy...

And a telegram should be sent to all Heads of state when a resolution is on its way, so that everybody is at least aware that there is something happening... We do receive a telegram when the resolution is passed...

OOC:

As delegate I only vote if the rest of my region agrees because my votes will over rule theirs and I don't think that is fair.

Some don't vote because they are abstaining.

Some are trying to destroy The UN

Some only want to use The UN to invade

Some are unused nations waiting to die.

All of these things are legal, or at least not illegal, ways to play the game. If we were to make voting compulsory, we would have to sort out the 'legitimate' reasons from the rest. And ask in technical.

Not everyone necessarily has a position on every resolution - and not all log in during the resolution's time at vote. Many more are unfortunately sending their nations into the inactivity pile, no longer interested in NS.

If we needed a majority of all UN members to vote in order for a resolution's passing, none would be passed. Just not enough people log on or vote to make this feasible.

I would consider suggesting a telegram notification to the mods in the Technical forum, though.

I do know this.
I am just saying that if there are inactive nations, it should be possible to check that out and put them off UN.

It is perfectly regular and relieble if some body does not want to vote for a resolution, but that should be a sign of disagreement not just inactivity.

I had problem voting two times already (even though I managed to decide what to vote anyway) and I did vote because I thought that non-voting would not be rapresentative the way things are now. With a "smaller" or more acive UN ensamble non-voting could be part of a political strategy instead of lazyness.

And yes, let's post something to the mods about the telegram notice..

I am just saying that if there are inactive nations, it should be possible to check that out and put them off UN.

OOC:

I don't think that’s a good idea. In this game your UN status means something. You can endorse, become delegate, and submit proposals. You would loose all those things when your nation was inactive for a period of time. Sometimes people can't log on, sometimes they go away. Why should they be punished?

ooc: We could just say 50% of the poeple that logged in the past week need to vote for a Resolution to pass. I do not know wheter this is possible to be implemented in the game code. So people could be inactive without losing their status and still not ruin the decision-process.

OOC:

I don't think that’s a good idea. In this game your UN status means something. You can endorse, become delegate, and submit proposals. You would loose all those things when your nation was inactive for a period of time. Sometimes people can't log on, sometimes they go away. Why should they be punished?

It is exactly becouse it MEANS something to be part of UN that it shouldn't be allowed to be there without doing anything, if you don't mean that of course.

If you are away you can put your nation in to vacation mode.
If you can't log in for a period of time doesn't metter. It is when there are nations that are actually playing but doesn't bother to check what is going on in the UN that I start having problems. Or people that decide to let a nation die and do not resign from the UN before they do so...

A UN resolution affects all the nations that are part of it. I still think it should be rapresentative of the majority (absolute majority not relative)...

OCC: maybe this should have been in GAMEPLAY, but it is about UN, so I don't know...

I wonder if adding a "No Decision" option might clear up just how many people don't vote because they don't have an opinion, and how many don't vote because they aren't around.

More like technical with all the requests for coding related change, but (shrug)

While I do not like people using U.N. member-ship as a tool for invasion, personally, I currently would rather not change the system, only if because we would be making voting mandatory and I doubt all pro-U.N. players, no matter how diligent, could keep up for various reason and such.

Better to retain a majority vote sysem as we do now, where you turn up if you want, cast your stone into the jar, and we find out which way the majority goes. The important thing is you have the choice, especially to abstain.

I know I've not always voted on some things I'm sure. Not every issue can be resolved by a black-or-white style decision I feel.

I guess I'm trying to say, if it is not bust, don't fix it, and I don't think its bust right now, I guess.

(shrug) + (sleepy) = ARGH ! I HAVE LAB WORK DUE IN THE MORNING, I DIE NOW ! ;)

If you are away you can put your nation in to vacation mode.

I'd just like to say something in regards to this.... I have been away from the computer for long periods of times for various reasons, without time for preparation. For example, my computer once died. Several components overheated. I did not have the money to fix it, and so I couldn't use the 'net for a while. When my mother had her cancer scare, I didn't particularly want to use the internet; I had more important things to do. When my younger sister tried to commit suicide, I didn't particularly want to come on the internet. Various things sprung on you all of a sudden can cause you to completely forget about the internet, without a chance to think 'Oh, I know, I'll just go online and put my nation on vacation mode'. I wouldn't really want to be kicked out of the UN for something like that.

I think it would be great if we could get all the UN member nations to vote. It could even counter the 'Too Many Liberals!' moaning. But like various people have said, many nations either don't want to vote, are unable to vote, or have joined the UN for other reasons. I understand that electing a delegate can add some interesting internal politics to regions. Perhaps they only want that aspect of the UN, and aren't so bothered about voting for resolutions. Or those invader nations. Stuff like that. After all, it's a game, and if you only have fun with part of the UN, you should only have to use part of the UN. Anyway, I'll ramble on somewhere else.

Ok. Let's put it this way then.

I don't like it when 14.000 nations decide for 33.000 (these numbers are just a vague idea) it doesn't sound democratic to me.
If we say that the 19.000 that are missing did abstained them selv from voting, then we should assume that the majority doesn't like the resolution the way it is formed and they can not then vote for or against 'cause both options are "wrong".
= the resolution doesn't pass.

That would be more rapresentative then 10.000 votes out of 33.000 possible says that the resolution is to be passed.

OOC: It would be a good idea if only this wasn't a game.

I see your point, it may be not representative, but if you don't turn up and vote, how can you complain ? And who are we to remove the right to abstain from vote ? Perhaps a voice just as power-ful as a " yes " or " no " is a silent one.

I see your point, it may be not representative, but if you don't turn up and vote, how can you complain ? And who are we to remove the right to abstain from vote ? Perhaps a voice just as power-ful as a " yes " or " no " is a silent one.

It is what I am saying.
Maybe I am not clear enough.
I don't want to take away the "abstain possibility", I want to give it a value that it doesn't have right now.

If you abstain from voting it has to have a meaning, the way it is now you can abstain from voting and result as one of many non-active nations.

Isn't the problem actually worse than you suggest, becuase the actual number of votes is greater than the number of nations in the UN, because deligates get a number of votes equal to their recomendations.

In any case, I think a better example is to get more people to be active in the UN. I think many people join the UN to get the nice banner to their nation, and not to actively look at and vote on all resolutions that appear before the body. As the deligate to Niftyonia, I make it a point to post regional notes whenever a vote is up in the UN, and constantly encourage my region's members to take an active part in the forum.

And I think, in the final analysis this is the best that we can hope for. People may frequent the system less in some months than in others. Perhaps a more mandatory requirement might be required of regional deligates, but a yes should mean yes, a no should mean no, and a lack of a vote should indicate that the person either did't care or wasn't there.

If a moderator could move this to Technical, since it is talking about changing game coding...

Ii is a good idea, but I still do not believe it would be entirely feasible in this situation. The system we have now is working just fine, and does not really need to change. Also, so many changes to the original suggestion have been posted, I'm starting to get dizzy.