NationStates Jolt Archive

I know it was well-intentioned, but a quick look at current U.N. proposals already demonstrates how the new right of appeal is being abused. Some nations are spamming the proposal page with numerous appeals, some are asking for repeals using zero thought or logic to back up their request, and most of the rest are using the argument that the resolution passed with such a small margin as justification for appeal. Only a few appear to be sincere attempts to use this new tool in a rational manner.

Thoughts, anyone?

It's almost as bad as when people suddenly could do "resolutions". That ended up pretty badly, too.

Look at it this way, repealing Law of the Sea is all that will stop my construction program to build underwater nuke silos off shore of every UN nation :)

Repealing the resolution won't stop anything. Your threat to stop a role playing action is more or less meaningless.

I know a lot of people complain that the bar is too high to allow any resolution or now any repeal to be brought before the assembly. I would suggest that the bar is too low, not too high. It would have been nicer if it was coded that a resolution could only have one repeal on the queue at any one time, but that's a headache for the mods, and not for us.

Well, the concept is most certainly a good idea, (and one which I advocated for some time). Tekania is watching closely the direction the NSUN takes with this, as it could determine our possible return to the NSUN. It just matters to see if this alters the direction the NSUN takes (As of yet not, the 'repeals' have been based on the same illogical rhetoric as many of the resolutions they propose to repeal, with the exception of a few... a very few.)

Repealing the resolution won't stop anything. Your threat to stop a role playing action is more or less meaningless.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Who is threatening anyone? I just think that people are using this new feature indiscriminantly and wanted to start a dialogue about it. There are people asking to repeal the gay rights resolution because they "hate fags". Hardly a worthwhile use of the option :rolleyes:

Well, the repeal right should be recognized, but not abused. I say they should state real reasons, not selfish reasons.

I think we'll knock out the five or six most controversial and annoying in fairly short order ("Fight the Axis of Evil" comes to mind), and then it'll be just like the drugs, guns, and gambling proposals. Just something else to skip over in the proposals queue.

I'm really sorta surprised that this first crop of repeals isn't doing better than it is. I wonder how many people haven't voted to approve because they still don't realize repeals are legal? This hasn't turned into the fiasco I expected, at least not yet.

Well, the repeal right should be recognized, but not abused. I say they should state real reasons, not selfish reasons.

Well, given that the proposal system in itself is abused for the purportment of social gluttony, I'd say logically the repeal system would follow the same suit. So the content of the present repeals on the queue, is of no logical suprise.

I completely agree that, for some of the earlier resolutions, a call for repeal is warranted. But so far, I have seen very little constructive use of this new feature. People who could never even write a coherent sentence, no less get their proposal passed as a resolution, are surfacing to call for the repeal of resolutions based on absolutely nothing relevant.

I am already pissed off at having to wade through pages of worthless calls for repeal to find legitimate proposals--what happens when more nations get wind of this? I see a catastrophe brewing--pages and pages of nothing but stupidly conceived repeals, mods overworked trying to weed out the good from the bad...delegates saying "screw it--I am not looking through 30 pages of repeals to vote on 2 legit proposals"...

Restrictions need to be placed on this option NOW! I suggest:

1. Only one repeal request per resolution on the floor at any given time.

2. Reasons for the repeal request must at least be up to the same standards mods use to regulate standard proposals.

3. No repeal "spamming"--only one repeal request per nation per day.

4. Passing by a narrow margin is not a reason for repeal. If Max had intended for there to be some margin of victory other than 1 vote for a resolution to pass, he would have done so. These are his rules, people. Requests that use this as their argument should be deleted.

Any other ideas?

I think it is a good idea. While there are obvious problems with it (mostly since it has just been introduced) it does mean that the UN can change with the times, and that a proposal that was supported three years ago can be reviewed in the light of the current world situation, and possibly reviewed or scrapped completely.

As long as we can stomp all these unreasonable and annoying environmental resolutions, I'm all for it.

In the absence of any current controls on repeals, I suggest at least that no delegate approve a stupidly conceived proposal for one.

I can understand that repealing resolutions was allowed for the best of intentions, and at face value it is good, but I can't help thinking that it will end in the collapse of the UN as we know it. Currently deciding whether to remain in the UN at all following this decision.

I can understand that repealing resolutions was allowed for the best of intentions, and at face value it is good, but I can't help thinking that it will end in the collapse of the UN as we know it. Currently deciding whether to remain in the UN at all following this decision.

Please don't feel I'm singling anybody out ... but give it a chance.

Do you (plural) realize just how hard collecting 135+ endorsements is? Some of you do in fact remember. Repeals need endorsements as well. If UN Delegates want to fill the floor with repeals, we'll deal with that. If our UN Delegates aren't representing us, we can always unendorse them.

The problem is really just a messy queue for the Delegates to read and for the game moderators to clean.

If anything we will be able to remove some of the problems in earlier resolutions, and I think long-term this will increase interest in the UN.

The problem is really just a messy queue for the Delegates to read and for the game moderators to clean.
And for delegates to read!

From a technical standpoint this is a nightmare. You don't have to write something reasonably thought out to get a proposal on the boards, now you can just object to something someone else wrote and be heard!

The idea is good, but it is far too easy too take advantage of. The time wasted on this totally diminishes the power the UN is supposed to wield.

Actually, with recent delegate developments, the repeal option can be a huge victory.

Before the option of a repeal was introduced, if a certain voting bloc of delegates (cough-goon-cough) passed legislature through force of splinter number and etcetera, we, the more permanent and non-affiliated members of the UN, would be forced to live with it. Now that there is option of repealing legislature, such power is taken away from this bloc.

I have been doing some research, some eavesdropping and a lot of thought on the "reason Komokom left the UN" (if you catch my drift) and I find it to be quite frightening. If they correctly execute their operations they will become a huge threat. I'll come forward with my whole case for action shortly. There are things we can do, advantages we still hold, and, above all, the mighty power of mod which we can still plea for. Duh-Duh-Dunh!

Anyway, the repeal, however bad in allowing the unruly and impatient member of the UN to repeal the hard work and temperance of another, may become a valuable asset in the future...very soon, actually

I have no problem with the idea--in fact, used wisely, I think it is a fine idea. Unfortunately, even in its infancy it is being subverted--so at the very least, this option should be regulated with the same diligence that standard proposals are.

As we write, there are already pages of repeals, may of them on the same resolution. People are taking advantage as people do (which in itself is a sorry indictment of the human race), so this new option must be regulated.

If not, expect a mass exodus of nations that would rather have national autonomy than kowtow to international lunacy. When that happens, the UN will breakdown and the fabric of the game itself will be ruined.

Max, if this was your idea fix it or stop it!!!!!

1. Only one repeal request per resolution on the floor at any given time.


That sounds logical. Of course, then if there are two. Then the question arrises as to which should be deleted.


2. Reasons for the repeal request must at least be up to the same standards mods use to regulate standard proposals.


Judging by the plethora of substandard proposals, I think, at least so far, they have been. (I think the bar on proposals should be raised myself, to prevent travesties like "Abortion Rights" and "Legalize Euthanasia" to even make it past queue.... proposals should be based on reason and logic... and not rhetoric).


3. No repeal "spamming"--only one repeal request per nation per day.


And let's add preventing proposal spamming as well.


4. Passing by a narrow margin is not a reason for repeal. If Max had intended for there to be some margin of victory other than 1 vote for a resolution to pass, he would have done so. These are his rules, people. Requests that use this as their argument should be deleted.


Maybe, maybe not, narrow margin is a logic outcropping from logical reconsideration by NSUN council, especially on older proposals. (Though to relate previously, both proposal and repeal should be based on reason and logic, and not rhetoric.)

There are things we can do

And the fewer voices of sanity that leave the UN, the more effective action can be mounted. So please, don't all give up hope yet.

Re my suggestion that only one repeal per proposal be allowed in the queue at any given time:

That sounds logical. Of course, then if there are two. Then the question arrises as to which should be deleted.
I would think the one that was posted last should be deleted--it was the 2nd poster's responsibility to check the queue for the same repeal before she posted.

However, if the first one happens to suck it should be dumped, too ;)

Re my suggestion that only one repeal per proposal be allowed in the queue at any given time:


I would think the one that was posted last should be deleted--it was the 2nd poster's responsibility to check the queue for the same repeal before she posted.

However, if the first one happens to suck it should be dumped, too ;)

Well, I would propose based on quality rather than temporality. Of course, it is of my opinion that proposals should meet higher quality standards. It is of course fair. And it would be beneficial in the long run to those who fail the bar, as such, giving them a chance to ammend and rebuild proposals in a logical and consistent manner, to meet the standards. Let's do out best to remove rhetoric from law.

Well, I would propose based on quality rather than temporality. Of course, it is of my opinion that proposals should meet higher quality standards. It is of course fair. And it would be beneficial in the long run to those who fail the bar, as such, giving them a chance to ammend and rebuild proposals in a logical and consistent manner, to meet the standards. Let's do out best to remove rhetoric from law.

Point taken. However, if it is based solely on quality that will not prevent multiple repeals of the same resolution in the queue, and may actually cause another problem. My worry about the quality issue is this--say there is one repeal proposal in queue which was written well enough not to be deleted and delegates have been voting on it. Now, a second repeal proposal for the same resolution is added that happens to be better written than the first. Do you delete the first one? If a better-written proposal of the same repeal can automatically supercede any existing ones then repeals will almost never make it to resolutions (maybe that's not such a bad thing).

I think if a repeal proposal is written well-enough not to get deleted by the mods then any on the same repeal posted while the first is still in the queue should be deleted.

ETA: I just found this rule in the thread on proposal writing. This was written by a UN mod:

9. Duplicate Repeals
Always make sure that the repealment proposal you want to submit isn't already up for quorum. If we find any duplicates, we'll delete all younger ones.

This was written way before there was actually a button under each resolution you could press to do an "instant repeal", complete with a form to fill out--making the process far too easy in my opinion. Let's hope the rule above starts getting enforced soon.

ETA: I just found this rule in the thread on proposal writing. This was written by a UN mod:

9. Duplicate Repeals
Always make sure that the repealment proposal you want to submit isn't already up for quorum. If we find any duplicates, we'll delete all younger ones.

This was written way before there was actually a button under each resolution you could press to do an "instant repeal", complete with a form to fill out--making the process far too easy in my opinion.
Actually, that was added to Enodia's original post by Cogitation when he made some recent edits. I think this is all new:7. Amendments
You may not submit a proposal that 'changes' the wording or effect of a passed resolution. You can make a repeal proposal if you really want to see the back of one, but that's it.

8. Copied Proposals
There's no point in submitting a proposal that has already been made a resolution. So don't do it.

9. Duplicate Repeals
Always make sure that the repealment proposal you want to submit isn't already up for quorum. If we find any duplicates, we'll delete all younger ones.
As to the 'far too easy' part ... it's been far too easy for people to submit crap proposals in the past too. The repeal aspect is just another part of the same thing. As far as getting repeals Approved for Quorum and up for vote, I'd like to point out that we've had a full cycle of proposals since the new rules went into effect, and not one of the repeal motions made it even half way to Quorum.

It's going to take an all-out campaign to get rid of 'Fight the Axis of Evil' or the duplicate Free Education and RBH proposals. If somebody feels that strongly about repealing them, they're gonna have to work at it. From the look of things, wholesale dismantlement of the UN won't happen without a fight.

Thanks for setting me straight on the repeal law. I could have sworn the date of the mod's post was in 2003, and did not notice any edit info.

As for ease in getting stuff onto the floor, I think it is much harder to submit a decent proposal from scratch than a decent repeal--which is why I am amazed at the low quality of the repeals so far. I'd hate to see what happened if any of those nations actually tried writing something original. Although as I said earlier, I think they are taking advantage of this new U.N. toy because up until now, they weren't able to contribute any other way. I am hoping we see some really good, well-thought out calls for repeal as time goes on.

Thanks for setting me straight on the repeal law. I could have sworn the date of the mod's post was in 2003, and did not notice any edit info.

As for ease in getting stuff onto the floor, I think it is much harder to submit a decent proposal from scratch than a decent repeal--which is why I am amazed at the low quality of the repeals so far. I'd hate to see what happened if any of those nations actually tried writing something original. Although as I said earlier, I think they are taking advantage of this new U.N. toy because up until now, they weren't able to contribute any other way. I am hoping we see some really good, well-thought out calls for repeal as time goes on.

BING BING BING

We have a winner!

It is going to take a bit of time for a repeal to collect enough endorsements, because there are so many of the same thing, and they all have looked frankly kinda "dumb".

The best repeal I've seen was for the Required Basic Healthcare (RBH) resolution, which was already "repealed" by a previous resolution. The justification was that this was a technical motion.

Frankly, I telegrammed that author, because he / she was completely correct and wasn't attempting to make any political statement that hasn't been done before.

That said, if somebody really wants to repeal a resolution, they should use list of active UN Delegates (HINT there is one that each of you has access to right now) and send out a poll:

"Would you be interested in endorsing a repeal of the Xth resolution, titled "Y" adopted on Z if I were to repeal it?"

And then add, "I'm asking this because I've noticed there are two many duplicate repeals, and I'd like to coordinate all our efforts before submitting a repeal. If you are interested, may I contact you when I've collected over 100 other UN Delegates and then ask you endorse my proposal to repeal this resolution?"

Spend a few weeks collecting the signatures. It is easy. And if you plan to repeal the RBH or first resolution and want to go this route, I'll offer to help you. I'll take one letter of the alphabet and over a week telegram active UN delegates and tell them I'm doing this on your behalf.

Anyways, Kritosia is right. Too many of you (whom I know aren't really here on this list / forum) whom have made repeals aren't putting thought into your plans.

They'll be a heck of a lot easier than drafting something original, but just S.L.O.W. D.O.W.N. :)

Please forgive the use of puppet, this is Hack-in-Disguise.

I am already pissed off at having to wade through pages of worthless calls for repeal to find legitimate proposals--what happens when more nations get wind of this?

Aye, and just think about I feel having to go through that list when I'm not even in the UN. And imagine what it'd look like if we didn't prune it.

I see a catastrophe brewing--pages and pages of nothing but stupidly conceived repeals, mods overworked trying to weed out the good from the bad...delegates saying "screw it--I am not looking through 30 pages of repeals to vote on 2 legit proposals"...

That happened long before repeals. Why do you think Enodia was the only one who did anything for the longest time? The rest of us couldn't be bothered. We still get poorly worded and/or stupid proposals that are, alas, technically legit.

1. Only one repeal request per resolution on the floor at any given time.

Not gonna happen. Despite what Cog has said, multiple proposals are not being deleted, unless they are wrong in some other form. For instance, if it was "Repeal Gay Rights because homos should be shot," it would be deleted (and the proposer ejected for gross violation, by the way). Unfortunately, we could have 10 duplicates and they'd be left in.

No, I don't much care for it, but when [violet] speaks, I listen.

2. Reasons for the repeal request must at least be up to the same standards mods use to regulate standard proposals.

Well... the standards aren't all that high, I'm afraid. Remember, a pro-gambling proposal that states: "Gambeling shud be legal cause its kewl" doesn't technically violate any rules. Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it makes the brain hurt. But since it doesn't violate the rules, we have to let it sit there. Luckily, only a couple people will support it so it'll die as it should.

Similarly, demanding that Fight The Axis Of Evil be deleted because "Only 3 people voted," is also legit. Yes, I used that exact question when asking [violet]. It's stupid, but it's legal.

In other words, the lesson is: don't vote for stupid proposals.

3. No repeal "spamming"--only one repeal request per nation per day.

Also not likely to happen. A person could post a dozen unique (legal and stupid) proposals without recourse, repeals are no different.

4. Passing by a narrow margin is not a reason for repeal. If Max had intended for there to be some margin of victory other than 1 vote for a resolution to pass, he would have done so. These are his rules, people. Requests that use this as their argument should be deleted.

See above.

Remember, just because there's a repeal on the floor doesn't mean anything will happen. It has to reach the general vote and be approved by the UN as a whole. The best method to keep stupid repeals out is to not vote for them.

Just like stupid proposals.

Man or Astroman, I know my list was just wishful thinking *sigh*
Similarly, demanding that Fight The Axis Of Evil be deleted because "Only 3 people voted," is also legit. Yes, I used that exact question when asking [violet]. It's stupid, but it's legal.
Yes, but I get the feeling that people aren't using this because of its legitimacy, they are using it only because, in the absence of any other valid reason, it would be a helluva lot easier to get a resolution repealed that passed with a narrow margin, rather than pick on those that passed with a landslide.

That said, if somebody really wants to repeal a resolution, they should use list of active UN Delegates (HINT there is one that each of you has access to right now) and send out a poll:

"Would you be interested in endorsing a repeal of the Xth resolution, titled "Y" adopted on Z if I were to repeal it?"

And then add, "I'm asking this because I've noticed there are two many duplicate repeals, and I'd like to coordinate all our efforts before submitting a repeal. If you are interested, may I contact you when I've collected over 100 other UN Delegates and then ask you endorse my proposal to repeal this resolution?"

Spend a few weeks collecting the signatures. It is easy. And if you plan to repeal the RBH or first resolution and want to go this route, I'll offer to help you. I'll take one letter of the alphabet and over a week telegram active UN delegates and tell them I'm doing this on your behalf.

Anyways, Kritosia is right. Too many of you (whom I know aren't really here on this list / forum) whom have made repeals aren't putting thought into your plans.

They'll be a heck of a lot easier than drafting something original, but just S.L.O.W. D.O.W.N.
Mikitivity, big WORD. While I did not do any "advance polling" when I wrote my proposal on greenhouse gases, I first made sure I would have the support of my delegate and other UN members in my region, who actively helped me not only to get the proposal on the ballot but to get it passed into law by actively campaigning by telegram and in the forums.

However, it seems to me most of these new repeal proposals are not even meant to be serious; like I said earlier, its just a bunch of our "less talented nations" taking advantage of a way to get involved in the process where they never would have before. It's easy to call for the repeal of an original idea you weren't smart enough to come up with in the first place.

That being said, I totally agree that there have been a few repeal proposals (like the health care one) that actually have merit, and should be seriously considered by the delegates.

Man or Astroman, I know my list was just wishful thinking *sigh*

Eh, it's not like we get everything we want.

Yes, but I get the feeling that people aren't using this because of its legitimacy, they are using it only because, in the absence of any other valid reason, it would be a helluva lot easier to get a resolution repealed that passed with a narrow margin, rather than pick on those that passed with a landslide.

To be fair, 'Fight the Axis of Evil' passed 2 to 1, which is 66% to 33%, which, technically, is a landslide. If we were to scale repeals based on their winning margin, we'd likely use percents.

To be fair, 'Fight the Axis of Evil' passed 2 to 1, which is 66% to 33%, which, technically, is a landslide.
It also passed the day before the UN started, a fact that most people fail to notice, or at least ignore.

It also currently has the most repeal attempts going right now.

I beleive it should be much more difficult to repeal. Someone should have to make a arguement sutible and sensible enough to make it worth repealing. :sniper:

To be fair, 'Fight the Axis of Evil' passed 2 to 1, which is 66% to 33%, which, technically, is a landslide.
The Most Glorious Hack, technically yes, it was a landslide. But 2 votes to 1? I kinda consider this a special case ;)

It also passed the day before the UN started, a fact that most people fail to notice, or at least ignore.
Wow, I did not know that. How was that even possible?

The Most Glorious Hack, technically yes, it was a landslide. But 2 votes to 1? I kinda consider this a special case ;)


Wow, I did not know that. How was that even possible?

It was done as a test to insure that everything was working correctly.

It was done as a test to insure that everything was working correctly.
Interesting. If that's the case, why was it allowed to stand?

At any rate, there are currently about 10 repeal proposals in the queue for "Axis of Evil", and maybe only one is worth a damn. Although I suppose one is all it takes :) --but it is a real drag having to look at 17 pages of proposals to find a handful of decent ones worth voting for.

Interesting. If that's the case, why was it allowed to stand?


Oversight. It was going to be removed before the game went online, but...

Here is what you'll have to do if you really want to repeal the "Fight the Axis of Evil" resolution.

Keep a list (off-line) of all of the UN Delegates that endorse *any* of the repeals. Wait until you can have around 50 different UN Delegates, and then submit your own proposal and telegram each of these UN Delegates asking that they work together to coordinate their efforts.

I'm planning on doing this with my nation's technical motion to remove the "Required Basic Healthcare" resolution (which was repealed by the 'RBH' Replacement resolution, before the current repeal system was established).

I think it's well meaning but I do think if it happened we would have abuse of the system.

I think it's well meaning but I do think if it happened we would have abuse of the system.

Not quite sure what you are referring to here--to Mikitivity's idea to get a repeal through? Polling and campaigning to promote a resolution are perfectly acceptable in the U.N., so why not a repeal?

I think it's well meaning but I do think if it happened we would have abuse of the system.

I'm not worried.

It takes a lot of work to follow through and get the 130+ endorsements. The only people who really are going to spend a few hours telegramming so many delegates and collecting those endorsements are going to tend to believe in the system and are less likely to zap a resolution without a good plan.

I don't think that is the part that is open to abuse. Although I do think we need to raise the bar slightly because some resolutions do get to the floor that really should not belong there.

I think the part of abuse is the relative ease it takes to repeal a resolution. In order to propose a resolution you have to go through a number of steps; some not always obvious. If you make a bad resolution you are given a permanent warning. On the other hand, all you have to do to make a repeal resolution is to select the repeal option and enter some good/poor/horrid reason. Even if you wanted to ensure that you are not making a duplicate repeal there is no way to determine if someone isn't proposing to repeal a resolution at the same time you are. (The odds of someone entering a nearly identical resolution at the same time, on the other hand, are slim.)

But what if you get a plethora of deligates to deliberately fill the queue with repeal resolutions? You wind up with a gigantic queue, which might cause some deligates to avoid going through the resolution approval process all together. This is, I think, the possible abuse of the system mentioned in the original poll.

Bear in mind that the *highest* number of endorsements I've seen a resolution get was over 311 and that was back in July when the forums were down.

Most resolutions reach the floor with between 160 and 200 endorsements, of which most of those endorsements are collected on the last day of endorsing.

I'd just say that in the long-term a filter to search not only by name, but by current endorsement count would be a nice tool for delegates. The problem is many Delegates have expressed to me that they wait until the last day before deciding.

They have many reasons for doing this, and one of them is they *actually* are reading the proposals and thinking about them. But as a campaigner you have to catch Delegates about the first day and just pray they'll get online.

I'd warn against raising the threshold too much higher for either resolutions or repeals.